Skip to main content

Full text of "Biographia juridica : a biographical dictionary of the judges of England from the conquest to the present time, 1066-1870"

See other formats 


Google 


This  is  a  digital  copy  of  a  book  that  was  preserved  for  generations  on  Hbrary  shelves  before  it  was  carefully  scanned  by  Google  as  part  of  a  project 

to  make  the  world's  books  discoverable  online. 

It  has  survived  long  enough  for  the  copyright  to  expire  and  the  book  to  enter  the  public  domain.  A  public  domain  book  is  one  that  was  never  subject 

to  copyright  or  whose  legal  copyright  term  has  expired.  Whether  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  may  vary  country  to  country.  Public  domain  books 

are  our  gateways  to  the  past,  representing  a  wealth  of  history,  culture  and  knowledge  that's  often  difficult  to  discover. 

Marks,  notations  and  other  maiginalia  present  in  the  original  volume  will  appear  in  this  file  -  a  reminder  of  this  book's  long  journey  from  the 

publisher  to  a  library  and  finally  to  you. 

Usage  guidelines 

Google  is  proud  to  partner  with  libraries  to  digitize  public  domain  materials  and  make  them  widely  accessible.  Public  domain  books  belong  to  the 
public  and  we  are  merely  their  custodians.  Nevertheless,  this  work  is  expensive,  so  in  order  to  keep  providing  this  resource,  we  liave  taken  steps  to 
prevent  abuse  by  commercial  parties,  including  placing  technical  restrictions  on  automated  querying. 
We  also  ask  that  you: 

+  Make  non-commercial  use  of  the  files  We  designed  Google  Book  Search  for  use  by  individuals,  and  we  request  that  you  use  these  files  for 
personal,  non-commercial  purposes. 

+  Refrain  fivm  automated  querying  Do  not  send  automated  queries  of  any  sort  to  Google's  system:  If  you  are  conducting  research  on  machine 
translation,  optical  character  recognition  or  other  areas  where  access  to  a  large  amount  of  text  is  helpful,  please  contact  us.  We  encourage  the 
use  of  public  domain  materials  for  these  purposes  and  may  be  able  to  help. 

+  Maintain  attributionTht  GoogXt  "watermark"  you  see  on  each  file  is  essential  for  informing  people  about  this  project  and  helping  them  find 
additional  materials  through  Google  Book  Search.  Please  do  not  remove  it. 

+  Keep  it  legal  Whatever  your  use,  remember  that  you  are  responsible  for  ensuring  that  what  you  are  doing  is  legal.  Do  not  assume  that  just 
because  we  believe  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  the  United  States,  that  the  work  is  also  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  other 
countries.  Whether  a  book  is  still  in  copyright  varies  from  country  to  country,  and  we  can't  offer  guidance  on  whether  any  specific  use  of 
any  specific  book  is  allowed.  Please  do  not  assume  that  a  book's  appearance  in  Google  Book  Search  means  it  can  be  used  in  any  manner 
anywhere  in  the  world.  Copyright  infringement  liabili^  can  be  quite  severe. 

About  Google  Book  Search 

Google's  mission  is  to  organize  the  world's  information  and  to  make  it  universally  accessible  and  useful.   Google  Book  Search  helps  readers 
discover  the  world's  books  while  helping  authors  and  publishers  reach  new  audiences.  You  can  search  through  the  full  text  of  this  book  on  the  web 

at|http  :  //books  .  google  .  com/| 


■niiiiM 

60001 31 27K 


r 


fl 


A    BIOGRAPHICAL    DICTIONARV 


or     THB 


JUDGES    OF    ENGLAND 


1066 — 1870 


BY    THE    SAME    AUTHOR. 


The  Judges  of  England,  with  Sketx^hes  of  their  Lives,  and 
Notices  of  the  Courts  at  Westminster,  from  the  Conquest  to 
the  Present  Time.     9  Vols.  Svo.     126«. 

TabulSB  Curiales;  or,  Tables  of  the  Superior  Courts  of  West- 
minster Hall.  Showing  the  Judges  who  sat  in  them  from 
1066  to  1864;  with  the  Attorney  and  Solicitor  Generals  of 
each  reign.  To  which  is  prefixed  an  Alphabetical  List  of  all 
the  Judges  during  the  same  period.     Svo;     lOs.  6d. 


^iosj^W  ^ntUiicn 


A   BIOGRAPHICAL   DICTIONARY 


OF    THB 


JUDGES     OF     ENGLAND 


FKOM   THE   CONQUEST    TO    THE   PRESENT    TIME 


1066 1870 


BY    EDWARD    FOSS,    F.S.A. 


OF     THE     INNBB     TEHPLE 


SU>E       QUI8QUE       FORTUNE       FABER 

Salluttf  de  R<ptU>lica  ordinanda,  I.  i. 
(on  the  8erjoant'8  ring  of  Chicf-Jiutice  Fincux,  1 185) 


LONDON 

JOHN     MUERAY,     ALBEMAIiLE     .STliEET 

1870 


^/o. 


7hr    ryjht 


0.  f.  ai 

"    tnMnation    .>    ffttrrtv 


6 


r/ymton :  niiiTRf)  iiY 

BrOTTIIWOODII    A  Kit    CO..     KKW-8TRKKT    8QUAX1 
AVD    PARl.TAMRIfT    8TKKXT 


PEEFACE. 


In  my  former  work  I  endeavoured  to  trace,  chronologically,  the 
different  incidents  and  changes  in  the  Courts  of  Westminster  that 
occurred  from  the  reign  of  William  the  Conqueror  to  that  of  her 
present  Majesty ;  and  I  gave  an  account  under  each  reign  of  the 
judicial  personages  who  then  administered  the  law. 

The  arrangement  then  adopted,  with  its  palpable  historical 
advantages,  had,  biographically,  one  inconvenience,  that  when  infor- 
mation was  required  for  any  individual  judge,  the  time  of  whose  ex- 
istence was  doubtful  or  uncertain,  a  search  became  necessary  among 
several  volumes  or  reigns  in  order  to  find  the  narrative. 

To  remedy  this  defect,  and  to  facilitate  the  reference  to  every 
name  in  the  judicial  record,  and  also  to  reduce  the  bulk  to  one  con- 
venient volume,  this  publication  has  been  undertaken.  It  is  limited 
to  the  biographical  portion  of  the  larger  work,  and  comprehends 
every  name  therein  introduced,  with  slight  abridgments  and  correc- 
tions, adding  to  them  the  judges  who  have  been  appointed  since 
1864  :  the  whole  number  exceeding  1,600  lives. 

I  have  not  thought  it  necessary  in  the  separate  lives  to  refer 
specially  to  Dugdale's  *  Chronica  Series,'  because,  from  the  Conquest 
till  the  decapitation  of  Charles  I.,  I  have  inserted  every  name  that 
is  included  in  his  list.  I  have  even  done  so  when  I  have  ventured 
to  differ  from  him  in  regard  to  the  individual  filling  the  particular 
position,  or  flourishing  at  the  precise  period  represented.  In  all 
these  cases  I  have  been  careful  to  quote  the  authorities  upon  which 
I  base  the  objections  I  have  raised ;  and  I  have  invariably,  as  well 
in  the  lives  above  alluded  to  as  in  those  of  the  judges  who  flourished 
since  Dugdale  wrote,  given  such  references  as  will,  I  trust,  justify 
every  fact  I  have  introduced. 

In  the  long  period  of  eight   hundred  years  over  which  the 

•a  3 


vi  PREFACE. 

history  travels,  there  were  many  changes  in  the  administration  of  jus- 
tice and  the  arrangement  of  the  courts,  which  when  described  under 
the  different  reigns  in  which  they  occurred  would  naturally  account 
for  the  terms  then  used,  and  the  titles  then  given  to  the  persons  com- 
memorated ;  but  some  explanation  of  them  seems  necessary,  or  at  all 
events  desirable,  when  their  biographies  are  collected  in  an  alpha- 
betical form,  and  names  appear  together  which  are  sundered  by 
J  centuries,  as  one  in  the  reign  of  Henry  II.,  and  the  next  in  that  of 

!  Henry  VIII.  or  William  IV.     I  therefore  add  a  short  account  of 

the  various  alterations  in  the  respective  reigns. 

In  the  reign  of  William  the  Conqueror  the  highest  court  of 
judicature  was  the  Curia  Regis,  in  which  the  King  himself  frequently 
presided.  Its  members  were  the  prelates  and  barons  of  the  realm, 
and  certain  officers  of  the  palace.  Of  these  the  principal  was  the 
Chief  Justiciary,  who  in  the  King's  absence  was  the  ruling  judge. 
!  This  office  continued  till  the  reign  of  Henry  III.,  a  period  of  two 

I  hundred  years,  when  its  judicial  duties  were  transferred  to  the  Chief 

'I  Justice  of  the  King's  Bench. 

8  Many  of  the  barons,  as  members  of  the  Curia  Regis,  soon 

![  neglected  the  legal  part  of  their  duties,  some  from  avocations  that 

1  otherwise  engaged  them,  some  from  unwillingness   so  to  employ 

themselves,  and  some  from  incapacity  to  unravel  the  intricacies  of 
the  law.  This  naturally  led  to  the  association  with  those  that 
remained,  and  eventually  to  the  entire  substitution  for  them,  of  per- 
sons whose  lives  had  been  devoted  to  judicial  studies.  These  were 
^  called  justiciaries,  and  seem  to  have  been  first  introduced  in  the 

-  reign  of  Henry  I.,  and  their  organisation  to  have  been  completed  in 

that  of  Henry  II.    The  justiciaries  not  only  sat  at  Westminster,  but 
♦  went  on  circuits  or  itinera  throughout  the  kingdom.     To  the  com- 

missions by  which  they  were  appointed  some  of  the  great  men  of  the 
several  counties,  whether  lay  or  clerical,  were  occasionally  added, 
and  all  were  designated  aB  justiciers  or  justices  itinerant ;  and  from 
the  reign  of  Edward  I.  to  that  of  Richard  II.,  justices  of  trailbaston 
for  the  trial  of  certain  particular  transgressions  were  appointed. 

•  

By  the  Charter  of  King  John,  confirmed  and  acted  upon  by 
Henry  III.,  Common  Pleas,  being  causes  between  private  indi- 
viduals, were  directed  to  be  held  *  in  some  certain  place.'  This  was 
to  remedy  the  grievance  felt  by  all  litigants  in  being  obliged  to 
follow  the  Curia  Regis  to  whatever  distance  the  King  might  choose 


PREFACE.  vii 

to  travel.  The  Court  of  Common  Pleas  was  thus  originated;  and 
in  it  the  ancient  advocates  of  the  Curia  Regis — the  Serjeants — had 
sole  audience. 

When  the  office  of  Chief  Justiciary  was  abolished,  the  King's 
Pleas  were  left  to  be  decided  in  a  separate  court,  presided  over 
by  the  Chief  Justice  of  the  King's  Bench,  the  first  of  whom  was 
appointed  by  Henry  III. 

The  division  of  the  courts,  in  nearly  their  present  form,  of 
King's  Bench,  Common  Pleas,  and  Exchequer,  was  completed  by 
Edward  I.,  the  English  Justinian. 

The  Court  op  King's  Bench  at  first  took  cognisance  of  no 
other  suits  than  those  in  which  the  Crown  was  concerned ;  but  from 
the  increase  of  private  suits,  which  were  a  source  of  great  profit  to 
the  advocates,  means  were  gradually  employed  to  bring  them 
within  its  jurisdiction,  which  was  at  last  effected,  so  that  now  every 
description  of  cause  may  be  tried  there. 

The  Court  of  Common  Pleas  has  now  the  same  jurisdiction, 
and  remains  in  nearly  the  same  position,  as  when  it  was  first  esta- 
blished, with  the  exception  that  the  Serjeants,  by  a  recent  innova- 
tion, no  longer  monopolise  the  practice,  which  is  now  opened  to  all 
barristers. 

The  Court  op  Exchequer  was,  before  the  division  of  the 
courts,  an  integral  department  of  the  Curia  Kegis,  under  the  name 
of  Scaccarium,  in  which  all  cases  touching  the  Revenue  were 
decided,  and  now  continue  so  to  be.  But  by  similar  means  to  those 
before  alluded  to,  the  privileges  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  have 
been  encroached  upon,  and  private  suits  form  a  great  part  of  its 
employment.  '  The  judges  who  sit  in  the  court  are  called  barons, 
the  title  being  continued  from  the  barons  of  the  realm  who  origi- 
nally sat  in  the  Curia  Regis.  They  were  till  the  reign  of  James  I. 
of  a  much  lower  degree  than  the  other  judges,  and  indeed  were  not 
considered  men  of  the  law,  nor  ever  employed  to  go  the  circuits. 
The  statute  of  Nisi  Prius,  14  Edward  III.,  enacts  *  that  if  it  happen 
that  none  of  the  justices  of  the  one  bench  nor  of  the  other  come  into 
the  county,  then  the  Nisi  Prius  shall  be  granted  before  the  Chief 
Baron  of  the  Exchequer,  if  he  be  a  man  of  the  law.'  But  the 
general  increase  of  litigation  occasioned  by  the  extension  of  com- 
merce, with  the  gradual  combination  of  civil  and  revenue  cases,  by 
tlie  cunning  use  of  the  Writ  Quo  minusy  requiring  the  aid  of  learned 


viii  PREFACE, 

lawyers  for  their  decision^  it  was  determined  to  place  the  barons  on 
precisely  the  same  footing  as  the  other  judges,  and  consequently 
those  barons  who  were  appointed  after  the  twenty-first  year  of 
Queen  Elizabeth  were  selected  from  the  serjeants-at-law,  and  were 
distinguished  from  their  predecessors  by  the  term  *  Barons  of  the 
Coif.*  Kobert  Shute  was  the  first  of  these.  As  soon  as  the  court 
was  filled  with  these  legal  barons,  none  of  whom  had  been  instructed 
in  the  business  of  the  revenue,  it  became  necessary  to  appoint  a  new 
oflicer,  one  who  was  acquainted  with  and  could  attend  to  the  fiscal 
business  of  the  Exchequer.  He  was  called  the  puisne  or  cursitor 
baron,  whose  duty  it  was  to  inform  the  other  barons  of  the  course  of 
the  court  in  any  matter  that  concerned  the  King's  prerogative.  The 
first  of  these  cursitor  barons  was  Nowell  Sotherton,  who  was  ap- 
pointed in  1606;  but  the  office,  after  existing  250  years,  was 
abolished  in  1856,  its  duties  having  gradually  been  removed  to  other 
departments  of  the  State.*  The  Court  of  Exchequer  had  also  an 
equitable  jurisdiction,  which  in  the  year  1841  was  abolished,  and  its 
suits  were  transferred  to  the  Court  of  Chancery. 

All  the  judges  of  these  three  courts  must  be  selected  from  the 
serjeants-at-law,  a  practice  originating  from  the  advocates  in  the 
Curia  Regis  consisting  only  of  Serjeants,  and  they  from  their  learn- 
ing being  praised  to  the  bench.  But  as  business  accumulated,  other 
efficient  men,  who  practised  only  as  barristers,  had  opportunities  of 
distinguishing  themselves,  and  were  gradually  advanced  to  the 
bench,  on  which  occasions  the  old  custom  was  still  adhered  to  by 
investing  them  with  the  coif  before  they  received  their  patent 
as  judges.  This  change  was  commenced  in  the  reign  of  Queen 
Elizabeth  in  the  person  of  Robert  Monson  in  the  yeai*  1572,  and  is 
now  the  general  practice.  The  judges  and  Serjeants  always  address 
one  another  as  ^  Brothers.' 

The  number  of  these  judges  from  the  time  of  the  first  division 
of  the  courts  until  the  reign  of  Henry  VII.  varied  considerably,  ac- 
cording to  the  whim  of  the  Monarch,  the  claims  of  the  Government, 
or  the  necessity  for  additional  or  reduced  assistance.  By  a  reference 
to  a  little  volume  I  published,  called  *  Tabulae  Curiales,'  in  which  I 
have  shown  the  state  of  each  court  under  the  different  reigns,  and 
the  judges  who  sat  in  them  in  chronological  order,  it  will  be  seen 
that  there  was  no  regular  number,  but  that  it  varied  in  each  court, 

I  See  Jndge$  of  England,  tI.  16-27,  iz.  109. 


PREFACE.  ix 

sometimes  extending  to  eight  and  even  to  nine  on  one  of  the  benches. 
In  the  reign  of  Henry  VIIL,  however,  the  number  of  four  in 
each  of  the  three  courts  seems  to  have  been  established,  and  by 
its  continuance  nearly  without  change  till  the  reign  of  William  IV., 
a  period  of  300  years,  the  Twelve  Judges  of  England  came  to  be 
r^arded  as  a  sacred  institution.  This  number,  however,  was  in- 
creased in  the  reign  of  William  IV.,  by  whom  another  judge  was 
added  to  each  court ;  and  Queen  Victoria  has  followed  the  example ; 
so  that  instead  of  twelve  there  are  now  eighteen  judges  of  England. 
It  is  to  be  hoped  that  litigation  will  not  increase  so  much  as  to 
require  another  extension. 

The  Coubt  of  Chancery  originated  from  that  department 
of  the  Curia  Regis  called  the  Cancellaria,  in  which  were  prepared 
and  issued  the  various  writs  and  precepts  in  reference  to  the  Curia 
Regis.  There  also  were  all  royal  grants  and  charters,  and  other 
instruments  requiring  the  King's  seal,  supervised.  It  was  presided 
over  by  an  officer  called  the  King's  Chancellor,  who  held  at  first 
a  somewhat  inferior  rank  in  the  Curia  Regis,  but  who  sat  with  the 
rest  of  the  judges,  and  occasionally  even  went  a  circuit.  He  origi- 
naUy  was  the  King's  chief  chaplain,  and  little  more  than  his  private 
secretary,  being  commonly  rewarded  at  the  end  of  his  service  with 
a  bishopric.  His  intimate  connection  with  the  sovereign  naturally 
led  by  degrees  to  a  frequent  reference  to  him  upon  the  affairs  of 
state ;  and  gaining  thus  an  ascendency  in  council,  he  at  last  became, 
on  the  extinction  of  the  office  of  Chief  Justiciary  and  the  transfer  of 
the  legal  duties  of  that  functionary  to  a  court  of  law,  the  recognised 
Prime  Minister  of  the  kingdom.  This  responsible  position,  after  a 
lapse  of  several  centuries,  gradually  devolved  first  upon  favourites 
and  next  on  party  politicians ;  the  Chancellor  of  subsequent  times, 
though  losing  the  lead,  still  held  and  now  holds  a  most  influential 
place  in  the  Government  and  is  recognised  as  the  head  of  the  law,  but 
is  removable,  and  always  removed,  with  every  change  of  Ministers. 
From  his  first  title  of  the  Chancellor  of  the  King,  he  rose  to  that  of 
Chancellor  of  England ;  soon  after  he  was  called  Lord  Chancellor,  a 
title  which  has  been  since  increased  to  that  of  Lord  High  Chancellor. 
A  keeper  of  the  Great  Seal  was  sometimes  appointed  instead  of  a 
Chancellor,  and  it  was  somewhat  difficult  to  distinguish  the  diflerence 
in  dignity  between  the  one  and  the  other ;  but  in  the  reign  of  Queen 
Elizabeth  an  Act  of  Parliament  was  passed  declaring  their  identity 


X  PREFACE. 

in  rank,  power,  and  privileges.  The  Great  Seal  was  also  occasionally 
put  into  the  hands  of  Commissioners,  who  held  it  for  a  temporary, 
and  principally  for  a  political  purpose,  till  a  Chancellor  or  keeper 
was  appointed. 

The  duty  of  the  Chancellor  to  supervise  and  issue  the  necessary 
writs  and  charters  led  of  course  to  the  discussion  before  him  as  to  the 
propriety  and  expediency  of  them,  but  it  was  a  long  time  before 
questions  of  legal  wrong  were  referred  to  his  decision.  It  was  soon 
found  however  that  there  was  much  truth  in  the  maxim  ^  Summum 
jus,  summa  injuria ; '  consequently  questions  involving  private  wrong 
were  frequently  submitted  by  petition  to  Parliament,  where  they 
were  decided.  These  petitions  multiplied  to  such  an  extent  that  it 
was  found  necessary  to  refer  them  to  a  separate  court — naturally  pre- 
sided over  by  the  Chancellor;  and  the  rules  which  guided  it  were 
gradually  moulded  into  a  system  of  Equity  Law.  In  its  administra- 
tion the  necessity  of  additional  assistance  was  soon  apparent,  and  the 
clerks  or  masters  in  Chancery  were  resorted  to.  The  principal  one, 
who  received  the  title  of  Master  of  the  Rolls,  from  these  records 
being  specially  entrusted  to  his  care,  was  deputed  to  exercise  the 
same  jurisdiction.  The  first  who  was  designated  by  that  title  was 
John  de  Langton,  in  the  reign  of  Edward  I.  Commissions  also 
were  sometimes  issued  to  some  of  the  judges  to  ease  the  Chancellor 
in  hearing  causes.  The  Court  of  Exchequer  also  had  a  similar 
jurisdiction  till  1841,  when  it  was  taken  away,  and  its  Equity  cases 
were  transferred  to  the  Court  of  Chancery. 

More  permanent  assistance  had  been  previously  required  as  liti- 
i  gation  increased,  and  in  the  reign  of  George  III.  one  Vice-Chancellor 

I  was  appointed.     To  these  three  Equity  Judges  two  others  were 

I  added  by  our  present  Queen,  on  the  Court  of  Exchequer  losing  its 

■j  equitable  jurisdiction ;  and  the  decisions  of  the  Master  of  the  Rolls 

and  of  the  three  Vice-Chancellors  were  made  appealable  to  the  Lord 
J  Chancellor,   and   two   other  new  judges,  called  Lord  Justices  of 

Appeal.     So  that  the  Court  of  Chancery  now  consists  of  seven 
judges,  instead  of  the  two  to  which  it  was  limited  for  more  than 
500  years,  from  4he  reign  of  Edward  I.  to  that  of  George  III. 
ji  These  short  particulars  will  be  sufficient  to  explain  the  various 

designations  given  to  the  different  judges  included  in  this  Dictionary. 
I  Those  readers  who  are  desirous  of  more  ample  details  must  be  re- 

ferred  to  my  larger  work,  where  I  have  given  a  full  account,  not 


PREFACE.  xi 

only  of  the  Division  of  the  Courts,  but  also  of  the  origin  of  the  l^al 
Terms  and  Vacations ;  the  institution  and  formalities  of  Serjeants ; 
and  the  perquisites  of  the  Chancellors,  and  salaries  and  robes  of  the 
Judges.  In  it  I  have  also  traced  the  appointment  of  Attorney  and 
Solicitor  General,  and  the  first  designation  eo  nomine  of  King's 
Counsel;  the  various  uses  to  which  Westminster  Hall  has  been 
applied ;  the  origin  of  the  various  Inns  of  Court  and  Inns  of 
Chancery,  and  of  the  different  Serjeants'  Inns,  with  other  interesting 
details  incidental  to  the  History  of  the  Law. 


P.S. — In  my  eighty-third  year  I  cannot  expect  to  witness  either  the 
success  or  fidlore  of  the  new  scheme  for  the  arrangement  of  the  courts 
about  to  be  introduced  in  pursuance  of  an  Act  of  Parliament  passed  in  the 
last  Session.  I  own  that  I  cannot  predict  that  much  material  benefit  will 
result  from  the  intended  change ;  and  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  those 
who  are  conversant  with  the  history  of  the  past  will  consider  the  new 
High  Court  of  Justice  little  more  than  a  mere  revival  of  the  ancient 
CuETA  Regis,  with  all  its  varied  powers  and  privileges,  which  were  dis- 
tributed into  Uie  present  divisions  so  many  centuries  ago.  Another  remark- 
able restoration  will  be  noted  in  the  new  statute — ^that  by  which  the 
legal  Terms  are  reduced  from  four  to  three,  as  they  orif^nally  Rtood  in  the 
earlier  times.  But,  be  the  innovation  good  or  bad,  I  am  sure  it  is  well 
intended,  and  I  sincerely  hope  that  it  may  prove  as  beneficial  to  the 
administration  of  justice  as  its  promoters  anticipate. 

Note. — Although  the  Bill  referred  to  (which  was  hrought  into  the  Upper  House 
of  Parliament  by  Lord  Chancellor  Hatherley)  did  not  pass  during  the  Session  of 
1^70,  it  has  been  thought  wdl  to  preserve  the  author*s  remarks  on  it 


The  PRDrmrQ  of  this  volume  was  fitr  advanced  when  the  Author  was 
attacked  by  ilhiess,  which  ended  &tally  on  the  following  day.  In  these 
circumstances  it  seems  proper  that  the  many  lives  which  are  contained 
in  the  following  pages  should  be  accompanied  by  some  notice  of  the 
Biographer. 

Edward,  the  eldest  son  of  Edward  Smith  Foss  and  Anne,  daughter  of 
Dr.  William  Rose,  of  Chiswick,  and  sister  of  Samuel  Rose,  the  fiiend  of 
Cowper,  was  bom  in  Gough  Square,  Fleet  Street,  October  16,  1787.  By 
his  mother's  side  he  was  nearly  related  to  the  Rev.  Hugh  James  Rose, 
one  of  the  ablest  and  most  eloquent  among  the  English  clergy  of  late 
times,  and  to  his  brother,  the  present  learned  Archdeacon  of  Bedford ;  and 
one  of  his  maternal  aunts  was  the  wife  of  the  eminent  scholar  Dr.  Charles 
Bumey.  His  younger  brother,  Henry,  who  died  in  January  1868,  was  for 
many  years  a  partner  in  the  firm  of  Payne  and  Foss,  which  stood  at  the 
head  of  the  London  trade  in  rare  and  valuable  books,  and  was  distinguished 
for  his  great  bibliographical  knowledge. 

Edward  Foss  was  educated  under  Dr.  Bumey,  at  Greenwich,  and  in 
1804  was  articled  to  his  father,  who  was  a  solicitor  in  Essex  Street,  Strand. 
In  1811  he  became  a  partner,  and  on  his  father's  death  in  1830  he  suc- 
ceeded to  the  whole  business,  which  he  carried  on  with  a  high  reputation 
for  ability  and  integrity.  In  1827-8,  when  his  friend  Mr.  Spottiswoode 
was  one  of  the  Sheriffs  of  London,  he  filled  the  office  of  Under- Sheriff. 
HiR  professional  work  brought  him  into  intercourse  with  most  of  the 
leading  barristers  of  the  day,  so  that,  while  he  was  able  to  turn  to  account 
his  observation  of  the  Judges  who  then  occupied  the  Bench,  he  could  speak 
from  nearer  personal  knowledge  of  many  who,  by  later  promotion,  came 
to  be  included  among  the  subjects  of  his  biographical  labours.  In  1822 
ho  became  a  member  of  the  Inner  Temple,  with  the  intention  of  being 
called  to  the  Bar ;  but  he  afterwards  relinquished  this  plan,  and  continued 
to  practise  in  his  original  branch  of  the  legal  profession  until  1840,  when 
he  retired  from  business. 

In  1844  he  removed  from  Streatham,  where  he  had  for  some  time  Hved, 
to  Street  End  House,  about  three  miles  from  Canterbury.  The  change 
was  one  which  for  most  men  would  have  involved  no  small  risk ;  for  in 
too  many  cases  it  has  been  found  that  a  withdrawal  from  a  life  of  busy 
engagements  to  one  of  competence  and  leisure  does  not  bring  the 
happiness  which  had  been  expected;  and  so  it  might  have  been  with 
Mr.  Foss.  He  had  little  taste  for  country  occupations  or  amusements ; 
and,  although  he  took  an  active  part  in  the  public  business  of  the  neigh- 
bourhood— among  other  things,  by  acting  as  chairman  of  the  Canterbury 
bench  of  magistrates,  where  his  strong  sense  and  his  legal  knowledge 


XUl 

made  his  senrices  very  valuable — this  was  not  enough  to  fill  up  his  time. 
In  his  own  words,  he  '  found  that  full  employment  was  necessary  to  his 
existence  and  his  happiness ;'  *  and  he  was  fortunately  able  to  provide 
himself  with  the  means  of  such  employment.  He  had  always  felt  a  strong 
love  of  literature ;  he  had  already  pubhshed  some  volumes,  besides  many 
oontributionB,  both  in  prose  and  in  verse,  to  periodicals  and  newspapers ; 
and  he  had  early  formed  a  project  of  writing  the  lives  of  all  the  English 
Judges.  Through  many  years  of  busy  London  life  he  had  kept  this 
project  steadily  in  view,  and  had  gradually  accumulated  large  stores  of 
materials  for  carrying  it  into  effect.  These  he  now  set  himself  to  arrange, 
to  complete,  and  to  employ  in  composition ;  and  the  first  two  volumes 
of '  The  Judges  of  Englimd '  were  published  in  1848.' 

Although  these  volumes  were  at  once  noticed  with  high  praise  by  some 
of  the  most  esteemed  critics,  the  general  reception  of  them  was  not  very 
encouraging.  Lord  Campbell,  in  his  '  Lives  of  the  Chancellors,'  had  lately 
made  the  public  familiar  with  a  very  different  style  of  legal  biography ; 
and  when  readers  came  to  take  up  Mr.  Foss's  account  of  the  early  judges 
with  the  expectation  of  finding  it  equally  amusing  with  Lord  CampbeH's 
popular  narratives,  they  could  not  but  be  disappointed.  The  Chancellors 
were  commonly  men  who  had  played  an  important  part  in  the  history  of 
their  times :  of  the  older  Judges,  the  vast  majority  were  utterly  forgotten ; 
as  to  many  of  them,  it  was  necessary  to  enquire  whether  they  ever  existed 
at  all,  and,  if  so,  whether  they  Were  judges  or  not ;  and  perhaps  nothing 
more  could  be  ascertained,  after  all  possible  enquiry,  than  that  their  sig^na- 
tores  were  found  attached  to  certain  documents,  and  so  prove  them  to 
have  been  in  certain  places  at  certain  times.  It  was  unfortunate  for  tho 
author  that  ihe  portion  of  his  book  whichwas  first  published  should  be  that 
in  which  the  names  for  the  most  part  had  nothing  of  attraction  for  the 
generality  of  readers,  and  were  incapable  of  being  invested  with  any 
other  interest  than  that  which  arises  from  skilful  investigation  and 
acmpulous  correctness. 

The  two  volumes,  therefore,  could  not  be  regarded  as  at  first  very 
saccessful.  But  Mr.  Foss  knew  that  he  was  doing  a  good  and  substantial 
work ;  he  felt  that  in  it  he  had  found  a  source  of  continual  interest,  tho 
chief  occupation  of  his  life  ;  and  he  determined  to  persevere,  even  if  tho 
pablication  should  involve  (as  at  one  time  seemed  not  unlikely)  a  con- 
siderable pecuniary  loss.  The  third  and  fourth  volumes  appeared  in 
1S51 ;  the  fifth  and  sixth,  in  1857  ;  the  last  three,  in  1864. 

In  the  meantime  the  reputation  of  the  book  had  been  rising.  The 
subject  became  more  interesting  as  it  advanced;  the  author's  laborious 
research,  his  acuteness  in  enquiry,  his  sound  and  impartial  judgment, 
Were  discerned,  and  were  warmly  acknowledged  by  the  highest  critical 

'  Introduction  to  '  Judges  of  England,*  p.  xiii. 

*  It  may  be  well  to  mention  that  Mr.  Fosb's  set  (consisting  of  nearly  100  voIutdcn)  of  tlio 
Beeofid  Commission's  publications,  for  which,  in  the  preface  to  the  second  instalment  of  his 
vork^  be  acknowledges  himself  indebted  to  '  the  liberality  of  Government,'  was  granted  to  him 
St  the  instance  of  Lord  Langdale,  then  Master  of  the  Rolls,  to  whom  '  The  Lives  of  the  Judges  * 
ire  dedicated,  and  who  early  showed  his  high  estimation  of  them. 


XIV 

authorities;*-  and  long  before  the  conclnding  volumes  were  published,  the 
v^ork  had  taken  its  place  as  (what  Lord  Campbell's  '  Lives '  could  never 
become)  one  of  historical  authority.  How  valuable  it  is  in  this  character 
may  be  in  some  degree  understood  from  the  continual  references  to  it  in 
Dr.  Pauli's  learned  *  Oeschichte  von  England ; '  nor  was  this  by  any 
means  the  only  testimony  which  the  author  received  of  the  appreciation 
which  his  work  has  found  among  German  men  of  letters.  In  America  also 
its  reputation  is  well  established ;  and,  resting  as  that  reputation  does  on 
A  foundation  of  solid  merits,  it  is  not  likely  to  be  disturbed. 

From  the  lives  of  Judges,  Mr.  Foss  was  led  on  to  the  compilation  of  his 
'  TabulsB  Curiales ;'  and  his  last  years  were  employed  in  the  re-casting 
Df  his  old  materials  with  a  view  to  the  present  publication. 

While  engaged  on  these  labours,  he  removed  in  1859  from  Street  End 
bo  Churchill  House,  near  Dover;  and  in  1865  he  finally  settled  at 
Prensham  House,  Addiscombe.  The  infirmities  of  age  fell  gently  on  him, 
ind  he  retained  to  the  last  his  powers  of  sight  and  hearing,  with  the  full 
^gour  of  his  mind.  £Us  death  took  place  at  Frensham  House  on 
Fuly  27,  1870,  and  his  remains  are  interred  in  the  neighbouring  church- 
rard  of  Shirley.  By  those  who  knew  him  he  will  be  remembered  as  a 
nan  of  strong  understanding,  of  thorough  uprightness,  and  of  kind  and 
^nerous  heart. 

He  was  twice  married — first,  in  1814,  to  Catherine,  daughter  of  Peter 
^rtineau,  Esq. ;  and  again,  in  1844,  to  Maria  Elizabeth,  daughter  of 
iYilliam  Hutchins,  Esq.  By  his  second  marriage  he  has  left  six  sons  and 
ihree  daughters.  The  eldest  son,  Edward  W.  Foss,  a  barrister  of  the 
[nner  Temple,  assisted  in  the  revision  of  this  volume,  and  has  completed 
he  task  since  his  father's  death. 

Mr.  Foss  was  a  Fellow  of  tiie  Society  of  Antiquaries,  to  which  he  was 
lected  in  1822 ;  a  member  of  several  other  antiquarian  and  literary 
ocieties ;  a  member  of  the  Incorporated  Law  Society,  which  elected  him 
s  its  president  in  1842  and  1843  ;  a  magistrate  for  Kent  and  Surrey ; 
^  Deputy-Lieutenant  for  Kent,  &o. 

His  chief  publications  were  — 

I.  *  The  Beauties  of  Massinger,'  1817. 

II.  'Abridgment  of  Blackstone's  Commentaries,'  published  (1820)  in 
he  name  of  John  Gifford,  Esq.,  who  had  undertaken  the  work,  but  died 
»efore  completing  the  first  sheet.  (This  volume  had  a  large  sale,  and 
bras  translated  into  German.) 

III.  *  The  Grandeur  of  the  Law ;  or.  The  Legal  Peers  of  England,'  1843. 

IV.  *  The  Judges  of  England,'  9  vols.,  1848-64. 

V.  *  Tabulae  Curiales ;  or,  Tables  of  the  Superior  Courts  of  Westminster 
lall,  showing  the  Judges  who  sat  in  them  from  1066  to  1864.' — 1865. 

VI.  *Biographia  Juridica:  a  Biographical  Dictionary  of  the  Judges,' 
870. 

>  •  Edinbnrgh  ReTiew/  roL  cvi. ;  *  Qnaiterly  Review,*  vol.  cxix.  j  *  Saturday  Review,* 
Imes,*  &C.,  iodading  several  legal  periodicals. 


XV 

VII.  Contributions  to  the  *  ArchaBologia  :* — 

(1)  'On  the  Lord  Chancellors  in  the  Reign  of  King  John/ 

(2)  •  The  Lineage  of  Sir  Thomas  More.' 

(3)  '  On  the  Relationship  between  Bishop  Fitajames  and  Lord  Chief 
Justice  Fitzjames.' 

(4)  •  On  the  Origin  of  the  Title  and  Office  of  Corsitor  Baron  of  the 
Exchequer.*     (And  other  communications.) 

Vm.  •  On  the  Collar  of  SS  '  (•  Archa9ologia  Cantiana,'  vol.  i.  1858). 

EX.  *  Legal  History  of  Westminster  ELall '  (in  •  Old  London — Papers 
read  at  the  London  Congress  of  the  Archaeological  Institute,  1867  '). 

Mr.  Fobs  also  contributed  largely  to  the  '  Monthly  Review,'  Aikin*8 
'Athenaeum,*  the  'London  Magazine,*  the  'Gentleman's  Magazine,*  the 
*  Legal  Observer,'  '  Notes  and  Queries,*  &c.  A  small  volume  of  his 
epigrams  and  other  pieces  in  verse  (most  of  which  had  appeared  in 
newspapers)  was  privately  printed  in  1803,  under  the  title  of  '  A  Century 
of  Inventions.' 


J.  C.  Robertson. 


PxEcnrcTS,  CAirniBBUBT: 
September  1870. 


• 

•  * 


BIOGEAPHIA   JUBIDICA. 


1066—1870. 


ABBIH6W0BTH,  Gilbert  de,  was  one  his  admission  into  Corpus  Christi  College, 
of  the  justices  itinerant  into  the  counties  Oxford,  in  March  1781,  where  he  imme- 
of  Sussex,  Surrey,  Kent,  and  Middlesex,  in  <  diately  obtained  a  scholarship.  At  Oxford 
-i  Henry  III.,  1218.  His  name  also  appears  '  he  distinguished  himself  by  gaining  the 
with  that  designation  on  fines  levied  at  •  only  two  honours  which  the  tmiyersity 
Westminster  in  that  year ;  showing  that  then  bestowed,  the  chancellor's  medals  for 
the  justices  itinerant  were  accustomed  to  Latin  and  English  compositions.  The  sub- 
sit  at  Westminster.  He  was  employed  in  ject  of  the  former  (in  1784)  was  *  Globus 
the  same  manner  in  122d,  for  Surrey ;  and  Aerostaticus,*  the  noyelty  of  Lunardi's 
in  the  next  year  was  at  the  head  of  those  balloon  occasioning  the  thesis ;  and  that 
appointed  to  collect  the  quinzime  of  that  of  the  latter  (In  1786)  *  The  Use  and 
county.     (Hot.  Clam,  i,  7o,  146.)  Abuse  of  Satire,  an  essay  so  much  admired 

ABBOTT,  Charles,  when  created  Lord  for  its  learning  and  reasoning  that  it  was 
Tenterden,  far  from  following  the  example  afterwards  published.  Having  taken  his 
<if  many  a  new-made  peer  by  endeavounng  '  decrees,  he  was  rewarded  with  a  fellowship 
to  trace  his  pedigree  to  an  ancient  race,  >  in  nis  college,  and  became  sub-tutor  under 
gloried  in  his  descent  from  parents  in  the  I  Dr.  Burgess,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Salisbury, 
lower  ranks  of  life,  as  exemplifying  the  Soon  aner  he  was  selected  as  the  private 
beauty  of  the  British  constitution,  which  tutor  of  Mr.  Yarde,  the  son  of  Mr.  Justice 
excludes  no  one  from  its  honours,  and  even  '  Buller ;  and  that  sagacious  judge,  seeing 
opens  the  door  of  the  peerage  to  the  most  and  appreciating  his  talents,  recommended 
humble  individual,  when  merit  claims  an  him  to  devote  his  attention  to  the  legal 
entrance.  When  he  was  at  his  highest  instead  of  the  clerical  profession.  He 
ekvation  he  attended  the  festival  of  the  accordingly  entered  himseu  at  the  Middle 
f^hool  in  his  native  city,  at  which  he  im-  Temple  on  November  16,  1787 ;  but  in 
bibed  the  rudiments  of  his  education,  May  1793  he  removed  to  the  Inner  Temple, 
acknowledged  the  benefits  he  had  received  by  which  he  was  ultimately  called  to  the 
from  its  foundation,  and  perpetuated  the  bar.  In  the  meantime,  for  the  purpose  of 
memory  of  his  connection  with  it,  by  acquiring  a  practical  knowledge  of  the 
founding  two  prizes  for  future  aspirants,  working  of  the  law,  he  attended  for  some 
(>n  his  epitaph  too,  written  by  his  own  pen,  months  the  office  of  Messrs.  Sandys  &  Co., 
he  recoras  himself  as  sprung  ^humilbmis  attorneys  in  considerable  business,  and  then 
sortis  paren tibus. '  placed  himself  under  Mr.  (afterwards  Baron) 

He  was  bom  on  October  7, 1762,  in  the  Wood,  the  leading  pleader  of  that  day. 
precincts  of  Canterbury  Cathedral,  where  Subsequently  Mr.  Aboott  selected  the  same 
his  father,  John  Abbott,  carried  on  a  re-  department  for  his  own  commencement ; 
spectable  business  as  a  wigmaker  and  and  for  several  years  devoted  himself  to 
luurdres.ser.  His  mother  was  Alice,  dau^h-  this  branch  of  tne  science,  with  so  much 
ter  of  Daniel  Bunce  of  the  same  city,  success,  that  in  July  1795  he  was  enabled 
Having  entered  the  granunar-school  there,  to  take  the  important  step  of  marrying, 
called,  from  its  foundation  by  Henry  VHI.,  His  bride  was  Mary,  daughter  of  John 
the  King's  school,  by  his  industey  and  Lagier  Lamotte,  Esq.,  of  Basilden  in  Kent, 
devemess  he  gave  such  satisfaction  to  his  His  call  to  the  bar  was  in  the  following 
master^  Dr.  Osmond  Beauvoir,  and  to  the  February;  and  he  joined  the  Oxford  circuit, 
ftverend  trustees  of  the  cathedral,  that  he  Such  was  his  reputation  as  a  special 
leceived  one  of  the  school  exhibitions  on    pleader,  that  no  sooner  did  he  assume  the 

n 


2  ABBOTT  ABBOTT 


barri8ter*8  gown  than  he  was  employed  as 
junior  counsel  for  the  crown  in  all  the 
numerous  state  prosecutions  for  the  next 
ten  years,  under  the  attorney-generalships 
of  Lord  Eldon,  Lord  Redesdale,  Lord 
EUenborough,  and  the  Hon.  Spencer  Per- 
ceyal.  In  1801  he  was  elected  recorder  of 
Oxford ;  and  in  1802  he  published  a  work 


for  'misconduct  at  the  riots  in  that  dtju 
He  immediately  took  to  his  bed,  fronn 
which  he  neyer  rose,  but  died  on  Noyember 
4,  1832,  exactly  fourteen  years  since  he  was 
constituted  chief  justice.  He  was  buried 
in  the  Foundling  Hospital,  and  on  hia 
monument  is  a  modest  mscription  written, 
by  himselfl 


on  '  The  Law  Relating  to  Merchant  Ships  Various  attempts  haye  been  made  to> 
and  Seamen,*  a  treatise  which  was  praised  j  analyse  Lord  Tenterden*s  mind  and  cha- 
by  all  jurists,  and  at  once  became  the  racter,  and  a  great  deal  of  ingenuity  and 
standard  book  and  practical  guide  on  the  ,  eloquence  haye  been  expended  in  tne  en- 
subject  It  raised  Mr.  Abbott's  reputation  .  deavour.  All  allow  that  both  were  pecu- 
so  nigh,  and  consequently  brought  him  I  liarly  fitted  for  the  judicial  office,  in  his- 
snch  an  accession  of  employment  in  com-  practice  at  the  bar  and  in  his  opinions  in 
mercial  and  maritime  cases,  that  when  an  answer  to  cases  he  exhibited  less  of  the 
income-tax  was  imposed  in  1807  he  re-  adyocate  than  of  the  arbitrator.  It  was 
turned  his  professional  receipts  during  the  not  till  he  was  raised  to  the  bench  that  his 
previous  year  at  8,026/.  6$,  full  poweis  were  brought  into  play.    There 

With  such  an  income  as  this  it  is  not    he  soon  proyed  himself  one  of  tlie  ablest 
surprifdng  that  he  should  haye  declined  in   judges  that  eyer  presided.    He  was  pecu- 
1808  to  accept  the  offer  then  made  him  of   liarly  a  common-sense  judge.     Complete 
a  seat  on  the  bench.    Neither  would  he  ,  master  of  every  branch  of   law,  strictly 
apjply  for  the  honour  of  a  silk  gown,  con-    impartial  and  unprejudiced,  and  detesting 
scions  that  his  temperament  and  disposition    anything  that  approached  to  quibbling,  he 
disqualified  him  as  a  leader,  and  that  his    applied  himself  to  discover  the  justice  of 
services  as  a  junior  would  be  more  usefully   the  case  before  him,  and  by  his  clear  and' 
employed  and  in  greater  requisition  than  if  perspicuous  explanations  most  commonly 
he  aimed  at  the  higher  grade.    But  after  j  led  the  jury  to  a  right  conclusion.    Severe^ 
eight  years  more  of  laborious  but  profit-  .  against  everything  that  had  the  semblance 
Me  application,  he  felt  that  his  nealth  '  of  fraud  or  conspiracy,  he  was  particularly 
would  not  bear  the  continued  strain  upon    so  if  an  attorney  was  implicated ;  but  to- 
his  faculties,  and  that  he  could  with  pru-    the  respectable  members  of  the  profession 
dence  accept  the  comparative  relief  of  a    he  showed  marked  respect  and  urbanity, 
judgeship.    On  the  death  therefore  of  Mr.    J£  he  occasionally  exhibited  impatience  at 
Justice  Heath,  Mr.  Abbott  was  raised  to  ;  the  long  speeches  and  irrelevant  arguments 
the  vacant  seat  in  the  Common  I'leas  on  '  of  counsel,  it  should  be  remembered  that  it 
January  24,  1816,  receiving  the  customary    was  occasioned  by  his  anxiety  to  clear  away 
honour  of  knighthood.  |  the  accumulation  of  business,  the  extent  of 

He  remained  in  that  court  little  more  which  may  be  estimated  by  the  fact  that 
than  three  months,  remonng  on  May  3,  while  Loni  Mansfield  had  to  dispose  of  only 
very  unwillingly,  but  at  the  urgent  soli-  200  causes  at  a  sitting,  the  number  had  in- 
citation  of  Lord  Ellenborough,  to  the  court  >  creased  in  Lord  Tenterden's  time  to  above 
of  Kinff's  Bench  as  the  successor  of  Sir  800 :  but  as  a  significant  proof  of  the  esti- 
Simon  Le  Blanc.  His  excellence  in  a  judi-  ,  mation  and  respect  in  which  he  was  held 
cial  character  was  so  prominent  that  when  ;  by  his  bar,  notwithstanding  the  rebukes 
Lord  Ellenborough  resigned  two  years  and  sometimes  administered,  they  paid  him  the 
a  half  after,  he  was  elevated  to  the  chief  imusual  compliment  of  attending  in  a  body 
justiceship  on  November  4,  1818.  After  his  introduction  as  a  peer  into  the  House 
having  continued  in  the   office  for  nine  ^  of  Lords. 

years,  and  established  his  fame  by  the  ex-  As  a  member  of  that  house  he  carefully 
emplary  manner  in  which  he  fulfilled  its  .  avoided  all  party  politics,  but  with  higk 
duties,  the  royal  wish  was  intimated  to  Tory  principles  opposed  any  attempted  in- 
him,  that  he  should  be  created  a  peer ;  and  novation  on  the  constitution.  He  spoke 
he  was  accordingly  ennobled,  by  the  title  of  against  the  repeal  of  the  Test  and  Corpora- 
Baron  Tenterden  of  Hendon  in  Middlesex,  tion  Acts,  the  Roman  Catholic  Relief  Bill, 
on  April  ;K),  1827.  and  the  several  bills  for  reform  in  parlia- 

Soon  after  this  elevation  his  health  began  ment,  as  dangerous  speculations  and  not 
to  decline,  and  his  infirmities  were  in-  likelyto  produce  the  benefits  which  their  ad- 
creased  by  his  anxious  exertions  to  contend  vocates  prophesied.  In  his  own  department 
with  the  growing  business  of  his  court,  he  introduced  and  carried  several  useful 
He  betrayeid  no  diminution  of  mental  en-  measures,  and  to  his  care  and  diligence  the 
erg;^,  and  so  farfrom  shrinking  from  judicial  legal  profession  is  mainly  indebted  for  the 
duties  he ,  died  almost  in  harness ;  being  statutes  0  Geo.  IV.  c.  14  and  15,  for  the ' 
seized  with  his  last  illness  while  sitting  on  limitation  of  actions,  and  for  the  preventioii 
the  third  day's  trial  of  the  mayor  of  Bristol,    of  a  failure  of  j  ustice  by  reason  ofTa  variance "- 


ABEL  ABNEY  3 

between  Tecords  and  writings  produced  in  f  ABVST,  Thomas.  The  Abneys  were  ori« 
evidence  ;  and  also  for  the  statutes  2  and  |  ffinAily  seated,  almost  from  the  time  of  the 
3  WilL  lY.  c.  S9,  for  nniformity  of  process.  >  Conquest,  at  a  Tillage  of  that  name  in 
It  is  pleasing  to  find  that  the  relaxations  j  Derbyshire.  They  afterwards  settled  at 
of  a  mind  so  oTerburdened  with  the  labours  I  Willesley  in  the  same  county;  and  the 
of  a  judicial  life  should  be  in  botanical  i  jadffe  was  the  son  of  Sir  Edward  Abney, 
researches  and  in  literary  pursuits.  The  LLTD,,  of  that  place,  an  eminent  civilian 
union  of  these  in  him  produced  some  elegant  I  and  M.P.  for  Leicester  in  1090  and  1695, 
Latin  Terses  of  great  classical  merit,  in  the  >  and  the  nephew  of  Sir  Thomas  Abney  the 
composition  of  which  he  amused  the  little  I  famous  lord  mayor  of  London  in  1701,  whose 
intervals  of  leisure  durine  the  latter  portion  |  virtues  are  celebrated  in  an  elegy  by  Dr. 
of  his  life ;  as  in  his  eanier  years  he  had  |  Isaac  Watts.  (Funeral  Sermon^  by  Jer. 
penned  some  graceful  English  trifles.  i  Smithy  1722.)     His  mother  was  .nidith, 

ICif  was  a  truly  domestic  home.    His  :  daughter  and   co-heir  of  Peter  Ban;   a 
wife  survived  him  only  six  weeks.    Of  his    London  merchant.    He  entered  himself  at 
four  children,  John  Henry,  the  eldest  son,    the  Inner  Temple  in  1097,  put  on  his  bar  • 
is  the  present  peer,      (toicnsmd'a  Ttcdve  '  gown  in  1713,  and  was  made  a  bencher  in 
Judgety   ii.  234;  Jardin^s  Life,  in   Biog.    1733. 

DiWm  Soc.  Useful  KnowL)  Being  placed  on  the  commission  of  the 

JoH5,  was  not  improbably  the  '  peace  for  Middlesex,  he  was  chosen  for  the 

chairman  of  the  quarter  sessions  at  Hicks's 
Hall,  in  February  1731.  In  1733  he  was 
one  of  the  commissioners  to  enquire  into 
the  fees,  &c.,  of  the  officers  of  the  Ex- 
chequer ;  and  in  the  same  year  he  was  ap- 
pointed attorney-general  for  the  duchy  of 
engage^in  the  king's  service  in  23  Edward  I  Lancaster,  with  the  grade  of  king's  counseL 
L  {Ahb,  Mot.  Orig.  i.  112),  and  two  years  '  From  this  he  was  advanced  in  December 
afterwards  we  find  him  seneschal  of  the  \  1735  to  be  judge  of  the  Palace  Court  and 
^ueen  and  cnstos  of  her  lands.  {Rot,  Pari.  ;  steward  of  the  Marshalsea,  and  was  then 
1. 140-205.)  Both  he  and  his  wife  were  knighted.  At  the  same  time  he  was  in  full 
summoned  to  the  coronation  of  Edward  U.  |  practice,  and  among  the  causes  in  which  he 
among  those  selected  from  the  county  of  :  distinguished  himself  was  that  of  Moore  v. 
Kent.  The  Corporation  of  Hastings,  in  which  he 

On  March  8, 1312,  he  was  constituted  one  established  the  right  of  the  eldest  son  of  a 
of  the  barons  of  the  Exchequer,  and  in  the  freeman  to  be  admitted  a  freeman  of  the 
next  year  he  received  the  office  of  king's  borough.  (Strangej  1070 ;  State  Triale,  xvii. 
eseheator,  the  duties  of  which  he  performed,    845. ) 

principally  on  the  south  of  Trent,  for  three  His  elevation  to  the  bench  of  Westminster 
yens.  (Abb.  Rot.  Orig.  i.  195-210.)  During  was  not  long  delayed,  being  made  a  baron 
that  time  he  was  employed  to  fix  the  tallage  |  of  the  Exchequer  in  November  1740.  In 
on  the  dty  of  London  and  on  the  king*s    little  more  than  two  years  he  was  renioved, 


eon  or  grandson  of   a  goldsmith  named 
Richard  Abel,  who,  in  27  Henry  IH.,  was 

rinted  maker  and  cutter  of  the  dies  for 
king's  mint  {Madox,  ii.  88.),  as  the 
whole  of  John's  property  was  situated  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  London.    He  was 


burghs,  &C.,  in  the  home  counties ;  and  was 
also  directed  to  attend  the  coimcil,  with 
instructions  to  be  in  readiness  to  proceed 


in  February  1743^  to  the  Conmion  Pleas. 
There  he  sat  for  the  rest  of  his  life,  which 
was  terminated  by  one  of  those  afflicting 


oo  the  kinfi^s  service  beyond  the  seas.  I  visitations,  too  commonlv  occasioned  by  the 

It  would  appear  that  when  he  entered  I  infamous  manner  in  which  the  common 
on  the  functions  of  eseheator  he  resigned    gaols  were  then  conducted,  and  the  confined 


his  seat  in  the  Excheouer,  for  he  was  re- 
appointed a  baron  on  May  4, 1315 ;  and  was 
probably  again  removed  in  14  Edward  H., 
as  he  was  not  summoned  to  parliament 


construction  of  the  criminal  courts.  The 
Black  Sessions  at  the  Old  Bailey  in  May 
1750  will  be  long  remembered.  An  un- 
usually large  number  of  prisoners  were 


Edward  IL,  possessed,  among  others,  of 
Urge  estates  at  Footscray  and  Lewisham  in 
Kent,  at  Rochford  in  Essex,  and  at  Camber- 
well  in  Surrey,  besides  the  manor  of  Da- 
djngton  in  Oxfordshire,  about  which  there 


beyond  that  year,  and  because  a  new  baron    arraigned,  all  most  uncleanly,  and  some  suf- 
then    nominated.      He    died    in   10    fering  from  the  gaol  distemper;  and  a  great 

concourse  of  spectators  were  crowded  in  the 
"narrow  court  to  hear  the  trial  of  Captain 
Clarke  for  killing  Captain  Innes  in  a  dueL 
These,  added  to  the  filthy  state  of  the 
rooms  in  connection  with  the  court,  ^ 
icas^afterwards  a  suit  in  parliament  between  tainted  the  air  tb  at  many  of  those  assembled 
his  three  daughters  by  his  wife  Margerv,  were  struck  with  fever,  of  whom  no  less 
and  their  husbands,  and* the  Earl  of  Norfolk,  .  than  forty  died.  Of  the  judges  in  the  com 
who  claimed  it  by  a  subsequent  grant  from  |  mission  only  the  chief  justice  (Lee)  and 
Edward  ELL  (Pari.  WrUs,  ii.  421 ;  Cal  i  the  recorder  (Adams)  escaped.  Those  who 
hpas.  p.  m.  i.  303;  Rot.  Pari  ii.  391.)  ,  fell  a  sacrifice  to  the  pestdence  were  Mr. 

Lord.    See  J.  Scarlett.  Justice    Abnev,    Mr.  Baron   Cl&ike,  S\i 

b2 


4  ABRINCIS 

Samuel  Feimant,  lordma^or,  and  Alderman 
Sir  Daniel  Lambert ;  besides  several  of  the 
counsel  and  juirmen. 

Sir  Michael  Foster,  who  in  his  report  of 
the  Trial  of  the  Rebels  (p.  75),  after  desig- 
nating Sir  Thomas  Abney  as  'a  very 
worthy  man,  learned  in  his  profession,  and 
of  great  integrity,'  proceeds  thus  : — '  He 
was  through  an  openness  of  temper,  or  a 
pride  of  virtue  habitual  to  him,  incapable 
of  recommending  himself  to  that  kind  of 
low  assiduous  craft,  by  which  we  have 
known  some  unworthy  men  make  their 
wav  to  the  favour  of  the  great.  .  .  .  . 
In  liis  judicial  capacity  he  constantly  paid 
a  religious  regard  to  the  merits  of  the 
question  in  the  light  the  case  appeared  to 
him ;  and  his  judgment  very  seldom  mis- 
led him.  In  short,  when  he  died  the  world 
lost  a  very  valuable  man^  his  majesty  an 
excellent  subject,  and  the  public  a  faithful 
able  servant.' 

He  married  Frances,  daughter  of  Joshua 
Burton,  of  Brackley  in  Northamptonshire, 
and  left  a  son,  Thomas,  whose  onty  daugh- 
ter married  General  Sir  Charles  tiastings, 
Bart  Their  descendants  have  assumed  the 
name  of  Abney  in  addition  to  their  own, 
and  possess  Willesley  Hall,  the  judge's 
seat.  Another  branch  of  the  Abney  fiEunily 
is  seated  at  Measham  Hall  in  the  same 
county. 

ABBIHCIS,  or  AYEEEKCHE8,  WiL- 
LIAK  DE,  is  one  of  the  twelve  barons 
inserted  in  Dugdale's  ^  Chronica  Series '  as 
justices  itinerant  in  II70  for  the  counties 
of  Kent,  Surrey,  Middlesex,  Berks,  Oxford, 
Buckingham,  and  Bedford.  These  barons, 
however,  cannot  be  properly  so  considered  ; 
they  seem,  in  fact,  only  commissioners  ap- 
pointed to  enquire  into  the  abuses  of  sherins, 
Miliffs,  and  otiber  officers. 

He  was  the  grandson  of  a  Norman  noble 
of  the  same  name ;  and  the  son  of  Roe- 
landus  de  Abrincis,  a  valiant  soldier  under 
Henry  I.,  by  his  wife  Maud,  the  daughter 
and  heir  of  Nieel  de  Monville,  or  Mundevil, 
who  brought  him  the  lordship  of  Folke- 
stone in  Kent,  with  all  the  lands  and 
honours  she  inherited  from  her  mother, 
Emma,  the  daughter  of  William  de  Arques. 
According  to  the  manner  of  the  time^  he 
devoted  part  of  his  property  to  religious 
purposes.  In  1147  he  ratified  his  mother's 
grant  of  the  lordship  of  Siwelle  in  North- 
amptonshire, to  the  abbey  of  St.  Andrew 
in  Northampton :  and  he  gave  to  the  church 
of  Our  Ladv  of  Merton  two  sheaves  of  his 
whole  lordship,  with  the  tithes  of  his  mill, 
paunage,  cheese,  calves,  colts,  lambs,  apples, 
and  nuts,  in  pure  almes.  To  the  monks  of 
Essay,  in  Normandy,  he  also  gave  the 
fourth  part  of  the  church  of  St.  Saviour, 
with  the  tithe  of  the  chapelxy  of  his  own 
house,  and  other  benefactions* 
He  died  before  2  Ricbazd  I,  his  son 


ACLE 

Simon  being  then  in  possession  of  the  es* 
tates.  The  male  branch  of  the  fiunily 
terminated  a  little  before  the  year  1235,  bj 
the  death  of  another  William  de  Abrincis 
without  issue.  His  sister  became  his  heir, 
and  married  Hamon  Crevequer,  lord  of 
Leeds  Castle,  in  Kent.  (Dugdale's  Bo" 
ronage^  i.  467;  Mimast.  v.  190.) 

ABTITDOH,  Richard  de,  held  the  im- 
portant  office    of   chamberlain  of  North 
Wales  from  the  12th  to  the  18th  Edward  1., 
his  duty  being  the  collection  and  disburse- 
ment of  the  royal  revenues  in  that  newly 
subjugated  country.     (Arch^eol.  Joum.  vii. 
239.)    He  had  no  doubt  been  previousW 
connected  with  the  Exchequer  in  Englana^ 
where,  rising  by  degrees,  he  was,  on  Octo- 
ber 17, 1299,  27  Edward  I.,  constituted  one 
of  the  barons  of  that  court,  and  kept  his 
place  there  during  the  rest  of  that  King's 
life.    In  37  Edwfurd  1.  he  and  another  were 
appointed  custodes  of  the  vacant  bishopric 
01  Ely.    Though  at  the  commencement  of 
the  next  reign  he  was  not  immediately 
re-sworn  a  baron,  his  name  being  omitted 
in  the  patent  of  September,  1307  on  Ja- 
nuary 30,  1308,  he  had  a  special  patent 
constituting  him  a  baron,  '  ita  quod  m  eo* 
dem  Scaccario  habuit  eundem  locum  quern 
habuit  tempore  Domini  Edwardi  quondam 
regis  Angliffi,  patris  regis  nunc'    A.  eakaj 
of  forty  marks  was  attached  to  his  office, 
in  which  he  continued  to  act  for  the  next 
!  ten  years.      (Abhrev.  Rot.   Orig,  L  120; 
Madox,  ii.  57,  59,  325.)    There  is  a  com- 
plaint against  William  Kandolf  in  9  Edw. 
IL  for  insulting  and  imprisoning  him  and 
three  others,  justices  who  were  assigned 
to  hear  and  determine  certain  matters  in 
the  city  of  Bristol.  (Rot.  Pari  i.  130.)  The 
next  year  his  powers  failed  him ;  and  John 
i  de  Okham  was  appointed  his  successor  br 
a  patent  of  10  Edw.  IL,  dated  June  1^ 
1317,  in  which  his  infirmity  is  thus  de- 
scribed:   'quia   dilectus    clericus   noster 
Ricardus  de  Abyndon,  unus  baronum  nos- 
trorum  de  Scaccario,  adeo  impotens  sui 
existit,  quod  ea  quae  ad  offidum  illud  perti- 
nent non  potest  commode  exercere.'     He 
certified  in  9  Edw.  H.  as  lord  of  the  town- 
ship of  Horton  in  Gloucestershire.    (ParL 
WriU,  il  div.  ii.  114^  361.) 

ACHAED,  WiLLiAic,  possessed  property 
in  Berkshire,  which  was  grantea  to  his 
ancestor  bv  King  Henry  I.  Although  he 
acted  in  9  llichiffd  L,  1197-8,  as  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  in  fixing  the  tallage  for 
that  county,  he  does  not  again  appear  in  a 
judicial  character,  nor  is  he  mentioned  as 
an  officer  of  the  court  (Madax,  i.  648- 
705.) 

ACXB,  RseiKALD  de,  having  been  oon- 
steble  of  Marlborough  Castle  in  88  Henzy 
m.,  became  sheriff  of  Gloucester  in  the 
50th,  and  so  continued  till  the  56th  yeai^ 
when  he  was  allowed  to  aooonnt  by  at* 


ADAMS 

^iofiMy.  Ib  9  Eiwtfd  L  he  wm  directed  to 
ttke  that  office  into  the  king's  hands,  and 
eonmh  it  to  a  trastj  penon ;  and  to  go  to 
die  Ezcheqaer  to  TeceiTe  the  king's  eom- 
Baada  theteon  from  the  harons.  (Ahhrev. 
SoL  OHq.  L  12;  Modax,  IL  68, 181.)  It 
was  no  doubt  as  shexiff  that  he  was  added 
to  the  fiat  of  jastices  itinerant  in  63 
Hemy  IIL,  1268.  In  the  same  rear  he 
waa  eitttoa  of  the  bishopric  of  Hereford. 
{ExterpL  t  BoLFm.  u.  484.) 

AHAMitj  RiCHABD,  was  the  son  and 
heir  of  a  gentleman  of  the  same  name  re- 
siding at  Shrewsbury.  He  was  bom  in 
1710,  and  waa  called  to  the  bar  of  the  Inner 
Temple  in  February  1735.  He  practised  as 
a  common  ]deader  of  the  dty  of  London, 
until  elected  its  reooider  on  January  17, 
1748.  He  obtained  this  honourable  post 
after  a  aerere  contest,  in  which  he  was  only 
sneeeaafol  by  the  casting  Tote  of  the  lord 
uMyor.  Diuing  the  time  he  held  it  he  was 
kn^ted ;  and  on  February  3, 1753,  he  was 
momoted  to  the  bench  of  the  Exchequer. 
iGsB  Hawkins,  in  the  second  rolume  of  her 
Memoir^  relates  that  he  owed  his  elevation 
to  the  king*a  admiration  of  him  in  his  cha- 
neterof  leeorder.  The  ministers  not  agree- 
ing on  the  person  who  should  succeea  Mr. 
Bma  Clire,  Georgpe  H.  put  an  end  to 
the  discnsricm  by  culing  out  in  his  usual 
F^igliah, '  I  yill  nave  none  of  dese ;  give  me 
de  man  wid  de  dying  speech,'  meaning 
the  recorder,  whose  duty  it  was  to  make 
the  report  of  the  conyicts  under  sentence  of 
death. 

After  a  judicial  sendee  of  twenty  years, 
he  died  on  March  15,  1773,  at  Bedford, 
whOe  on  the  circuit,  of  the  gaol  distemper, 
caught  a  fortnight  before  at  the  Old  Bailey. 
In  Lord  Chief  Justice  AVilmot^s  Common- 
plaee  Book  {lAfej  199)  his  death  is  thus 
recorded: — 'He  was  a  very  good  lawyer 
aad  an  ezcdlent  judge,  having  ever}- quality 
aeoeeaaiy  to  dignify  the  character.  I  never 
«w  him  out  of  temper  in  my  life,  and 
I  have  known  him  intimately  for  forty 
years.' 

ALAV  was  made  abbot  of  Tewkesbury 
on  June  16, 1187,  having  been  previously  a 
monk  and  then  prior  of  the  Benedictme 
Monastery  of  St.  Saviour  of  Canterbury. 
In  1  John  he  fixed  the  tallage  in  Berkshire, 
aad  in  the  aame  year  he  is  named  as  one  of 
thejuatieiers  before  whom  fines  were  levied. 
(iMeur,  L  722.)  He  was  a  learned  and  a 
pious  man,  and  greatly  beloved  by  Arch- 
Bshop  BeckeL  to  John  of  Salisbury's  Life 
of  iHiom  he  aaded  a  supplement,  ife  wrote 
aome  other  works,  and  died  in  1202.  {B. 
WaU^s  Mitred  Abbeys:  Biog,  Lit.  ii. 
965.) 

ALAVBy  JoHir  Fobtbscue  (Lord  Fob- 
TBcrz),  was  the  grandson  of  Hugh  For- 
tMBoe,  tiie  aerenth  in  lineal  descent  from 
Ibt  iOnatxiona  chief  justice  of  Henry  VI. 


ALAKD  5 

IHs  second  son,  Arthur,  was  the  naadfither 
of  the  first  Lord  Fortescue,  of  Castle  ffill, 
to  which  the  earldom  now  enjoyed  by  his 
successors  was  added  in  1789.  flue's  third 
son,  Edmond,  by  his  marriage  with  Sarah, 
daughter  of  Henry  Aland,  Fsa^y  of  Water- 
ford,  whoee  name  he  added  to  his  own,  was 
the  judge's  father. 

He  was  bom  on  March  7. 1670.  Oxford 
has  been  supposed  to  be  the  place  of  his 
education,  as  ne  received  from  that  uniyer- 
sity  the  honorary  degree  of  doctor  of  civil 
law  on  May  4,  1733.  But  the  language  of 
that  diploma  leads  to  a  different  conclusion, 
and  no  trace  is  to  be  found  of  him  in  the 
register  of  matriculations.  In  1084  he 
became  a  member  of  the  Middle  Temple, 
but  afterwards  removed  to  the  Inner  Tem- 

fle :  and  having  been  called  to  the  bar  in 
712,  arrived  at  the  post  of  reader  in  1716. 
In  October  1714,  immediately  after  the 
arrival  of  George  I.,  he  was  appointed 
solicitor-general  to  the  Prince  of  Wales 
(afterwards  George  II.),  from  which  he  was 
promoted  in  December  of  the  following 
year  to  be  solicitor-general  to  the  kinjg.  He 
was  chosen  member  for  Midhurst  m  the 
first  parliament  of  George  I.,  but  only  sat 
during  its  first  session,  being  raised  to  the 
bench  of  the  Excheq^uer  on  January  24. 
1717,  when  he  was  knighted.  He  occupiea 
that  seat  for  little  more  than  a  year ;  and 
one  of  his  last  duties  as  a  baron  was  to  give 
his  opinion  respecting  the  education  and 
marriage  of  the  royal  family,  his  argument 
on  which  is  fully  reported  by  himself,  and, 
though  he  had  been  one  of  the  law  officers 
of  the  Prince  of  Wales,  was  decidedly  in 
favour  of  the  prerogative  of  the  crown.  On 
May  15,  171o,  he  was  removed  to  the 
Kinff^s  Bench,  and  Hat  in  that  court  till  the 
death  of  George  I.  in  June,  1727;  but 
George  II.  about  the  middle  of  September, 
perhaps  on  account  of  the  above  opinion 
against  his  claim,  superseded  him.  {State 
Trials,  xv.  975,  xvi.  1200;  Strange,  80; 
Lord  Raymond,  1510.) 

After  fifteen  montmj'  retirement,  he  was 
restored  to  favour,  and  placed  in  the  Com- 
mon Pleas  on  January  27,  1729.  There  he 
continued  for  above  seventeen  years,  when, 
warned  by  his  age  and  infirmities,  he  re- 
signed in  June  174<5.  So  long  before  as 
1741  he  had  petitioned  for  leave  to  retire 
with  a  pension,  accompanied  by  the  incon- 
sistent request  that  a  seat  in  tne  House  of 
Commons  might  be  obtained  for  him. 
When  at  last  permitted  to  resign,  after  a 
service  in  all  the  three  courts  extending  to 
twenty-eight  years,  his  senatorial  ambition 
was  gratitied  by  the  grant  of  a  baronyiii 
the  Irish  peerage  in  August  1740.  His 
title  was  Lord  Fortescue  of  Credan  in  the 
county  of  Waterford ;  but  he  enjoyed  it  for 
little  more  than  four  months,  dying  on 
December  19,  1740. 


6  ALBEMARLE 

In  addition  to  his  le^  xepatatiun,  he 
had  the  character  of  being  well  Ters^  in 
^onnan  and  Saxon  literature.  This  he 
fully  maintained  in  the  introductory  re- 
marks to  his  edition  of  the  treatise  of  his 
illustrious  ancestor  Sir  John  Fortescue,  en- 
titled *  The  Difference  between  an  Absolute 
and  LimitedMonarchy,'  which  he  published 
in  17l4y  being  then  a  Fellow  of  the  Koyal 
Society.  His  Law  Reports  of  Select  Cases 
were  prepared  for  publication  before  his 
death,  but  not  printed  till  1748.  Of  his 
manner  on  the  bench  the  following  illus- 
tration in  Bentley*8  case  may  serve  as  an 
example.  '  The  laws  of  God  and  man/  he 
said,  *both  give  the  party  an  opportunity 
to  make  his  defence  if  he  has  auy.  I  re- 
member to  have  heard  it  observed  by  a 
veiy  learned  man,  that  even  Ood  Himself 
did  not  pass  sentence  upon  Adam,  before 
he  was  called  upon  to  make  his  defence. 
Adam  (says  God),  where  art  thou  P  Hast 
thou  not  eaten  of  the  tree  whereof  I  com- 
manded thee  that  thou  shouldest  not  eat  P 
And  the  same  question  was  put  to  Eve 
also/  Of  his  anpearauce  the  *  Conveyan- 
cer's Guide '  (p.  107)  gives  this  description : 
^  The  baron  had  one  of  the  strangest  noses 
ever  seen:  its  shape  resembled  much  the 
trunk  of  an  elephant.  '*  Brother,  brother,'' 
said  the  baron  to  the  counsel,  ''you  are 
handling  the  cause  in  a  very  lame  manner.'' 
*'  Oh  !  no,  my  lord,"  was  the  reply ;  "  have 
patience  witn  me,  and  111  make  it  as  plain 
as  the  nose  in  your  lordship's  face."  ' 

Lord  Fortescue's  first  wife  was  Grace, 
daughter  of  Chief  Justice  Pratt,  by  whom 
he  had  two  sons,  who  died  unmarried  in 
their  father's  lifetime.  His  second  wife 
was  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Mr.  Justice 
Dormer,  by  whom  he  left  a  son,  his  suc- 
cessor in  his  title  and  estates,  one  of  which 
was  Lambom  Hall  in  Essex;  on  whose 
death  in  1781  without  issue  the  peerage 
expired. 

ALBEMAELE,  Earl  of.  See  ^Y.  de 
Mandevil. 

ALBDri-BBITO,  William  be.  Two 
persons  named  William  de  Albini  lived  at 
this  time.  One,  called  Pincerna^  whose 
romantic  adventures  with  Adelaide,  Queen 
Dowager  of  France,  are  related  by  Dugdale 
in  his  'Baronage,'  married  Adeliza,  the 
widow  of  King  Henry  L  The  other  was 
sumamed  Bnto,  probably  in  order  to  dis- 
tinguish him  from  his  celebrated  contem- 
porary. 

He  was  the  son  of  Robert  de  Todeni, 
the  standard-bearer  of  William  the  Con- 
<^ueror,  who  participated  largely  in  the 
nch  rewards  distributed  by  his  master,  and 
founded  Belvoir  Castle,  in  Leicestershire, 
as  his  chief  seat  He  died  in  1088,  and  by 
his  wife  Adela  left  four  sons ;  the  eldest  of 
whcnn,  this  William,  assumed  the  name  of 
Albin^  in  consequence,  it  is  believed,  of 


ALBINI 

his  having  been  bom  in  the  parish  of  that 
name  in  Normandy. 

In  the  town  of  Sawbtidgeworth  in  Hert* 
fordshire,  which  belonged  to  him,  he 
exercised  almost  royal  power,  if  we  may 
judge  from  hb  charter  or  writ  commanding 
his  vassals  there,  that  if  any  plaint  or 
quarrel  arose  among  the  monks  of  that 
church,  it  should  be  staved  till  it  could  be 
brought  before  him.    (madox,  i.  120.) 

He  greatly  distinguished  himself,  in 
1106,  at  the  battle  of  Tenchebrai,  and 
afterwards  appears  to  have  been  high  in 
Kinff  Henry's  favour.  The  county  of 
Itutland  was  placed  under  his  care  as 
sheriff,  or  fermour :  and  the  custody  of  the 
extensive  lands  of  Otuer  Fitz-Count  was 
entrusted  to  him.  He  was  also  one  of  the 
council  of  the  king,  attended  him  in  his 
movements,  and  was  a  witness,  immediately 
after  Hugh  Bigot,  and  before  Richard 
Basset,  to  the  charter  by  which  Henry,  in 
1134,  granted  the  office  of  Great  Chamber- 
lain to  Alberic  de  Vere  and  his  heirs. 
(Madox,  i.  50,  297,  327.) 

When  circuits  were  established  by  King 
Henry  for  the  dispensation  of  justice 
throughout  the  kingdom,  he  was  naturallj 
selected  to  act  in  the  county  where  his 
largest  possessions  were  situate.  The  great 
roll  of  31  Henry  I.  gives  evidence  of  his 
holding  pleas  in  Lincolnshire,  and  also  as 
justice  ot  the  forest  in  Essex. 

From  this  roll  it  appears  that  he  was 
excused  from  the  payment  of  Danegeld  in 
seven  counties  in  which  he  had  property ; 
an  exemption  he  enjoyed  in  common  with 
all  those  who  were  employed  in  the  ad- 
ministration of  justice. 

Adhering,  under  the  reign  of  Stephen, 
to  the  fortunes  of  the  Empress  Mauae,  he 
was  for  a  time  deprived  of  his  extensive 
estates ;  but  they  were  afterwards  restored 
to  him.  His  name  appears  as  a  witness  to 
this  king's  charter  granting  the  burgh  of 
Hereford  to  Robert,  Earl  of  Leicester. 
(Madox,  ii.  139.) 

He  died  about  1135, 2  Henry  U.,  leaving 
by  his  wife  Maud,  daughter  of  Simon  de 
Liz,  Earl  of  Huntingdon,  and  widow  of 
Robert,  son  of  Richard  de  Tonbridge,  two 
sons,  William  and  Ralph. 

1.  AVilliam,  who  was  sumamed  Mes- 
chines,  had  a  son,  also  William,  subse- 
quently mentioned  as  a  justice  itinerant. 

2.  Ralph,  whose  descendants  called 
themselves  Daubeney,  by  which  name  they 
were  summoned  to  parliament  In  1538, 
Baron  Daubeney  was  created  Earl  of 
Bridgewater,  but  both  titles  became  ex- 
tinct on  his  death,  without  issue,  in  1548. 
(Maff,  Rot.  31  Henry  L ;  DugdaWs  Baron, 
L  111 ;  CoUMa  Peerage,  L  402,  tL  484,  iz. 
451.) 

ALBIHI,  WnxiAic  DE,  was  the  thizd 
Earl  of  Arundel,  being  grandson  of  Williaia 


ALBIOT.  ALBINI  7 

4t  Alfaiiii,  suRuuned  *  with  the  strong  hand/  i  was  the  grandson  of  the  hefore-iuuned  WU- 
who  ohtaiDed  the  earldom  hy  his  marriage  '  liam  de  Aihini,  sumamed  Brito.  and  the 
with  Queen  Adeliza,  the  widow  of  Heniy  |  son  and  heir  of  William  de  Aihini,  sar- 
L,  to  whom  the  castle  of  Arundel  had  heen  ■  named  Meschines,  who  died  in  1107. 
jsaigned  in  dower.  His  father  died  in  1196, 1  In  2  Richard  L,  1190-1,  he  was  en- 
whod  he  paid  100/.  for  the  relief  of  his  trusted  with  the  sheriffalty  of  Rutland, 
Lmds  in  Norfolk.  With  King  John  he  was  which  he  held  during  the  remainder  of 
in  high  farour,  zeceiving  many  grants  from  '  that  reign :  in  the  couim  of  which  he  was 
him;  and  his  almost  constant  attendance  at  also  sheriff  of  the  united  conntiee  of  War- 
die  court  ia  shown  hy  the  fact,  that  in  every  wick  and  Leicester,  and  of  Bedford  and 
year  of  the  reign,  except  the  last,  he  was  a  BuckingbanL  In  1194  he  was  with  the 
witness  tocharters  or  other  royal  documents,  royal  army  in  Normandy ;  and  in  10  Rkhaxd 
In  the  earlier  contests  with  the  harons,  he  L  he  was  one  of  the  JustideiB  before  whom 
adhered  to  the  king,  and  was  present,  as  a  fine  was  levied  at  Norwich,  but  evidently 
one  of  his  Mends,  at  Runnymede.  Dis-  '  onlv  as  a  justice  itinerant, 
psted  at  last  with  the  tyranny  and  bad  Under  King  John  he  was  frequently 
nith  of  his  soverei^,  he  joined  Prince  employed.  In  the  first  vear  he  was  ap- 
Loma  of  France  on  his  arrivu  in  England,  pointed  one  of  the  bailins  of  the  Jews  m 
His  lands  were  immediately  ravaged  by  the  iSngland.  (JRot,  Chart,  01. )  In  7  John  he 
royal  army,  and  his  whole  possessions  seized  was  sent  on  some  embassy,  the  Close  Roll 
hj  the  crown ;  but  they  were  restored  to  (i.  50)  containing  an  order  for  a  ship  to  be 
hmi  after  the  death  of  King  John,  on  his  provided  for  him  on  the  kind's  service.  In 
retomin^to  his  alle^nce  in  the  following  10  John  a  fine  was  again  levied  before  him 
Jolv.    (J^,  dauA,  1.  314.)  as  a  iusticier  at  Derby.  In  14  John  he  was 

tils  entire  restoration  to  the  goodwill  of  employed  with  four  others  on  a  commission 
the  king,  or  rather  of  the  protector  of  the  ;  of  enquiry  in  Yorkshire  and  Lincolnshire 
Jdngdom,  is  shown  by  several  entries  on  the  '  (Hot,  Fat  97) ;  and  in  the  next  year  in 
rolk,  and  particularly  by  his  acting  as  a  collecting  the  assize  of  woad,  in  the  latter 
jastider  in  2  Henry  IIL,  in  which  year  a  county,  and  the  duties  on  corn,  salt^  grease, 
iine  was  levied  before  him  at  Westminster,  honey,  and  salmon.  (Madox,  i.  77*3.) 
fioger  de  Wendover  relates  that  in  the  During  the  whole  of  this  time  he  was 
same  year,  I2I8,  he  proceeded  to  the  Holy  frequently  a  witness  to  charters  granted  by 
Land,'  and  was  at  the  siege  of  Damietta ;  the  king;  and  on  January  14, 121/>,  he  was 
and  Matthew  Paris  adds  that,  in  1221,  he  joined  in  a  commission  with  the  Archbishep 
\iied  abroad,  as  he  was  returning  from  the  of  Canterbury  and  others  to  give  safe  con- 
rrosade,  and  that  his  body  was  brought  to  duct  to  those  who  came  to  supplicate  the 
JEjigland  and  buried  at  the  abbey  ot  Wi-  king's  mercy  for  their  great  ofiences.  {Rot. 
mondham,  of  which  he  was  a  patron.  His  Ptit  120.)  On  the  granting  of  Magna 
«on  William  did  homage  for  nis  lands  on  Charta,  however,  he  was  one  of  the 
April  12,  1221,  o  Henry  III.  {Hot.  Clam,  twenty-five  barons  who  were  appointed  tt> 
L  4o2. )  enforce  it?  observance ;    and,  though   he 

H^  is  sometimes  called  Earl  of  Chi-  afterwards  neglected  the  invitation  sent  by 
cheT^ter :  and  on  one  occasion  he  signs  the  barons  to  be  present  at  the  tournament 
himself  William  of  Arundel,  Earl  of  Sussex,  on  Hounslow  Heath,  he  subsequently  joined 
{EU.  Chart.  14  John,  180.)  them  in  London,  and  was  entrusted  with 

In  December  1218,  probably  Just  pre-  the  command  of  Rochester  Castle.  There 
Tious  to  his  embarkation  for  the  Holy  Land,  he  bravely  sustained  a  siege  of  three  months, 
the  sheriff  of  Sussex  was  commanded  to  but  being,  in  December  1218,  compelled  at 
pay  him  twenty  marks  out  of  the  issues  of  last  for  want  of  nrovisions  to  submit,  he 
;he  county,  which  he  ought  and  was  accus-  narrowly  escaped  oeing  hanged,  a  sentence 
t}me<l  every  year  to  have  by  the  name  of  which  the  angry  monarch  hod  pronounced 
the  Earl  of  Sussex.     {Rot.  Claw.  i.  383. )      against  all  the  defenders.     He  owed  his 

He  married  Maude,  daughter  of  James  i  safety  to  the  remonstrance  of  Savaricus  de 
de  St  Sidonio,  and  widow  of  Roger,  Earl  Malloleone,  one  of  the  king's  Poictevin 
of  Clsjre.  By  her  he  left  two  sons,  William  generals ;  and  wa«i,  with  his  son  Odenel, 
ivnd  Hugh,  who  successively  held  the  earl-  sent  prisoner  to  Corff  Castle.  The  loss  of 
dom,  and  died  without  issue ;  and  several  all  his  possessions  was  the  consequence  of 
daughters,  one  of  whom,  Isabel,  married  his  rebellion,  to  which  was  added  the  pope's 
John  Fitz-Alan,  Lord  of  Clun  (son  of  |  excommunication.  {R,  de  WendoveTj  iii- 
^Villiam  Fitz-Alan,  a  justice  itinerant  32^)-355.)  His  wife,  Agatha,  however, 
under  Bichard  L),  to  whom  the  castle  of  ,  succeeded  in  obtaining  his  pardon,  with  the 
Arundel,  with  its  appendant  title,  was  restoration  of  his  property,  on  the  payment 
tpportioned,  which  has  come  down  in  lineal  of  a  fine  of  six  thousand  marks.  {Rot, 
descent  to  its  present  possessor,  the  Duke  Claris,  i.  280,  287.) 
€if  Norfolk.     (Dugdale^  Baron,  i.  118.)        '      According  to  Roger  de  Wendover,  he 

ILBm,  WiLUAM  DE,  of  Bel  voir  Castle,  \  was  not  released  till  November  25, 1216, 


8  ALCOCK  ALCOCK 

about  a  month  after  the  king'a  death ;  and  :  in  1461  to  the  church  of  St.  Margaret's^ 
it  is  certain  that  the  whole  of  the  fine  was  '  New  Fish  Street,  London^  and  subeequently 
not  paid  before  hia  liberation,  or  indeed  up  I  received  two  prebends,  one  of  Sausbuiy, 
to  tne  period  of  his  own  decease,  neai'lj  i  and  the  other  of  St.  Paurs.    He  was  next 


by  annual  instalments  of  20/.  each.  {E. 
cerpt,  e  Bot,  Fin,  i.  306.)  He  was  at  once 
received  into  confidence,  and  had  an  early 
opportunity^  of  proving  his  loyalty  in  the 


It  is  not  impobable,  from  the  diplomatie 
services  in  which  he  was  engaged,  that  he 
acted  as  an  advocate  in  the  ecclesiastical 


battle  of  Lincoln,  fought  on  May  19, 1217,  courts,  the  members  of  that  branch  of  the 
whei'e  he  greatly  d^tinguished  himself,  law  being  then  commonly  selected  for  that 
Entrusted  with  the  castle  of  Muleton  and  duty.  In  March  1470,  ti  few  months  be- 
the  lands  of  Thomas  of  Muleton,  which  '  fore  the  restoration  oi*  Henry  VI.,  he  was 
had  been  forfeited,  and  obtaining  the  valu-  one  of  the  ambassadors  to  the  King  of 
able  custody  of  the  land  and  heir  of  Henn-  Castile  (Hymery  xi.  653),  and  havinj?,  on 
de  NeviUe/he  enjoyed  the  royal  favour  till  I  April  29  in  the  following  year,  immediately 
his  death.  In  3  Henry  IH.  he  was  placed  after  the  battle  of  Bamet,  which  replacedi 
high  in  the  list  of  itmerant  justices  sent ,  Edward  IV.  on  the  throne,  superseded 
into  the  counties  of  Lincoln,  Nottingham,  |  William  Morland  in  the  office  of  master  of 
and  Derby;  and  again  into  Yorkshire  in  9  the  Rolls  (Rot,  Pat.  11  Edw.  IV.  p.  1,  m. 
Henry  HI.  (Rot,  Claus.  ii.  77.)  He  died  24 :  not  I  Edw.  IV.  as  Dugdale  has  inad- 
in  May  1236.  He  was  a  great  benefactor  vertently  called  it),  he  was  appointed,  on 
to  the  monks  of  Belvoir,  and  founded  the  August  2^,  a  commissioner  to  treat  with 
hospital  of  Our  Lady,  called  Xewstead,  at  the  Scotch  ambassadors  for  a  perpetual 
Wassebridge,  between  Stanford  and  Offing-  !  peace.  {Rymer,  xi.  717.) 
ton,  in  Lincolnshire,  in  which  his  body  He  was  made  Bishop  of  Eochester  on 
was  interred,  his  heart  being  buried  at  March  17;  1472,  having  on  the  previous  day 
Belvoir.  j  resigned  the  mastership  of  the  Rolls  to 

He  married  twice.    His  first  wife  was  i  John  Morton,  and  on  September  20  the 


Margery,  daughter  of  Odenel  de  Umfraville, 
by  whom  he  nad  several  children.  With 
his  eldest  son,  likewise  AVilliam,  the  male 


Great  Seal  was  placed  is  his  hands,  when 
the  lord  chancellor,  Bishop  Stillington,  gave 
up  the  duties  on  account  of  a  temporary 


branch  of  this  family  became  extinct,  but    illness.     {Clam,  12  Edw.  TV,  m.  16.)    He 


the  possessions  were  carried  by  his  daughter 
Isabel  to  her  husband,  Robert  de  Koos; 
and  her  male  descendants  continued  to  hold 


opened  the  parliament  as  keeper  on  October 
6;  and  the  lord  chancellor,  having  recovered, 
prorogued  it  on  April  5, 1473.     {Rot.  Pari. 


that  barony  till  the  year  1/508,  when,  by    vi.  3,  9,  41.) 

the  marriage  of  the  heiress  with  Sir  {  King  Edward  entrusted  to  him  the  edu- 
Robert  Manners,  it  devolved  on  their  son  cation  of  his  infant  son,  and  placed  him  on 
George,  whose  son,  Thomas,  was  created  his  privy  council,  and  a  curious  instance  of 
Earl  of  Rutland  in  1525.  On  the  death  of  the  royal  favour  occurred  in  the  year  1475, 
this  earPs  grandson  without  male  issue  the  I  when  Doth  Alcock  and  Bishop  Rotheram 
two  titles  became  divided :  but  their  pre-  ,  held  the  title  of  lord  chancellor  for  several 
sent  possessors — viz.,  the  Duke  of  Rutland  months  together,  affording  a  solitary  in- 
andLorddeRos — plainly  trace  their  descent  stance,  in  the  history  of  this  kingdom,  of 
from  Isabel  de  Albini.  His  second  wife  two  chancellors  acting  at  the  same  time, 
was  Agatha,  daughter  and  coheir  of  the  '  The  fact  is  incontestably  proved  by  the  evi- 
Baron  William  de  Trusbot,  for  whom,  with  dence  of  numerous  Privy  Seal  bills  addressed 
her  inheritance,  he  accounted  six  hundred  to  both  by  the  same  title,  from  April  27  to 
marks  in  10  Richard  I.  It  does  not  appear  September  28,  1475.  This  extraordinary 
that  she  bore  him  any  children.  circumstance    may    be     thus    explained. 

ALCOCK,  John,  the  earliest  chancellor  When  the  king  planned  his  invasion  of 
of  Henry  VII.,  is  described  by  Bale,  who  France,  he  intended  to  be  accompanied  by 
wrote  about  half  a  centurr  after  his  death,  ;  his  lord  chancellor,  Bishop  Rotheram,  and 
as  so  devoted  fix)m  his  childhood  to  learning  I  feeling  it  necessarj'  to  provide  for  the  busi- 
and  piety,  growing  from  grace  to  grace,  ness  of  the  Chancer}'  in  England,  he  nomi- 
that  no  one  throughout  England  was  more  |  nated  Bishop  Alcock  to  take  the  duty  during 
renowned  for  his  sanctity.  He  was  bom  the  chancellor's  absence.  Instead,  However, 
at  Beverley  in  Yorkshire,  where  his  father,  of  pursuing  the  customary^  practice  of  mak- 
William  Alcock.  sometime  burgess  of  ing  him  merely  keeper  of  tne  Seal,  he,  as  a 
Kingston-upon-Hull,  was  in  circumstances  mark  of  special  favour,  invested  him  with 
sufficiently  easy  to  be  enabled  to  send  him  the  title  of  chancellor,  intending  that  the 
first  to  the  grammar-school  there  and  then  regular  chancellor  should  be  with  him 
to  Cambridge^  where  he  took  the  degree  of  during  the  whole  period  of  his  absence  in 
Doctor  of  Jjam  in  1466.    He  was  collated    Franco.    It  happened;  however,  that  the 


ALCOCK 

•rmtmeiit  was  delayed  fiom  April  till  July, 
•0  that  during  thow  months  PriTv  Seal 
bills  were  addiessed  to  both  officers  in 
England,  frequently  on  the  same  day  and 
from  the  aame  place.  The  last  writ  of 
PtiTT  Seal  addressed  to  fiishop  AJooek  is 
dated  on  September  2d,  after  which  fiishop 
Rotberam,  having  returned  from  France,  re- 
somed  his  functions  as  sole  chancellor. 

The  see  of  Worcester  becoming  vacant, 
the  Idz^  was  happy  in  the  opportunity  of 
appointing  Alcock  to  till  it ;  and  possession  j 
of  the  temporalities  was  granted  to  him  on 
September  25,  1470.      (Hf/tner,  xii.  34.)  : 
He  preiided  over  the  diocese  for  the  rest  of  i 
the  rdgn,  during  which  he  enlarged  the  ' 
church  of  TVeetbur\%  and  founded  a  school  , 

*  I 

at  Kingston- on-Iiull.  where  he  built  a 
chapel  over  the  remains  of  his  parents  at 
the  south  of  the  church,  endowing  a  diantry 
there  also.  (  CaL  Rot.  Ptirl.  324.)  In  147^ 
he  was  constituted  President  of  Wales,  but 
on  the  death  of  Edward  he  was  removed 
from  the  nreceptorship  of  his  infant  suc- 
cessor by  tne  protector  Richard,  who,  how- 
ever, introduced  a  clause  in  the  act  of 
attunder  paased  when  he  became  king, 
declaring  it  should  not  prejudice  the  bishop 
in  reference  to  certain  property  in  Kent. 
{Eot.  ParL  vL  201,  249. ) 

The  battle  of  fiosworth,  on  August  22, 
1485,  placed  Henri'  VII.  on  the  throne; 
and  Bishop  Alcock  was  his  first  chancellor. 

The  date  of  his  appointment  does  not 
appear,  though  Dugdale  erroneouslv  states 
it  to  be  on  March  6, 1480,  the  date  oi  Bishop 
Morton's  appointment;  but  Alcock  was 
present  as  chaDcellor  at  the  coronation  on 
(.October  30, 1485,  and  opened  the  first  parlia- 
ment on  November  7,  emeiently  superintend- 
io?  the  difficult  ques^tions  it  liad  to  decide. 
{Suflamd  Papers,  x.  10:  Pot.  ParL  vi.  267.) 
BUhop  Morton  succeeded  him  in  the  office 
on  March  0,  1486,  being  then  Bishop  of 
Br,  to  which  see  Alc(Hrk  was  translated  on 
that  prelate's  advance  to  the  primacy*,  and 
▼u  admitted  to  the  temporalities  on 
December  7,  having  in  the  intervening 
Jidy  been  employed  in  treating  with  the 
commissioners  of  the  Scottish  king. 
{S^nier,  xii.  285,  318.; 

The  latter  yearB  of  his  life  were  occuoied 
in  building  the  beautiful  hall  at  his  paiace 
cf  Ely,  and  in  decorating  all  his  manors 
▼ith  new  edifices.  On  the  site  also  of  the 
dd  nunnery  of  St.  Radegund,  in  Cambridge, 
ke  founded  Jesus  College,  a  lasting  monu- 
ment of  his  liberality  and  taste.  Nor  were 
the  claims  of  literature  forgotten.  Various 
compoeitiona  connected  with  his  profession 
issued  from  his  pen,  among  wnich  was 
one  called  '  Gkdli  Cantus  ad  Confratres  suos 
Cuntoa  in  Synodo  apud  Bamewell,  Sej^tem- 
ber  25, 1488*,*  at  the  beginning  of  which  is 
ittint  of  himself  preaching  to  his  dergr, 
vith  a  cock  (his  crest)  at  each  side,    in 


ALDERSON 


9 


his  sermons  he  must  hare  fatigued  his 
auditors,  if  they  were  all  as  long  as  one  he 
preached  at  St.  Mary*s  church,  in  Cam- 
oridge,  which  is  said'  to  have  lasted  two 
hours. 

The  bishop  died  at  his  castle  ot  Wisbeoch 
on  October  1, 1*500,  and  was  buried  in  a  mag- 
nificent chapel  erected  by  himself  in  Ely 
cathedral.  All  writer*  concur  in  speaking 
highly  of  his  erudition  and  his  piety.  The 
latter  is  said  to  have  been  carried  to  an  ex- 
treme in  mortifications  and  abstinence.  IIo 
was  greatly  beloved  and  respected  by  bin 
contemporaries,  and  was  named  by  Judg«« 
Lyttelton  as  the  supervisor  of  his  will. 
Coke  in  relating  thii^  fact  calls  him  *  a  man 
of  singular  piety,  devotion,  chastity,  tem- 
perance, ana  toline*:*  of  life.'  {Fvllerit 
Worthies:  Angt.  Sar.  i.  3^1.  -VJ^,  67"> ; 
Godicin  de  Pr<tsul.  26l> :  Coojters  Ath. 
Cantab,  i.  3.) 

ALDEBUBOH,  IticnAiii*  i>E.  derived  his 
name  from  Aldebur^^h  ( Aldbon^ugh)  in 
Yorkshire,  where  he  hod  a  grant  of  lands 
in  12  Edw.  II.,  and  8evon  vears  afterwards 
purchased  the  manor  of  Itundeburton  and 
property  in  Mildeby.  {Ahh.  Pttt.  On'a.  i. 
24o,  293.)  lie  is  freouently  nientionea  k< 
a  counsel  in  the  Year  BookiTof  Edward  II., 
and  the  first  five  venrs  of  I'Mward  III.  In 
the  third  year  of  the  latter  rt'ign  be  acted  as 
the  king's  attorney  in  the  pleas  of  quo  war- 
ranto at  Northampton  :  and  in  the  same  year 
he  is  noticed  ns  one  of  the  king's  Serjeants. 
In  the  fifth  vear  he  w(i<>  a  commissioner  for 
presening  the  peace  between  England  and 
^^cotland  {X.  Fadera,  ii.  80iM :  and  on 
February  3,  1332,  0  Edwanl  III.,  he  was 
constituted  a  judire  of  the  Conmion  Pleas, 
and  knighted.  Du<;dale  introduces  two 
other  patents,  conferring  on  him  the  game 
office,  dated  NovombeV  10,  l.'Vt'J,  and 
Januorv  8, 1341 ;  but  I  presume  that,  as  on 
these  davs  new  cbiefs  of  the  court  were 
appointecl,  these  were  merely  formal  re- 
nominations  without  anv  intervening  re- 
tirement :  especially  as  l)ugilale  does  not 
record  any  break  in  the  fines  levied  befonv 
him.  .These  are  stated  to  terminate  at 
Michaelmas,  14  Edward  III.,  1340,  in 
which  year  he  had  a  licence  to  enrloue  on»' 
hundred  acres  of  land  in  Bigton  in  AVheme- 
dale.     {Cat.  Pot.  Pat.  114, 1 17,  1  n»,  138. ) 

He  is  last  mentionetl  as  the  head  of  a 
judicial  commission  in  Yorkshire  as  late  a-s 
May  20,  1343.     (X  Fadvra,  ii.  1225.) 

ALBEBSOK,  Edward  Hall,  was  the  ad- 
ditional judge  in  the  Common  Pleas  under 
the  new  act  passed  at  the  conmienccment 
of  the  reip  of  William  IV.  His  father, 
Bobert  Aiderson,  Esq.,  was  an  eminent 
member  of  the  same  profession,  recorder 
of  Norwich,  Ipswich,  and  Yarmouth,  and 
his  mother  was  the  daughter  of  Samuel 
Burrv,  Esq.,  of  the  latter  place,  where  he 
was  \>om  on  September  11,  1787.    After 


dO  ALDERSON  ALEN9ON 


spending  a  short  time  at  Scaminpp  School, 
near  Dereham,  where  Lord  Thurlow  com- 
menced his  education,  he  was  removed  to 
.  the_  Qiammar  School  of  Burv  St.  Edmunds, 


common  law  side  till  the  former  waatran»> 
ferred  into  Chancery  by  an  enactment  in 
1841. 
The  only  fault  that  has  been  found  with 


and  subsequently  had  the  advantaTO  of  the    him  as  a  Judge  arose  from  the  quickness  of 


pivate  tuition  of  Dr.  Maltby,  afterwards 
Bishop  of  Durham.  His  progress  was  so 
^at  and  his  intelligence  so  marked,  that 
tne  highest  expectations  were  formed  of  his 


insight  into  the  Questions  before  him, 
which  sometimes  lea  him  into  too  rapid  a 
judgment  of  their  real  merits,  producing  a 
degree  of  impatience  against  tnose  whose 


college  career ;  and  so  self-conscious  was  duty  it  was  to  arirue  against  his  precon- 
he  of  his  own  talents  and  acquirements  ceived  opinions.  Yet  notwithstanding  this 
that  he  afterwards  acknowledged  that  if  i  failing  he  was  in  the  main  a  popular  jud^ 
any  one  had  offered  him  on  entering  the  I  especially  with  juries ;  and  while  sitting 
university  the  place  of  second  wrangler,  he  j  in  Banco  he  had  much  influence  in  the 
would  at  once  nave  refused  it.    Thus  well  |  decisions  of  the  court.    His  reasoning  in 


prepared,  he  entered  Caius  College,  Cam- 
bridge, in  1805,  and  by  his  indomitable 
perseverance  and  extraordinary  genius  he 


the  latter  was  deep,  solid,  and  acute ;  and 
his  relish  of  fun  and  his  occasional  witti- 
ebms  on  the  bench  no  doubt  made  him  a 


not  only  achieved  the  success  his  friends  i  general  favourite  at  nisi  prius.  Even  in 
had  prophesied,  but  exceeded  his  own  prog-  !  Banco  he  could  not  always  refrain.  Once 
nostications,  obtaining,  besides  the  antici-  |  a  counsel  on  applying  for  a  nolle  prosequi, 
pated  place  of  senior  wrangler,  the  additional  !  pronounced  the  peniutimate  syllable  long; 
distinction  of  first  Smithes  prizeman  and  '  Stop,  sir,'  said  the  baron :  ^  consider  that 
senior  medallist,  the  higoest  honours  \  this  is  the  last  day  of  term,  and  don^tmake 
which  his  university  could  give  both  in  !  things  imnecessarily  long.'  At  an  assize 
classics  nnd  mathematics^  and  a  triple  ^lory  .  town  a  juryman  sai^  to  the  clerk  who  was 
which     few     had     previously    obtained.  \  administenug  the  oath  to  him,  *  Speak  up. 


During  his  progress  through  the  university 
he  also  gained  Sir  Thomas  Browne's  medal 
for  the  best  Greek  and  Latin  epigrams,  and 


1  cannot  hear  what  you  say.'  The  baron 
asked  him  if  he  was  deaf,  and  on  the  jury- 
man answering,  *  Yes,  with  one  ear,'  replied 


the  members'  prize  for  the  Latin  essay,  j  *  Well  then  you  may  leave  the  box,  for  it 
In  1809  he  took  his  degree  as  bachelor,  and    is  necessary  that  jurymen  should  hear  both 
in  1812  that  of  master  of  arts,  when  he  was  i  sides.^ 
elected  fellow  of  his  college.  1      With  all  this  spirit  of  drollery,  he  was 

Having  entered  the  inner  Temple,  in  essentially  of  a  senous  and  religious  dispo- 
1811  he  was  called  to  the  bar,  and  selected  sition  ;  cordially  loved  in  his  private  lifsi 
the  Northern  circuit  and  York  sessions,  in  and  highly  esteemed  and  respected  by  the 
which  he  had  no  cause  to  complain  of ;  bar.  He  employed  his  leisure  in  the 
neglect  at  the  outset  of  his  career,  in  1817,  renewal  of  his  early  studies,  and  was  him- 
on  the  termination  of  the  Reports  of  Maule  -  self  a  graceful  poet  Several  of  his  fugitive 
and  Selwyn,  he  joined  with  Mr.  Bamewall  1  pieces,  some  of  which  are  addressed  to  hia 
in  their  continuation  for  the  five  succeeding  |  literary  cousin,  Mrs.  Opie,  are  introduced 
years,  when  he  felt  obliged  to  relinquish  I  into  an  interesting  memoir  of  his  life,  pub- 
tbe  employment.  In  1823  he  married  lished  by  his  son  soon  after  his  death. 
Oeorgina,  daughter  of  the  Rev.  Edward  That  event  occurred  on  January  27,  1867, 
Drewe,  of  Broadbemburv,  Devonshire.         '  in  his  seventieth  year,  when  he  had  been 

He  thence  went  on  with  such  increase  of  :  on  the  bench  more  than  six  and  twenty 
employment  and  reputation  that  in  1828  he  years.  His  remains  lie  in  the  churchyard 
was  appointed  one  of  the  commissioners  for  ,  of  Eisby,  near  Bury,  his  brothers  living, 
the.  amendment  of  the  law.  So  much  in  j  ALEK90ir,  Jonx  be,  was  prob£9)lT 
demand  were  his  services  on  the  circuit  i  one  of  the  clerks  of  the  Chancery ;  ana, 
that  he  himself  described  his  position,  i  obtaining  ecclesiastical  preferment  accord- 
*  Heir-apparent  to  the  crown,  upon  the  ing  to  the  custom  of  these  ofiicers,  was 
departure  of  the  present  holders.'  At  this  raised  to  the  archdeaconry  of  Lisieux  in 
time  the  act  before  referred  to  was  passed,  '  1185.  He  was  selected  by  Richard  I.  to 
and,  though  he  never  had  a  silk  gown,  nor  accompany  him  as  his  vice-chancellor  to 
the  advantage  of  a  seat  in  parliament,  he  Normandy  on  his  departure  for  the  Holy 
was  at  once  selected  from  the  outer  bar  for  Land.  There  are  six  charters  ^data  per 
his  acknowledged  ability,  as  one  of  the  manum  Johannis  de  Alen9oni,  Archiaia- 
three  judges  then  added  to  the  old  number  cono  Lexoviensis,  vice  Cancellarii  nostri,' 
of  twelve.  He  was  first  placed  in  the  granted  bv  Richard  in  that  country  in  the 
Common  Pleas  in  November  1830,  receiv-  mouths  ot  January,  March,  June,  and  July 
ing  the  honour  of  knighthood.  There  he  '  ll(K).  (N.  Fced^a,  i.  48,  51 ;  DugdaiJt 
remained  till  February  1834,  when  he  was  \  Monad,  i.  485 ;  vi.  1115.^  William  do 
removed  to  the  Exchequer,  where  he  per-  ^  Longchamp,  Bishop  of  Ely,  waa  at  that 
iormed  the  double  duties  on  the  equity  and  '  time  chancellor   and  chief  justiciary  in 


ALENCUX 

1,  where,  no  doubt,  according  to  the 
Lolj  xeooffded  on  the  rolb  of  sabse- 
Npi%  one  great  seal  was  left  with 
hile  another  was  entrusted  to  a 
in  attendance  on  the  king,  to  be  used 
ig  to  the  rojal  pleasure.  In  the 
ig  March  the  duty  was  performed 
per  Malua  Catulus.  In  February 
len^OQ  was  one  of  the  witnesses  to  a 
gxren  under  the  hand  of  Warine, 
a  Loches,  'tunc  agentis  vicem 
ini    noetri*   (Xeustria    Fia,  897; 

tL  II 10) ;  and  he  was  appointed 
r  of  Vaudreuil    on  September  6, 

John.  (jRot.  Chart,  i.  19.)  The 
e  lie  is  mentioned  is  when  he  ac- 
ted Ralph  de  Fumellis  to  Home, 
eiB  of  protection  were  granted  to 
lUe  there.  (  Rot,  Pat.  3  John,  5.) 
rem,  Herbert  de,  possessed  pro- 

Sofiblk ;  and  a  suit  preTiously  in- 

by  him  relative  to  the  manor  of 
ton,  in  that  county,  which  was  to 
m  heard  before  the'justices  itinerant  ; 
uy  III.,  was  directed  to  be  removed  ; 
ie  judges  at  Westminster,  in  con-  i 
i  or  his  being  included  in  the  com-  { 
for  that  Iter.     (Hot.  Clatu.  ii.  77, 
I II  Henry  III.  he  was  employed  | 
e  tallage  for  Norfolk  and  buiiblk  i 
.  174,  208),  and  for  the  next  five  | 
filled  the  office  of  sheriff  of  those  ' 
.  (FuUe/s  Worthies.) 
AVDEB  was  the  nephew  of  Roger, 
of  Salisbury.     He  was  born  in  : 
iy,  and,  with  such  a  connection,  { 
reived  advancement  in   England, 
rst  appointed  him  archdeacon  in  his  | 
;e8e,  and  at  Easter,  1123,  he  was  | 
I    to    the    bishopric  of    Lincoln.  . 
edral  being  soon  after  destroyed  by  , 
ebuilt  it  with  the  greatest  magni-  ' 
ncreasing  the  number  of  prebends,  i 
isomely  endowing  them.    He  emu-  ! 
s   uncle  in  the  erection  of  three  I 
-  those  of  Banbury,  Sleaford,  and  I 
—the  last  of  which  he  was  incau- 
»u^h   to  declare  was  designed  as  j 
'the  security  as  the  dignity  of  the 

When  King  Stephen  became 
f  the  power  of  the  clergy  he  shared 
dea  disgrace,  and  was  compelled 
ider  his  castles  to  the  monarch. 
nders  of  that  of  Newark,  however, 
the  royal  power,  and  could  not  be 
L  upon  to  deliver  it  up  until  they 
lat  the  king  had  sworn  that  the 
lould  not  taste  food  so  long  as  they 
L  Even  after  their  submission 
op  was  kept  in  prison  for  some 
id  when  he  at  last  was  liberated, 
)d  the  strife  of  politics,  and  devoted 
md  his  property  to  his  religious 
od  the  improvement  of  his  see.  He 
I  journeys  to  Rome,  and  so  pleased 
tdng  and  the  pope  by  bis  conduct 


ALEXANDER 


11 


that  he  was  appointed  legate  from  the 
latter  in  England,  where  he  convened  a 
synod,  and  passed  some  useful  canona  for 
repressing  the  enormities  of  the  times.  In 
1147  he  made  a  third  visit  to  the  pope, 
then  in  Franco,  but,  being  seized  with 
sickness,  he  had  scarcely^  time  to  return 
ere  he  died,  in  the  month  of  August. 

Besides  the  above  proofs  of  his  munifi- 
cence, the  hospital  of  St  Leonard  at 
Newark,  the  priory  of  Ebverholm  in  Lin- 
colnshire, and  the  abbeys  of  Dorchester  and 
Thame  in  Oxfordshire,  acknowledged  him 
as  their  founder. 

Henry  of  Huntingdon,  who  dedicated  his 
History  to  him,  paints  him  in  glowing 
colours  in  some  verses  while  living,  and  in 
his  epistle  'De  Mundi  Contemptu'  when 
dead. 

His  introduction  into  Thynne's  and 
Dugdale*s  list  of  chancellors  under  King 
Stephen  is  founded  on  a  passage  in  William 
of  Newbury,  in  which,  nowever,  no  name 
occurs,  and  the  fact  referred  to  evidently 
applies  to  the  fate  of  his  cousin  Roger,  the 
son,  or,  as  he  was  often  called,  the  nephew 
of  the  bishop,  and  an  undoubted  chancellor. 
No  charter  or  other  record  mentions  Alex- 
ander as  chancellor.  {Godwin  de  Pramli* 
hus^  284;  IVtUiam  of  Malmesbftn/,  716, 
710,  744 ;  Angl.  Sac.  ii.  700  ;  Thoroton's 
yott^,  i.  389,  308,  406.) 

AIiKXAlfDBB,  William,  of  Scottish 
birth  and  extraction,  possessed  propertv  at 
Airdrie.  in  the  county  of  Lanark.  Bom 
about  the  year  1761,  at  the  age  of  twenty- 
one  he  was  called  to  the  bar  of  the  Society 
of  the  Middle  Temple  ;  and,  selecting  the 
Court  of  Chancery,  ne  practised  there  with  a 
high  reputation  as  an  equity  and  real  property 
lawyer  for  nearly  twenty  vears,  and  was  in 
1800  rewarded  with  a  silk  gown.  Lord 
Eldon  appointed  him  on  November  9, 1809, 
one  of  tne  masters  in  Chancery ;  and  after 
filling  this  comparatively  subordinate  office 
for  about  fifteen  years,  he  was,  to  the  sur- 
prise, and  somewhat  to  the  dissatisfaction, 
of  the  profession,  all  at  once  by  the  same 
patronage  raised  to  the  head  of  the  Court 
of  Exchequer^  being  constituted  lord  chief 
baron  on  January  9,  1824,  and  thereupon 
made  a  privy  counsellor  and  knighted.  He 
himself  nesitated  to  accept  the  appointment 
when  offered,  being  aware  of  nis  limited 
acquaintance  with  criminal  law  and  the 
practice  of  the  common  law  courts.  But, 
notwithstanding  his  own  doubts^  and  those 
entertained  by  the  legal  world  m  general, 
he  presided  most  ably  for  seven  years,  his 
experience  in  equity,  which  then  formed  a 
great  part  of  the  business  of  his  court,  being 
peculiarly  valuable. 

In  Januarv  1831  he  was  induced  to 
resign,  for  the  purpose  of  enabling  Lord 
Lyndhurst,  who  had  given  up  the  Qreat 
Seal,  to  take  his  place  as  lord  chief  baron. 


12  ALLERTHORPE  ALTHAM 

About  the  same  time  he  had  a  large  acces-  ;  mission  for  the  cpaol  delivery  of  that  town 
sion  to  his  fortune  from  the  discovery  of  I  in  1511,  and  in  the  commission  of  the  peace 
iron  ore  on  his  estate  at  Airdrie.  He  sur-  '  for  the  county  till  1514.  {Cal,  St.  Fiipersp 
Tived  his  retirement  more  than    twenty  \  1509-14.) 

years,  and  dying  on  June  29,  1842,  wai  \  Blomefield  {Norfolk,  i.  758)  is  clearly  in 
buried  in  the  chapel  of  Roslin  Castle.  |  error  when  he  states  that  John  Wodehouse^ 

ALLESTHOBPE,  Laubence  de,  derived  '  of  Kimberley  in  Norfolk,  married  the  relict 
his  surname  from  the  village  in  York-  of  'John  Aleyne,  one  of  the  barons  of 
shire  so  called.  There  is  no  account  of  the  Exchequer,*  inasmuch  as  John  Wode- 
his  family ;  but  it  is  evident  that  his  house  himself  died  in  1405,  and  his  lady 
early  life  was  spent  as  a  clerk  in  the  Ex-  lies  buried  with  him. 
chequer.  In  1370  he  was  an  auditor  of  ALLIBOirE,  Kichard.  The  grandfather 
that  department,  receiving  10/.  a  year  for  of  this  short-lived  judge  was  an  eminent 
his  salary,  together  with  sixty  shillings  for  ,  divine,  rector  of  Cheyneys  in  Buckingham- 
his  expenses  in  going  into  the  northern  \  shire,  whose  third  son,  Job  Allibond  (for  so 
counties  to  affeer  amercements.  {lame  BoUj  Anthony  Wood  spells  the  name),  turned 
44  Edward  III.  143,  404.)  An  ecclesiastic,  Roman  Catholic,  got  a  comfortable  place  in 
like  his  brethren,  he  obtained  a  canonry  in  the  post  office,  died  in  1072,  and  was  buried 
St.  PauFs.  *         at  Dagenham  in  Essex.    He  was  the  father 

On  September  27,  1375,  he  was  consti-  of  Richard,  who,  bom  about  1621,  rather 
tuted  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer.  This  office  late  in  life  commenced  his  legal  education 
he  retained  during  the  remainder  of  Ed-  at  Gray*s  Inn  on  April  27, 1003.  Though 
ward's  reign,  the  whole  of  the  next,  and  i  called  to  the  bar  on  February  11,  1070,  no 
for  nearly  two  years  of  that  of  Henry  IV.,  mention  is  made  of  him  till  November  1086, 
during  the  last  twelve  yeai-s  holding  the  when,  being  a  papist,  he  was  selected  by 
higher  position  of  second  baron.  I  King  James  to  oe  one  of  his  counsel,  and 

Having  now  sat  upon  the  bench  for  above  |  knighted.  On  April  28, 1087,  he  was  ap- 
A  quarter  of  a  century,  he  was  advanced,  j  ])ointed  a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench.  In 
on  May  31,  1401,  2  Henry  IV..  to  the  the  summer  of  that  year  he  went  the 
treasurership,  which  he  held  ratner  less  |  Northern  Circuit,  and  Bishop  Cartwright 
than  a  year :  and  then  accompanied  the  relates  that  at  Lancaster,  while  his  colleague 
king's  son,  Thomas  of  Lancaster,  to  Ireland.  .  Judge  Powell,  attended  at  the  parish  church, 
{RymcTf  viii.  227.)  Dying  on  July  21,  |  Allibone  went  to  the  school-house,  and  had 
1400,  he  was  buried  in  St.  D^stan's  chapel  '  mass.  In  his  charge  to  the  grand  jury  he 
in  St.  Paul's  CathedraL  Shortly  before  i  took  notice  that  only  three  of  the  gentry 
that  event  he  is  stated  to  have  been  the    came  out  to  meet  tne  judges,  and  called 


sole  residentiaiy  there,  and  to  have  had 
the  whole  revenue  of  the  thirty  canons  at 


it  a  great  disrespect  of  the  king's  com- 
mission— a  fact  strongly  indicative  of  the 


his  own  disposal,  in  consequence  of  all  his    general  feeling  of   dissatisfaction    in  the 
brethren  bemg  excluded  by  the  pope's  bull  i  country. 

from  participating  on  account  of  their  non-        At  the  trial   of  the  seven   bishops  in 
residence.  (  m  ggtw,  300.)  Trinity  Term  1088  Sir  Richard  laid  down 

ALL£Yir,  or  ALETK,  JoHX,  was  entered  i  the  most  arbitrary  doctrines,  and  exerted 
at  Lincoln's  Inn  on  February  2,  1470,  and  |  himself  to  the  utmost  to  procure  their  con- 
was  elected  reader  in  autumn  1491,  and  |  viction.  On  going  the  Home  Circuit  in 
again  in  Lent  1490.  He  is  not  mentioned  '  July,  immediately  after  the  trial,  he  had  the 
as  an  advocate  by  any  reporter,  and  pro-  i  indecency  in  his  charge  to  the  Croydon  Juir 
bably  held  some  office  in  the  Exchequer.  ''  to  speak  against  the  verdict  of  their  acquittal^ 


He  was  constituted  fourth  baron  on  Fe- 
bruary 18, 1504,  19  Henry  VH.,  and  was 
continued  in  the  same  position  for  the  first 


ana  to  stigmatise  their  petition  to  the  king 
as  a  libel  that  tended  to  sedition.  His 
death  on  the  22nd  of  the  following  month 


two  years  of  the  reign  of  Henry  ^1IL  at  his  house  in  Brownlow  Street  probably 

Phillips,  in  his  '  Grandeur  of  the  I^w,'  '■  saved  him  from  attainder  at  the  revolution. 

p.  69,  says  that  Sir  Thomas  Allen,  Bart.,  I      He  was  buried  at  Dagenham,  where  a 


lord  mayor  of  London,  was  one  of  the 
baron's  descendants ;  but  evidence  is  want- 
inff  in  support  of  the  statement.  There  is 
indeed  the  same  difficulty  as  in  former 
reigns  in  tracing  the  pedi^ee  of  the  barons 
of  the  Exchequer,  wno  m  general  began 
their  career  as  clerks  in  the  department. 
He  was  appointed  in  1509  supervisor  of  the 
will  of  Jonn  Perfay,  draper,  of  Bury  St. 
Edmunds,  who  bequeaths  'to  h3rm  for  hys 
labor  XX  «.  in  mony,  and  a  blak  ffowne ' 
(JBury  WiUs,  113) :  and  he  was  in  the  corn- 


pompous  monument  was  erected  over  his 
remains.  His  wife  was  Barbara  Blakiston^ 
of  the  family  of  Sir  Francis  Blakiston,  of 
Gibside,  in  l)urhani,  Bart.  (Ath.  Oxoh,  ii. 
440;  BramstoTif  275;  Diary  of  Bitkop 
CaHicright,  71:  Luttrellj  i.  2^7;  8taU 
Trials,  xii.  190.) 

ALTHAX,  James,  was  of  civic  descent, 
both  paternally  and  maternally.  Ifia 
srandfather,  Edward,  was  sheriff  of  Lon- 
don in  1531 ;  his  father,  James,  of  Mark'a 
Hall,  Latton,  Essex,  was  sheriff  of  tlie 


ALTHAM 

citr  in  lor»7,  and  of  the  county  of  Essex  in 
15i0:  and  his  mother  was  Elizabeth, 
daughter  of  Thomas  Blanke,  citizen  and 
haberdasher,  and  the  sister  of  Sir  Thomas 
Blanke,  lord  mayor  of  London  in  1582. 
(Archttdo^,  jLxii.  400-417.)  After  being 
called  to  the  bar  at  GniT's  Inn,  he  was 
choaen  reader  there  in  autumn  1600,  and 
again  in  Lent  1603,  on  his  being  summoned  ' 
by  Queen  Elizabeth  to  assume  the  degree  of 
the  coif  in  the  following  Easter  Term.  But 
her  decease  happening  befoie  that  period, 
King  James  renewed  the  writ  with  the  same 
retuzn. 

He  represented  Bramber  in  the  parlia- 
ment of  lo89,  and  had  acquired  such  a 
character  in  his  profession  that  he  was 
apDointed  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  on 
Feomary  1,  1607,  when  he  received  the 
hcAoar  of  knighthood. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Coke  seems  to  have 
been  in  the  habit  of  treating  the  judges 
rather  superciliously,  since  Justice  Wil- 
liams told  Archbishop  Abbot,  who  reported 
it  to  Lord  Chancellor  Ellesmere,  '  of  his 
utter  dislike  of  all  the  Lord  Coke  his 
couzaes;  and  that  himself  and  Baron 
AJtham  did  once  Ten'  roundly  let  the  Lord 
Coke  know  their  minde,  that  he  was  not 
such  a  maister  of  the  lawes  as  he  did  take 
on  him,  to  deliver  what  he  list  for  lawe, 
and  to  despise  all  other.*     {Egerton  Papers^ 

lie  died  on  February  21,  161G-17;  and 
Sir  Francis  Bacon  (  JJ^orksj  vii.  267),  in  a 
speech  to  his  successor,  calls  him  *  one  of 
tne  gravest  and  most  reverend  judges  of 
this  Jdngdom.*  The  numerous  references 
to  and  reports  by  him  in  the  State  Paper 
Office  prove  the  great  respect  that  was 
entertained  for  his  judgment  by  the  go- 
vernment. He  was  interred  in  the  chapel 
of  Oxhey  House,  near  Watford,  which  he 
had  founded  in  1G12,  under  a  monument 
on  which  he  is  represented  in  his  robes. 

He  was  thrice  married.  His  first  wife 
was  Maxgmret,  daughter  and  heir  of  Oliver 
Skinner,  Eaq.,  by  whom  he  had  one  son ; 
his  second  was  Slary,  daughter  of  Hugh 
Stapeia,  Esq.,  who  brought  him  one  son 
and  three  daughters:  and  his  third  was 
Helen,  daughter  of  John  Saunderson,  mer- 
chant of  London,  and  widow  of  John 
Hvde,  citizen  and  mercer  of  London,  by 
wliom  he  had  no  children.  His  male  issue 
soon  failed*  but  all  his  daughters  married 
intonoUe  families.  One  of  them  was  united 
to  Arthur  Annesley  the  first  Earl  of 
Angieaea;  and  her  second  son  by  him, 
christened  Altham,  was  created  Baron 
«Utham  in  Ireland,  his  descendants  even- 
tually succeeding  to  the  earldom.  The 
lizth  earrs  son  failed  to  make  good  his 
dum  to  the  English  peerage,  which  thus 
became  extinct ;  but  he  succeeded  in  regard 
to  the  Irish  titles,  and  was  created  Earl  of 


ANDEBSON 


13 


Mountnorria  in  Ireland,  which  title  also 
failed  on  the  death  of  its  second  possessor. 
Another  daughter  of  Sir  James  Altham 
married  Richard  Vaughan,  second  Earl  of 
Carberry,  a  title  which  became  extinct  in 
the  next  generation.  The  third  daughter 
had  three  husbands — Sir  Francis  Astley, 
of  Hill  Morton  in  Warwickshire,  knight; 
Robert,  Lord  Digby  in  Ireland;  and  Sir 
Robert  Bernard,  baronet,  serjeant-at-law. 
(Moranfa  Essex^  5G5 ;  Wottons  Baronet. 
iii.  60,  3(U,  iv.  402.) 
ALVAHLZT,  Lord.  <S«?  R.  P.  Ajidex. 
AMBLY,  William  be,  was  one  of  the 
many  who,  having  been  in  arms  against 
King  John,  returned  to  their  allegiance  on 
the  accession  of  Henry  UI.  After  the 
appointment,  in  9  Henry  HI.,  of  justices 
itinerant  for  Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  in  one 
of  which  his  estates  were  situate,  he  was 
joined  to  those  named,  in  the  place  of 
"mrtholomew  Glanville.  {Rot,  Clans,  i. 
340,  ii.  77.) 

AHDELET,  or  ATJKBELET,  Maurigb 
D£,  was  so  called  from  a  town  in  Xoiw 
niandy.  In  17  John  he  was  sent  down  to 
Northampton,  with  Simon  de  Pateshull  and 
others,  to  hear  a  dispute  relative  to  the 
presentation  of  the  church  of  Oxenden 
(Hot.  Claus,  i.  270)  ;  and  in  Trinity  Term 
1219,  3  Henry  lU.,  he  appears  as  one  of  the 
justices  at  W  estminster  before  whom  fines 
were  levied,  and  as  a  justice  itinerant  in 
various  coimties,  which  duty  he  performed 
as  late  as  1230.  (Bot,  Claus,  i.  616 
ii.  77.) 

AKDEBSOlf,  Edhui^d.     A  younger  son 
of  the  ancient  family  of  Anderson  of  North- 
umberland having  migrated  into  Lincoln- 
!  shire,  the  first-named  as  resident  in  that 
i  county  is    Roger,  who  had  an  estate  at 
Wrawbey,  and  was  grandfather  of  Henry, 
.  whose  son  Edward,  of  Flixborough  in  the 
I  same  county,  married  Joan  Clayton,  niece 
'  to  the  Abbot  of  Thomholme.    They  had 
j  three  sons — Thomas,  who  married  EllinoTy 
I  a  daughter  of  Judge  Dalison ;  Richard,  of 
Roxby ;    and  Edmund,  the    future    chief 
justice. 

Edmund  was  bom  about  1530,  educated 
at  Lincoln  College,  Oxford,  and  admitted 
'  to  the  Inner  Temple  in  June  looO.    He 
,  became  reader  in  Lent  1507,  and  again  in 
I  Lent   1674.     He  was  one  of  seven  who 
;  were  called  to  the  degree  of  the  coif  in 
'■  Michaelmas  1677,  and  two    years    after- 
■  wards  he  was  nominated  queen's  serjeant. 
In  this  character  he  went  as  assistant  judge 
I  on  the  Western  Circuit  in  that  year,  and 
in  November  15S1  conducted  the  trial  of 
Edmond  Campion    and    others    for  high 
treason.    His  introductory  speech,  which  ia 
described  as  having  been  ^  very  vehemently 
pronounced,  with  a  grave  and  austere  coun- 
tenance,* is  a  fair  example  of  the  vidoos 
rhetoric  of  the  bar  at  that  period.     It 


14 


ANDERSON 


seems  to  be  directed  more  against  the  pope 
than  the  prisoner;  and  whatever  may  nave 
been  Campion's  guilt,  he  certainly  beats  the 
crown  lawyers  both  in  eloquence  and  argu- 
ment,    (fitete  Trials,  i.  1061.) 

Within  six  months,  on  the  death  of  Sir 
James  Dyer,  the  chief  justice  of  the  Com- 
mon Pleas,  Serjeant  Anderson  was  ap- 
pointed in  his  place,  on  May  2, 1582,  and 
soon  after  knighted.  The  l(ecorder  Flete- 
wood,  in  a  letter  to  Lord  Burleigh,  relates 
that  on  the  dav  of  his  investiture  the  Lord 
Chancellor  (Efatton)  'made  a  short  dis- 
course what  the  dewtie  and  ofEce  of  a  good 
justice  was  ;*  and  that  after  he  was  sworn, 
'  Father  Beuloos,  because  he  was  auncient, 
did  put  a  short  case,  and  then  myself  put 
the  next.'  To  both,  he  continues,  the  new 
chief '  argued  very  leamedlie  and  with  great 
£adlitie.'  Anderson  sat  as  president  of  that 
court  not  onl^  during  the  remainder  of 
Elizabeth's  reign,  but  for  more  than  two 
years  under  James  L,  a  period  in  the  whole 
exceeding  twenty-three  years.  In  the 
state  trials  which  disgraced  the  earlier 
part  of  his  judicial  career  there  is  certainly 
nothing  that  distinguishes  the  chief  justice 
from  his  fellows ;  all  were  inTolved  in  the 
disgusting  barbarity  of  the  proceedings. 
He  was  one  of  the  performers  in  the  farce 
of  Secretary  Davison's  trial,  and  was  equally 
puzzled  with  the  rest  in  drawing  that  dis- 
tinction between  the  propriety  of  the  act 
itself  and  the  impropriety  of  its  perform- 
ance, which  was  necessary  for  the  purpose 
of  justifying  the  required  condemnation. 
A  strenuous  supporter  of  the  discipline  of 
the  Church  of  Endand,  he  showed  himself 
too  severe  a  condemner  of  all  sectarians; 
and  Browne,  the  founder  of  the  Brownists, 
on  his  trial,  and  Udall,  the  Genevan 
minister,  on  his  examination,  felt  that  the 
chief  justice  was  not  an  imprejudiced 
censor.  (State  Trials,  I  1229-1271.)  He 
discouraged,  however,  the  'insolence  of 
office ;'  and  when  the  mayor  of  Leicester, 
who  had  caused  a  Maypole  to  be  pulled 
down,  had  committed  a  poor  shoemaker  for 
saying  that  *he  hoped  to  see  more  morice 
dancing  and  Maypoles  soon,'  the  chief  jus- 
tice, on  coming  to  the  assizes  there  in  1599, 
instantly  ordered  the  lover  of  old  customs 
to  be  discharged.     (Hist,  of  Leicester,  305.) 

As  a  jud^e  in  civil  cases  he  was  patient 
and  impartial ;  his  knowledp^e  of  law  was 
extensive,  and  he  was  ready  m  its  applica- 
tion ;  and  the  *  Reports'  wliich  he  collected, 
and  which  were  afterwards  pubUshed,  prove 
the  industry  and  devotedness  with  which 
he  pursued  his  profession.  His  successful 
resistance  of  an  attempted  encroachment 
on  the  rights  of  his  place  in  the  case  of 
Cavendish,  to  whom  Queen  Elizabeth,  at 
the  instigation  of  Lord  Leicester,  had 
granted  letters  patent  for  making  out  writs 
of  supersedeas  upon  exigents,  on  the  ground 


ARCHER 

that  the  queen  had  no  power  to  pant  th9^ 
office,  speaks  highly  forthe  judicial  inde* 
pendence  in  those  arbitrary  times. 

Sir  Edmund  died  on  August  1, 1605,  and: 
j  was  buried  at  Ey  worth  in  Bedfordshire, 
<  with  a  handsome  monument,  on  which  he* 
;  is  represented  in  his  robes. 

His  first  residence  was  at  Flixborough, 
then  at  Arbury  in  Warwickshire,  where  he- 
built  a  house  out  of  the  ruins  of  the  monas- 
tery. This  he  exchanged  with  the  New- 
digates  for  Harefield  in  Middlesex,  to  be 
nearer  the  courts ;  and  there  he  entertained' 
the  queen,  who  gave  him  a  ring  set  with 
diamonds,  which  was  long  preserved  in  the 
family,  till  one  of  them  liad  it  reset,  and 
afterwards  ^ve  away  the  jewels.  Thus 
losing  their  identity,  the  present  represen- 
tatives will  not  probably  be  so  fortunate  a» 
one  of  the  Northumberland  Andersons  is^ 
said  to  have  been,  who,  having  dropped  a 
ring  into  the  sea,  gave  it  up  for  lost,  when 
some  time  after,  having  bought  a  cod  in  the- 
market,  on  opening  the  fish  the  ring  was- 
found  in  his  maw. 

The  judge  married  Magdalen,  daughter 
of  Chnstopher  Smvth,  Esq.,  of  Annables 
in  Hertfordshire,  and  Ackthorpe  in  Lincoln- 
shire, and  by  her  had  nine  cnildren.    His 
eldest  son,  Edmund,  died  without  issue. 
His  second  son.  Sir  Francis,  was  the  f&ther 
of  Sir  John  Anderson  of  St.  Ives,  who  was- 
created  a  baronet  in  1628,  and  tne  grand- 
father, by  another  son,  of  Sir  Stephen  An- 
derson of  Eyworth,  who  received  a  iNUtK 
netcy  in  1664 ;  but  both  these  titles  have 
been  long  extinct.    From  this  Sir  Francis 
also,  through  another  grandson,  descended 
Charles  Anderson  of  Manley,  in  the  parish 
of  Broughton  in  Lincolnshire,  who,  upon' 
inheriting  the  estates  of  his  maternal  great- 
uncle,  Charles  Pelham  of  Brocklesby  in  the 
same  county,  assumed  that  name,  and  waa- 
raised  to  the  peerage  in  1794  as  Banm 
Yarborough,  a  title  which  was  erected  into 
an  earldom  in  1837,  the  second  possessor  of 
which  now  represents  the  chief  justice  in 
the  House  of  Lords.    The  third  son  of  the 
judge  was  William,    of  Lea  (a  manor  in 
Lincolnshire  given  to  him  by  his  father), 
whose  son,  Edmund  Anderson  of  Broughton, 
was  advanced  in  1060  to  a  baronetcy,  which 
is  still  enjoyed  by  his  lineal  representative. 
(Ath.  Oxon.  i.  753 ;    WottotCs  Baronet,  iii. 
191 ,  427 ;  Collinses  Peerage,  viii.  393-3980 

ARCHER,  John.  Morant,  in  his  ^Im- 
tory  of  Essex'  (i.  161),  relates  that  the 
Archers  derive  themselves  from  Simon  de 
Bois,  who  attended  Henry  V.  at  Agin- 
court,  for  which  he  received  a  pension  of 
five  marks  a  year  for  his  life ;  and  that  he 
changed  his  name  to  Archer  by  command 
of  the  king  for  his  excellence  at  a  8hooting>- 
mateh  before  the  monarch  at  Havering-at- 
Bower.  John  Archer,  according  to  the 
same  authority,  was  bom  in  1508,  and  wu 


ABGHER  ARD£N  15 


the  fion  of  Simon  Archer,  an  alderman  of 
LondoOy  of  Coopersale  in  Theydon-BoiB; 
Easex,  by  Anne  nia  wife,  but  bis  admiasion 
to  tbe  aocietj  of  Gray's  Inn  on  January 
IS,  1617,  more  correctly  described  him  as 
the    aon    of   Henry    Archer,   of  Haydon 


time  bath  kept  no  record,  unless  in  a  sinister 
way ; '  and  he  describes  him  as  always  de- 
sirous of  staying  off  a  long  cause,  relating 
the  mode  in  which  Sir  Francis  North  (after- 
wards lord  kee]^r)  played  upon  this  weaJf- 
ness.    He  sunnyed  nis  remoyal  more  than 


ClairoQ  in  that  county.  He  was  educated  \  nine  years,  dying  on  Feb.  8,  1682.  His 
at  Queen's  College,  Cambridge,  and  took  j  burial-place  is  in  the  churchyard  of  They- 
his  degrees  of  B.A.  Bxid  M.A.  in  1619  and  ;  don,  wnere  there  is  a  monument  to  him. 
1632.  His  call  to  the  bar  was  in  March  !  He  had  two  wiyes :  one  was  Mary, 
1620,  and  his  eleyation  to  the  bench  of  his  daughter  of  Sir  Geoive  Sayille,  Bart. ;  and 
inn  in  1648.  the  other  Eleanor,  daughter  of  Sir  John 

In  1647  he  was  counsel  for  the  corpora-  Curzon,  Bart  His  son  John  by  the  latter 
tkm  of  Grantham,  and  was  engaged  in  |  liyed  at  Coopersale  in  Theydon  Gamon, 
1651  as  one  of  the  counsel  for  Christopher  !  and  was  knighted.  (  Wotton's  Barofiet.  1. 
Loye,  tried  for  hiffh  treason  i^inst  the  '  162,  ii.  246,  d47.) 

Commonwealth  before  the  High  Court  of ;  ABOEH,  or  ABDE&HE,  Ralph  dk. 
Justice,  though  he  was  not  allowed  to  was  son-in-law  of  Ranulph  de  Glanyille,. 
plead  for  him  because  he  had  not  taken  '  haying  married  his  second  daughter,  Ama- 
tiie  engagement.  (State  TrUds^  y.  211.)  bilia.  With  this  connection  it  is  natural 
This  sufficiently  accounts  for  the  fact  that  that  he  should  haye  receiyed  employment 
he  was  never  employed  by  Cromwell ;  in  the  king's  service  ;  and  we  accordingly 
though,  on  his  election  for  ^Essex  in  the  find  him  sheriff  of  Hereford,  where  he  haH 
parliament  of  1666,  he  was  one  of  the  mem-  considerable  property,  from  1184  to  1189. 
Den  approved  by  the  council,  (^^y"'-  -^w^*  {Fuller's  Wonkies,)  In  the  latter  year  he 
HL  1480.)  Soon  after  the  Protector's  was  amerced  in  the  large  sum  of  65/.  for 
death  he  was  made  a  seijeant,  on  Nov.  27,  thirteen  days'  neglect  in  attending  at  the- 
1658 ;  and  on  the  restoration  of  the  Long  Exchequer  according  to  his  summons. 
Parliament  was  one  of  the  judges  appointea  {Madox,  ii.  235.)  In  the  same  year,  pro- 
by  that  body  on  Blay  15,  1&9.  White-  bably  just  before  his  father-in-law  had 
locke  does  not  name  the  court  to  which  he  retired  from  the  place  of  chief  justiciary, 
was  then  attached,  but  it  maybe  presiuned  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  in  Shrop- 
to  have  been  the  Conmion  Fleas,  as  he  is  shire,  Herefordshire,  Gloucestershire,  and 
placed  there  on  Jan.  17,  1660,  when  all    Staffordshire. 

the  judges  are  designated  with  their  par-  I  The  Pipe  Roll  of  6  Richard  I.,  1195^ 
tiealar  courts.  During  the  short  time  that '  (95,  144,  168,  248),  charges  him  as  a 
elapsed  before  the  return  of  the  king  he  debtor  in  Essex  and  Hertfordshire  for 
was  assig^l  to  go  the  Northern  Circuit ;  362/.  10«.  M,  for  his  fine,  and  for  having 
■ad  though  on  the  Restoration  he  lost  his  benevoletttiam  regis.  But  in  1198  he  had 
seat  on  the  bench,  he  was  among  the  ser-  recovered  the  long's  favour,  and  accounts 
jeants  of  the  interregnum  who  were  im-  on  the  Norman  Roll  of  that  year  as  bailiff 
mediately  confirmed  m  the  degree  by  the  of  Pont-Audemer,  in  which  office  he  was 
xettored  government.  succeeded,  on  tbe  accession  of  King  John, 

Two  years  afterwards  he  was  made  a  by  Walter  de  Ely  (jRot,  Norm,  ii.  observa^ 
of  the  Common  Pleas,  on  Nov.  4,  ;  ttons),  and  probably  died  soon  after.  His 
He  sat  there  for  nine  years,  when  |  wife,  however,  had  died  before  6  Richard 
services  were  interrupted  in  Uie  Christ-  1 1.,  for  in  that  year  Thomas  de  Arden,  their 
\  yacation,  1672,  by  a  royal  prohibition ;  son  and  heir,  was  engaged  in  a  lawsuit  re- 
the  reasons  for  which  were  unknown  to  lative  to  the  partition  of  the  property  of 
8b  Thomas  Raymond,  who  reports  the  fact,  Ranulph  de  Glanville,  who,  previous  to 
and  adds  that  the  judge,  having  been  ap-  I  his  departure  to  the  Holy  Land,  had  de- 
pmnted  '  quamdiu  se  bene  gessent,'  refused  j  vised  it  among  his  three  daughters.  (Hot. 
to  surrender  his  patent  without  a  scire  I  Cur,  Regis,  24.)    This  Thomas  was  alive 


ftdaa.     As  this  would  not  have  been   a    inl4John,  when  a  compromise  was  effected 


eoovenient  proceeding,  he  retained  his  posi- 
tion, and  received  his  share  of  the  fees  till 
his  death,  though  forbidden  to  sit  in  the 
court,  ms  place  in  the  meantime  was 
sqyplied  by  Isir  William  Ellis,  who  was  in 


between  him  and  the  Bohuns,  with  whom 
his  father  and  he  had  been  in  litigation  for 
some  years. 

ABOEir,    or    ABOEBNE,    Ralph    de, 
was,  there  is  little  doubt,  the  grandson  of 


htt  turn  removed  before  Archers  death,  to  the  justice  itinerant  last  named,  and  the 
Bake  way  for  Sir  William  Scroggs.  (Si-  '  son  of  Thomas  de  Arden.  (Preface  to 
der^Hy  i.'3,  163;  T.  Raymond,  217;  T,  I  Coke's  Sth  Report)  lie  is  mentioned  by 
/oM9,  43.)  Dugdale  as  a  justicier  in  9  John,  1207,  and 

The  only  account  of  Archer  as  a  judge  is  i  by  Mr.  Hunter  in  the  next  year,  when 
br  Roger  North  (Life,  45-48),  who  says  ;  tines  were  levied  before  him  at  Derby. 
tfeii  he  was  one  of  thoae  '  of  whose  abilities  ;      He  had  previously  incurred  the  king*8 


16 


ARDEN 


displeasure,  and  in  3  John  fined  272/.  lQ8,Qd, 
for  the  royal  favour  (Jiat,  Cancel  147),  but 
in  the  following  year  he  was  employed  in 
the  kind's  service,  being  sent  witn  (j^erard 
de  Rodes  to  Otho,  King  of  the  Romans, 
with  an  allowance  of  five  marks  for  their 
passage.  {Mado.i\  ii.  340.)  Two  years 
afterwards  he  accompanied  the  abbot  of 
Insula  and  Eustace  de  Fauconberg  to 
Flanders,  the  sheriff  of  Kent  beiug  com- 
manded to  provide  a  good  and  secure  ship 
to  convey  them.     (Hot  Clatts.  i.  16.) 

He  endowed  the  priory  of  Butley,  in 
Sussex,  which  was  founded  by  Eanulph  de 
Glanvilie,  with  half  the  town  of  Bawdesey, 
part  of  the  inheritance  which  he  had  ac- 
<iuired  through  that  great  justiciary;  and 
bv  his  wife  Agnes  he  left  a  son  named 
T^homas.  (MonasL  vi.  381 ;  Rot.  Cur, 
Heffis.i.  121.) 

ABOEN ,  or  ABOEBNE,  JoHy.  To  which 
particular  branch  of  this  ancient  and 
numerous  family  he  belonged  no  means 
of  tracing  are  left.  He  was  an  officer 
of  the  Exchequer  in  the  reign  of  Henry 
v.,  imder  whom  and  his  successor  he  held 
the  place  of  clerk  and  supervisor  of  the 
king  s  works.  He  received  23/.  6s,  &d.  for 
making  the  tomb  of  Henry  V.  in  West- 
minster Abbey:  and  various  sums  were 
advanced  to  dim  for  the  repair  of  the 
Tower  of  London  and  the  palace  of  West- 
minster, and  for  building  the  prison  in 
Wallingford  Ca.stle.  In  7  Henry  VI.  he 
was  appointed  with  William  Fitz-Harry  to 
enquire  respecting  certain  jewels,  gold,  and 
silver  which  had  been  conveyed  into  the 
castles  of  IMcardy  without  the  king*B 
licence ;  and  so  late  as  July  1443  he  was 
a  clerk  of  the  works  sent  to  York  to  super- 
intend the  repairs  of  '  all  that  was  drowen 
down  belongj^ng  to  the  church  of  York,' 
being  the  propert}'  of  the  archbishop  which 
had  been  destroyed  in  a  popular  commo- 
tion, and  which  the  Earl  of  Xorthumber- 
land  had  been  awarded  to  restore.  (Devon* 8 
Issue  Boll,  376,  ;^  385,  430 ;  Acts  Privy 
Council,  iii.  54,  243,  320,  v.  300,  and  In- 
trod,  cxxiii.) 

On  February  o,  1444,  22  Henry  VI.,  he 
was  constituted  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer, 
an  office  which  seems  to  have  been  granted 
to  him  as  an  honourable  retirement  from 
active  life,  as  there  is  no  later  notice  of  his 
name. 

His  services  were  requited  by  the  grant 
of  the  custody  of  the  prioiy  of  Elyngham 
in  Hants,  and  the  manor  of  Totyngbek  in 
Surrey,  at  small  reserved  rents,  which 
were  afterwards  assigned  by  the  king  to 
the  support  of  Eton  College.  (Rot.  Pari. 
V.  48.) 

ABi)EH,  or  ABDEBITS,  Peteb,  was  not 
improbably  the  son  of  the  above  John 
Ardeme.  In  18  Henrv  VI.  he  was  deputy 
of  William  de  la  Pole,'  Earl  of  Suffolk,  the 


ARDEN 

chief  seneschal  of  the  king  in  his  duchy  of 
Lancaster.  (Phtmpton  Corresp.  liii.)  He 
took  the  degree  of  the  coif  on  February  14y 
1443,  21  Henry  VI.,  during  the  two  years 
after  which  his  name  frequently  occurs  as 
an  advocate  in  the  cases  recorded  in  the 
Year  Books.  He  was  afterwards  made  one 
of  the  king's  Serjeants,  and  was  raised  to 
the  office  of  chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer 
on  May  2,  1448,  20  Henry  VL.y  and  on 
Juno  7  following  was  constituted  also  a 
judge  of  the  Common  Pleas;  thus,  like 
three  of  his  predecessors — Cokayne,Babing- 
ton,  and  Juyn — holding  both  places  at  the 
same  time.  "  {Pot.  Pat.  p.  2,  m.  0.) 

On  the  accession  of  Edward  IV.,  1461, 
being  then  a  knight,  his  patents  for  both 
ofiices  were  renewed,  and  ne  continued  to 
act  in  the  double  capacity  till  September 
10  in  the  following  year,  when  a  new  chief 
baron  being  substituted  for  him,  he  retained 
the  judgeship  of  the  Court  of  Common 
Pleas,  and  fines  were  acknowledged  before 
him  so  late  as  Easter  1467.  From  a  case 
in  the  Year  Book  3  Edw.  IV.,  p.  6,  in 
which  he  is  called  '  late  chief  baron  of  the 
Exchequer,  and  now  justice  of  the  Common 
Bench  et  secundar,*  it  would  seem  that  he 
also  remained  in  the  Exchequer  as  second 
baron ;  but  the  meaning  of  the  title  is  not 
very  clear.  He  had  a  grant  of  a  tun  of 
wine  for  his  life,  which  was  excepted  from 
the  act  of  resumption  passed  in  4  Edward 
IV.  (Rot.  Pari  v.  628.)  He  died  en 
June  2,  1467. 

He  and  his  wife  Catherine  founded  a 
chantry  in  the  church  of  NetUeswell,  in 
Essex ;  and  another  was  endowed  by  him 
in  the  neighbouring  parish  of  Latton,  the 
manor  of  which  belonged  to  him,  where  a 
moniunental  brass  now  lies  over  his  graye. 
(MoranVs  Es^ex,  ii.  430 ;  Inqttis.  p.  m.  iy. 
382 ;  GougKs  Monum.  ii.  21(3.) 

ABOEH,  Richard  Pepper  (Lord  Air 
vanley),  belon^d  to  the  same  familTy 
but  the  connection  has  not  been  predself 
traced.  His  great-grandfather  was  Sir 
John  Ardeme  of  Harden ;  his  grandfather 
was  John  Ardem,  buried  at  Stockport  in 
1703;  and  his  father  was  John  Ardenof 
Arden,  who  by  his  marriage  with  Maiy^ 
daughter  of  Cuthbert  Pepper,  Esq.,  of 
Pepper  Hall  in  Yorkshire,  had  two  saoB, 
of  whom  he  was  the  younger. 

He  was  bom  at  Bredbury  in  1745,  and| 
after  attending  the  grammar-school  in 
Manchester,  was  admitted  a  gentleman 
commoner  of  Trinity  College,  Cambridjg;ey 
in  October  1763,  having  in  the  precedmg 
year  been  entered  at  the  Middle  Temple, 
ile  was  named  seventh  wrangler  in  1766^ 
when  he  took  his  B.A.  degree,  and  ym 
elected  in  1760  fellow  of  his  college,  when 
he  proceeded  M.A.  His  application  did 
not  prevent  him  from  joining  in  society  | 
and  in  the  True  Blue  Club,  as  well  as  in  ml 


Arden 

•ellegey  Idi  gaiety  aod  good^lmmoar  gained 
Um  the  fiiTOUr  of  his  rellow-students.  By 
'tte  heads  of  the  houae  he  was  no  lees  re- 
mcted^and  was  entrosted  by  them  witb 
WB  lenaon  of  their  statutes.  Called  to 
ike  htat  in  1709^  he  took  his  seat  in  the 
oomt  of  Chancerj'y  and,  according  to  the 
nactice  of  the  tune,  joined  the  Northern 
Gixcaxt  At  a  Tery  early  period  he  was, 
Irr  fiurnly  interest,  appcnnted  recorder  of 
luodeifi'eld,  near  his  native  place ;  and  in 
177^  when  he  had  been  scarcely  seven 
TMurs  at  the  bar,  he  was  constitutecL  one  of 
m&  jnd^  on  the  South  Wales  Circuit,  in 
eottjmietion  with  Daines  Barrington.  His 
chambers  were  in  Stone  Bmldings,  Lincoln's 
hm«  and  it  is  said  that  those  occupied  by 
WiUiam  Pitt  were  on  the  same  staircase ; 
hot  as  he  was  fourteen  years  the  senior  of 
tbe  great  mimster,  the  intimacy  that  existed 
between  them  must  have  commenced  at  a 
later  poiod,  and  certainly  could  not  have 
ioflne&ced  his  nomination  to  the  Welsh 
judgeship,  nor  probably  his  advance  to  the 
Aoooor  of  a  dljc  gown,  which  he  received 
in  Michaehnas  Term  1780,  while  Lord 
Ihulow  was  chancellor.  This  advance, 
d^pedally  considering  that  he  was  no 
fiToortte  with  his  lordship,  shows  that  he 
ted  gained  a  considerable  standing  at  the 
hv.  What  was  the  origin  of  their  mutual 
dSiltke  is  not  very  clear,  since  they  were 
efaallv  free  of  tougue  and  careless  of  ob- 
KTTstion.  The  chancellor  was  fond  of 
flraUnng  Bfr.  Arden,  and  one  day,  the  latter 
baring  m  the  excitement  of  his  argument, 
in  a  cause  in  which  the  age  of  a  woman 
was  in  dispute,  said  to  the  opposing  coimsel, 
'm  lay  yxm  a  bottle  of  wme  she  is  more 
than  forty-five,'  at  once,  seeing  the  in- 
decency, apolocised  to  the  chancellor,  de- 
dtting  that  he  forgot  where  he  was. 
Thnriow  growled  forth,  'I  suppose  you 
ttofu^t  yon  were  in  your  own  court,' 
■ih>*mg  to  the  free  and  easy  manner  in 
whidi  ue  proceedings  in  the  Welsh  courts 
were  then  conducted 

When  Lord  Shelbume  became  prime 
■hiisler  on  the  death  of  the  Muquis  df 
in  July  1782^  Mr.  Arden,  no 
toDbt  by  the  instrumentahty  of  his  friend 
lEr.  FHty  then  chancellor  of  uie  Exchequer, 
Wis,  notwithstanding  the  disinclination  of 
Lnd  Thnrlow,  appointed  solicitor-eeneral 
en  November  7,  and  was  elected  M.P.  for 
Hewton  in  the  Isle  of  Wight.  On  the 
Cnolotion  of  that  ministry  in  the  following 
April  he  of  course  retired;  but  in  nine 
aoDtha,  the  Coalition  Ministry  being  in 
Ihor  torn  discarded,  and  Mr.  Pitt  entrusted 
with  the  eondnct  of  affairs,  Mr.  Arden  was 
mtored  to  his  place,  in  December  1783. 
Hs  only  held  it  for  three  months,  when,  on 
Mtrch  31, 1784,  he  succeeded  Lord  Kenyon, 
bodi  as  attorney-general  and  chief  justice 
of  Chester.  Danng  this  time  he  strenuously 


ARDEN 


17 


opposed  Mr.  Fox's  East  India  ^11,  and  wa4 
an  unflinching  supporter  of  Mr.  Pitt  in  his 
memorable  contest  with  the  coalesced  op- 
position immediately  after  his  appointmoit. 
For  the  new  p^liament  of  May  1784,  which 
confirmed  the  ministerial  power,  Mr.  Arden 
was  returned  member  for  Aidborongh  in 
Yorkshire,  and  in  those  of  1790  and  1796 
he  represented  Hastings  and  Bath  tesp^ 
tively.  In  all  the  parliaments  he  was  a 
frequent  and  effective,  though  not  a  brilliant, 
sp^er.  He  exposed  himself  in  1784  to 
some  just  censure  by  proposing  a  loose 
enactment  with  reference  to  elections ;  and 
by  indiscreet  acknowledgments  he  laid 
himself  open  to  the  sarcastic  taunts  of  his 
opponents.  The  shafts  of  the  writers  of 
the  'RoUiad'  and  of  the  '  Ihrobationair 
Odes '  were  levelled  against  him,  as  well 
for  his  want  of  law  as  of  personal  beauty. 
But  the  good-humour  witn  which  he  met 
these  attacks  disarmed  them  of  their  sting 
and  silenced  his  assailants. 

On  the  elevation  of  Lord  Kenyon  he 
succeeded  as  master  of  the  Rolls,  on  June  4, 
1788,  notwithstanding  Lord  ThurloVs 
onpositioni  which  was  onlj  silenced  by  a 
significant  hint  firom  the  kmg.  The  animo« 
sitv  and  disrespect  of  the  defeated  ehan- 
ceuor  were  nuiandsomely  shown  against 
the  new  master  on  all  occasions,  and  par* 
ticularly  by  calling  upon  Mr.  Justice  Buller 
to  sit  lor  him  wnen  he  was  ill.  or  idle, 
which  was  frequentiy  the  case.  Tne  master 
of  the  Rolls  was  too  good-natmred  and  too 
wise  to  retaliate.  He  discreetly  avoided 
the  slightest  appearance  of  any  angry  feel- 
inffs  existing  between  the  judges ;  and  the 
omy  revenge  he  took  for  the  chancellor's 
disfike  was  by  proving  his  antagonist  mis- 
taken in  his  estimate  of  him ;  and  indeed 
at  ^e  same  time  surprising  the  legal  pro- 
fession by  the  excellent  manner  in  which 
he  decided  the  various  cases  in  equity  that 
came  before  him,  his  judgments  oeing  far 
the  best  that  were  pronounced  in  the  court 
of  Chancery  during  the  period  in  which  he 
sat.  He  was  knitted  at  his  promotion. 
After  enduring  philosophically  the  rough- 
ness of  Thurlow  for  four  years,  he  worked 
for  nine  more  with  oomplexe  harmony  under 
Lord  Loughborough,  on  whose  retirement 
from  the  Seils,  and  the  elevation  of  Lord 
£ldon  to  the  chancellorship.  Sir  Richard 
was  on  May  SO,  1801,  constituted  lord 
chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  which 
Lord  £3don  had  vacated.  On  the  22nd  of 
that  month  he  had  been  created  a  peer  by 
the  titie  of  Lord  Alvanley,  a  manor  in  the 
parish  of  Frodsham  in  Cheshire,  which  had 
been  in  the  possession  of  his  family  ever 
since  the  reign  of  Henry  IIL 

He  performed  the  judicial  functions  of 
his  new  position  with  great  efficiency  and 
learning  for  nearly  three  years;  when  to 
the  regret  of  all  he  was  suddenly  Beuedi, 

0 


18 


ARESEY 


."while jpresddioir  in  the  Qouse  of.  Lords  for 
Lord  !^doD,  with  a  Tiolent  attack  of  inflam- 
mation, which  after  three  days  of  sviffenng 
terminated  fatally,  on  ^arch  19, 1804.  He 
died  at  hia  house  in  Great  George  Street, 
Westminster,  and  was  huried  in  the  ch^l 
of  the  Bolls. 

As  a  judge  he  falsified  the  jokes  of  his 
early  opponents  by  proring  himself  a  good 
lawyer  and  a  conscientious  administrator  of 
justice ;  and  to  the  last  he  preserved  the 
character  he  had  borne  from  the  conmience- 
ment  of  his  career,  of  a  hearty,  good- 
humoured,  and  entertaining  companion, 
and  of  a  simple,  steady,  and  kind-hearted 
fiiend.  His  advance* in  dignity  had  not 
the  common  effect  of  rendering  him  either 
proud,  formal,  or  reserved ;  neither  did  it 
have  the  better  effect  dT  sobering^  the 
quickness  of  his  temper.  His  occasional 
irritabilities  indeed  made  the  French  in- 
terpretation of  his  name,  'Mons.  Poivre 
Ardent,*  peculiarly  applicable.  These  how- 
ever were  slight  failmgs,  and  did  not  pre- 
vent his  being  universally  esteemed,  or 
being  looked  upon  with  affection  and  te- 
apect  by  'troops  of  friends,*  one  of  the 
failiest,  most  intimate,  and  steadv  of  whom 
was  the  great  minister  William  Pitt 

In  1784  he  married  Anne  Dorothea, 
daughter  of  Richard  Wilbraham  Bootle, 
Esq.,  of  Lathom  Hall  in  Lancashire,  the 
father  of  the  first  Lord  Skelmersdale.  This 
lady  survived  her  husband  till  1825.  Of 
their  children  the  two  eldest  sons  held  the 
title  successively,  which  on  the  death  of 
the  latter  in  1857  became  extinct.  (Lives 
lny  Jardine^  W,  C.  Tomuendf  ^.) 

ABS8ST,  or  B^AAOT,  Norman  de,  was 
the  fifth  in  descent  from  his  namesake 
the  founder  of  this  noble  family,  whose 
chief  seat  was  situate  at  Nocton  in  Lin- 
colnshire, where  he  had  thirty^three  lord- 
ships from  the  immediate  gift  of  the 
Conqueror.  He  was  the  son  of  Thomas  de 
Axesey  and  Johanna,  who  afterwards  mar* 
ried  William  de  Lauda,  and  succeeded  his 
father  in  7  John,  giving  to  the  king  a  fine 
of  six  hundred  marks,  two  pidfreys,  and  a 
complete  horse  for  uvery  of  his  lands. 
(Bat.  de  Fin.  340, 340.)  He  accompanied 
the  king  on  his  expedition  to  Ireland  in 
1210  (Eot.  de  Pratt.  187-229)  j  but,  join- 
ing in  the  confederacy  against  him  in  1215, 
his  lands  were  seized  into  the  king*s  hands 
for  the  remainder  of  that  reign ;  nor  were 
they  restored  under  Heniy  HI.  till  he  had 
given  hostages  for  his  future  fidelity.  {R(A. 
Claw.  L  249,  311,  320.)     That  his  subse- 

?[uent  conduct  was  quiet  and  loyal  appears 
rom  his  receiving  in  3  Henry  IIi«  the 
confirmation  of  the  grant  of  a  market  at 
his  manor  of  Nocton,  which  had  been  made 
to  him  in  16  John  (Eot.  FM.  201),  pn- 
senting  to  hia  soveraign  a  goes  hawk  of 
Norway  for  the  ptinlege,  and  firom  his 


ARFASTUS 

being  one  of  those  employed  in.  -0^  Henir 
j  JU.  to  conduct  the  qmnzime,  which  haa 
I  Wn  collected  for  the  county  of  lincols, 
to  Northampton.    {Rot.  Clau$.  vl*  74.) 

On  the  circuits  wbich  were  appointed  on 

I  August  1, 1234,  he  was  placed  as  a  justiee 

i  itinerant  for  Lincolnshire ;  and  in  1245^ 

for  the  counties  of  Nottingham  and  Derim 

He  died  shortly  before  October  16, 12IM^ 

when  livery  of  his  lands  was  ordered  to  bd 

'  made  to  Philip,  his  son  and  heir.    (Exm 

\  cenf.  e  Itot  Fin.  ii.  196.) 

i     This  barony  fell  into  abeyance  amonff 

!  daughters  about  1340.    Another  barony  m 

:  Darcy  was  created  in  a  younger  son  of  ona 

,  of  Norman's  successors,  m  1332,  which  alio 

fell  into  abeyance  in  1418.    A  third  bazoojr 

!  was  created  m  1509  in  another  branch.  One 

of  whose  descendants  was  advanced  to  the 

earldom  of  Holdemess  in  1662,  which  be- 

-  came  extinct  in  1778 ;  but  the  barony  of 

i  Conyers,  which  was  also  in  the  family,  de* 

j  scended  to  Uie  deceased  earl's  dauffnteor, 

who  married  the  Duke  of  Leeds.    (2)iHh 

dale's  Baron,  i.  369.) 

ABPABTU8,  or  HERFABTITB,  by  birth  k 
Norman,  was  one  of  the  cha^lcons  of  Wil* 
liam  the  Conqueror  before  his  invasion  of 
I^ffland.  He  had  previously  been  a  mook 
in  tne  Abbey  of  Bee  in  Normandy,  whoN^ 
from  the  greater  ignorance  of  his  brethniDy 
his  slender  pretensions  to  learning  mada 
some  show.  It  seems,  however,  that  ha 
was  merely  luscue  inter  strabones,  a  blink* 
ard  amonff  the  blind ;  and  it  is  related  that 
after  Lanuranc  had  raised  the  character  of 
the  abbey,  Arfastus,  as  one  of  the  dukell 
chaplains,  visited  it  in  great  pomp^  whan 
Lanfrano,  soon  discoverinff  his  deficiendas^ 
somewhat  rudely  ridiculed  and  exposed 
them;  an  indignity  which  Arfattua  xe- 
venged  by  procuring  his  temnoraiy  disgittba 
and  banishment.  {Godwin  ae  PramL  60.) 
After  the  Conquest,  Arfastus  continnMl 
in  great  favour  with  King  William,  and 
became  his  chancellor.  The  date  (»  hii 
appointment  does  not  appear ;  but,  aa  it  ii 
certain  that  he  held  the  office  at  Whitiim- 
tide  (1068,  his  name  vnth  that  addition 
being  attached  to  the  charter  which  WU* 
Ham  then  granted  to  the  church  of  St» 
Martin  -  le  -  Grand  in  London  (itfoNoA 
vi.  1324*),  it  is  not  unlikely  that  he  ifM 
William  s  first  chancellor.  Dugdale  and 
his  followers,  Oldmixon  and  LordCampbaQi 
give  the  date  of  1073  to  the  same  charteir, 
an  inspection  of  which  v^  prove  thair 
error.  Thynne,  Philipot,  and  Spelman 
state  it  correctly. 

He  was  chaupellor  in  the  following  yatr, 
1069,  being  an  attesting  witness  to  lOng 
William's  diarter  to  the  chuich  at  Ezater 
(Monoit.  ii  531) ;  and  probably  xeAptd 
about  the  middle  of  the  year  1070,  wktt 
he  received  the  biahopzic  of  Halmnam  in 
Norfolk— not  Helmstadt  in  Qen/kutf^  fs 


5 


1. 


ABGENHNE  ARUNDEL  19 

Oldmixooi  and  Lofd  Campbell  erroneously  !  Essex  and  Hertfordshire  in  lldS  (AfadaXf 
assert.  ii.  20),  of  which  counties  he  was  tifter- 

In  1075,  in  conseqtience  of  the  mandate  wards  sheriff;  and  his  pl^esence  lis  a  jus- 
of  the  council  of  London  that  the  episcopal  ticier  in  the  court  at  Westminster  in*the 
aees  should  be  transferred  from  villages  to  *  following  reign  is  evidenced  by  iineis  &  3  & 
th»  most  eminent  towns  in  their  dioceses,  .  4  John,  1201-2,  being  leried  therid  before 
this  see  was  removed  to  Thetford ;  and  the  i  him.  (Hunters  Prefyce,) 
bishop  made  a  subsequent  attempt  to  fix  it  |  At  the  close  of  the  reign  he  joined  the 
At  Bufy.    Alleging  that  a  great  part  of  the  I  barons  and  lost  his  landcf;  but  restitution 


i^venoes  then  belonging  to  the  monastery 
there  had  been  alienated  from  the  see  by 
his  predecessor,  he  took  active  measures 
afpainst  the  Abbot  Aylwin ;  but  that  dig- 


was  made  ih  1  Henry  UX.,  on  retuniing  to 
his  allegiance. 

ABOJEHTIJIJS,  Giles  db.  Was  the  grand- 
son of  the  above  Reginald  de  Aiffe^itine, 


Bitaxy,  daaming  to  be  exempt  from  t£e  and  the  son  of  Richimi,  ivho  'ittis  dne  of 
•epiacopal  jurisdiction,  strenuouslv  defended  I  the  justiiciers  in  Normandy  Under  King 
(he  whtB  of  his  house;  and  the  contest,  >  John,  and  steward  of  the  household  utoder 
notwithstanding  the  bishop's  interest  with  |  Henry  IH.  (Madox,  i.  63, 156.)  Li'1247, 
the  king^  was  decided  against  him  in  1081.  *  on  his.father*s  death,  Giles  did  homage  for 
There  are  letters  of  Pope  Gregory  VIL  to  '  the  lands  held  in  capite,  and  paid  Iw.  for 
lAnfranr  abusing  Arfastus  plentifuUy  for. '  his  relief.  {Excerpt,  e  Hot.  ISn,  ii.  ^.) 
his  behaviour  to  the  monks  of  Bury.  He  was  a  knight  of  great  valoUr,  and  had 

Thynne  places    Arfastus   as  chancellor    been  actively  engagea  in  the  tvars  with  the 
agam  in  1077  {HoUmhed,  iv.  348),  and    Welsh,  by  whom  he  was  taken  prisoner  in 


Philipot  (p.  4)  mentions  Maurice  in  the  same 


16  Henry  HL 


year,  out  as  they  neither  cite  any  authority,  He  was  made  goviemor  of  Windsor 
91x1  as  there  is  proof  that  Maurice  was  Castle,  and  in  1253  he  t^as  at  the  head  of 
chancellor  probably  in  1078,  and  certainly  ,  the  justices  itinerant  for  Berksldre,  Ox- 
in  1081,  when  the  above  decision  was  pro-  fordshire,  and  othelr  ccyunties,  '  and  Was 
nonneed  between  the  bishop  and  the  aboot,  present  in  that  year  as  jud^  at  Alton,  in 
BO  saftcient  ground  is  oTOred  for  reliance  ;  Hampshire,  when  Wil]jam  de  Insula  took 
en  tins  statement  !  John  le  Falconer  by  the  throat  in  open 

That  he  was  not  deprived,  however,  of  .  court  (Abbr^,  Pltic.  132.) 
the  .royal  favour  is  evidenced  by  the  grant  After  the  battle  of  Lewes,  when  the  king 
which  he  received  of  all  the  churches  and  ,  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  barons,  (Hl^s  de 
various  other  possessions  in  Thetford;  i  Argentine  joined  the  latter,  and  was  s^le6ted 
wherry  assisted  by  Roger  Bigod,  he  rebuilt  ,  as  one  of  the  council  to  govern  t^e  realm. 
the  church  of  St  Mary,  and  spared  neither  i  While  in  this  office,  the  chancellor,  Thomas 
paina  nor  cost  in  augmenting  and  improving  de  Cantelupe,  during  a  temporary  absence, 
ioB  see.  I  delivered  the  Seal  to  Ralph  oe  SandtHch,  to 

He  died  in  1084,  and  wa?  buried  in  his  be  kept  by  him  under  the  seals  of  Giles  de 
«athednL  Weever  (785,  827)  has  pre-  {  Argentine  and  two  others.  The  mandr  of 
asrved  his  epitaph.  He  bequeathed  his  Witherfield,  which  he  had  lately  puitehased, 
posttMions  among  Richard  and  his  other    was  seized  from  him  as  a  rebel,  and' ^ven 

back  to  Robert  de  Stuteviile,  its  original 
proprietor.  (Co/.  Rot.  Pat.  39. )  He  di^d  in 
1283,  leaving  a  son,  Reginaki,  >«rho  was 


who,  no  doubt,  were  bom  long  before 
diepromulgation  of  the  decree  of  the  synod 
of  Tvindiester  in  1076,  enforcing  the  celi- 
bacy of  the  clergy.  (Bloinefidds  Norfolk ^  i. 
404;  yorwu^,\.  463.) 

iBOXVnVS^  REanrALO  de,  is  named 
by  FaUer  in  his  'Worthies  of  EUgland' 
as  shcfriflr  of  the  counties  of  Camoridge 
and  Huntingdon  in  6  &  7  Richard  1.  An 
fiitiTy  however,   on  the   roll  of  5  John 


summoned  to  parliament  in  25  Edward 
1. ;  but  neither  he,  nor  anv  of  his  descend- 
ants, afterwards.  (DugdaleU  Baron,  i.  615.) 

ABirnr,  Wuxuu.    See  W,  EBMTir. 

ABHTTLPH.     See  Raxulph. 

ABinfDEL,  £abl  of.  See  W,  be 
Albini. 


4isenazges  him  from  the  payment  of  ten        ABUKBEL,  Rogeb,  was  of  the  derical 


■arks  ^  de  dono,*  which  he  had  promised  ;  profession,  and  is  generally  menti(fned  "with 
,fat  the  sheriffidty  of  those  counties,  because  i  the  addition  of  *  Magister.'  He  was  one  of 
le  never  had  that  office,  but  only  accounted  j  the  fermers  of  the  see  of  York  during"  its 
as  sab-sheriff  to  the  chancellor  (Madox,  \.  ,  vacancy  at  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Henry  2l., 
206>,  William  de  Longchamp,  Bishop  of  j  and  he  and  his  colleagues  account  for  it  up 


Hy.  He  was  no  doubt,  therefore,  an  officer  to  1  Richard  I.  {Madox,  i.  309,  ^^')  In 
of  the  court  at  that  time,  and  appears  to  !  that  year  he  held  pleas  with  Hugh  Pa4ar, 
have  held  Wilmundele  Magna,  in  Hertford-  '  Bishop  of  Durham,  and  others,  as  » justice 
akij«,  '  per  seijentiam  luncemiae.'  (Rot.  itinerant  in  Yorkshire,  and  in  the  ninth 
<V.  RegUy  102. )  year  of  that  reiffn  performed  the  same  duty 

ffis  name  stands  at  the  end  of  a  list  of   m  all  the  northern  counties.     (^Pipe  RoU, 
five  justices  itinerant  who  held   pleas  in    9,81.)    In  the  following  reign  he  acted aa a 

c  2 


20 


ARVrSDEL, 


justider,  his  name  appeftring  on  fines  levied 
before  him  in  4  ana  8  John.  (Hunter's 
IVeface.) 

He  died  a  few  years  afterwards,  and  his 
property  must  have  been  of  considerable 
amount,  as  in  15  John  his  nephew,  Thomas 
de  Holm,  paid  a  fine  of  500  marks  and  five 
palfreys  for  having  his  land  in  Yorkshire 
and  lieicestershire.     (Hot,  de  Fin,  491.) 

ABXrVDSL,  or  7ITZ-ALAH,  Thomas  de, 
the  latter  being  his  fitmily  name;  but 
according  to  the  common  practice  of  the 
time,  especially  among  tne  dergy,  he 
adopted  that  of  ArundeL  from  his  oirth- 
plaoe  or  his  father's  title.  He  was  the 
third  son  of  Richard,  Earl  of  Arondd,  and 
Eleanor  his  second  wife,  who  was  the 
fifth  daughter  of  Henry  Plantagenet,  third 
Earl  of  Lancaster,  and  the  widow  of  John, 
Lord  Beaumont  Bom  about  1352,  and 
educated  for  the  priesthood,  he  soon  found 
the  benefit  of  his  noble  connections,  by  being 
made  Archdeacon  of  Taunton  in  1873,  and 
Bishop  of  Ely  in  1374,  before  he  was  of 
canomcal  age  for  either  preferment. 

Attadied  to  the  party  of  the  Duke  of 
Gloucester,  he  assisted  tnat  mince  in  recti- 
fying the  misgovemment  of  King  Bichaid, 
and  opposing  the  unworthy  favourites  of 
that  umortunate  monarch.  On  his  appUca- 
tion  to  the  chancdlor,  Michad  de  la  Fole, 
Earl  of  Sufiblk,  for  the  restoration  of  Uie 
temporalities  to  the  Bishop  of  Norwich,  the 
proud  earl  rebuked  him,  saying,  '  What  is 
it,  my  lord,  that  you  now  aUE  of  the  king  P 
Seems  it  to  you  a  small  matter  for  him  to 
part  with  the  temporalities,  when  they  yield 
to  his  cofiers  1,000/.  a  year?  Little  need 
has  the  king  of  such  counsellor  to  his  loss.' 
Whereupon  Bishop  Arundel  thus  roimdly 
retorted :  *  What  is  it  that  you  say,  my  lord 
Michael  P  Know  that  1  desire  not  of  the 
kii^  that  which  is  his  own;  but  that 
which,  bv  the  counsel  of  you  and  such 
as  you,  he  imjustl^  detains  fh>m  other 
men,  and  which  will  never  do  him  any 
good.  If  the  king's  loss  weigh  with  you, 
why  did  you  gre^Jdily  accept  1,000  marks 
per  annum  when  you  were  made  an  earl  ?' 
On  the  disgrace  of  that  earl,  Arundel  was 
appointed  chancellor,  on  October  24,  1386 
(jRot.  Ciatu.  m.  35),  and  in  the  following 
month  was  passed  the  act  which  placed  the 
roval  authority  in  the  hands  of  eleven  com- 
missioners. In  the  next  parliament  he 
pmided,  when  his  predecessor,  and  the 
Duke  of  Ireland,  Alexander  KevOle,  Arch- 
bishop of  York,  Chief  Justice  Tresilian, 
and  ^iicholas  Brambre  were  charged  with 
high  treason.  One  of  the  immediate  effects 
of  their  conviction  was  his  own  appoint- 
ment to  fill  the  vacant  archbishopric  of 
York,  the  pope's  bull  for  his  translation  to 
which  was  dated  April  3, 1388.  (Hymer, 
vii.  574.) 

Soon  after  the  temporalities  of  the  arch- 


ABUNDEL 

bishopric  were  restored  to  him  he  retiredf 
f^m  the  chancellorship,  being  succeeded  ii> 
that  office  on  May  3. 1389,  by  William  of 
Wykeham,  Bishop  of  Windiester,  on  whose 
resignation,  on  September  27,  1391,  the- 
Oreat  Seal  was  again  entrusted  to  him. 
(Bot.  ClauB,  ii.  m.  o  and  m.  84.)  On  eadi 
of  his  appointments  as  chancdlor  he  re- 
ceived a  patent  from  the  king,  stating  that, 
as  he  has  no  domains  or  villas  pertaiiiiii|f 
to  his  bishopric  near  London,  where  hi» 
people,  family,  and  horses  can  be  enter- 
tained while  ne  is  in  the  office  of  chancd- 
lor, the  kinff  asskns  to  him  for  his  livery^ 
by  virtue  of  nis  office,  the  villas  and  parishes- 
of  Hakenev  and  Leyton  on  the  first  occa- 
sion, and  Stebenhytn  on  the  second,  so  that 
his  people,  &c.j  may  be  entertained  therdn 
liberally  and  without  impediment  {Bj^ma-y 
vti.  553-708.) 

There  is  a  curious  instance  of  the  appli- 
cation of  the  word  '  unde '  in  a  letter  to 
him  from  Heniy  of  Lancaster,  Eari  of 
Derby  (afterwards  Heniy  IV.),  who  ad- 
dresses him  as  'his  very  dear  and  very 
entirely  well-beloved  uncle.'  (Proeem* 
mgs  in  Chancery,  temp.  EUz.  L  7.)  Th» 
actual  relationship  between  them  was  this: 
Henry's  mother,  Blanch,  the  wife  of  John 
of  Gaunt,  was  tiie  granddai^hter  of  tiie- 
archbishop's  grandfather,  wrongh  hi» 
motJier's  elder  brother,  and  was  conae- 
quentiy  the  archbishop's  first  cousin.  It. 
thus  appears  that  it  was  the  custom  in  that 
age  for  (^dren  to  designate  the  first 
cousins  of  their  parents  as  undes  and  aunts, 
a  practice  which  is  still  prevalent  in  Waks. 

On  tiie  death  of  Archlnshop  CourteMje- 
he  was  translated,  in  1396,  to  the  provinoe 
of  Canterbuiy,  being  the  first  instance  of 
a  removal  from  one  archbishopric  to  Ae 
other.  He  thereupon  resigned  the  G^nat 
Seal,  on  September  27  {Rot  Ctaui.  n,  I,  n. 
22),  having  hdd  it  on  this  second  oeofc- 
don  for  five  years.  With  the  attaimnent 
of  the  highest  ecdesiasticd  podtion,  hi» 
prosperity  forsook  him  for  a  time;  to 
shortly  afterwards  King  Bidiaxd,  having  % 
subservient  parliament,  threw  off  the  con- 
trol of  the  party  of  the  Duke  of  Gloucester, 
and  determined  to  punish  all  who  wave- 
implicated  in  the  proceedings  against  his 
former  favourites.  One  of  the  first  vidiiBa 
was  the  archbishop's  brother,  Riehaid, 
Earl  of  Arundel ;  and  immediatdy  after 
his  condemnation  the  Commons  proceeded, 
on  September  20, 1397, toimpeach  the  aich* 
bishop  of  high  treason.  The  principal  chaige 
affdnst  him  was  tliat,beingthe  chief  oiBoer 
of  the  king,  his  chancellor,  he  aided  and 
advised  in  making  the  commiadon  in  iSb» 
tenth  year  of  the  king's  rdgn,  by  iMA, 
the  Tojsl  authority  was,  in  nct^  placed  ift 
the  hands  of  certam  lords  therem  named; 
and  that  he  put  the  add  comnriwion  » 
execution.  This  fact,  which  the  aicbbidifl|^ 


ARXJSSEL  JUEOmURST  21 

could  not  deny,  being  decUred  to  be  txea-  dence  to  «how  that  he  moBt  have  been  a 
MOy  lie  WM  thereupon  convicted  and  sen-  man  of  great  vigour  Mid  capacity  for  buai-* 
taneed  to  be  banished  the  xealm^  and  allhiB  nees ;  and  he  left  a  hi^h  reputation  as  well 
uoperty  to  be  oonfiecated.  The  king  gave  ,  for  learning  and  intelligence  ae  lor  personal 
aim  ax  weeks  to  depart  (Bytner,  viiL  31), ;  courage. 

with  a  poramise  to  liecall  mm,  which  he  -  That  he  was  not  re-appointed  chancellor 
treachgonsly  broke.  on  the  accession  of  Henry  V.  seems  to  have 

Anmdel  joined  Henry  of  Bolingbroke  in  arisen  from  a  dispute  with  the  king  while 
Ids  invaaioo  of  the  reum^  and,  on  King  I  he  was  Prince  of  Wales.  Of  this  we  have 
Bichaid'a  arrest,  was  placed  for  a  third  time  no  other  notice  than  a  reference  which  was 
intheehanceUorshipy  m  August  1390,  hold-  ',  made  to  it  in  the  instructions  given  to 


ing  ity  however,  for  little  more  than  ten 
days  (J2iirc^'«  CataL  46),  when  the  Seal 
was  placed  in  the  hands  of  John  de  Scarle, 
the  master  of  the  Rolls. 

Tlie  remmciation  of  the  unfortunate  king 
was  made  to  the  archbishop  at  Conway, 
and  afterwards  repeated  at  Westminster  on 
September  30,  when  Henry  was  led  by  the 
•primate  to  the  vacant  throne.  He  opened 
the  parliament  six  days  afterwards,  and 
m  a  short  time  replaced  in  full  pos- 
of  the  temporalities  of  his  see 


certain  lords  in  the  following  reign,  with 
the  view  of  accommodating  the  contoition 
between  the  Duke  of  Gloucester,  and  Beau* 
fort.  Bishop  of  Winchester,  the  chancellor. 
It  is  apparent  that  the  prince  had  then  re- 
quired Amndel*s  removal ;  and  it  looks  as 
u  he  took  the  opportunity  of  his  accession 
to  effect  his  object. 

His  death  took  place  at  the  rectory  of 
Hackyngton  on  the  20th  of  the  .following 
February,  at  the  age  of  sixty-two,  and  he 
was  buned  in  Canterbury  CathediaL  His 
The  attempts  hitherto  made  for  the  sup-  *  disease  was  an  inflammation  of  the  throat, 
-presoiim  of  the  opinions  of  Wickliffe  having  which  increased  so  much  as  to  prevent  his 
proved  ineffectual,  a  statute  was  passed  in  i  taking  any  nutriment.  The  superstition  of 
2  Henry  IV.  authorising  the  burning  of  I  the  time  traced  its  commencement  to  the 
heretics.  Although  prolMibly  the  archbishop  i  day  on  which  he  pronounced  sentence 
was  no  more  gml^  than  the  rest  of  his  against  Sir  John  Oldcastle,  Lord  Cobham, 
Misoopal  brethren  in  obtaining  this  detest-  ,  for  heresy,  and  asserted  that  it  was  a  judg- 
a!ble  act,  he  cannot  be  acqmtted  of  the  '  ment  of  6od  that  he,  who  had  deprived  tne 
diigraoe  of  being  the  first  who  pressed  its  people  of  food  for  the  soul,  should  himself 
ezecation,  and  who  sullied  the  English  sufi^r  for  want  of  food  for  the  body.  But, 
annals  by  bringing  a  man  for  his  opinions  whatever  may  be  our  own  opinions  of  these 
to  the  stake.  Within  a  month  after  the  persecutions  at  the  present  time,  we  must 
passing  of  the  statute  he  delivered  a  priest  not  judge  harshly  of  those  who,  brought  up 
nfltned  William  Sautre  over  to  the  secular  '  with  strictness  in  tiieir  religious  tenets, 
power  to  undergo  the  horrible  sentence  would  naturally  look  with  abhorrence  on, 
i^Symer^  viiL  178),  and  ere  his  career  was  and  use  every  effort  to  exterminate,  those 
dosed  some  others  suffered  under  his  con-  ridiculers  of  their  faith  whose  constant  en- 
demnatioo.  deavour  was  to  subvert  the  principles  in 

His  strennous  support  of  the  rights  of   which  they  had  been  educated,  and  to  slight 
the  Chnrch  was  prominentiy  shown  in  the    the  authority  they  had  been  accustomed  to 
bold  resistance  he  made  to  the  represents.-    reverence.     His  liberality  to  the  three  ca- 
tion of  the  Commons  to  the  king  in  1405,    thedrals  over  which  he  presided  shows  that 
that  the  ropil  necessities  might  be  supplied   a  love,  of  money  was  not  one  of  his  vices ; 
by  seizing  on  the  revenues  of  the  clergy,    and  some  Latm  verses  in  '  his  grace  and 
llie  kin^y  fearful  of  offending  that  order,    commendation,'  quoted  by  Weever  (220), 
fi^ve  emct  to  the  r^rimand  pronounced    afford  evidence  of  the  estimation  in  which 
^  the  ardilnshop,  and  the  Commons  took    he  was  held  by  his  contemporaries. 
nothing  by  their  motion.    He  enjoyed  King       ASCWABOBY,  Adam  de,  as  Abbot  of 
Houy^  favour  during  the  whole  of  his    Bardney,  was  placed  in  the  commission  for 
icign,  and  was  for  the  fourth  time  consti-   justices   itinerant  for  Lincolnshire,  dated 
tated  chancellor  on  Januair  30, 1407.    Hb  |  August  1,  1234,  18  Henry  Ul.    He  was 
cootinoanoe  in  office  on  this  occasion  was  !  elected  abbot  in   1225,  and  resigned  the 
«Bly  till  December  21, 1409  (Hot.  Claus.  m.  ,  office  in  1237.     (^.  WiUis,  i.  30.) 
35  and  m.  3) ;  but  after  an  interval  of  about  I      ASHE,  Alax  be,   is  noted  as  an  advo- 
two  years  he  was  restored  to  it,  on  January  5,  |  cate  in  the  Year  Books  of  the  early  part  of 
1412,  and  retained  it  till  the  death  of  the    the  reign  of  Edward  HI.    He  was  made  a 
iaog  on  March  20, 1413.     {Hardy,  4d.)         baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  July  2, 1340, 


Thns  did  he  hold  the  highest  judicial 
ofiee  of  the  realm  no  less  tmm  five  times, 
Ike  aggregate  extent  of  his  tenure  being 
dsvoi  years  and  about  eight  months,  out  of 
twenty-six  years  and  a  half  from  his  first 


and  he  had  his  robes  in  21  Edward  lU. 
(Abb,  Rot.  Orig,  ii.  192),  but  beyond  that 
date  all  the  published  records  are  silent 
about  him. 

ASHHITB8T,  William  Henby,  derived 


jffwiuUiienU    We  want  littie  further  evi-  j  his  name  from  Ashhurst,  neat  Wigsxi^  vn. 


22 


AHHHtTRST' 


LancaBhire^  where  hid  family  was  reeid^t 
soon  after  the  Conquest.  It  comprehended 
some  famona  knights,  members  of  parlia- 
ment, and  merchants,  one  of  whom  was 
Sir  William  Ashhnrst,  lord  major  of 
London  in  1693.  Henry  Ashhnrst/one  of 
the  yoonger  branches,  settled  at  Water- 
stock  in  Oxfordshire,  and  was  created  a 
baronet  by  James  II.  in  July  1688,  but  the 
title  became  extinct  in  1732.  The  Water- 
stock  property  then  devolyed  on  Diana,  the 
only  child  of  Sir  Richard  Allin,  Bart,  of 
Somer-Leighton  in  Suffolk,  by  the  daugh- 
ter of  Sir  Henry  Ashhurst;  and  by  her 
marriage  with  Thomas  Henry  Ashhurst, 
vice-chancellor  of  the  Duchy  of  Limcaster, 
and/recorder  of  Liverpool  imd  Wigan,  the 
representative  of  the  elder  bnmch,  the  two 
estates  became  united.  They  were  the 
parents  of  several  children,  the  third  sod, 
and  eventually  the  heir,  being  William 
Henry,  the  future  judffe. 

He' was  bom  at  Asnhurst  on  January  25, 
1725,  and  was  educated  at  the  Charter 
House.  After  his  admission  to  the  Inner 
Temnle  in  1750  he  practised  as  a  special 
pleader  under  the  bar,  one  of  his  pupils 
beinff  his  future  colleague  on  the  bench, 
Mr.  Justice  BuUer.  In  1754  he  became  a 
barrister,  and  in  that  character  pursued  an 
honourable  career  for  twenty  years,  during 
which  he  was  appointed  to  the  office  of 
auditor  of  the  Duchy  of  Lancaster. 

On  June  25,  1770^  he  was  appointed  a 
judge  of  the  Kiug^s  Bench,  and  was  then 
knighted.  He  sat  in  that  court  no  less 
than  twentv-nine  years,  preserving  the 
character  of  an  impartial  administrator  of 
justice,  and  a  careful  expounder  of  the  law, 
united  with  a  benevolent  heart  and  po- 
lished manners.  His  countenance  was  ex- 
Eressrre  of  the  kindness  and  amiability  of 
is  disposition,  but,  being  rather  lank,  was 
often  made  a  subject  for  the  barrioters' 
jokes.  Mr.  (afterwards  Lord)  Erskine  is  ! 
said  to  have  indited  this  complimentan^ 
couplet  on  him : 

Judge  Ashhurst,  with  his  /an/em  jaws, 
Throws  fiffht  upon  our  Englisli  laws. 

He  was  twice  entrusted  with  the  custody 
of  the  Great  Seal  as  one  of  the  commis- 
sioners—the first  time  from  April  9  to 
December  23,  1783,  during  the  interval 
between  the  two  chanceUorshipe  of  Lord 
Thurlow;  and  the  second  from  June  16, 
1702,  to  January  28,  1703,  between  that 
lord^  retirement  and  the  appointment  of 
Lord  Loughborough.  While  acting  in  tiiat 
capacity  he  still  performed  his  duties  in 
the  King*s  Bench,  and  during  the  latter 
period  he  delivered,  in  November  1702,  a 
venr  able  address  to  the  grand  jury  of 
Middlesex  on  the  subject  of  the  seditious 
meetings  and  corresponding  societies  which 
were  consequent  on  the  French  Bevolution. 


iSKEBY 

On  June  9, 1799,  being  then  in  the  seventy- 
fifth  year  of  his  age,  he  resigned  his  seat 
on  the  bench,  and  retired  to  his  residence 
at  Waterstock,  where,  eiffht  years  after- 
wards, he  died,  on  November  5, 1807. 

By  his  wife,  Grace,  daughter  <^  -John 
Whalley,  of  Oxford,  M.D.,  and  sister  of 
Sir  Jolin  Whalley  Smythe  Oardiner,  Bait. 
(whom  he  married  after  he  became  a  judge), 
he  left  several  children,  the  descendants  of 
whom  now  reside  on  the  faunily  estate  and 
hold  a  distinguished  position  in  the  county^; 
(Croke  Family ,  377,  559;  BiacksUme's  Rm, 
719.) 

ABKE,  KiCHABD,  belonged  to  a  younger 
branch  of  an  ancient  YorKshire  £unily  set- 
tled at  Richmond.  His  grandfather  Kobert 
Aske  of  Aughton  was  high  sheriff  of  the 
county  in  1588 ;  his  father  was  John  Aske 
of  the  same  place  ;  and  his  mother  was 
Christiana,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Fair- 
fax of  Denton,  knight.  When  admitted  a 
member  of  the  Inner  Temple  in  1606  he 
was  described  as  of  Rides  Park  in  that 
county.  He  was  called  to  the  bar  on  Ja- 
nuary 20^  1614,  but  did  not  reach  the  post 
of  reader  till  Lent  1636.  His  connection 
with  the  Fairfaxes  probably  introduced  him 
to  the  notice  of  the  parliamentary  leaders. 
He  was  employed  by  Mr.  Stroud,  one  of 
the  imprisoned  members  in  1029,  to  argue 
against  the  return  to  the  habeas  corpus^  and 
in  several  actions  on  that  side  of  the  qnes- 
tion.  {Rtuhivorth,  i.  App,  18;  Col,  State 
Papers  [1625-6],  47.)  On  Qctober  18, 
1643,  the  Conmions  specially  recommended 
him  to  the  lord  mayor  and  aldermen  of 
London  to  be  elected  one  of  the  four 
pleaders;  and  in  Jime  1644  both  houses 
presented  him  with  the  valuable  office  of 
coroner  and  attorney  of  the  king  in  the 
King's  Bench.  {Joum.  iii.  380,  521,  636.) 
He  was  next  selected  as  junior  counsel  on 
the  trial  of  King  Charles ;  and  on  June  1, 
1649,  the  parliament  nominated  him  one  of 
the  justices  of  the  Upper  Bench^  making 
him  a  seijeant  for  the  purpose.  {Statt 
Trials,  iv.  1064;  Whitehcke,  405.)  For 
a  short  time,  in  June  1655,  he  was  the  only 
judge  in  the  court  {Style's  Rep.  462),  an2l 
on  June  23,  1656,  he  died.  (Peck's  Desid, 
Cur.  B.  xiv.  20.) 

ABKEBT,  RoBEBT  be,  as  early  as  26 
Edward  I.,  1297,  held  some  office  in  the 
Chancery,  all  the  writs  of  I^vy  Seal 
directed  to  the  chancellor  after  the  king's 
embarkation  to  Flanders  being  then 
delivered  into  his  custody.  (Pari.  Writs,  i. 
56.)  Like  his  fellows,  he  was  an 
ecclesiastic;  and  as  parson  of  Doke- 
lington  in  Oxfordshire  he  was  engaged 
in  a  suit  with  the  abbot  of  Osney  about 
tithes.  (Abb.  Placit,  246.)  A^ain,  in  86. 
£dw.  L,  he  was  rector  of  Hale  in  linooifaK 
shire,  and  in  the  parliament  at  Carliaie  lie 
was  one  of  the  proctors  for  the  Bi^bop  cit 


ASTON 

fiig>inl«;  In  8  £dw.  U.  it  was  hia  buaioeas 
fo  nukke  tip  the  pftrliament  roll;  and  in 
the  foUcywing  year,  when  he  was  appointed 
one  of  the  receivers  of  the  petitions  for 
Eoq^land,  he  is  sbrled  a  clerk  in  the 
ChsnoeiT.  (Jtot  Pari  i.  189,  290,  850, 
46a) 

(m  Anffost  16, 1316,  the  chancellor,  John 
de  Saad^e,  being  nlout  to  proceed  from 
York  to  London,  on  the  business  of  his 
election  to  the  bishopric  of  Winchester, 
was  desired  to  leave  the  Great  Seal  in  the 
eostody  of  William  de  Avremynne,  the 
keeper  of  the  Rolls,  under  the  seals  of  two 
cieima  of  the  ChancexTy  of  whom  Robert  de 
Ajskebj  was  one.  The  same  course  was 
adopted  on  November  9,  1317,  when  the 
same  ehancellor  went  to  his  bishopric  on 
boBtnesa ;  and  again,  from  February  13  to 
19, 1313,  on  the  bishop's  taking  a  pilgrim 
mage  to  8t  Thomas  of  Canterbury ;  and 
on  March  20,  when  he  went  to  Leicester. 
(Omif.  10  &  11  £dw.  n.) 

In  the  following  June,  and  subsequently 
under  John  de  Hotham,  Bishop  of  Lly,  the 
new  chancellor,  the  Seal  was  left  in  the 
same  manner;  with  directions  to  do  the 
bosineas  of  the  Chancery  during  his  ab- 
sence. Robert  de  Askeby,  however^  ob* 
tained  leave  to  return  home  from  I^orth- 
ampton  on  July  20,  and  his  name  does  not 
appear  later  than  the  following  year. 

A  Robert  de  Askby  was  appomted  chan« 
cellor  of  Ireknd  in  15  Edward  lU.,  1341. 
(CW.  JW.  Pat.  140.) 

A8T0V,  RiCHABD,  belonged  to  the  very 
aadent  family  of  Aston  of  Aston  in  Che- 
shire, dating  from  the  reign  of  Henry  11.,  to 
the  head  of  which  Charles  I.,  in  1628, 
granted  a  baronetcy.  The  judge  was  grand- 
son of  the  second  and  brother  of  the  fifth 
baronet,  both  named  Sir  Willoughby  Aston. 
His  fkther  was  Richard  Aston  of  Wadley, 
the  sixth  son  of  the  former ;  and  his  mother 
was  Etiaabeth,  daughter  of  John  Warren, 
Esq.,  of  Oxfordshire. 

As  a  barrister,  he  was  so  successful  in 
his  practice  that  he  attained  in  1759  the 
rank  of  king*s  counsel ;  from  which  he  was 
advanced  two  years  afterwards  to  the  office 
of  chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas  in 
Ireland.  Here  his  career  was  unfortunate. 
He  found  that  justice  was  very  loosely 
administered,  it  being  the  common  practice 
tor  grand  juries  to  nnd  the  bills  without 
exaimning  witnesses,  but  upon  the  mere 
ioapection  of  the  depositions  taken  before 
the  committing  mapstrate.  Against  this 
and  other  inregulanties  the  chief  justice 
naturally  remonstrated ;  but  his  represen- 
tations of  the  illegality  of  these  proceedings 
produced  no  other  effect  than  to  create  a 
prejudice  against  him,  which  was  consider- 
lUy  heightened  by  the  rude  and  overbear- 
iiw  manner  in  which  he  delivered  his 
araooitiona.     These    disputes   frequently 


ATEYNS  23 

occnning,  idie  judge's  position  became  ao 
disagreeable  that  he  solicited  a  removal. 
AccOTdingly,  on  the  death  of  Sir  Thomai 
Denison,  he  bade  adieu  to  his  Irish  anta« 
gonists,  apd  was  transferred  to  the  English 
court  of  King's  Bench  on  April  19, 1766, 
being  at  the  same  time  knighted. 

In  thit!  new  arena  his  brusque  demeanour 
nearly  led  to  more  serious  consequences. 
On  a  motion  relative  to  a  libel,  a  barrister 
had  the  imprudence  to  make  an  affidavit 
that  he  believed  it  to  be  no  libel.  This 
being  a  mere  matter  of  opinion.  Lord  Mans* 
field  and  the  other  judges  good-naturedlv 
overlooked  the  impropriety  as  a  foolish 
ebullition  of  the  lawyer*s  zeal;  but  Sir 
Richard  coarsely  declared  <  that  he  would 
not  believe  such  a  man's  oath.'  The  bar* 
rister,  naturally  indignant,  watched  for  an 
opportunity  to  be  revenged,  and,  tracing 
tne  judire's  movements,  succeeded  in  de- 
tecting him  ^  in  a  sale  of  lottery  tickets, 
presumed  to  be  received  as  the  wages  of 
judicial  prostitution  in  the  memorable 
trials  about  Wilkes  and  Junius.'  This 
evidence  of  guilt  was  proclaimed  in  a  manly 
pamphlet  and  believed  by  every  one,  being 
imanswered  and  unnoticed  by  the  subject 
of  the  charge. 

Whether  these  charges  were  exaggerated, 
or  wholly  true,  or  partially  false^  niev  did 
not  prevent  Sir  Richard  Aston  from  being 
entrusted  with  a  more  responsible  office. 
On  the  sudden  death  of  Lord  Chancellor 
Yorke  he  was  appointed  one  of  the  com- 
missioners of  the  ureatSeal,  on  January  21, 
1770.  As  neither  of  them  had  had  much 
experience  in  equity,  their  rule  was  not  a 
very  distinguished  one,  and  their  decisions 
were  supposed  to  be  guided  principally 
by  Lord  Mansfield's  advice.  Their  trust 
terminated  on  January  23, 1771,  when  Sir 
Richard  resumed  his  duties  in  the  King's 
Bench,  where  he  continued  till  his  deatn^ 
on  March  1, 1778. 

He  married,  first,  a  daughter  of — El- 
dred;  and  secondly,  Rebecca,  daughter  of 
Dr.  Rowland,  a  physician  of  Aylesbury,  and 
widow  of  Sir  David  Williams,  Bart. ;  but 
he  left  no  issue  by  either. 

ABTT,  Hkitbt  de,  was  connected  with 
the  county  of  Liocidn,  in  which  he  held 
the  manor  of  Burwell,  and  the  advowson 
of  the  priory  there,  paying  to  the  king  an 
annual  rent  of  100  marks.  (^Abb.  Rot,  Orig. 
ii.  348 ;  Cal  ^  Inv.  Exch.  ii.  22.) 

Of  his  official  position  there  is  no  account 
until  he  was  raised  to  the  office  of  chief 
baron  of  the  Exchequer,  on  November  12, 
1376, 49  Edward  HI.,  in  which  he  remained 
till  December  6, 1380,  4  Richard  II.,  when 
Robert  de  Plessington  was  appointed  in  his 
stead.  He  however  was  stiU  retained  on 
the  bench,  and  acted  as  a  judge  of  the 
Common  Pleas  until  Hilary  Term  1383, 

ATXTV8,  EnwABD.    No  lei*3  than  four 


Ui  ATEYNS 

gei^eiatioDB  of  thiB  ftaxaly,  which  anciently 
came  from  Monmouthfilurey  attaint  lefffu 
bonoon.  Thomas  Atkyns  waa  twice  reader 
in  Linc61n*8  Inn  in  uie  reigna  of  Henry 
VnL  and  Edward  VL,  was  judge  of  the 
Sheriff's  Court  in  London,  and  amied  the 
first  case  in  Flowden's  Reports.  Kichard, 
his  son,  was  a  reader  in  lincohi's  Lm  in  the 
time  of  Elizabeth,  and  chi^  justice  of 
North  Wales.  Richard's  third  son  by 
Eleanor,  daughter  of  Thomas  Marsh,  Esq., 
of  Waresby  m  Huntingdonshire,  was  Sir 
Edward,  the  subject  of  the  present  sketch, 
whose  two  sons.  Sir  Robert  and  Sir  Edward 
the  younger,  loUowed  him  in  the  same 
career, 

Edward  Atkyns  was  bom  about  1587, 
and,  haying  been  admitted  to  Idnooln'slnn 
on  f'ebruaiy  5, 1600,  he  was  called  to  the 
bar  on  January  25, 1613,  became  a  govexnor 
of  the  society  m  1680,  and  autumn  reader  in 
1632.  In  the  following  year  he  was 
engaged  as  counsel  for  William  Prynne,  on 
his  prosecution  for  writing  the  '  His^o- 
ALastix/  and  when  Prynne  was  prosecuted 
a  second  time  in  1637,  in  conjunction  with 
Bastick  and  Burton;  the  two  latter,  on 
their  sentences  being  called  .in  question  by 
the  Long  Parliament  in  1640,  prayed  tiiat 
he  might  be  one  of  the  counsel  assigned 
for  them.  He  was  included  in  the  last  call 
of  Serjeants  made  by  Charles  L  on  May  19, 
1640,  and  there  is  a  patent  in  Rymer, 
dated  on  October  7  foliowinff,  appomting 
Serjeant  Edward  Atkyns  a  baron  of  the 
Exchequer.  Dugdale,' however,  does  not 
mention  it,  and  it  is  evident  ^at,  if  it 
really  passed  the  Great  Seal,  it  was  never 
acted  on,  for  when  in  February  1643  the 
parliament  submitted  their  propositions  to 
the  king,  they  requested  he  would  make 
^Mr.  Serjeant  Atkyns'  a  justice  of  the 
King's  Bench,  {State  Triah,  iii.  564,  761, 
763 ;  Bymer,  xx.  447;  Clarendon^  iii.  407.) 

The  Commons,  though  then  disappointed, 
soon  took  uDon  them  to  fill  the  vacancies 
on  the  benco,  and  the  seneant,  by  their 
selection,    was    sworn    a   baron   of    the 
Exchequer    on    October   28,    1645.      He 
continued  till  the  death  of  the  king,  when, 
objecting    to    act    under    the    iisurping 
government,  he  courageously  declinea  to 
accept  a  new  commission.    He  was,  how- 
ever, induced  afterwards  to  undertake  the 
judicial  office,  and  on  October  19, 1649,  he 
became  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas.    In 
May  1654  he  was  one  of  the  presiding 
judges  on  the  trial  of  Don  Pantaleon  Sa, 
the  Portuguese  ambassador's  brother,  for 
murder.    The  subsequent  mention  of  him 
by  Whitelocke  (178,  378,  590,  678)  as 
having  been  made    a  judge  with  some 
others  in  May  1659  arose,  probably,  from 
his  being  re-appointed  by  the  Long  Parlia- 
ment when  they  resumed  their  power.    On 
their  second  return,  after  the  committee  of 


ATKYNS 


safety  ba4  been  dissolved,^  Atkyna  was 
omitted  in  the  nominations ;  but  on  the  re» 
turn  of  the  kin^,  so  satisfactory  had  been 
the  proofs  of  his  loyalty,  he  was  at  onoa 
|laced  in  his  old  position  as  a  baron  of  the 
£bccheauer.  and  was  thereupon  knighted, 
e  of  nis  first  duties  was  to  sit  on  the  trials 


One 

of  the  regicides,  and  one  of  the  last  was  to 
assist  in  the  trial  of  the  rioters  in  1668,  who 
were  charged  with  high  treason;  but  in 
neither  ^d  he  take  a  prominent  part ;  and 
on  the  subsequent  discussion  of  the  judges, 
whether  the  latter  ofience  amounted  to 
hi^h  treason,  he  took  the  merdfiil  view, 
and  several  of  them  were  in  consequence 
saved.     (State  Trials,  v.  986,  vi.  912.) 

He  died  in  Michaelmas  vacation  1660, 
at  Albury  Hall  in  Hertfordshire,  beinjg^  then 
above  eighty  years  of  age.  By  his  first 
wife,  Ursula,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas 
Dacre,  of  St.  Andrew  le  Mott  in  that 
county,  he  had  several  children,  two^  of 
whom  became  judges.  His  second  wife. 
Frances,  daughter  of  John  Berrv,  of  Lydd 
in  Kent,  and  widow  of  —  (xulstone,  of 
Hackney,  whom  he  married  in  1645,  and 
who  died  in  1703,  aged  104,  brought  him 
no  issue.  (Atkyn'8  OloucestersH  335; 
Chauncy's  Herts,  149,  301;  1  Stderfin, 
485.) 

ATXTK8,  Edwari),  second  of  that 
name,  was  the  youugest  son  of  the  pre- 
ceding judge.  Bom  about  1630,  he  be- 
came, like  tne  rest  of  his  family,  a  member 
of  Lincoln's  Inn  in  1648 ;  and  having  been 
called  to  the  bar  in  1653,  he  attained  the 
post  of  reader  in  autumn  1675,  when  he 
made  a  very  learned  reading,  and  kept  a 
very  bountiful  table.  (Ckatmcy's  Herts, 
149.)  In  Easter  Term  1679  he  was  called 
Serjeant,  and  on  June  22  following  was 
constituted  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  and 
knighted.  On  the  trial  at  York,  in  July 
1680,  of  Thomas  Thwing  and  Mary  Pres- 
wicks  for  high  treason,  both  he  and  Justice 
Dolben  conaucted  the  proceedings  and 
summed  up  the  evidence  with  fairness  and 
impartialitv. 

James  tl,  promoted  him  to  the  office  of 
lord  chief  baron  on  April  21, 1686,  on  the 
removal  of  Chief  Baron  Montagu  for  not 
agreeing  with  the  royal  claim  to  the  dis- 
pensing power.  It  may  therefore  be  pre- 
sumed that  Sir  Edward  gave  in  his 
adhesion  to  his  majesty's  opinion;  which 
may  very  well  account  for  his  not  being 
re-appointed  at  the  revolution  of  1688,  while 
the  omission  of  his  name  from  the  judges, 
who  for  that  reason  were  excepted  out  of 
the  act  of  iademnity,  probably  arose  from 
the  king*s  consideration  for  his  brother.  Sir 
Robert  Atkyns,  who  was  then  appointed  to 
fill  his  place. 

He  declined  to  take  the  oathato  King 
William,  and  retired  to  his  seat  at  Picken- 
ham  in  Norfolk,  where  he  spent  the 


ATKYNS 

mnnder  of  his  life  in  reconciling  differences 
among  liis  neighbonrB,  who  had  so  great  a 
reliaiioe  on  his  integrity  and  judgment  that 
they  confided  the  most  difficolt  causes  to  his 
denakin.  He  died  in  London  of  the  stone, 
in  October  1608. 

▲IKTSty  Robert,  was  the  eldest  son 
of  the  first  Sir  Edward  Atkyns,  and  the 
elder  hcother  of  the  second  Sir  Edward. 
He  was  bom  in  1621.  At  which  of  the 
unirersitieB  he  was  educated  is  disputed, 
Chalmers  (Oxford^  60)  claiming  him  as  a 
member  of  Mllic^  College,  Oxford,  and 
Dyer  (CmwAridge,  ii.  437)  as  of  Sidney  Sus- 
sex College,  Cunbridge.  Admitted  to  Lin- 
coln's Inn  in  1638,  he  was  called  to  the  bar 
in  1615,  became  a  bencher  in  1661,  and 
antunm  reader  in  1664.  Long  ere  that 
date  he  commanded  a  good  business  as  an 
adTocate,  his  name  appearing  frequently 
throuffhout  Hardres'  Reports  \  and  so  great 
was  £is  success  in  his  profession  that  he 
was  enabled  to  purchase  several  estates  in 
Krloucestershire. 

Though  elected  member  for  Evesham  in 
Protector  Richard^s  parliament  of  1669,  he 
was  so  well  reputed  for  loyalty  that  on  the 
Restoration  he  was  selected  as  one  of  the 
persons  of  distinction  who  were  created 
xnights  of  the  Bath  at  Charles's  coronation. 
About  the  same  time  also  he  was  chosen 
recorder  of  Bristol,  and  on  the  king's  mar- 
riage was  made  solicitor-general  to  the 
queen.  His  royal  mistress  some  time  after 
rewarded  him  with  a  reversionary  grant  of 
the  mastership  of  St.  Catharine's,  which 
however  did  not  fall  in  till  the  year  after 
his  removal  from  the  bench,  when  the 
gxsnt  was  disputed,  and  the  decision  was 
pronounced  in  favour  of  his  opponent. 
ilMttr^  L  118,  145.) 

He  represented  Penryn  in  the  parliament 
that  met  in  1661,  in  which  he  paid  assi- 
duous attention  to  its  business;  and  on  the 
impeachment  of  the  Earl  of  Clarendon  he 
spoke  against  its  proceeding.  {Pari,  Hist. 
iv.  :J8L)  Little  more  than  two  years  after 
his  father's  death,  in  1660,  he  was  himself 
called  to  the  bench  as  a  iudge  of  the  Com- 
mon Fleas,  on  April  15,  1672.  During  the 
tight  years  he  occupied  that  position  he 
pTbiideid  with  fairness  and  moderation  at 
msDv  of  the  trials  connected  with  the 
popi^  plot«  in  the  existence  of  which  he 
mears  to  have  fullv  believed.  He  had 
ihe  misfortune  to  go  t&e  Oxford  Circuit  with 
Chief  Justice  Scroggs,  to  whom  his  consti- 
tntional  opinions  were  so  obnoxious  that 
Soocrgs  retailed  them  to  the  court.  Whether 
Sir  Robert  was  dismissed  in  consequence, 
or  voluntarily  resigned  on  linding  that  his 
ctdlesCTes  axul  the  government  were  discon- 
tented with  him,  does  not  precisely  appear. 
But  he  received  his  quietus  on  February  6, 
16^;  and  on  his  examination  before  the 
House  of  Commons  in  1089  be  attributed 


AXKYKS 


25 


his  removal  principally  to  the  two  chief 
justices,  besides  enumerating  other  causea— 
riz.,  his  expressed  objections  against  pen* 
dons  to  parliament  men;  his  assertion  of 
the  neorde's  right  to  petition ;  and  his  denial 
of  tne  King's  power  without  parliament  to 
forbid  the  publication  of  booln.  (Xuttrsff, 
L35;  i^l  JTue. T. 308 ;  /Stoto  Jrto^  viiL 
1030 

Tne  presumed  displeasure  of  the  court 
stirred  up  the  corporation  of  Bristol  to  oust 
Sir  Robert  from  the  recordership,  first  by 
prepared  insults,  and  next  by^  a  prosecution 
for  a  pretendea  riot  in  an  irregular  civil 
election.  They  succeeded  in  procuring  a 
conviction ;  but  the  judgment  was  arrested 
by  the  court,  Sir  Rol>ert  appearing  in  person 
to  argue  the  case.  He  was  however  per- 
suaded for  the  sake  of  peace  to  resign  the 
place,  which  was  the  real  bone  of  con- 
tention. 

During  the  interval  of  Sir  Robert's  re- 
tirement he  naturally  took  great  interest  in 
the  political  questions  that  agitated  the 
country.  He  aavised  on  the  line  of  defence 
to  be  taken  by  Lord  Russell,  and  after  the 
revolution  he  issued  two  tracts  in  assertion 
of  that  nobleman's  innocence.  He  resisted 
King  James's  attempt  to  dispense  with  the 
peufd  statutes,  in  the  publication  of  a  lucid 
ar^^ument  proving  its  illegality.  He  also 
prmted  a  discourse  relative  to  the  ecclesi- 
astical commission  issued  by  that  monarch. 
These  and  some  other  of  his  tracts  were 
collected  in  a  volume,  which  was  published 
in  1734.  It  does  not  appear  that  he  took 
any  further  part  in  promoting  the  revolu- 
tion than  attending  the  Lords  on  their 
summons  as  one  of  their  advisers  after 
James's  flight.  His  reputation  as  a  lawyer 
was  so  high  as  to  insure  the  admission  of 
his  name  into  the  lists  which  King  William 
desired  the  nrivy  councillors  to  send  in,  and 
he  was  fixea  upon  to  fill  the  office  of  lord 
chief  baron.  He  is  said  to  have  declined  it 
for  some  time,  probably  from  a  disinclina- 
tion to  supersede  his  brother  in  the  place. 
But  when  he  saw  that  his  refusal  would 
not  secure  his  brother's  re-appointment,  he 
was  induced  to  accept  the  office.  In  October 
1689,  tiie  Great  Seal  being  in  commission, 
Sir  Robert  was  appointed  speaker  of  the 
House  of  Lords,  over  whom  he  presided  till 
March  1693.  when  Lord  Somers  was  con- 
stituted lord  keeper.  He  resigned  his  i  udi- 
cial  seat  on  October  22, 1694.  He  lived 
about  fifteen  years  more,  residing  quietly 
at  his  manor  of  Saperton,  near  Cirencester, 
where,  on  February  18, 1710,  he  died^  after 
half  an  hour's  indisposition.  (ZuttreU,  i.  490, 
522,  593,  iii.  386,  iv.  547.)  There  is  a 
monument  to  the  memory  of  him  and  his 
&ther  and  brother  in  Westminster  Abbey. 

By  his  first  wife,  Mary,  daughter  of  Sir 
George  Clerk,  of  Watford  in  Korthampton- 
shire,  he  had  no  issue.   By  his  second  wife. 


26 


ATKY^'S 


Annei,  daughter  of  Srr  Thomas  Daere,  and 
great  niece  of  hie  father's  wife,  Ursuhi 
Paciejhe  had  a  son,  Robert,  the  autiior  of 
the  'Jffistory  of  Gloucestershire/  and  a 
daughter,  whomarried  into  theTracr  family. 
(AUtyn^s  QloucesUrth, ;  Jardin^t  iife.^ 

AXXTVB,  JoHK  Tract,  was  the  tnird 
son  of  John  Tracy,  Esq.,  of  Stan  way  in 
Gloucestershire  (gnmdson  of  the  third  Vis- 
count  Tracj^,  by  Anne,  the  daughter  of  the 
above  Sir  Kobert  Atkyns.  He  was  called 
to  the  bar  at  lincoln'^s  Inn  in  1732.  It 
does  not  appear  at  what  date  he  assumed 
the  name  of  Atkyns.  nor  when  he  discarded 
it,  resuming  his  fatner's  name;  but  under 
the  former  he  received  the  appointment  of 
cursitor  baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  April  22, 
1755,  and  under  the  latter  he  made  a  codicil 
to  his  will  in  1768.  He  died  on  July  24, 
1778 ;  and  left  no  issue  by  his  wife,  named 
Katherine. 

He  had  earned  the  office  to  which  he 
attained  by  the  industry  with  which*  he 
devoted  himself  to  taking  notes  in  court. 
His  Keports  of  cases  in  Chancery  during 
the  whole  period  that  Lord  Hardwicke 
presided  there,  which  he  had  the  boldness 
to  publish  without  the  judge's  usual  allo- 
catur, in  three  folio  volumes,  are  highly 
valued  for  their  correctness,  and  have 
passed  through  several  editions.  Chief 
Justice  Wilmot  {Life,  199)  describes  him 
in  his  Diaiy  as  'a cheerful,  good-humoured, 
honest  man ;  a  good  husband,  master,  and 
friend.' 

AUBEBYILLE,  Willi  A  3f  de,  was  de- 
scended either  from  a  baron  of  the  same 
name,  lord  of  Berlai  in  Hertfordshire,  or 
from  H<Mrer  de  Auberville,  or  Otherville, 
who  heM  divers  lordships  in  Essex  and 
Suffolk;  both  of  whom  flourished  in  the 
time  of  the  Conqueror. 

.  His  father  was  Hugh  de  Auberville,  on 
whose  death,  in  1130,  he  was  a  minor,  and 
was  placed  under  the  care  of  Turgis  de 
Abrincis,  who  gave  three  hundred  marks 
of  silver  and  one  of  gold,  with  a  courser, 
for  his  wardship,  and  for  the  marriage  of 
Wynanc,  his  mother,  Hugh's  widow. 

He  married  Matilda,  one  of  the  three 
daughters  of  Ranulph  de  Glanville ;  and  in 
1182, 28  Henry  II.,  he  was  present  with  that 
great  justiciary  at  Westminster  at  the 
passing  of  two  .fines  there,  and  evidently 
actingas  ajusticier.     (Hunter' 8  Preface,) 

He  was  alive  in  6  Kichard  L,  1194^, 
being  in  that  year  a  party  to  a  suit  relative 
to  the  partition  oi  the  inheritance  of 
Eanulph  de  Glanville,  his  father-in-law. 
{JRoi,  Cur.  RegiBj  24.)  In  1192  he  founded 
an  abbey  of  white  canons  of  the  Preemon- 
stratensian  order,  removed  from  Leyston  in 
Suffolk,  at  West  Lanffdon  in  Kent,  and 
widowed  it  with  the  whole  of  that  manor 
and  with  other  lands.  In  his  charter  of 
foundation  he  mentions  a  son,  William, 


AUDLEY 

and  a  daughter,  Emma ;  besides  whom  he^ 
had  another  son,  Huffh,  who  succeeded 
him.  Hugh's  son  William  left  only  a 
daughter,  named  Joan,  who  married  Nidio^ 
las  de  Criol.  {Monad,  tL  898 ;  Barmi,  L 
499 ;  Haited^  ix.  401.) 

ATTBIXT,  or  ALDITHLST,  Jaxxs  SB, 
was  the  son  of  Henry  de  Aldithley^  of 
Helei^  in  Staffordshire,  who  adhered  to 
King  John  in  his  troubles,  and  served  the 
office  of  sheriff  of  that  county  under  Henry 
HL,  besidefl  being  entrusted  with  the  cus- 
tody of  various  castles  on  the  marches  of 
Wales.  Henry  founded  the  abbey  of 
Hilton  in  Staffordshire,  and  died  about 
November  1246,  bavin?  had  by  his  wife, 
Bertred,  daughter  of  Ralph  deMeisnilwarin, 
(3i  Cheshire,  besides  this  son,  a  daughter 
named  Emma,  who  married  Griffin,  son  of' 
Madoc,  lord  of  Bromefield,  a  person  of 
great  power  in  Wales. 

James,  the  son  and  heir,  was  consti<« 
tuted  constable  of  Newcastle-under-Lyne, 
and  did  good  service  against  the  Welsh ; 
and  in  44  Henry  IH.  was  made  sheriff  of 
Shropshire  and  Staffordshire,  acting  as  a 
justice  itinerant  into  Huntingdon,  and  other 
counties.  In  1268  he  was  appointed  justice 
of  Ireland,  and  in  the  reference  made  to 
the  King  of  France  relative  to  the  dispute 
between  Henry  III.  and  the  barons  as  to 
the  provisions  of  Oxford,  he  was  one  of  the 
peers  who  undertook  for  their  sovereign's 
observance  of  the  award.  But  in  1266  ho 
joined  Prince  Edward  when  he  escaped 
from  his  keepers  at  Hereford,  and  is  design 
nated  as  a  rebel  in  the  letters  issued  on 
that  occasion.     (CaL  Hot.  Pat,  36.) 

In  54  Henry  HI.  he  went  on  a  pilgrimage 
to  the  Holy  Land,  and  died  two  years  aft^ 
wards,  as  it  is  stated,  by  breaking  his  neck^ 
his  eldest  son  James  doing  homage  for  his 
father's  lands  on  July  29,  1272.  {Excerpt. 
e  Hot,  Fin,  ii.  674.)  Hi8  descendants  were 
regularly  summoned  to  parliament;  but 
the  male  line  terminated  on  the  death  of 
Nicholas,  the  tenth  baron,  in  1392.  The 
barony,  however,  survived  in  John  Touchet, 
the  gnmdson  of  his  sister,  in  whose  de* 
scendants  it  has  remained  till  the  present 
time.  The  earldom  of  Castlehaven,  in  In* 
land,  was  added  in  1617,  but  became  extinct 
in  1777.     (Baron,  i,  747.) 

AUDLEY,  Thomas  (Lord  Audlet^  was 
bom,  according  to  Morant,  of  ooecure 
parents  at  EarFs  Colne  in  Essex,  in  1488. 
It  is  believed  that  he  went  to  one  of  the 
universities,  and,  if  so,  the  claim  of  Cam- 
bridge may  be  preferred,  from  his  after- 
wards becoming  a  great  benefactor  to,  if 
not  founder  of,  Magdalen  College  there. 
He  studied  the  law  at  the  Inner  Temdje, 
and  became  autumn  reader  in  1626.  He 
had  held  the  office  of  town  clerk  of  061^ 
cheater,  and  had  been  of  the  coondl  of 
the  Princess  Mary,  when   she  held  her 


AUDLET" 

court  ftt  Ludlow.     (Strickland's  QueenSf  r. 

1560 

The  step  bj  which  he  raised  hitaself'to 
eminence  seems  to  have  been  the  obtain- 
ing A  seat  in  the  House  of  Commons  ki 
152S,  as  member  for  Essex.  He  wqis  elected 
epesLker  of  the  BLadc  Parliament,  that,  met 
in  NoTember  1629,  which  was  nffnalised 
bf  the  fidl  of  Cardinal  Wokey,  and  bj  l^e 
fizst  attack  on  the  papal  power.  So  sealous 
were  the  sneaker's  services  that  he  was  re- 
warded by  being  in  1580  appointed  attorney 
for  the  dochj  of  Lancaster,  and  in  1681 
king's  seijeant. 

It  was  then  the  practice  for  the  king  to 
conmiunicate  with  the  speaker  and  certain 
membera  of  the  house  on  subjects  which  he 
intended  to  come  before  them ;  and  in  all 
these  matters  he  found  Audley  so  willing 
an  instrument  that  it  was  not  long  before 
he  secured  the  speaker^s  services  in  a  still 
more  prominent  position. 

On  Mar  80,  1682,  he  succeeded  Sir 
Thomas  More  in  the  possession  of  the 
Great  Seal,  with  the  title  of  lord  keeper, 
which  on  January  24,  1688,  was  changed 
to  that  of  lord  chancellor.  {Clous,  ii. 
16,  m.  24.)  This  oiBce  he  held  for  the  rest 
of  his  life;  but  during  his  last  illness  he 
lent  the  Seal  to  the  King,  who  deposited 
it  temporarilj  with  Sir  Thomas  Wnothes- 
lev  during  Audley's  infirmities,  which  in  a 
few  days  terminated  in  his  death.  {Cknu, 
p.  1,  nL  3.) 

Audley  had  the  custody  of  the  Seal  for 
nearly  twelve  years,  a  period  more  dis- 
graceful in  the  annals  of  England  than  any 
of  a  similar  extent.  Within  it  were  com- 
prehended the  king's  divorce  from  one 
queen,  alter  a  union  of  two  and  twenty 
years,  under  pretence  of  a  scruple  of  con- 
science ;  the  repudiation  of  another  after  a 
few  daya*  intercourse,  on  the  mere  ^und 
oi  personal  antipathy;  the  execution  of 
two  others,  one  of  them  sacrificed  to  ob- 
tain a  new  partner ;  and  innumerable  judi- 
cial imd  remorseless  murders,  those  c«  Sir 
Thomas  More  and  Bishop  Fisher  leading 
the  dreadful  array.  Even  the  Reforma- 
tion, the  foundations  of  which  were  laid 
daring  this  period,  though  producing  such 
glorious  results  to  this  country,  orings 
Qothinff  but  disgrace  on  its  active  originar 
tors.  Comment  b^  a  despotic  ^rrant  in 
defiance  of  the  religious  tenets  wnich  he 
hfd  himself  advocated  and  which  he  still 
noie«eed,  the  power  of  the  pope  was  ab- 
jured solely  in  revenge  for  the  papal  refusal 
to  s«nction  his  divorce ;  his  own  imposed 
Mpremacy  was  only  used  to  introduce  doc- 
trines which  it  was  equally  difficult  for 
Catholics  or  Protestants  to  adopt,  each 
suffering  in  turn  from  the  dilemma  m  which 
they  were  placed;  and  the  monasteries 
were  dissolved,  not  for  the  professed  pur- 
poses of   purification,  but  for  the  sake  of 


AUDLEY 


27^' 


the  riches  they  produced  to  the  kingV 
treasury,  abd  to  supply  the  means  of  re« 
warding  the  subservient  minions  of  his 
power. 

Among  ^eae,  Audley,  who  all  alonflp^ 
acted  as  a  thorough  tool  to  the  king,  and 
was  a  most  lealous  promoter  of  the  sup* 
pression,  secured  no  inconsiderable  share  of^ 
the  confiscations,  '  carving  for  himself  in 
the  feast  of  abbey  lands,'  as  Fuller  humor^ 
ously  remarks,  'the  first  cut,  and  that  s^ 
dainty  morsel.  This  was  the  magnificent 
prionr  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  or  Christchurch; ' 
m  Aldgate,  London,  founded  in  the  reign 
of  Henry  I.  He  pulled  down  the  great' 
church,  and  converted  the  priory  into  a 
mansion  for  himself,  in  which  he  resided 
during  the  remainder  of  his  life.  It  was- 
subsequentiy  called  Duke's  Place,  firom  hir 
son-in-law  the  Duke  of  Norfolk.  To  this  ' 
were  next  added  many  of  the  smaller 
priories  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Colchester. 
But  he  was  not  satisfied  with  even  these 
extensive  spoils ;  for  having  fixed  his  eye 
on  the  rich  monastery  of  Walden  in  tne 
same  county,  in  suing  for  it  he  not  only 
lessened  its  value,  but  nad  the  meanness  to- 
allege  that  he  had  in  this  world  sustained 
fifreat  damage  and  infamy  in  his  serving  the 
king,  which  the  grant  of  this  abbey  would' 
recompense.  He  succeeded  in  his  applica- 
tion, and  took  his  titie  from  the  plunder, 
when  the  kinff,  on  November  29,  1588,.. 
raised  him  to  the  peerage  as  Baron  Audley 
of  Walden.  The  order  of  the  G^arter  was 
soon  after  disgraced  by  his  admission  among 
its  members. 

The  consciousness  that  the  odious  lavra 
he  had  introduced  might  be  turned  against 
himself,  and  that  his  fate  depended  on  the- 
momentary  whim  of  an  inexorable  tyrant, 
may  most  probably  have  brought  on,  onlr 
five  years  afterwards,  that  illness  which 
terminated  in  his  death  on  April  80, 1544; 
His  remains  were  deposited  under  a  magni-^ 
ficent  tomb  erectea  by  himself  in  his 
chapel  at  Walden,  with  an  epitaph  in  verse 
as  contemptible  as  his  career.  (Weever, 
624.) 

Audley  has  acauired  the  character  of 
undoubtedly  equalling,  if  he  did  not  ex- 
ceed, all  lus  contemporaries   in  servili^. 
The    only    circumstance  that  rescues  his 
name  from  entire  opprobium  is  his  appro- 
priation of  part  of  his  ill-gotten  wealth  to 
the  restoration  of  the  college  in  Cambridge 
which  Edward  Stafford,  Duke  of  Buokii]|^ 
ham,  had   left  incomplete,  obtaining  l£e 
King's  licence  to  change  its  name  of  Buck- 
ingham College  to  that  of  St.  Mair  Mag- 
dalen.    The  only  example  recorded  of  his 
wit  is  in  the  application  of  two  of  *  Isope's 
fables '  to  the  case  of  Sir  Thomas  More„ 
then  in  the  Tower  for  conscience'  sake, 
which  he  related  to  Alice  Allington,  Sir 
Thomases  step-daughter,  to  show  that  the^ 


28 


AUDLEY 


•conscientioiis  prisoner  was  only  ^  obstinate 
in  his  own  conceited  One  of  these  was  the 
^tory  of  the  wise  men  who  hid  themselves 
in  caves  to  avoid  the  rain  which  was  to 
make  all  fools  on  whom  it  fell,  hoping  to 
rule  the  fools  when  the  storm  was  over: 
but  the  fools  were  the  more  numerous,  ana 
would  not  then  be  ruled.  The  other  was 
of  the  confessions  of  the  lion,  the  ass,  and 
the  wolf,  intimating  that  Sir  Thomas's 
conscience  was  like  that  of  the  ass,  who 
confessed  that  he  had  in  his  hunger  taken 
one  straw  out  of  his  master's  shoe,  by 
which  he  thought  his  master  had  taken 
cold.  More,  on  receiving  a  report  of  the 
interview,  showed  that  the  first  tale  was  a 
clumsy  repetition  of  one  often  told  to  the 
council  by  Cardinal  Wolsey  as  a  reason 
for  going  to  war,  which  rable,  he  adds, 
^dydde  in  hys  daves  help  the  king  and  the 
reabne  to  spend  manye  a  fayre  penye.' 
The  second  tale  he  proved  not  to  be  .^Esop's, 
and  wittily  turned  the  application  of  both 
from  himself  to  the  reiater.  (Sinffer*s 
It<merj  127-138.) 

His  interference  with  the  king  to  pre* 
vent  the  introduction  of  More*s  name  mto 
the  bill  of  attainder  with  reference  to  Eliza- 
l>eth  Barton,  the  Holy  Maid  of  Kent,  seems 
to  have  been  dictateii  rather  by  the  dread 
of  a  defeat  in  the  House  of  Lords  than  bj 
any  friendly  interest  in  More's  behalf.  His 
spiteful  reminder  to  Cromwell,  to  mark  in 
his  report  to  the  king  that  More  would 
not  even  swear  to  the  succession  *  but  imder 
some  certaine  maner;'  his  omission  as 
president  on  the  trial  of  the  ex-chancellor, 
when  about  to  pass  the  dreadful  sentence 
of  the  law,  to  put  the  usual  question  to  the 
prisoner, '  whether  he  could  sive  any  reason 
why  jud^ent  should  not  oe  pronounced 
against  him ;'  and  his  ready  adoption,  after 
hearing  More*s  argument,  of  the  chief  jus- 
tice's equivocal  reply,  and  hastily  proceeding 
with  the  sentence,  all  manifest  tnat  he  was 
imbued  with  the  same  spirit  which  prompted 
his  vindictive  master  to  seek  for  More's  de- 
struction. 

Of  his  legal  acquirements  there  is  little 
evidence,  beyond  the  reputation  that  he 
gained  at  the  Inner  Temple  for  his  reading 
on  the  Statute  of  Privileges,  which  recom- 
mended him  to  the  Duke  of  Suffolk,  his 
first  patron.  The  judicial  decisions  in 
which  he  was  engaged  during  his  period  of 
office  were  too  much  mixed  up  with  the 
political  questions  of  the  day,  and  too  clearly 
controUed  by  the  sovereign  whose  will  he 
was  so  ready  to  obey,  to  have  any  weight 
attached  to  them.  To  this  perhaps  there 
is  one  exception ;  for  the  privilege  that  is 
now  exercised  by  the  Commons  of  punish- 
ing those  who  imprison  their  own  members 
is  said  to  have  been  first  established  imder 
Audley's  sanction,  in  34  Henrv  VUL,  in 
the  case  of  George  Ferrers,  M.TP.  for  Fly- 


AUDLEY 

mouth,  for  whose   arrest   the  sheriff  of 
London  was  sent  to  the  Tower. 

His  interpretations  of  the  law  on  the 
various  crinunal  trials  at  which  he  presided 
are  a  disgrace,  not  only  to  him,  but  to  every 
member  of  the  bench  associated  with  him, 
while  both  branches  of  the  legislature  axe 
equally  chargeable  with  the  i^ominj  of 
passing  the  acts  he  introduced,  periUing 
evezj  man's  life  by  the  new  treasons  thej 
invented,  and  every  man's  conscience  by 
the  oontradictoiy  oaths  they  imposed.  It  is 
a  d^mdation  to  the  pious  and  excellent 
Sir  Thomas  More  to  mention  him  even  in 
contrast  with  such  a  man  as  Audley ;  and 
the  name  of  More's  less  estimable  prede- 
cessor, Cardinal  Wolsey,  acquires  an  addcNd 
brightness  when  the  moderation  of  his 
ministry,  during  the  earlier  years  of  the 
reig^n,  is  compared  with  the  persecuting 
spirit  which  prevailed  while  Audley  held 
tne  Seals  at  its  close. 

Lord  Audley  was  married  twice — first  to 
a  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Bamardiston,  of 
Keddmgton,  Suifolk,  and  secondly  to  Eliza- 
beth, daughter  of  Thomas  Grey,  Marquis  of 
Dorset.  He  left  no  son  to  inherit  his  title, 
but  by  his  last  wife  he  had  two  dawhters 
^Mary,  tiie  elder,  who  died  unmarried ;  and 
Margaret,  thus  his  sole  heir,  who  became 
the  wife,  first,  of  I^rd  Henry  Dudley,  a 
younger  son  of  John,  the  first  Duke  of 
Northumberland,  and  secondly  of  Thomas, 
Duke  of  Norfolk,  who  had  been  previously 
married.  By  the  latter  she  had  a  son 
Thomas,  who  erected  on  the  ruins  of  the 
abbey  of  Walden,  which  he  inherited  from 
his  mother,  the  stately^mansion  called,  in 
memory  of  her  father,  Audley  End.  He 
was  summoned  to  parliament  by  Queen 
Elizabeth  as  Baron  Howard  de  Widden, 
and  was  created  Earl  of  Sufiblk  by  James  L 
Both  titles  still  survive  in  different  branches 
of  the  family,  and  were  not  divided  till  the 
deatii  of  James,  the  third  possessor,  in  1706. 
The  barony  then  fell  into  abeyance  between 
Essex  and  Elizabeth,  his  two  daughters, 
and  continued  so  for  seventy-eight  years, 
being  terminated  in  1784  in  favour  of  the 
great  grandson  of  the  elder  daughter.  He 
was  created  Baron  Braybroke  in  1797,  but 
dying  in  the  same  year  without  issue,  and 
no  other  descendant  of  Essex,  the  elder 
daughter,  remaining,  the  representative  of 
Elizabeth,  the  younger  daughter,  was  found 
to  be  FredericK  Augustus  Hervey,  fourth 
Earl  of  Bristol  and  Bishop  of  Derry,  on 
whom  therefore  devolved  the  barony  of 
Howard  de  Walden. 

The  earldom  of  Suffolk  was  held  till  the 
death  of  the  tenth  earl  in  1745,  when  it 
passed  to  the  descendant  of  the  second  son 
of  the  first  earl,  and  again  in  1783  to  the 
descendant  of  a  younger  grandson  of  the 
first  earL  By  this  change  in  the  descent, 
the  titles  of  Baron  Howard  of  ChuletoOy 


AUMABI 

Vieooimt  AndoTer,  and  Eul  of  Bei&ahirei 
cnatioiia  aoquired  by  tiie  second  son  of  the 
ibat  Earl  oT  Suffolk,  liaye  been  all  united 
to  the  latter  title.  (Baron.  iL  382 ;  Jfo- 
rwiftEMex/x.  138;  Lhuford :  NuxMb  8if^ 

AinOLBI,  RoBEBT  DB,  was  a  regolar 
jioflticier  befoie  whom  fines  were  levied  at 
Westminster  from  10  to  13  John,  and  act- 
ing in  the  first  of  those  years  as  a  justice 
itinerant  at  lincoln.  In  2  Henry  UI.  he 
was  sent  into  Kent  with  Martin  de  Pttte* 
shall  and  Ral^  Harengto  take  an  asrise 
of  norel  disseiun.  In  9  Henry  HI.  he  was 
one  of  liie  justices  itinerant  in  Oxfordshire, 
and  in  the  following  year  was  appointed  to 
eoUect  the  quinzime  m  that  county,  for  his 
activity  in  performing  which  duty  he  was 
pardoned  a  fine  of  forty  shillings,  which  he 
owed  for  permisaion  to  nlough  up  part  of 
his  wood  of  Ferye,  in  Oxfordshire,  where 
his  mmsrtj  lay.  (Bot.  Cknu,  L  367,  ii. 
76,  147,  164.)  He  had  beoi  sob-sheriff 
there  in  9  John  (Mathx,  ii.  168) ;  and  one 
of  his  descendants  was  sheriff  under  Ed- 
ward II. 

ABJKBLTUJJL    See  B.  DE  BlTBT. 

AimXBfllTS,  KooEB  DX,  was  one  of 
the  justices  itinerant  for  the  county  of  Wilts 
in 9 Henry m,  1225.    {Bot.  CUm9.TL7^) 

AVBX,  JoHK  DB,  who  was  a  justice  iti- 
neiant  in  46  Henry  UI.  and  the  following 
year  in  the  counties  of  Comwall,  Beron, 
bonety  and  Somerset,  had  the  custody  of 
the  two  latter  counties,  with  the  castle  of 
Shirebum,  committed  to  him  six  years  pre- 
yia^.  {Ahh.  Bot.  Oruf.i.\b.)  EQsfionily 
belonged  to  a  place  of  his  namem  Glouoester- 
ahire,  and  he  was  probably  the  ffrandson  of 
Walter  de  Aure,  who  died  in  6  Henry  HL, 
and  the  son  dl  Philip  de  Aure.  (MadoXf  i. 
118,  ii.  27 ;  Excerpt,  e  Bot.  Fin.  i.  700 

ATUmOV,  RoBEBT  DS,  then  Canon 
sf  Salisbury,  in  1323,  17  Edward  H..  was 
keeper  of  the  Priyy  S^  and  was  employed 
in  various  counties  to  try  the  sherins  and 
otherB  accused  of  malyersation  and  oppres- 
■on.  On  May  21, 1323,  he  was  nonunated 
a  baron  of  tiie  Exchequer;  and  on  JuIt  18, 
1326,  was  sworn  in  as  cJianoellor  ot  the 
Ezdiequer,  by  which  he  seems  to  have  va- 
cated nis  former  seat  on  the  bench,  as  he 
was  not  among  the  barons  appointed  on  the 
accession  of  Edward  UI. 

In  the  fourth  year  of  that  reign,  howerer, 
he  resumed  his  place  as  a  biuxm,  on  De- 
cember 20, 1330,  haying  in  the  preceding 
August  been  collated  to  the  archdeaconry  <n 
Berks.  He  apin  vacated  his  seat  on  the 
iMDch,  on  bemg  constituted  treasurer  on 
March  29, 1332 ;  and  while  he  held  that 
office  the  kmg  made  an  unsuccessful  apj^li- 
cation  to  the  pope  to  procure  his  nomination 
to  the  vacant  oishopric  of  St.  Andrew's. 
He  continued  treasurer  till  February  3, 
1334.    There  is  no  other  trace  of  his  death 


lYMER 


2» 


than  is  afforded  by  the  appointment  of  his 
successor  in  the  archdeaconnr  in  September 
1338, 12  Edward  in.  (Pari.  Wntsyn.^.n. 
428;  Le  JVew,  279:  N.  Fcedera,  ii,  847. 
866.) 

ATUtn,  WiLLiAK.  The  town  of  Wye 
in  Kent  belonged  in  the  reign  of  Henry  III* 
to  the  ancient  Saxon  family  of  Aylof^ 
whose  seat  in  its  neighbourhood  was  called 
Bocton-Aloph.  Li  tiie  course  of  time  the 
representative  of  the  house  removed  into 
Essex,  where  he  settied  at  Homchurch,  and 
poaseffied  the  manors  of  Brittons,  Braxted 
Magna,  &c.  William  seems  to  have  been 
the  favourite  Christian  name,  and  law  the 
ordinary  profession,  of  the  family ;  for  among 
the  readers  of  Lincoln's  Inn  there  are  no 
less  than  three  William  Aylo£&  from  IS 
Henry  VH. -to  10  James  I.  The  first  of 
these  was  this  judge's  grandfather.  His 
father^  also  WHuam,  was  sheriff  of  Essex 
and  Hertfordshire;  and  his  mother  was 
Agnes,  daughter  of  SirThomasBemardiston, 
of  Ketton  m  Sofiblk  The  judge  himself 
was  the  second  of  these  readers  in  Lent 
1571.  He  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1560; 
and  the  degree  of  the  coif  was  conferred 
upon  him  in  Michaelmas  Term  1577,  appa- 
rently for  the  purpose  of  his  being  raised 
to  a  seat  in  the  Queen's  Bench,  his  judg- 
ments in  which  are  duly  reported  by  I)yer, 
Coke,  and  Savile.  Having  been  present  at 
the  trial  of  Edmund  Campion  and  others 
for  high  treason  in  November  1581,  he  was 
made  the  subject  of  a  febricated  miracle. 
In  a  book  entitied  *  An  i^nstie  of  Comfort 
to  the  Reverend  Priestes,  and  to  the  Ho- 
norable, Worshipful,  and  other  of  tiie  Laye 
Sort,  restrayned  in  Durance  for  the  Catho- 
licke  Favth,'  it  is  thus  narrated :  '  I  omitt 
Judge  Alephe,|who  sitting  to  keepe  the 
place  when  the  other  judges  retyred.  while 
the  jurye  consulted  about  the  condemna- 
tion of  f'ather  Campian  and  his  companye, 
pulling  of  his  glove,  founde  all  his  nande 
and  hys  scale  of  armes  bloodye  without 
anye  token  of  range  pricking  or  nurte;  and 
bemg  dismayed  uierwith  wipinge  it  went 
not  away  but  still  returned,  he  shewed  it 
to  the  gentle  men  that  sat  before  him,  who 
can  be  witnesses  of  it  till  this  days,  and 
haue  some  of  them  uppon  theyr  faytiies  and 
credites  auouched  it  to  be  true.'  He  sat 
on  the  bench  till  his  death,  on  Novembers. 
1585. 

By  his  wife  Jane,  daughter  of  Eustaco^ 
Sulyaid,  of  Fleming  in  Suffolk,  he  had 
three  sons — ^William,  Thomas,  and  Ghsorge* 
William  was  knighted  by  King  James  on 
lus  arrival  in  England ;  and  in  1612  he  was 
further  honoured  with  a  baronetcy,  which 
continued  in  his  line  till  1781,  when  it 
became  extinct  for  want  of  male  issue* 
(Wotton'8  JBarmet.  i.  249 ;  Movant's  Essex, 
u.  139.) 

ATIOB;  or  DAKIEL.    '  The  Abbot  of 


so 


AYREMYKXE 


Ohertsey '  is  the  second  of  the  *  hATones 
^errantesV  or  *  inquisitores,'  sent  hj  Henry 
n.  in  1170  to  enquire  into  the  conduct  of 
'the  sheriffsy  whom  Bugdale  erroneouslj 
'  designates  Mustidarii  itinerantes/ 

It  is  doublful  whether  this  abbot  was 
Daniel  or  Aymer,  but  probably  the  latter. 
'  The  date  atach^  to  the  former  in  Manning 
andBrav's  •  Surrey  ■  is  1149.  (Vol.  iii.  217.) 
The  *  LaWr  Niger  Scaccarii  *  proves  that  the 
latter  was  abbot  in  1175,  if  not  earlier. 
(Monad,  i.  428.) 

AYBEXYiniE,  WiLLiAH  P£.  Presum- 
ing that  a  patent  of  2  Edward  III.  applies 
to  this  bishop,  we  have  his  pedigree  for 
three  generations.  By  it  divers  lanas,  tene- 
ments, and  rents  in  the  town  of  Ayrmyn 
.and  elsewhere  are  confirmed  to  *  William 
ihe  son  and  heir  of  John  the  son  of  Adam 
the  son  of  Sewall  de  Ayrmyn'  in  fee. 
[CoL  Rot,  Pat.  102.)  Another  authority 
leaves  out  John,  and  makes  him  the  son  of 
Adam, and  states  that  his  mothers  name 
was  Matilda.  The  family  was  an  ancient 
one,  and  was  then  settled  at  Osgodby  in 
Lincolnshire.  {Angl  Sacra,  i.  802.)  Wil- 
liam was  the  eldest  of  ^iree  sons,  his 
brothers  being  the  under-mentioned  Kich- 
aid,  and  Adam,  Archdeacon  of  Norfolk. 

He  is  described  as  one  of  the  clerks  in 
the  Chancery  in  6  Edward  II.  (Hot,  Clous. 
m.  27),  when,  from  August  27  to  Sep- 
tember 28, 1311,  the  Great  Seal  was  placed 
In  the  hands  of  the  keeper  of  the  Bolls 
during  the  absence  of  Bishop  Keginald,the 
chancellor,  under  the  seals  of  him  and 
Robert  de  Bardelby.  When  sent  by  the 
chancellor  to  summon  to  parliament  the 
Abbot  of  Osenev,  who  had  used  every  eva- 
sion to  avoid  obeying  the  writs,  he  '.  cun- 
ningly gained  access  to  the  abbot  in  the 
disguise  of  a  penitent ;  but  as  soon  as  his 
errand  was  disclosed,  he  received  such  a 
aaliitary  discipline  from  the  knotted  scourges 
provided  by  the  monks  for  the  benefit  of 
the  visitors  to  the  shrine  of  St.  Brithwold 
as  induced  him  to  decamp  most  speedily, 
adopting  with  entire  sincenty  the  character 
which  he  had  assumed.'  (Palprave's  Mer^ 
t^iani  and  Friar,  70.) 

He  was  one  of  the  three  keepers  of  the 
Seal  appointed  on  December  9,  1311,  who 
held  it  till  September  1314  He  was  clerk 
of  the  parliament  which  met  at  Lincoln 
in  January  1310,  and  on  the  10th  of  the 
.following  August  was  raised  to  the  office 
of  keeper  or  master  of  the  Rolls.  (Sot, 
daus.  10  Edw.  II.  m.  28.)  In  this  character 
the  Great  Seal  was  frequently  placed  in  his 
custody,  under  the  seals  of  three  clerks,  to 
perform  the  duties  of  the  Chancery,  when 
the  chancellors,  John  de  Sandale,  John  de 
Hotham,  and  John  Salmon,  were  absent 
'from  court  About  1310,  having  joined 
'  the  ArchUshop  of  York,  the  Bishop  A  Ely, 
and  others  at  the  head  of  an  irregmar  army 


AYREMYNKE 

of  8,000  men  raised  for  suppressing  the  id- 
cursions  of  the  Scots,  they  proceeded  witii 
so  little  oaution  that  on  oeing  attacked 
they  were  quickly  thrown  into  confusion 
and"  entirely  routed.  The  two  prelates 
escaped,  but  William  de  Ayremynne  was 
taken  prisoner  (HoUnsked,  iv.  859),  -and 
probably  remaincKl  in  durance  till  the  com- 
pletion of  the  truce  at  the  end  of  the  year, 
i^m  the  number  of  priests  and  monks  in 
the  English  ranksj  the  name  of  the  Wliite 
Battle  was  flnyen  to  this  encounter.  (  Weevtr. 
702.) 

He  resigned  the  office  of  keeper  of  the 
Rolls  on  May  20, 1324,  when  his  brother, 
Richard  de  Ayremynne,  received  the  «h 
pointment  (Hot.  Claus,  17  Edw.  U.  m.  1(h) 
He  then  became  keeper  of  the  king's  Privy 
Seal,  and  in  the  following  August  had  the 
Great  Seal  again  committed  to  his  custody 
during  the  temporary  absence  of  Robert  de 
Baldock,  then  chancellor.    (Ibid,  m.  88.) 

His  preferment  in  the  Church  prooe^ed 
no  less  rapidly  than  his  civil  advancemeqt. 
He  held  tne  valuable  rectory  of  the  pariah 
of  Wearmouth,  in  addition  to  which  he 
successively  received  canonries  in  the  ca- 
thedrals of  St.  Paul,  Lincohi,  York,  Salis- 
bury, and  Dublin.  Not  content  with  theee 
rich  benefices,  he  obtained  through  the  in- 
fluence of  Queen  Isabella,  to  whose  cause 
he  was  devoted,  the  papal  nomination  -to 
the  vacimt  see  of  Norwicn,  to  which  he  was 
consecrated  in  France,  on  September  15, 
1325,  but  the  temporalities  were  then  re- 
fused by  the  king.  He  still  remained  :in 
France  till  he  accompanied  Queen  Isabella 
on  her  landing  in  England,  in  September 
13^;  and  on  November  30  the  Great  Seal, 
which  the  king  had  in  the  meantime  sent 
to  the  queen  and  prince,  was  placed  in  the 
hands  of  Ayremynne,  who,  with  Henry  de 
Clifi^,  the  keeper  of  the  Rolls,  retained  it 
till  the  king's  resignation  of  Ms  crown,  on 
January  20, 1327.  (Hot.  Claus.  20  Edw.  IL 
m.  3.) 

Under  Edward  IlL  he  held  no  official 
position  till  April  1,  1331,  when  he  was 
appointed  treasurer  (Hot.  Claus.  5  Edw.  lU. 
p.  1,  m.  13),  and  filled,  that  office  aboot  a 
year.  He  presided  over  the  bishopric  of 
Inorwich  nearly  eleven  years,  when  he  died 
at  his  house  at  Charing,  near  London,  on 
March  27, 1336,  and  was  buried  in  his  ca- 
thedral 

ATSEXTKHS,  Richard  db,  was  a 
younger  brother  of  the  above  William  de 
Ayremynne.  He  probably  was  one  of  the 
clerks  of  the  Chancery,  as  on  D^remberS, 
1319,  13  Edward  II.,  he  is  recorded  as 
being  present  at  a  delivery  of  the  Ghraat 
Seal,  and  as  on  May  26,*  1324,  he  was 
constituted  keeper  of  tne  Rolls  in  the  place 
of  his  brother  WilliauL  On  November  16 
Allowing,  the  Great  Seal  was. placed  in  Idfl 
custody,  under  the  seals  of  two  other  derk^ 


AYSCOOHE 

till  December  12,  the  chancellor,  Robert  de 
Baicfock,  being  then  engaged  on  a  mieeion 
to  the  Scots.  He  held  the  keeper»hip  of 
the  RoUa  little  more  than  a  year,  Henzy 
de  Cliff  being  anbstituted  for  him  on  July 
i.  1S25.  (Hot.  Clous.  13, 17, 18  £dw.  XL) 
No  eocplanation  is  given  ca  huremoval,  but 
it  ■Mms  not  improbable  that  it  was  con- 
nected with  some  sasjncicms  then  arising  as 
to  his  brother^s  fidebty,  as  it  occurred  two 
days  after  the  death  of  John  Salmon,  Bishop 
of  "Norwicb,  whose  see  was  then  the  subject 
of  contention.  On  his  brother's  consecra- 
tion to  that  bishopric  in  the  following 
September,  lUchara.  who  was  then  rector 
of  JSlTelaj,  was  made  chancellor  or  vicar- 
mMTal  of  the  diocese.  CBlomefiMs  AV- 
witk^  L  601.) 

It  seems  probable  that  both  he  and  lus 
youngest  brother  Adam  joined  William  de 
Ayremynne  in  France,  inasmndi  as  the 
ku^,  in  a  writ  dated  March  1326,  com- 
piams  of  th^  refusal  to  appear  before  him, 
jud  commands  the  Archbisnop  of  York  to 
enfoEce  their  attendance,  (JtoL  Clans.  10 
Sdw.  n.  m.  90 

On  March  1, 1327,  soon  after  the  acces- 
iioD  of  Edward  HI.,  he  is  mentioned  as 
derk  of  the  FriTT  Seal  (Sot.  Pari.  u.  440), 
sod  on  the  8th  oi  that  month  he  was  ap- 
pointed custos  of  the  House  of  Converts 
for  life,  an  office  which  had  been  filled  hj 
Ua  brother  '^ViUiam.  Bichard  resigned  it 
00  June  7,  1339.  {Eat.  Pat.  p.  1,  m.  13  & 
m.10.) 

The  chancellorship  of  the  church  of 
SaKaboiT  waa  added  to  his  ecclesiastical 
pRfeimento  on  July'l^»  1329;  and  as  his 
succesMir  in  this  digni^  was  collated  on 
April  19,  1340,  the  vacancy  was  pro- 
hu>ly  occasioned  by  his  deaths  (Le  Neve, 
215.) 

AY800GHE,  WnxiAX.  The  Ayecoghes 
were  a  very  old  Lincolnshire  family,  and 


B.\ALUN  91 

the  descendants  of  the  judge  for  nioie 
than  two  centuries  resided  at  Kelsey  in  that 
county,  several  of  them  filling  the  office  of 
sheritfl  William  Ayscoghe's  name  appears 
am<Hig  the  advocates  recorded  in  the  Vear 
Books  firom  Michaelmas  1420.  In  aboat 
eight  vears  he  was  called  to  the  deme  of 
the  coif,  and  was  raised  to  the  bench  as  a 
justice  of  the  Common  Fleas  two  years 
afterwards,  on  April  1 7, 1440, 18  Heniy  VI. 
This  rapid  advance  he  represented  in  a  peti* 
tion  to  the  king  as  a  grievance,  complain«> 
ing  that  '  or  he  had  ben  fully  two  yere  in 
that  office  at  the  barre  [of  Serjeant]  he  was 
called  by  your  heghnes  unto  the  benche  and 
made  justice,  by  which  makyng  justice  all 
his  winnings  tliat  he  sholde  have  hade  in 
the  said  office  of  serjeant,  and  alle  the 
fees  that  he  had  in  England  weere  and  be 
cessed  and  expired  to  his  grete  empovryssk- 
ynff,  for  they  weere  the  grete  substance 
of  niB  lyvelode/  He  therefore  prayed,  as 
he  was  '  the  porest  of  alle  voure  justices,' 
that  the  king  would  grant  him  for  his  life 
certain  tenemente  he  specified  of  the  value 
of  252. 12«.  lOd  a  year.  He  sat  in  the  court 
for  sixteen  years,  the  last  fine  levied  before 
him  being  dated  at  Midsummer  14M,  32 
Henry  YI.    (IktgdaU's  Orig.  40.) 

His  son  married  Margaret,  the  daughter 
and  heir  of  John  Talboys,  Esq.,  of  Nuthall, 
Nottinghamshire. 

AY8HT0H,  Nicholas,  belonged  to  a 
branch  of  the  ancient  and  knightly  family 
of  Ayshton,  or  ^Vssheton,  in  Lancashire. 
He  was  created  a  serjeant-at-law  in  Fe- 
bruary 1443,  21  Henry  VI.,  and  a  judge 
of  the  Common  Fleas  about  Trinity  Term 
1 444.  His  j  udicial  career  extended  through 
the  remainder  of  Henry's  reign,  and  tne 
first  four  years  and  a  half  of  that  of  Ed- 
ward rV.,  the  last  fine  levied  before  him 
being  on  Felmiary  3, 14GC.  {Dugdale's  Orig, 
46.) 


B 


lAALW,  or  BALini,  JoHK  DS^  was^  a  ! 
haron,  whoee  estates  were  in  the  counties  < 
of  Gloocester,  Hereford,  and  Wilts.  He  was 
descendel  from  Hameline  de  Balun,  who 
came  into  England  with  the  C<mqueror, 
and  built  the  cartle  of  Abei^^venny.  Regi- 
aald,  the  father  of  John,  m  the  rei^  of 
Henry  IL  made  a  fine,  with  Geoffirey  Fitz- 
Ace  and  AsAes  his  wife,  of  certain  lands 
which  had  oelonged  to  the  said  Hameline, 
ks  the  pexfiwmance  of  which  the  son  paid 
afme  to  the  king  of  one  hundred  marks  and 
ajpaljfreyin9John.  {ItU.deJFm.2S%)  In 
12  John  he  accompanied  the  king  to  Ire- 
kai  (Bat.  da  P^-avtOo,  189\  but  afterwards 
jobed  in  the  wars  agmnst  nis  sovereign  and 


forfeited  all  his  lands.  On  the  accession  of 
Henry  III.  he  returned  to  his  duty,  and 
was  reinstated  in  his  possessions.  (Itot, 
Oaus.  i.  278,  280,  311.)  In  0  Henry  HI. 
he  was  placed  on  the  list  of  the  justices 
itinerant  fbr  the  county  of  Gloucester. 
(Ibid.  ii.  76.)  On  his  death,  in  1235,  his  son 
John  paid  100/.  for  his  relief^  and  did 
homage  for  his  inheritance.  (Excerpt,  e 
HotTl^.  i.  276.)  Another  son,  Walter, 
succeeded  his  brother  in  3  Edward  1.  (Abb. 
Rot.  Orig.  i.  24.) 

BAALITH,  or  BALUH,  Hoger  be  (who 
was  .probably  of  another  branch  of  the 
same  family),  was  also  one  of  the  justicds 
itinerant  in  0  Henry  HL,  being  appointed 


32 


BABINOTON 


for  Hampslure.  In  the  next  year  lie  died, 
and  was  at  that  time  coroner  for  the  county. 
(Hot.  Clout,  ii.  76,  91.) 

BABnrOTOV.  WiLLiAXy  derived  his 
name  from  a  place  so  called  in  Northmn<* 
berland,  where  his  ancestors  are  said  to 
have  remded  from  the  Conquest.  His  father 
was  Sir  John  Bahington,  of  East  Bridge* 
ford,  Notts,  an^  his  mother  was  Benedicta, 
daughter  and  heir  of  Simon  Ward^  of  Cam* 
bri^^feshire.  They  had  one  daughter  and 
fire  sons,  tiie  elder  of  whom,  Thomas,  ob- 
tained by  marriage  the  ridi  manors  of 
Bethick  and  Leachurch  in  Derbyshire,  and 
several  other  rich  possessions,  which  re- 
muned  in  the  hands  of  his  posterity  until 
1586,  when  Anthony  Babington  was  at- 
tainted for  high  treason,  and  nis  enormous 
patrimony  passed  to  a  brother,  who  dissipated 
the  whole.  Another  branch  of  this  part  of 
the  family  settled  at  Rothley  Temple  in 
Leicestershire. 

William  was  the  second  son  of  Sir  John; 
and  by  his  marriage  with  MaigeiT|  daughter 
and  heir  of  Sir  Peter  Martel,  of  Chilwell, 
Notts,  acquired  that  and  other  considerable 
property.  He  pursued  the  study  of  the  law, 
ana  on  January  16, 1414, 1  Henry  V.,  he  was 
constituted  the  king's  attorney,  an  office 
which  in  those  times  was  inferior  to  that  of 
a  seijeant-at-law,  as  we  find  him  sum- 
moned on  July  11,  1415,  to  take  upon 
himself  the  latter  degree.  ^  . 

He  and  some  others  neglecting  to  obey 
the  mandate,  and  there  being  then  an  in- 
sufficiency of  seijeants  to  cany  on  the 
business  of  the  courts,  comnlaint  was  made 
in  the  parliament  of  Novem  oer  1417,  which 
issued  an  order  that  they  should,  under  a 
great  penalty,  immediately  take  upon  them- 
selves ^e  degree.  Upon  their  promise  of 
obedience  they  had  a  respite  till  the  fol- 
lowing Trinity  Term.  (J2o<.  Pari  ir.  107.) 
From  that  time  his  name  frequently  occurs 
in  the  Year  Books  till  November  4, 1419, 
when  he  was  appointed  chief  baron  of  the 
Exchequer.  While  he  held  this  office  he 
was  placed  on  the  bench  of  the  Conmion 
Pleas  also,  on  June  9^  1420,  holdmff  both 
places  together  till  Mj&y  5, 1428,  when  he 
was  advanced  by  Henry  VI.  to  the  chief 
justiceship  of  the  Common  Pleas,  and  held 
the  presidency  of  that  [court  for  thirteen 
years,  retiring  on  February  9,  1436.  He 
survived  his  resignation  for  nineteen  years ; 
and  dying  in  1&5,  33  Henry  VI.,  he  was 
buried  at  Lenton  Priory  in  his  native 
county. 

The  Reports  show  his  active  attention  to 
his  legal  duties,  and  tradition  speaks  of  his 
godly  life  and  conversation.  His  piety  is 
evidenced  by  his  founding  a  chantry  for 
two  explains  at  the  altar  of  St  Catherine, 
in  the  church  at  Thurgarton  in  Notts ;  and 
b'v  endowing  the  chantry  of  Balnngton  in 
^aforth,  in  the  same  county,  with  several 


BACON 

houses  and  rents.     (Ctd,  InouU.  p.  m.  iv. 
163,  298.) 

He  left  two  sons  and  a  daughter,  but  hia 
branch  of  the  fiunily,  part  of  which  wa* 
settled  at  Eiddington  m  Oxfordshire,  has 
been  long  extinct 

BAOOV,  Jonir,  had  almost  always  tde 
title  of  Clericus  Regb  affixed  to  his  name 
before  he  was  raised  to  the  bench.  He  held 
the  office  of  '  custos  rotulorum  et  brevium 
de  banco'  certainly  &om,  if  not  before, 
May  1288,  16  Edward  L ;  for  among  the 
indentures  in  the  treasury  of  the  Exchequer 
is  one  of  that  date,  the  earliest  existing  in- 
strument of  the  sort,  acknowledging^  the 
delivery  by  him  of  certain  *  pedes  fimum  * 
to  the  treasurer  and  chamberlains.  These 
are  renewed  at  various  intervals  till  1  Ed- 
ward IL  (Cal.  Exch.  iii  99-112.)  In 
the  third  vear  he  was  directed  to  have  % 
counter-roll  of  aU  pleas.  The  custody  of 
Ledes  Castle  in  Kent  was  committed  to  him 
in  19  Edward  L  (^5d.  Bot.  Orig.  L  66); 
and  two  years  before  he  is  mentioned  as  one 
of  the  executors  of  Queen  Eleanor,  the 
record  calling  him  'attorney.'  (Devours 
Issue  BoB,  98.)  ^s  name  appeals  among 
the  advocates  in  the  Year  Book  in  the 
earlier  years  of  Edward  H.;  and  in  the 
mxth  year,  on  February  19, 1313,  he  was 
advanced  to  the  bench  of  that  court,  in 
which  he  hod  so  long  been  an  officer;  and 
he  continued  a  judge  there  till  October  16» 
1320,  when  John  de  Stonore  was  app<nnt6d 
in  his  place.    (Col.  Rot.  Pat.  79,  88.) 

In  ii  Edward  I.  he  received  permissioQ 
to  inclose  a  certain  way  in  Reston  in  Suffolk 
{CaL  Rot.  fVie.  56) ;  and  in  9  Edward  IL 
he  certified  as  having  possesmons  in  the 
townships  of  Shouldham  in  Norfolk^  and 
of  Hemmgston,  Cleydon,  and  Akenham,  in 
Sufiblk.    (Pari  Writs,  u.  p.  ii.  464.) 

BACOV,  TnoKiiS,  there  can  be  little 
doubt,  was  of  the  same  family  as  that  firom 
which  Sir  Nicholas  Bacon  and  Lord  Ve- 
rulam  s^ranff.  In  9  Edward  H.,  1316L  he 
was  certified  as  holding  property  in  StifFKer, 
Baconsthoipe,  and  other  niaces  in  Norfoll^ 
which  formed  part  of  tne  possessions  of 
those  eminent  individuals.  He  was  perh^ 
the  Thomas  Bacon,  son  of  Sir  Boger  Bacon, 
of  Baconsthorpe,  on  whom  tluit  knight 
settled  lands  in  Isbenham,  &c.,  on  his  mar- 
riage with  Johanna,  daughter  of  Roger  de 
Antringham,  in  8  Edward  HL;  but  the 
Bacons  were  even  then  so  numerous  that 
the  difierent  branches  can  scarcely  be  dia- 
tingiiiahed. 

Thomas  is  named  in  the  Year  Books  of 
Edward  HI.  both  before  and  after  he  was  a 
judge.  He  was  raised  to  that  dignity  in  the 
Common  Pleas  on  S^tember  SO,  ls!9,  and 
noeived  the  honour  of  knighthood.  Ho 
was  removed  into  the  Ejng's  Bendi  on 
January  28, 1332^  and  he  does  not  aeem  to 
have  exercised  his  judicial  ftmctioiis  sftw 


BACON 

10  Edward  ILL.,  1336;  but  if  he  were  the 
son  of  Sir  Ro^r,  an  above  sug^rested,  he 
was  still  alive  in  1359.  (Pari.  Writs,  ii.  p. 
iL  303 ;  Duydale's  Orig,  102 :  Rot.  Pari  u. 
68,  447 ;  Abb.  JRat.  Orig.  u.  99,  109.) 

BAOOVy  Nicholas.  The  lineage  of  this 
family,  so  eminent  in  philosophy,  literature, 
and  faw,  has  been  traced  up  to  one  Grim- 
haldus,  a  landed  proprietor  in  Normandy, 
who  accompanied  his  relative  William,  Earl 
Warren,  into  England  at  the  time  of  the 
Conqaest,  and  settled  at  Letheringset  in 
Norfolk.  One  of  his  great-grandsons  in 
the  nsign  of  Richard  L  iir&t  called  himself 
Bacon,  an  Anglo-Saxon  word  signifying  *  of 
the  beechen  tree,*  in  allusion  to  which  he 
bore  for  his  arms  argent,  a  beech-tree 
proper.  The  family  widely  extended  itself 
over  Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  holding  consider- 
able estates  in  the  latter  county,  amon? 
which  Monks  Bradfield  and  Hesset  belonged 
to  the  immediate  ancestor  of  the  lord  keeper. 
The  two  hist-named  judges,  John  and 
Thomas  Bacon,  doubtless  came  from  the 
same  stock,  both  having  property  in  these 
two  coonties. 

Nicholas  Bacon  was  the  second  son  of 
Robert  Bacon,  of  Drinkston  in  Suffolk,  by 
Isabel,  the  daughter  of  John  Cnge,  of  Pa- 
kenham  in  the  same  county.  Ills  father, 
who  held  the  office  of  sheep  reeve  to  the 
neighbouring  abbev  of  St.  Edmund's  Bury 
( Madert's  Corp.  Christi  CoU.  220;,  had  four 
other  children,  two  sons  and  two  daughters. 
Thomas,  the  elder  of  the  two  sons,  died 
without  issue ;  and  James,  the  younger,  was 
a  dalter  in  the  city  of  London,  of  which  he 
became  an  alderman,  and  served  the  office 
t»f  sheriff  in  1509.    (Machyn's  Diary,  280, 

Fuller  ( Worthies,  ii.  334)  says  that  Ni- 
cholas was  bom  not  far  from  the  abbey, 
meaning,  no  doubt,  hLi  father's  residence  at 
l>rinkston ;  but  most  other  writers  lix  the 
plAoe  of  his  birth  at  Chislehurst  in  Kent, 
knd  the  date  about  1509.  He  was  sent 
Ti-ry  early  to  Corpus  Christi  (Benet)  Col- 
lege, Cambridge,  where  he  was  one  of  the 
Lible  clerks,  and  proceeded  A.B.  about  1527. 
At  the  university  he  formed  that  intimacy 
with  Sir  W^illiam  Cecil  which,  afterwards 
riveted  by  their  union  with  two  sisters, 
ia«ted  throughout  their  lives.  On  leaving 
college  he  pursued  his  studies  at  Paris, 
where  he  remained  till  1532,  in  which  year 
Lf  was  admitted  a  student  at  Gray^s  Inn. 
He  was  called  to  the  bar  in  the  following 
y^^ar,  and  was  made  an  ancient  in  153C,  that 
odice  being  distinct  from  the  grade  of  a 
Wncher,  to  which  he  did  not  arrive  till 
I'VjO.  In  1552  he  held  the  office  of  its 
tie^nxer.  That  his  name  does  not  appear 
aa  an  advocate  in  any  of  the  reported  cases 
DiHj  be  accounted  for  by  his  nolding  the 
office  of  sob'citor  to  the  Court  of  Augmenta- 
tiona,  to  which  he  was  appointed  in  1537. 


BACON 


33 


In  1540  he  is  mentioned  as  the  first  of  the 
three  commissioners  to  accept  the  surren- 
der of  the  collegiate  church  of  Southwell 
(Pymer,  xiv.  674,  701)  ;  and  in  the  same 
year  he  is  styled  solicitor  for  the  university 
of  Cambridge.  His  name  appears  as  '  stu- 
diant  of  the  lawe,'  receiving  one  shilling  a 
quarter  in  the  accounts  of  the  king^s  trea- 
surer, during  the  first  three  years  of  Ed- 
ward VI.  ( Trevelyan  Papers),  which  seems 
to  have  been  a  customary  fee  to  the  de- 
pendents of  the  court. 

One  of  the  projects  which  the  king  had 
at  heart  on  the  aissolution  of  the  monas- 
teries in  1539  was  the  foundation  of  a 
house  for  the  study  of  the  civil  law  and  the 
formation  of  young  statesmen.  A  scheme 
was  prepared  by  Bacon,  but  the  lavish  ex- 
travagance of  Henry  having  exhausted  the 
means  which  the  monastic  lands  were  to 
supply,  this  noble  design  died  in  its  birth, 
not,  however,  without  securing  the  royal 
favour  to  Bacon,  whose  abilities  had  been 
manifested  in  the  composition.  In  1545 
he  had  a  grant  of  the  manors  of  Redgrave, 
Bottesdale,  and  Gillingham,  in  Sufiblk, 
which  hod  belonged  to  tne  monastery  of  St. 
Edmundsbury;  and  in  the  following  year 
he  was  promoted  to  the  office  of  attorney 
to  the  Court  of  Wards,  his  patent  for  which 
was  renewed  in  1547,  on  the  accession  of 
Edward  VI. 

During  Edward's  reign,  Bacon  purchased 
the  estate  of  Gorham,  which  had  belonged 
to  St.  Alban's  abbey,  where  he  fixed  his 
residence,  and  seeing  that  all  rule  and 
authority  in  the  town  of  St.  Albans  was 
overthrown  with  the  fall  of  the  abbot,  he 
obtained  a  charter  for  its  incorporation  in 
1553,  being  himself  nominated  high  steward. 
(Netccomes  St.  Albans,  481.) 

The  accession  of  Queen  Mary  made  no 
change  in  his  official  position  ;  but  he  was 
so  well  known  to  be  strongly  affected  to  the 
reformed  doctrines  that  Queen  Elizabeth 
immediately  selected  him  as  her  principal 
legal  minister.  On  December  22, 1558,  little 
more  than  a  month  after  Queen  Mary's 
death,  he  was  knighted,  and  the  Great  Seal 
was  placed  in  his  hands  as  lord  keeper. 
What  was  the  precise  difference  between 
the  two  offices  of  lord  keeper  and  lord  chan- 
cellor few  could  explain,  lis  the  powers  of 
both  were  apparently  the  same.  Doubts, 
however,  having  been  raised  on  the  subject, 
it  was  deemed  expedient  to  put  an  end  to 
them  in  the  second  parliament  of  this  reign, 
by  passing  an  act  declaring  that  the  keeper 
of  the  Great  Seal  always  had,  and  thence- 
forth should  have,  the  same  rights  and 
powers  us  if  he  were  lord  chancellor.  i^St.  5 
Eliz.  ch.  18.) 

In  the  first  parliament,  which  met  on 
January  25, 1559,  Bacon  contented  himself 
with  procuring  an  act  for  the  recognition  of 
Queen  Elizabeth's  title,  without  repealing 

I) 


34 


BACON 


BACON 


the  statute  by  which  she  had  been  declared  i  by  a  happy  repartee.    When  she  remarked 
illegitimate,  upon  the  maxim  that  the  crown    on  one  of  her  visits  to  his  mansion,  that  it 


purged  all  deiects,  and  '  chusing/  as  David 
Llovd  observes,  *  the  closure  of  a  festered 


was  too  little  for  him,  he  answered,  *  No, 
madam,  it  is  you  that  have  made  me  too 


wound  more  prudent  than  the  opening  of  '  big  for  it.*  The  queen  took  great  delight 
it.'  Bills  for  the  restoration  of  the  queen's  i  in  the  early  wit  of  Sir  Nicholas's  illustrious 
supremacy,  and  for  the  adoption  of  a  re-  son  Francis,  whom  she  called  *  her  young 
formed  liturgy,  having  been  then  intro-  '  lord  keeper.*  The  great  corpulency  which 
duced,  the  queen  commanded  a  conference  ;  oppressed  him  in  his  latter  years  was  a 
to  be  held  at  Westminster,  under  the  super-    subject  with   which,    in    good-humoured 


intendence  of  the  lord  keeper  as  moderator, 
to  settle  some  of  the  controverted  points ; 
at  which  a  certain  number  of  bishops  and 
learned  men  were  appointed  to  argue  on 
each  side.  Those  of  the  popish  party,  how- 
ever, refusing  to  be  bound  by  the  regula- 
tions which  nad  been  made,  no  discussion 
took  place,  and  the  bills,  after  considerable 
debate  in  the  two  houses,  were  passed  in 
both. 

Through  the  influence  of  the  Earl  of 
Leicester,  whose  dislike  to  him  is  evident 
from  some  letters  in  the  State  Paper  Ofiice 
(CaL  [1647],  236,  237),   he  was  charged 
with  assisting  John  Hales  in  the  composi- 
tion of  a  book  showing  that  the  succession 
of  the  crown  on  the  death  of  the  queen 
would  devolve  on  the  house  of  Suffolk. 
Nothing  could  be  more  offensive  to  Eliza- 
beth than  any  interference  in  a  question 
upon  which  she  was  notoriously  jealous, 
and  the  known  prudence  of  Sir  Nicholas 
Bacon  mis:ht  well  raise  a  doubt  whether 
he  so  far  failed  in  his  usual  caution  as  to 
meddle  in  so  dangerous  a  matter.    It  is 
said,  however,  that  the  queen  believed  the 
charge,  and  not  only  forbade  him  the  court, 
but  even  offered  the  Seal  to  Justice  An- 
thony Browne,  and  that  Sir  William  Cecil 
had  some  difficulty  in  persuading  her  ma- 
jesty to  restore  Sir  Nicholas  to  her  good 
graces.    Some  presumption  of  the  truth  of 
the  story  is  afforded  by  the  following  facts. 
On  October  25,  1666,  the  queen  *  under- 
standing the  lord  keeper's  slow  amendment ' 
(which  looks  very  like  a  politic  excuse), 
appointed  Sir  Robert  Cat! in,   lord  chief 
justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  to  execute 
the  office   of  lord  keeper  in  parliament. 
(Pari.  Hid.  i.  708.)     In  the  same  year  An- 
thony Browne  was  knighted,  an  honour 


raillery,  she  would  banter  him,  saying  that 

*  his  soul  lodged  well ; '  and  he  would  not 
hesitate  to  make  this  infirmity  an  excuse 
for  writing  to  her,  instead  of  paying  his 
personal  respects,  expressing  himself  thus: 

*  Oh !  madam,  not  want  of  a  willing  hart 
and  mvDd,  but  an  unhable  and  unweildy 
body  is  the  on  lie  cause  of  this.'  (CaL  St. 
P««cr«  [1647],  566.) 

So  burthensome  was  this  increase  of  his 
size  to  him  that  he  could  not  walk  from 
one  court  to  the  other  without  suffering, 
and  when  he  took  his  seat  it  was  the  custom 
for  the  lawyers  to  refrain  from  pleading  till 
he  gave  the  signal  with  his  staff.  It  was 
to  uiis  infirmity  he  alluded  when  he  said 
to  a  certain  nimble-witted  counsellor  who 
interrupted  him  often,  'There  is  a  great 
difference  betwixt  you  and  me ;  it  is  a  pain 
to  me  to  speak,  and  a  pain  to  you  to  nold 
your  peace.'  In  hearing  the  cases  in  Chan- 
cery and  the  Star  Chamber  he  was  re- 
markable for  his  patience,  always  saying, 
'  Let  us  stay  a  little,  and  we  shall  have 
done  the  sooner; '  and  his  judgments  were 
distinguished  by  soundness  and  modera- 
tion. 

Sir  Nicholas's  death  took  place  at  York 
House,  on  February  20,  1679,  after  hold- 
ing the  Great  Seal  for  above  twenty  years. 
His  remains  were  deposited  under  a  noble 
monument  erected  by  himself  in  St.  Paul's 
Cathedral,  with  an  inscription  penned  by 
the  famous  George  Buchanan. 

All  writers  concur  in  their  estimate  of 
his  character,  which  may  be  summed  up 
by  what  Camden  (in  Ketinet,  ii.  472)  says 
of  him :  '  He  was  a  man  of  a  gross  body, 
but  of  great  acuteness  of  wit,  of  singular 
wisdom,  of  great  eloquence,  of  an  excellent 
memory,  and  a  pilLur,  as  it  were,  of  the 


seldom  bestowed  by  Queen  Elizabeth  on  j  privy  council.'  David  Lloyd  (State  Wor^ 
her  puisne  judges ;  and  in  that  session  '  thies,  472)  is  equaUy  eulogistic,  but  his 
there  was  much  discussion  about  the  sue-  j  conclusion, '  he  was,  in  a  word,  a  father  of 
cession  and  the  queen's  marriage.  !  his  country,  and  of  Sir  Francis  Bacon,* 

The  queen's  confidence,  with  this  slight ;  savours  something  of  a  bathos.      In  his 
interruption,  was  never  withdrawn  from    motto,  '  Mediocria  firma,'  majr  be  seen  the 


him ;  and  to  the  end  of  his  life  he  enjoyed 
her  favour  so  much  that  he  even  ventured 
sometimes  to  advise  her  in  the  form  of  a 
joke.  When  the  queen  asked  him  his  opi- 
nion of  one  of  the  monopoly  licences,  which 
were  then  so  obnoziou^y  obtained,  he 
answered,  *  Would  you  have  me  speak  truth, 
madam  P  Liceniid  amnes  deteriores  Bumus,'' 
He  knew  also  how  to  gratify  her  majesty 


modesty  of  his  nature,  to  which  no  doubt 
may  be  attributed  his  long  continuance  in 
his  position,  unharmed,  and  almost  un- 
toucned,  by  the  assaults  of  envy  or  jealoua 
rivalry. 

His  residence  in  Ijondon,  before  he  became 
lord  keeper,  was  at  Bacon  House  in  NoUo 
Street,  Foster  Lane,  which  he  built,  and 
afterwards  in  York  House,  near  Charing 


RVCOX 

CrotMy  which  heloDged  to  the  Archbishops  of 
York,  and  stood  on  the  site  of  the  streets 
now  known  by  the  name  and  title  of  George 
Villiera,  Duke  of  Buckingham,  to  whom  it 
was  subsequently  granted.  The  Cursitor's 
<  )ffice  in  Chancery  Lane  was  erected  by  him^ 
and  he  founded  a  free  grammar  school  at 
Kedgrave,  allotting  SOL  a  year  for  its  sup-  , 
port,  and  settling  201.  a  year  for  the  main-  , 
tenance  of  six  scholarships  in  Corpus  Christi 
College,  to  be  chosen  out  of  that  school. 
Towards  building  the  chapel  to  this  college, 
the  place  of  his  education,  he  was  so  liberal 
t  contributor  that  the  society  presented  him 
with  a  silver  mazer  the  year  before  his 
death.  To  the  library  also  of  his  university 
he  was  a  great  benefactor,  and  his  merits 
were  so  highly  esteemed  there  that  eulo- 
gistic verses  were  published  to  his  memory. 

Sir  Nicholas  married  twice.  His  first 
wife  was  Jane,  daughter  of  William  Fem- 
Ihv,  of  West  Cretingin  Suffolk,  Esq.,  whose 
^ister  had  married  Sir  Thomas  Gresham. 
Hr  her  he  had  a  family  of  three  sons  and 
three  daughters.  The  eldest  son,  Sir 
Nicholas  Bacon,  of  Redgrave,  was  the  first 
penion  whom  King  James  advanced  to  the 
dignity  of  baronet,  on  the  institution  of  the 
order  in  1<511 :  and  the  title  has  continued 
nointerruptedly  in  his  descendants  to  the 
pref«ent  time.  A  second  baronetcy,  granted 
ID  1027  to  Sir  Butts  Bacon,  of  Mildenhall 
in  Suffolk,  the  fifth  son  of  the  first  baronet, 
became  united  to  that  of  Redgrave  in  1755; 
and  a  third  baronetcy,  granted  in  1001  to 
Sir  Nicholas  Bacon,  of  Gillingham,  a  grand-  < 
MiD  of  the  first  baronet,  expired  for  want  of  . 
i»«»ue  in  l*j85. 

The  date  of  the  death  of  the  lord  keeper's 
tint  wife  does  not  appear,  but  his  marriage 
with  the  second  must  have  taken  place 
Nime  time  before  he  received  the  Great 
S^'aL     She  was  Anne,  daughter  of   Sir  ] 
Anthony  Cooke,  of  Gidd^  Hall,  Essex,  and  i 
Mj'ter  of  the  wife  of  Sir  William  Cecil,  ' 
ttftKrwards  the  renowned  Lord  Burleigh, 
if^r  father,  the  learned  and  pious  preceptor  ! 
of   Edward    VI.,   had  given    to    all    his  ' 
daughters  a  scholastic  education ;  some  of  , 
the  fruits  of  which,  in  Lady  Bacon,  were  i 
h-r  translations  of    twenty-five    sermons  | 
fnoi  the   Italian  of   Bemardine  Achine, , 
Hiblished  in  1550,  and  of  Bishop  Jewell's 
>.itin  Apology  for  the  Church  of  England,  i 
iublij»hed  in  1564.     Her  children  by  the 
ord  keeper  were  Anthony  and  Francis, 
and  to  her  early  instructions  ma^  doubt- 
l^^c  be  attributed  some  of  that  eminence  to 
^hich  they  both  attained ;  the  former  in 
the  short  life   to  which  he  was  limited, 
t->r  he  died  early ;  the  latter,  not  only  in 
hi»  own  time  ana  in  his  own  country,  but 
f*T  all  ag«a  and  throughout  the  civilised 

BAOOJr,  FHA5CI8  (LOBD  VSRTJLAX,  Vl8- 

c«»i'5T  bt.   ALBAjr^).  No    uster  interpre- 


BACDX 


35 


tation  of  a  man's  transactions,  no  better 
explanation  of  his  policy,  can  be  found  than 
that  which  his  own  letters  furnish ;  and  in 
the  following  sketch  those  of  Bacon  have 
been  carefullv  used  in  order  to  form  an 
impartial  and  unbiassed  judgment  of  his 
real  character.  His  letters  have  been 
collected  in  the  edition  of  his  works  by 
Mr.  Ba^il  Montagu,  and  to  that  edition 
the  references  are  made. 

Francis  Bacon  was  bom  at  York  House 
in  the  Strand  on  January  22, 1500-1,  when 
his  father.  Sir  Nicholas,  had  been  lord 
keeper  of  the  Great  Seal  for  two  vears. 
His  mother.  Sir  Nicholases  second  wife,  to 
whose  early  instructions  the  future  philo- 
sopher owed  much  of  his  celebrity,  was 
Anne,  one  of  the  five  daughters  of  Sir 
Anthony  Cooke,  tutor  of  Edward  VI.,  ■ 
another  of  whom  was  Mildred,  the  second 
wife  of  Sir  W^illiam  Cecil,  soon  after 
ennobled  by  the  title  of  Lord  Burleigh. 
Anthony  and  Francis  were  the  only  issue 
of  this  union. 

As  no  person  has  claimed  the  honour  of 
being  Francis  Bacon*8  early  instructor,  it  is 
to  be  presumed  that  he  spent  the  first . 
tweh'e  years  of  his  life  at  home,  where, 
besides  the  tuition  he  received  from  his 
accomplished  mother,  he  had  all  the  ad- 
vantage that  could  be  derived  from  associa- 
tion with  the  great  and  learned  men  who 
frequented  his  father's  house.  In  Queen 
Elizabeth's  occatdonal  visits  to  Gorham- 
bury,  she  is  said  to  have  been  so  pleased 
with  his  readiness  that  she  called  him  her 
youn^  lord  keeper ;  and  his  answer  to  her 
question  how  old  he  was,  *Two  years 
vounger  than  your  majesty*s  happy  reign,* 
IS  somewhat  too  easily  accepted  as  a  proof 
of  his  early  wit. 

When  little  more  than  twelve  years  old 
he  was  sent  with  his  brother  Anthony  to 
Trinity  College,  Cambridge,  then  presided 
over  by  Dr.  Whitgift,  afterwards  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury.  By  the  master's 
books,  the  account  with  him  began  on  April 
5,  1573,  but  he  was  not  matriculated  till 
June  10;  and  according  to  the  same 
account  he  paid  for  sizings  up  to  Christmas 
1575.  (Brtiish  Mag.  xxxiii.  444.)  It  is 
stated  that  he  left  the  university  from  dis- 
gust at  the  system  of  education  then  adopted 
there,  and  which  remained  without  much 
alteration  to  the  days  of  Milton;  but  it 
seems  unlikely  that  his  father  should  have 
been  induced  to  listen  to  such  an  objection 
from  a  boy  not  yet  sixteen.  His  re- 
moval was  probably  caused  by  other  plans 
being  formed  by  him,  which  had  diplomacy 
for  their  object ;  for  in  the  course  of  the 
next  year  he  went  to  France  with  Sir 
Amyas  Paulet,  our  ambassador  there.  Sir 
Am}'as  having  occasion  to  send  to  England, 
entrusted  Bacon  with  the  mission ;  and  the 
queen  is  said  to  have  expressed  her  api^to- 


36 


BACON 


bation  of  the  manner  in  which  the  youth- 
ful messenger  performed  the  duty.  After 
spending  not  quite  two  jears  and  a  half  in 
'France f  during  which  his  journeys  into  the 
interior  seem  to  have  been  only  those  in 
which  he  accompanied  Sir  Amyas  as  his 
'companion/  his  tather*s  death  in  February 
1576-9  caused  him  to  be  suddenly  sum- 
moned home  from  Paris. 

At  this  period  he  was  just  turned  eigh- 
teen; ana^  as  the  youngest  of  a  large 
family,  the  pro\d8ion  that  came  to  his  share 
was  not  sufficient  for  his  maintenance 
without  some  aid  from  his  own  exertions. 
He  naturally  selected  the  law  for  his  pro- 
fession, and  entered  himself  at  Gray's  Inn, 
as  his  father  had  done  before  him.  The 
date  of  his  entry  is  uncertain,  but  in  a 
questionable  MS.  of  the  society  it  is  stated 
to  be  November  1576;  and,  although  at 
tiiat  date  he  was  either  gone  or  goinji^  to 
Paris,  it  is  possible  that  his  father  might 
have  entered  him  previous  to  his  departure; 
but  he  could  not  have  kept  his  terms,  or 
began  his  studies,  till  his  return  in  March 
1578. 

Shortly  afterwards  he  made  some  suit 
to  his  uncle  Lord  Burleigh,  the  precise 
nature  of  which,  from  the  involved  lan- 
guage in  which  he  urged  it  in  two  letters 
addressed  to  his  uncle  and  aunt  (Sept.  1(5, 
1680;  Works,  xii.  471),  it  is  difficult  to 
unravel.  It  was  evidently  connected  with 
the  law,  and  required  the  queen's  approval: 
but  his  request  Deing,  as  he  acknowledges, 
^rare  and  unaccustomed,*  and  one  which 
might  be  deemed  *  indiscreet  and  un- 
advised,' it  will  not  excite  much  wonder  if 
a  youth  not  yet  twenty  should  have  failed 
in  his  application.  It  has  been  supposed 
that  a  letter  without  date,  which  Montagu 
extracts  from  the  *  Cabala  *  (  Works,  xii.  7), 
thanking  Burleigh  for  his  intercession  with 
the  queen  on  his  behalf,  was  written  in  the 
next  month  after  this  application.  But, 
adverting  to  the  fact  that  he  was  then  a 
minor,  and  to  the  contents  of  his  subse- 
quent letters  to  his  uncle,  it  seems  to  be- 
long to  a  much  later  date,  speaking  as  it 
does  of  the  queen  having  '  appropriated  him 
to  her  senice,'  and  of  *  her  princely  liber- 
ality,' of  which  there  are  no  signs  at  this 
time,  nor  were  there  for  a  long  time  after. 

He  was  called  to  the  bar  on  June  27, 
1582,  and  on  February  10, 1586,  tliero  is  an 
order  that  he   'may  have  place  with  the 
readers  at  the  readers'  table,  but  not  to 
have  any   voice  in  pension,   nor  to  win  i 
ancienty  of  any  tliat  is  his  ancient,  or  shall , 
read  before  him.'    (Lattsdowne  MSS.  51,  art. 
i).)    To  a  copy  of  this  order  some  notes  of ! 
Lord  Burleigh  are  appended,  bein?  memo- 
randa of  the  successive  favours  shown  by 
the  inn  to  Bacon.    TheHe  are — 1.  That  he 
bad  a  'special  admittance  to  be  out  of 
commons,   sending  for  beer,    breads  and 


BACON 

wine ;'  which,  if  he  was  entered  in  1576, 
might  be  because  he  was  going  abroad.  2. 
'Admitted  to  the  Grad.  Sop.,  whereby  he 
hath  won  ancienty  of  40,  oeing  bar.  of  3 
years  continuance;'  which  is  perhaps  ex- 
plained  by  the  next  3.  'Utter  bfu*rister 
upon  three  years  study;'  by  which  he 
would  attain  seniority  over  those  who  were 
not  to  be  called  till  their  fuU  term  of  five  or 
seven  years'  study  had  expired.  4.  'Ad- 
mitted to  the  hign  table  where  none  are  but 
readers.'  None  of  these  memoranda  have 
any  date ;  but  the  last  refers  to  the  order  of 
Feoruary  1586,  which  proves  he  was  thea 
made  a  bencber. 

For  this  early  call  to  the  bench  he  was 
apparently  indebted  to  Lord  Burleigh,  who 
was  himself  a  member  of  the  inn.  He 
evidently  refers  to  it  in  a  letter  to  hia 
lordship  in  the  following  May,  when  speak- 
ing of '  a  late  motion  of  mine  own,'  wherein 
'  I  sought  an  ease  in  coming  within  bars,' 
meaning  simply  within  the  bar  of  his  inn, 
which  he  calls  in  his  letter  '  not  any  ex- 
traordinary or  singular  note  of  favour.  He 
then  alludes  to  some  reports  to  his  prejudice, 
upon  which  his  lordsnip  had  admonbhed 
him.  (  Works,  xii.  473.)  He  entered  parlia- 
ment for  the  first  time  in  November  1584, 
as  member  for  Melcombe  Regis,  but  little 
record  of  the  proceedings  remains.  In  the 
next  parliament,  of  October  1586,  he  sat 
for  Taunton,  and  was  'vehement  against 
the  Queen  of  Scots,'  joining  in  the  general 
demand  for  her  immediate  execution ;  but 
he  does  not  appear  to  have  taken  any  other 
active  part  in  the  business  of  the  session. 
{Pari,  Hist.  i.  837.) 

In  Lent  1588  he  was  elected  reader, 
and  double  reader  in  Lent  1600,  when  his 
reading  was  on  'The  Statute  of  Uses,' 
which  was  not  published  till  seventeen 
years  after  his  death.  In  the  meantime^ 
however,  he  had  been  actively  employed  in 
improving  and  ornamenting  the  premises  of 
the  society ;  and  various  sums  were  allowed 
to  him  for  planting  the  gardens,  &c.  {Dug^ 
dal^6  Oriy,  273.)  He  took  also  a  promi* 
ment  part  in  promoting  those  dramatic 
entertamments  for  which  the  society  was 
famous,  and  with  the  performance  of  which 
the  queen  was  so  mucn  gratified. 

Soon  after  this  his  uncle  procured  for 
him  a  grant  of  the  reversion  of  the  registrar- 
ship  of  the  Star  Chamber,  an  office  worth 
1,000/.  a  year,  which  '  meuded  his  prospect, 
but  did  not  fill  his  bam,'  as  lie  truly  said ; 
for  he  had  to  wait  nearly  twenty  years  for 
the  vacancy.  {Works,  xii.  142.)  It  is 
evident  that  during  this  time  he  was  not 
getting  on  in  his  profession ;  for  none  of 
the  reporters  as  yet  mention  his  name.  Ii| 
a  letter  to  his  mother,  dated  February 
18, 1591-2  (Bixonj  30),  he  applies  to  Lord 
Burleigh  for  the  wardship  of  Aldermfta 
Hay  ward's  aon;  and  in  another  a^licatioa 


BACON 

• 

to  his  lordflhipy  later  in  the  same  year 
(  Works,  xiL  5),  he  eajs  he  was  '  one  and 
thirty  years'  old,  and  threatens  'if  his 
lordship  will  not  carry  him  on/  to  sell  his 
inheritance  and  purchase  some  office  of  gain 
that  shall  he  executed  hy  deputy,  and  so 
'  hecome  a  sorry  bookmaker.'  Though  his 
views  were  afterwards  altered,  his  petitions 
do  not  seem  at  this  time  to  aim  at  any 
active  legal  place ;  for  he  says,  *  I  confess 
that  I  have  as  vast  contemplative  ends  as  I 
have  moderate  civil  ends,  for  I  have  taken 
all  knowledge  to  be  my  province.'  His 
fioit  not  receiving  so  much  encouragement 
from  his  uncle  as  he  hoped,  he  applied  to 
his  cousin,  Sir  Hobert  Cecil,  to  press  it. 
At  last  Lord  Burieigh,  in  September  1503, 
tells  him  that  he  had  induced  the  lord 
keeper  (Puckering),  who  had  been  required 
by  the  queen  to  give  to  her  the  names  of 
divers  lawyers  to  be  preferred,  to  put  him 
down  as  a  meet  man,  out  not  equal  to  Bro- 
grsve  and  Branthwait,  two  other  barristers 
whom  Puckering  specially  recommended. 
( Works,  xii.  72.) 

In  the  parliament  of  February  1589  he 
represented  Liverpool,  and  busied  himself 
in  promoting  the  supply,  being  appointed  to 
confer  with  the  queen's  learned  counsel 
thereon.  So  in  the  next  parliament,  in 
February  1503,  being  then  member  for 
Middlesex,  be  supported  the  motion  of  his 
couan  Sir  Robert  Cecil  to  the  same  pur- 
port (Pari.  Hid.  i.  856,  881) ;  but  on  a 
subf^uent  day  he  lost  the  credit  he  had 
jrainea,  by  objecting  to  the  course  proposed 
for  its  collection.  Discovering  his  mdis- 
cretion,  in  the  remaining  debates,  which 
continued  for  nearly  three  weeks,  he  had 
the  prudence  to  be  silent.  For  this  inter- 
ference he  so  deeply  incurred  the  queen's 
dixpleasare  that  it  had  not  subsided  when 
he  received  Lord  Burleigh's  favourable 
note,  nor  till  some  time  after.  {Worksy 
xiL  28,  xiii.  275.) 

In  April  1503  Sir  Gilbert  Gerard,  the 
master  of  the  Rolls,  died ;  and  though  this 
place  was  destined  for  Sir  Thomas  Egerton, 
It  was  kept  vacant  till  his  successor  as 
tttomey-general  was  determined  on.  The 
list  of  lawyers  to  be  preferred,  which  the 
lord  keeper  had  been  required  to  g^ve,  had 
no  doubt  reference  to  this  vacancy;  for 
though  Sir  Edward  Coke,  as  soficitor- 
gtrneral,  had  the  first  claim  to  the  succession, 
it  is  evident  that  efforts  were  making  to  set 
aside  his  just  preteDsiona.  Bacon  put  him- 
wlf  forward  as  Coke's  opponent  {Works^ 
xiiL  77),  endeavouring  to  break  through 
the  accustomed  routine;  but,  as  he  was 
then  only  a  young  man,  and  had  not  yet 
acquired  any  reputation  either  as  a  lawyer 
or  as  a  writer,  it  ia  diffictdt  to  understand 
on  what  his  claims  to  an  office  which  had 
been  lately  increasing  in  importance  were 
founded.    He  could  not  expect  that  his 


BACON 


37 


legal  descent  would  alone  avail  him,  and 
his  parliamentary  character  had  been  lately 
damaged,  so  that  his  principal  dependence 
must  have  been  on  uie  influence  of  his 
frieLds  at  court  There,  in  addition  to  Luid 
Burleigh  and  his  son,  ne  had  enlisted  the 
Earl  of  Essex  in  his  cause. 

The  earl  became  his  most  strenuous  ad- 
vocate. His  letters  show  that  both  he  and 
the  lord  treasurer  were  zealous  pleaders  for 
him ;  for  the  queen  was  strongly  prejudiced 
against  him,  telling  them  that  none  but 
they  thought  him  lit  for  the  place.  It  is 
grievous  to  be  obliged  to  add  that  Bacon's 
letters  betray  an  underhand  endeavour  to 
impede  Coke*s  success  by  depreciating  his 
abilities,  and  nicknaming  him  the  'Huddler.' 
{Works,  xiii.  74,  75.)  History  may  be 
searched  in  vain  for  an  earlier  example  of 
such  degradingsolicitation  for  legal  honours, 
and  for  such  unworthy  attempts  to  decry 
a  rival ;  and  it  is  to  be  lamented  that  almost 
all  Bacon's  future  struggles  for  advance- 
ment were  sullied  by  the  same  unprincipled 
accompaniments.  Coke,  however,  could  not 
with  decency  be  passed  over.  He  received 
the  appointment  on  April  10,  1504 ;  and  in 
filling  up  the  office  of  solicitor-general, 
which  he  vacated,  a  longer  delay  inter* 
vencd,and  a  similar  disappointment  awaited 
Bacon. 

This  vacancy  lasted  from  April  10, 1504, 
to  November  6,  1505,  a  perioa  of  nineteen 
months.  Bacon  exerted  every  effort  to  get 
the  place,  in  letters  to  Lord  Burleigh  and 
his  son  ( Works,  xii.  3,  475,  xiii.  78,  85), 
to  Lord  Keeper  Puckering  (xiii.  51,  56), 
and  to  the  Earl  of  Essex,  to  whom  he  says 
in  one  of  them,  'The  objections  to  my 
competitors  your  lordship  knoweth  partly ; 
I  pray  spare  them  not,  not  over  the  queen, 
but  to  the  gp^at  ones,  to  show  your  con- 
fidence and  work  their  distrust.'  (xiii.  77, 
70,  82.)  Notwithstanding  the  intercessions 
of  the  earl  and  some  others  of  his  friends, 
and  his  own  netitions  and  new  yearns  gifto 
to  the  queen,  both  of  which  she  refused  to 
receive,  she  was  so  disgusted  by  his  per* 
tinacity  that  she  said  if  he  'continued  in 
this  manner  she  would  seek  all  England 
rather  than  take  him'  (xii.  100,  166, 
xiii.  73,  81,  83);  and  in  the  end  the 
office  was  given  to  Sir  Thomas  Fleming. 
Bacon  was  precluded  from  complaining  of 
this  appointment ;  for  in  a  letter  to  the  lord 
keeper,  writen  in  the  previous  July^  he  had 

id,  'If  her  majesty  settle  her  choice  upon 


sai( 


an  able  man,  such  a  one  as  Mr.  Serjeant 
Fleming,  I  will  make  no  means  to  alter  it.' 
(xiii.  56.) 

During  this  contest  the  degree  of  Master 
of  Arts  was  conferred  upon  him  by  the 
university  of  Cambridge,  on  July  27,  1504 ; 
and  at  the  end  of  it,  Essex,  attributing  to 
himself  Bacon's  want  of  success,  gave  him, 
as  some  compensation  for  his  disappoint* 


38 


BACON 


ment,  an  estate  at  Twickenbam,  which 
was  afterwards  sold  for  1,800/.  (vi.  249.) 
I^rd  Burleigh's  *  constant  and  serious  en- 
deavours to  have  him  solicitor'  he  prate- 
fully  acknowledges ;  but  in  the  same  letter 
complains  that  his  lordship  does  not  employ 
him  in  his  profession  in  any  services  of  his 
own.  (Workt,  idi.  1Q2.)  The  queen,  pro- 
bably through  Lord  Burleigh  s  interest, 
fiTe  Jiim,  in  July  1595, 60  acres  in  Zelwood 
orest,  and  in  I^ovember  she  snuited  him 
the  reversion  of  Twickenham  raik. 

In  May  1596  Egerton  was  made  lord 
keeper,  but  as  he  still  retained  the  mastei^ 
ship  of  the  Kolls,  no  vacancy  immediately 
occurred  in  that  office.  Bacon  applied 
urgently  and  unsuccessfully  for  it  {Lnxon, 
88^) ;  and  Coke  and  Fleming  probably 
did  not  aspire  to  it,  as  they  were  common 
lawyers.  They  remained  in  their  respec- 
tive* posts  during  the  rest  of  the  reign,  so 
that  there  was  no  opportunity  for  any 
further  intrigue ;  and  Bacon  was  obliged  to 
content  himself  with  receiving  occasional 
employment  in  the  service  of  the  queen. 

He  has  been  represented  as  the  lirst  who 
held  the  office  of  queen's  or  king's  counsel, 
distinct  from  the  usual  law  officers;  but 
that  he  had  any  special  warrant  for  that 
purpose  from  Queen  Elizabeth  there  is  no 
eviaence  whatever  from  any  existing  record. 
Montagu  and  Macaulay  say  that  he  was  so 
appointed  in  1590 ;  but  the  preceding  facts 
sufficiently  prove  that  it  could  not  have 
been  so  early;  and  the  precise  time  at  which 
he  began  to  be  engaged  in  the  queen's  causes 
still  remains  in  doubt.  From  his  corre- 
spondence it  seems  probable  that  he  was  first 
employed  shortly  after  Coke  became  at- 
torney-general, in  April  1594,  during  the 
vacancy  in  the  office  of  solicitor.  There  is 
a  mysterious  expression  in  a  letter  to  the 
queen,  dated  July  20,  1594,  which  may 
probably  refer  to  the  royal  promise  so  to 
use  him — 'a  gracious  vail,  it  pleased  your 
majesty  to  cive  me.'  (WorkSf  xiii.  81.) 
The  undated  letter  to  Lord  Burleigh,  al- 
ready mentioned,  apparently  written  about 
this  time,  seems  also  to  allude  to  it.  Bacon 
says  in  it  that  it  is  an  exceeding  comfort 
and  encouragement  to  him,  *  putting  him- 
self in  the  way  of  her  majesty's  Aervice,' 
and 'seeing  it  had  pleased  her  majesty.  .  .  . 
to  vouchsafe  to  appropriate  me  unto  her 
ser\'ice.'  While  engaged  in  his  application 
for  the  solicitorship,  he  writes  to  Foulk 
Grevil,  'Her  majesty  had  by  set  speech 
more  than  once  assured  me  of  her  intention 
to  call  me  to  her  service;  which  I  could 
not  understand  but  of  the  place  I  had  been 
named  to.'  The  <^ueen,  however,  evidently 
had  no  such  meaning ;  and  it  soon  appears 
that  she  merely  intended  him  to  hold  some 
of  her  briefs;  for  Baocm  tells  his  brother 
Anthony,  Januaiy  25,  1594-5,  that  the 
queen,  complaining  of  his  pertinacity,  says 


BACON 

'  she  never  deals  so  with  any  as  with  me, 
she  hath  pulled  me  over  the  har,  she  hath  used 
me  in  her  greatest  causes.'  Yet  any  such 
regular  employment  does  not  seem  to  be 
consistent  with*  his  absenting  himself  during 
that  term,  as  he  tells  Lord  Burleigh  he  did, 
in  a  letter  dated  in  the  following  March, 
in  the  latter  part  of  which  he  adds,  '  This 
last  request  Ifind  it  more  necessary  for  me 
to  make,  because  (though  1  am  glad  of  her 
majesty's  favour,  that  I  may  with  more 
ease  practise  the  law,  which,  percase,  I 
may  use  now  and  then  for  my  countenance) ; 
yet,  to  speak  plainly,  though  perhaps  vainly, 
I  do  not  thint  that  the  o^inary  practice  of 
the  law,  not  serving  the  queen  in  place, 
will  be  admitted  for  a  good  account  of  the 
poor  talent  that  God  hath  given  me.' 
(  Works,  xii.  160,  475,  xiii.  83.)  There  is 
also  a  letter  from  Lord  Burleigh  to  Sir 
Robert  Cecil,  dated  February  14,  1594-6, 
which  plainly  proves  that  Bacon  was  not  then 
recognised  as  a  queen's  counsel.  His  lord- 
ship is  advising  nis  son  as  to  some  rents  to 
be  resened  on  the  nomination  of  the  new 
Bishops  of  Winchester  and  Durham,  about 
which  he  had  spoken  to  the  attorney- 
general  (Coke),  who,  he  says,  complained  of 
the  want  of  other  counsellors, '  seeing  ther 
is  but  one  sargeant  and  no  soUicitor ;  al- 
ledging  that  ther  ar  many  weighty  causes 
of  uer  majesty  to  be  ordered.'  (Peck*8 
DestiL  Cur,  b.  v.  6.)  Thus  it  is  clear  that 
the  queen  had  not  then  bestowed  on  him 
any  distinct  appointment ;  and  that  the  oc- 
casional employment  he  had  for  the  govern- 
ment was  not  of  such  importance  as  to  render 
his  absence  inconvenient. 

Bacon  was  engaged  in  some  crown  causes 
during  the  vacancy  of  the  solicitorship ;  but 
whether  as  having  the  independent  manage- 
ment of  them,  or,  as  junior  barristers  are 
now  employed,  in  assistance  of  the  attorney- 
general,  it  \b  difficult  to  say.  That  he  was 
desirous  of  producing  the  former  impression 
is  evident  from  two  letters  to  Lord  Keeper 
Puckering  in  1594  and  1595,  during  the 
vacancy,  in  which  he  uses  it  for  the  purpose 
of  being  urged  in  furtherance  of  his  suit. 
Both  of  them,  curiously  enough,  are  dated 
the  same  day  in  each  year,  September  25. 
In  the  first,  he  says,  ^I  was  minded  accord- 
ing to  the  place  of  employment,  though  not 
or  office f  wherein  1  serve,  for  my  better 
direction,  and  the  advancement  of  the  ser- 
vice, to  have  acquainted  your  lordship,  now 
before  the  term,  with  such  of  her  majesty's 
causes  as  are  in  my  hands;  which  cause 
...  I  find  .  .  .  your  lordship  of  your  favour 
'<  is  willing  to  use  for  my  good,  upon  that 
'  satisfaction  you  may  find  in  my  travels.'  In 
the  second  ne  says,  *  I  hope  your  lordship 
will  not  be  the  less  sparing  in  using  the  ar* 
^ment  of  my  being  studied  and  prepand 
in  the  queen's  causes.'  ( TForfci ,  xiiu  68^ 
58.)    From  a  letter  of  his  to  King  Jameiy 


BACON 

oertainly  written  between  July  1606  and 
June  1607y  his  own  opinion  as  to  the  time 
when  he  was  rejarularJy  employed  may  be 
collected ;  for  in  it  he  urges  iiis  *  nine  years* 
service  of  the  crown/  which  would  not 
make  it  earlier  than  1597.     (xii.  107.) 

Whatever  was  the  date,  it  is  clear  he  was 
not  a  sworn  adviser,  nor  had  any  patent 
cooferring  upon  him  the  office  of  queen's 
counsel.  That  he  was  not  so  considered 
when,  at  the  end  of  the  reign,  the  names  of 
all  the  existing  officers  were  sent  to  King 
James  for  re-appointment,  is  manifest  from 
the  omission  of  his.  His  activity  and  the 
interest  of  his  friends,  however,  soon  got 
this  omission  remedied,  by  procuring  the 
introdaction  of  his  name  in  a  warrant  on  a 
toially  different  subject,  dated  April  21, 
1003,  thus:  * Wherefas]  we  haveperceaved, 
by  a  lettre  from  our  councell  at  Whitehall, 
that  Francis  Bacon,  Esq.,  was  one  of  the 
learned  counsell  to  the  late  queen,  our  sister, 
by  speciall  commandment,  and  that  in  the 
warrant  granted  by  us  to  them  for  the  con- 
tinewance  of  their  places,  he  is  not  named, 
we  have  thought  good  to  allow  him  in  such 
sort  as  she  did.*  {Egerton  Papers,  367.)  He 
held  this  equivocal  position  for  the  sixteen 
following  months,  for  it  was  not  till  August 
2*5, 1604,  that  he  obtained  a  patent  formally 
appointing  him  'consiliarium  nostrum  ad 
legem,  sive  unum  de  consilio  nostro  erudito 
10  lege/  with  such  precedence  as  any  other 
learned  counsel,  or  as  he  had  '  ratione  verhi 
rtgii  Elizabeths,  vel  ratione  warranti  nos> 
tri ; '  and  panting  a  fee  of  40/.  a  year. 
{ RymeTf  xvi.  596.)  He  himself  confirms  this 
view  of  his  position  by  stating  in  one  of  his 
letters  to  Kmg  James, '  You  formed  me  of 
the  learned  council  extraordinaiy,  without 
warrant  or  fee,  a  kind  of  indimduum  vagum. 
You  established  me  and  brought  me  into 
ordinary;  soon  after  you  placed  me  so- 
licitor.'    (  Wwks,  xii.  402.) 

This  discussion  is  of  more  importance 
than  it  at  first  appears,  because  the  judg- 
ment to  be  formed  of  Bacon's  conduct  in 
pleading  against  the  Earl  of  Essex  before 
the  council,  and  on  his  trial  in  February 
IGOl,  maiioly  depends  on  the  question 
whether  the  nature  of  his  employment  did 
or  did  not  impose  upon  him  the  necessity 
Uf  such  appearance.  So  general  was  the 
disapprobation  it  caused  that  he  wrote  two 
letters  in  defence  of  himself  to  Sir  Kobert 
Cecil  and  Lord  Henry  Howard  (nearly 
copies  of  each  other) ;  and  so  long  did  the 
f^igma  attach  to  him  that  he  found  it  ne- 
ce^^ary,  nearly  three  years  afterwards,  to 
address  an  elaborate  apology  for  his  conduct 
to  the  Earl  of  Devonsnire,  Lord  Lieutenant 
of  Ireland.  (Works,  xii.  168,  171,  245.) 
His  justification  is  but  a  lame  one,  and  can 
have  satisfied  few ;  and  in  pleading  the  ne- 
cetMity  ot  his  place  as  one  of  the  queen's 
counsel,  be  forgets  that,  if  his  duty  was 


BACON 


30 


absolute  and  compulsory,  his  position  must 
have  been  so  notorious  that  olame  would 
not  have  been  imputed,  nor  exculpation 
needed. 

He  was  on  the  closest  terms  of  friendship 
with  Essex;   the  earl  had  been  his  most 
energetic  advocate  in  his  aspirations  to  the 
offices  of  attorney  and  solicitor  general,  and 
had  even  made  his  success  a  personal  matter 
with  the  queen ;  and  when  Bacon  had  been 
disappointed    of   both    the  places,   Essex 
generously  presented  him  with  an  estate 
worth  1,800/.     All  this  Bacon  is  forced 
to  acknowledge,  but  with  respect  to  the 
latter  he  asserts,  in  his  apology,  that  he 
said  to  the  earl,  'My  lord,  I  see  that  I 
must  be  your  homager,  and  hold  land  of 
your  gift ;'  but  do  vou  know  the  manner  of 
cloing  homage  in  law  ?    Always  it  is  with 
a  saving  of  his  faith  to  the  king  and  his 
other  lords ;  and,  therefore,  my  lord,  I  can 
be  no  more  yours  than  I  was,  and  it  must 
be  with  the  antient  savings ;  and  if  I  grow 
to  be  a  rich  man,  you  will  give  me  leave  to 
give  it  back  again  to  some  of  your  unre- 
warded followers.*  The  reliance  thai  is  to  be 
placed  on  this  minute  report  of  a  conver- 
sation occurring  eight  years  previously  may 
be  estimated  by  the  fact,  mentioned  in  the 
same  letter,  that,  notwithstanding  this  flou- 
rish about  giving  back  the  estate,  ne  had  al- 
ready sold  it  for  1,800/.  In  such  intimate  re- 
lations as  existed  between  the  enrl  and  him, 
both  gratitude  and  common  decency  ought 
to  have  prevented  him  from  taking  any 
active  part  in  the  prosecution,  unless  ab- 
solute necessity  compelled  him.    If  there 
was  no  such  necessity,  some  strong  per- 
sonal object   must    have    prompted    him 
'  officiously  to  intrude  himself   into    the 
business.'    To  prove  a  necessity,  it  would 
be  incumbent  on  him  to  show  that  there 
was  a  deficiency  of  the  queen's  ordinary 
leu:al  counsel ;  but,  besides  the  attorney  and 
solicitor  general  and  Serjeant  Yelverton, 
all  of  whom  assisted  at  the  trial,  there  were 
two  other  queen's  Serjeants,  Daniell  and 
Drew,  whose  services  would  have  fallen 
within  the  regular  course  of  their  duties. 
Even  if  additional  aid  was  required,  there 
was  the  whole  bar  to  choose  from,  and  the 
name  of  *  Nicholas  Kempe,   counsellor  at 
law,'  is  actually  recorded  as  taking  some  of 
the  examinations.     (  Works,  vi.  878,  380.) 
As  to  Bacon's  services  being  indispensable, 
he,  according  to  his  own  showing,  held  no 
office,  but  a  new  and  extraordinary  appoint- 
ment; and  it  is  a  curious  fact,  that  in  a 
memorandum  for  the  order  of  the  arraign- 
ment, in  Coke's  handwriting,  preserved  in 
the  State  Paper  Office,  Bacons  name  was 
not  proposed  m  the  list  of  counsel  to  be  re- 
tained.   There  is,  however,  a  note  from  the 
lords  of  the  council,  written  the  day  be- 
fore the  trial,  addressed  to  *  Mr.  Francis 
Bacon,    one    of    her    majesty's    counsel 


40 


BACON 


learned.'  (Jardme'$  Crim.  Trials^  i.  385.) 
The  non-introduction  of  his  name  in  Coke's 
memorandum  is  a  strong  proof  that  his 
appearance  was  not  a  necessary  part  of  his 
duty.  No  precedent  could  be  urged  against 
his  refusal,  if  he  had  been  earnest  in  his  re- 
sistance ;  and  if  his  aid  was  demanded  by 
the  council,  with  the  knowledge  of  his 
connection  with  the  earl,  he  ought  to  have 
felt  that  they  sought  rather  to  degrade 
than  to  advance  or  honour  him.  The  truth, 
however,  peeps  out,  even  in  the  apology 
itself,  in  his  avowal  that  one  of  his  objects 
was  'to  uphold  himself  in  credit  and 
strength  with  the  queen ;'  and  in  another 
place,  that  as  'she  was  constant  in  her 
favours,  and  made  an  end  where  she  began,' 
he  was  resolved  to  endure  his  condition  '  in 
expectation  of  better.'  The  queen  was 
offended  at  his  friendship  for  Essex,  which, 
he  says,  he  'saw  would  overthrow'  him ; 
and  consequently  he  pursued  a  course  by 
which  he  incurred  the  contempt  of  the 
world,  without  producing,  as  the  event 

E roved,  any  advantage  for  himself.  Had 
e  acted  a  more  honourable  part,  he  would 
have  obtained  the  credit,  witnout  incurring 
the  danger,  of  Sir  Henrv  Yelverton,  who 
refused  to  plead  agiainst  ^is  patron  Somer- 
set, and  Sir  John  Walter,  who  indignantly 
rejected  a  brief  against  Sir  Edward  Coke. 

This  disposition  to  undertake  anything 
with  a  view  to  his  own  advantage  is  still 
more  manifest  in  the  *  Declaration  of  the 
Treasons  of  the  Earl  of  Essex,'  published 
by  him  soon  after  the  trial.  ( Works,  vi. 
299.)  Though  he  says  that  he  wrote  it  at 
the  <jueen*s  command,  '  her  majesty  taking 
a  likmg  to  my  pen,'  it  is  impossible  to  be- 
lieve that  he  might  not  have  avoided  the 
task.  In  it  he  vili6es  and  blackens  the 
earl's  character  to  such  an  extent  that  it  is 
surprising  he  should  so  long  have  associated 
witn  him  without  discovering  or  suspecting 
his  criminal  intentions ;  and  it  is  curious  to 
observe  that  in  the  'Apology,'  after  the 
queen  was  dead,  and  wlien  the  enemies  of 
tne  earl  were  in  rather  doubtful  odour,  all 
the  criminal  imputations  against  him  are 
softened  down  to  '  his  misfortune,'  and  the 
designation  of  traitor  converted  into  '  the 
unfortunate  earl.' 

Another  remarkable  circumstance  con- 
nected with  this  conspiracy  requires  ex- 
planation. Catesby,  afterwards  Known  as 
a  principal  in  the  Gunpowder  Plot,  was 
also  implicated  in  this,  but  succeeded  in 
obtaining  his  pardon  by  the  payment  of  a 
fine  of  4,000iL  to  the  queen.  J3y  a  letter 
from  the  council  to  Mr.  AttomeynGeneral 
Coke,  the  queen's  orders  were  conveyed  to 
him  to  divide  the  aaid  fine  money  among 
'Mr.  FiBOcis  Bacon,  Sir  Arthur  Gorges, 
and  Captain  Carpenter;'  and  the  ahare 
appropriated  to  Atcan  was  1,200^  The 
date  of  this  warrant  ia  August  6, 1601,  and 


BACON 

\  it  is  signed  by  eight  privy  councillors^ 
(Cotmc,  Beg,  xvii.  336.^  Whatever  may 
have  been  the  motive  with  the  royal  donor 
inducing  this  extraordinary  g^,  it  is 
difficult,  under  all  the  attendant  circum- 
stances, to  draw  an  inference  favourable  to 
the  courtly  recipient. 

To  return.  Withia  ten  days  after  the 
appointment  of  Sir  Thomas  Eperton,  Essex 
wrote  to  him  to  have  a  care  of  Bacon  dur- 
ing his  absence  in  Spain.  (  JTorAa,  xii.  91.) 
i  The  new  lord  keeper  had  always  been 
friendly  to  him,  and  when  he  was  a  can- 
didate for  the  solieitorship  had  supplied 
him  with  observations  for  the  exercise  of 
the  ofiice.  (Egertan's  Lifcy  10.5.)  Bacon's 
crown  business  no  doubt  would,  with  such 
patronage,  be  materially  increased,  and  his 
personal  access  to  the  queen  become  more 
frequent.  Her  majesty  even  oc«isionally 
honoured  him  with  her  presence  at  his  house 
in  Twickenham  Park. 

This  advance  in  favour  had  the  natural 
effect  of  making  him  think  more  highly  of 
his  position  than  the  actual  nature  of  his 
employment  warranted.  That  he  was  in- 
clined to  encroach  beyond  his  province  is 
apparently  from  the  scene  that  occurred  in 
the  Court  of  Exchequer  about  1601,  when, 
Bacon  having  moved  for  the  reseizure  of 
certain  lands,  Coke,  probably  deeming  it 
an  interference  with  nis  duties,  'kindled 
at  it,'  and  insulting  and  scornful  words 
passed  between  them.  Among  the  rest, 
Coke  bade  him  'not  meddle  with  the 
;queen's  business,'  and  said  he  'was  un- 
sworn.'    ( Worksy  vii.  838.) 

He  had  in  1578  been  an  unsuccessful 
rival  of  Coke  for  the  favours  of  Liadv 
Hatton ;  and  the  Earl  of  Eseex,  with  hu 
wonted  zeal,  had  been  his  advocate  with 
both  her  parents.  His  disappointment  in 
not  obtaining  the  lady,  whose  violent  temper 
had  not  yet  been  displayed,  no  doubt  in- 
creased the  feeling  of  jealousy  and  dislike 
which  he  already  indulged  against  Coke, 
and  which  did  not  diminish  as  years  rolled 
on. 

Whatever  reputation  Bacon  may  have 
acquired  among  his  friends  and  associates 
by  his  private  studies,  he  was  not  yet 
known  to  the  public  in  his  literary 
character;  nor  was  it  till  the  year  1598 
that  he  made  his  first  appearance  as  an 
author.  In  it  he  published  his  'Essays,' 
which,  as  it  was  the  first,  so  it  was,  and 
still  remains,  the  most  popular  of  his  works. 

NotwithslAnding  all  the  professed  advan- 
tages he  enjoyed  from  his  legal  engage- 
ments, they  did  not  keep  him  free  from 
pecuniary  pressure.  His  mother  rebuked 
nim  for  ais  extravagance  in  1592  in  aettinff 
up  a  coach,  and  in  1594  for  keepingauper- 
fluoua  horses.  {Dixon^  31,  58.)  His  in- 
volvementB  at  length  became  so  great,  and 
his  credit  so  snuQli  that  he  was  taken  in 


V 


BACON 

execution  nnd  detained  in  a  house  in  Cole- 
man Street,  in  September  1508.     He  wrote 
to  Lord  Keeper  Egerton,  complaining  that  it 
iras  a  breach  of  privilege,  as  ne  was  coming 
from  the  Tower  in  '  a  senice  of  no  mean 
importance  *  for  the  queen.     The  result  of 
hia  complaint  is  not  stated ;  but  his  letters 
to  Mr.  >uchael  Hickes  and  Lord  Cecil  show 
that  his  difficulties  were  still  existing  at 
least  as  late  as  1603.     {WorkSj  xii.  1>75, 
278,  478,  479. ) 

In  the  last  two  parliaments  of  Elizabeth 
in  1*597  and  1(501,  he  was  a  frequent  speaker 
in  support  of  the  queen^s  measures ;  and  in 
the  interim  he  had  been  rewarded,  in  15i>8, 
with  the  rectory  of  Cheltenham  and  the 
chapeliy  of  Charlton-Kings. 

No  sooner  was  Queen  Elizabeth's  death 
announced  than  Bacon,  instead  of  waiting 
with  a  decent  and  dignified  patience  for  the 
kins-'s  arrival  in  London,  exerted  all  his  in- 
fluence among  persons  hi^h  and  low  to  get 
himself  favourably  mentioned  to  the  new 
monarch.       To  Mr.  Davis  he  writes,   '1 
commend  mjself  to  jour  love  and  the  well- 
using  my  name,  as  well  in  repressing  and 
answering  for  me,  if  there  be  any  biting  and 
nibbling  at  it  in  that  place,  as  by  imprinting 
a  good  conceit  and  opinion  of  me,  chiefly  in 
the  king,  as  otherwise  in  that  court'    To 
Mr.  Foules  he  writes  two  letters,  'to  further 
my  being  known  by  good  note  unto  the 
king.*     Dr.  Morison,  Sir  Thomas  Challenor, 
and  Lord  Kinloss  were  addressed  in  the 
Mune  degrading  style;  and  the   Earl    of 
Northumberland  (to  whom  he  volunteered  a 
proi?lamation  on  the  king's  entry),  the  Earl 
of  Northampton,   and    even    the  Earl  of 
Southampton,  were  reminded  of  his  services. 
(  Works,  lii.  20,  101, 113,  114,  xiiL  24, 29, 
48,  Oa,  102,   115.)     It  must  have  been  a 
severe  mortification  to  him  to  find  that  he 
had  not  been  even  named  among  the  queen*s 
servants  to  be  re-appointed ;  but  the  efibrts 
of  his  friends  were,  as  already  stated,  suc- 
cessful in  obtaining  the  warrant  issued  a 
month  afterwards,  allowing  him  as  one  of 
the  learned  counsel  '  in  such  sort '  as  Queen 
Elizabeth  did. 

That  at  first  he  was  not  much  encouraged, 

notwithstanding  a  most  fulsome  letter  to 

the  king  (  Works,  xiii.  99),  may  be  judged 

from  a  letter  in  July  to  Cecil,  who  was  now 

raised  to  ihfi  peerage,  wherein  he  says, '  I 

de«ire  to  meddle  as  little  as  I  can  in  the 

king's  causes,  his  majesty  now  abounding 

in  council ;' '  my  ambition  now  I  shall  only 

pot  upon  my  pen,  whereby  I  shall  be  able 

to  mMntwin  mcmory  and  merit  of  the  times 

eocceeding.'     He,  however,  accepted  the 

'prostituted  title  of  knighthood,'  as  he  calls 

i^  with  three  hundred  others,  at  the  coro- 

lafion  on  July  23,  100.%  and  assigns  as 

RwxH  for  doing  so,  '  because  of  his  late 

^Kgraoe'  (probably  another  arrest);  'and 

Wonae  I  have  three  new  knights  in  my 


BACON 


41 


mess  at  Gray's  Inn  commons ;  and  because  I 
have  found  out  an  alderman*s  daughter,  a 
handsome  maid  to  my  liking.'  ( Works,  xii. 
276,  270.)  This  maid  was  Alice,  one  of 
the  daughters  and  co-heirs  of  Benedict 
Bamham,  an  alderman  of  London,  whose 
widow  had  married  Sir  John  Pakington,  of 
Hampton  Lovet,  Worcestershire.  Bacon's 
mamago  with  Alice,  however,  did  not  take 
place  till  three  years  after,  in  May  1006, when 
It  is  stated  that  the  stores  of  fine  raiment 
drew  deep  into  her  portion.  ( ('aL  St,  Papers 
\\m^\  ;n7.)  The  alderman  had  left  a 
large  fortune,  the  lady*s  share  in  which 
much  increased  Bacon's  means. 

Bacon  penned  another  voluntary  procla- 
mation touching  the  king's  style,  which  had 
the  same  fate  as  the  former;  and  in  the 
session  of  parliament  in  that  and  the  fol- 
lowing year,  being  member  for  lpf»wich,  he 
made  himself  us(>f ally  prominent,  delivering, 
however,  a  speech  to  the  king  himself,  ful- 
somely  flattering  ( Works,  vi.  .%  vii.  170), 
and  another  with  reference  to  him  still  more 
so.     (/V^  i//x<.  i.  1014.) 

The  only  fact  which  is  recorded  of  him 
in  the  second  year  of  James's  reign  is  his 
redeeming  a  jewel  on  August  21,  on  the 
security  oif  which  Lord  Ellesmere  had  lent 
him  56L  (Egerton  Papers,  *%)5.)  Four  days 
afterwards  he  received  the  patent  already 
mentioned,  appointing  him  king's  counsel, 
with  a  salary  of  40/.  per  annum ;  and  on  the 
same  day  he  had  a  grant  in  addition  of  a 
pension  of  00/.  for  services  performed  by  his 
deceased  brother  Anthony  and  himself. 
{Hf/mer,  xvi.  507.) 

lie  was  not  employed  in  the  trial  of  Sir 
Walter  Raleigh,  in  November  lOOS,  though, 
besides  the  attorney-general,  Serj*'antsIlealo 
and  I'hillips  were ;  nor  in  any  of  the  crown 
prosecutions  before  he  wa^  made  solicitor- 
general,  the  queen's  serjeant  being  the  only 
assistant  to  the  attorney-general.  From 
these  omissions  of  his  services  some  judg- 
ment may  be  formed  as  to  the  necessity  of 
his  appearing  against  the  Earl  of  E^x, 
the  remembrance  of  which  was  probably 
the  cause  of  his  being  now  so  much  in  the 
shade.  He  occupied  the  interval  in  the 
composition  of  works,  some  addres.?ed  to  the 
king  himself,  and  others  evidently  intended 
for  the  king's  eye,  which,  however  excellent 
in  their  matter,  contained  more  of  flattery 
than  became  a  great  philosopher.  Suck 
were  his  letter  to  Lord  Ellesmere,  suggest- 
ing a  History  of  England,  and  his  letter  to 
Kmg  James,*  *  On  the  True  Greatness  of  the 
Kingdom  of  Britain.'  To  these  may  be  added 
his  tract  on  the  union  of  the  two  Kingdoms, 
and  his  speech  on  the  subject.  (  Works,  v. 
16,  47,  311,  xii.  69.)  Ilis  leisure  was  not 
wholly  devoted  to  politics,  for  he  published 
his  *  Advancement  of  Learning '  in  1005. 

In  spite  of  his  endeavours  to  force  him- 
self forward.  Bacon  did  not  obtain  the  object 


42 


BACON 


of  his  ambition  till  he  had  sufiered  two,  or 
indeed  three,  more  disappointments.  He 
■was  i^assed  over  in  October  1604,  when 
Fleming  was  appointed  chief  baron,  Sir  John 
Doderidge  being  made  solicitor-general. 
The  death  of  Sir  Edmund  Anderson,  in 
August  1005,  created  another  vacancy;  but, 
instead  of  Coke,  Sir  Thomas  Gawdy  was 
selected  to  supply  it  On  the  elevation  of 
Coke  to  the  chief  justiceship,  in  June  1606, 
Bacon  was  again  set  aside,  Sir  Henry  Hobart 
being  called  upon  to  fill  Coke*8  place,  and 
Doderidge  remaining  solicitor-general.  In  a 
letter  to  Mr.  Matthew,  at  the  coming  in  of 
the  king,  he  comforts  himself  that  'the 
canvassing  world  is  ^one,  and  the  deserving 
world  is  come.*  (xii.  230.)  But  he  soon 
altered  his  opinion,  for  on  this  last  occasion 
he  renewed  his  application  to  Cecil  (now 
Earl  of  Salisbury),  somewhat  depreciating 
the  place,  but  professing  to  desire  it  chiefly 
to  increase  his  practice.  (14, 68.)  An  ex- 
pedient was  suggested  by  which  Doderidge 
should  vacate  the  solicitorship  on  being 
made  king's  Serjeant.  This  plan  he  pressed 
in  letters  to  the  king,  recapitulating  all  his 
deserts,  parliamentary  and  hterary ;  and  also 
to  the  lord  chancellor,  (xii.  94,  105.) 
Chief  Justice  Po^am  died  in  the  following 
year,  and  Chief  Baron  Fleming  was  put  in 
nis  place ;  and  instead  of  either  the  attorney 
or  solicitor  general  succeeding,  Judse  Tan- 
Held  was  placed  at  the  hei^  of  the  Ex- 
chequer. The  opportunity  was,  however, 
taken  to  eifect  the  plan  of  making  Dode- 
ridge king^s  Serjeant;  and  Bacon,  after 
fourteen  years'  expectance,  obtained  at  last 
his  desire  of  entenng  the  king's  service  by 
being  created  solicitor- general  on  June  2o, 
1607.  His  prosperous  star  was  then  in  the 
ascendant,  for  in  the  next  year  his  reversion 
in  the  Star  Chamber  fell  in. 

One  of  the  first  fruits  of  his  leisure  in 
his  new  office  was  *  Certain  Considerations 
touching  the  Plantations  in  Ireland,'  which 
he  presented  to  the  king  as  a  new  year's 
offering,  (v.  169,  xii.  73.)  He  was  em- 
ployed also  in  preparing  his  great  work 
^  Instauratio  Magna,  and  in  1609  he  pub- 
lished '  Be  Sapientia  Veterum,*  a  collection 
of  fables  of  the  ancients  moralised. 

In  1611  he  was  appointed  joint-judge  of 
the  Knight-Marshal's  Court.  His  cousin, 
the  Earl  of  Salisbury,  died  on  May  24, 
1612 ;  and  within  a  week  Bacon  wrote  to 
the  king,  disparaging  his  abilities,  saying 
'  that  he  was  a  fit  man  to  keep  things  from 
growing  worse,  but  no  very  tit  man  to  re- 
duce things  to  be  much  better ; '  and  *  that 
he  was  more  tVi  operatione  than  in  opereJ 
Comparing  this  with  his  letters  to  the  earl 
himself,  full  of  professions  of  gratitude  and 
admiration,  either  they  must  be  taken  as 
mere  flattery,  or  this  must  be  regarded  as 
false  and  ungratefuL  In  this  and  other 
letters  to  the  king,  depredating  the  earl's 


BACON 

powers,  he  recommends  his  own  Mittle 
skill '  in  the  House  of  Commons,  where  he 
'was  never  one  hour  out  of  credit,'  and 
asks  '  leave  to  meditate  and  propound  some 
preparative  remembrances  touching  the  fu- 
ture parliament.'  (  Works,  xii.  281,  285.)  It 
was  not  till  after  the  earl's  death  that  he 
had  the  courage  to  publish  his  essay  'Of 
Deformity,'  in  which,  under  the  semblance 
of  a  general  description  of  the  mental  defects 
it  produces,  his  cousin  is  ungenerously  de- 
picted.    (Dixon,  165.) 

Bacon  held  the  office  of  solicitor-general 
rather  more  than  six  years,  during  which 
several  puisne  judgeships  were  tilled  up,  for 
which  it  does  not  appear  that  he  applied. 
He,  however,  was  not  idle.  On  a  vacancy 
in  the  mastership  of  the  Court  of  Wards 
and  Liveries  in  1612,  he  applied  to  the  Earl 
of  Rochester  for  the  post,  and  felt  so  certain 
of  success  that  he  ordered  new  clothes  for 
his  servants.  Sir  "Walter  Cope,  however, 
for  a  good  sum,  got  the  appointment.  The 
wags  laughed  and  said,  '  bir  Walter  has  got 
the  wards,  and  Sir  Francis  the  liveries.' 
(Dixon,  176.)  He  sent  one  of  his  petition- 
ary epistles  to  the  king,  begging  his  piromise 
of  the  '  attorney's  place  whenever  it  should 
be  void;'  and  another  when  the  attorney 
was  ill,  indecently  reminding  his  ihajesty 
of  his  promise.  (  Works,  xii.  97, 121.)  The 
attorney  recovered ;  but  upon  the  death 
of  Fleming,  the  chief  justice  of  the  King's 
Bench,  in  August  1618,  Bacon  lost  no  time 
in  urging  upon  the  king  that  no  one  but 
the  attorney  and  he  should  be  thought  of 
for  the  place,  and  that,  if  the  attorney 
should  refuse,  he  should  not  be  passed  over, 
intimating  that  the  kin^  woula  then  have 
'  a  chief  justice  which  is  sure  to  your  pre- 
rogative.'^ (286.)  But  before  the  vacancy 
was  supplied,  Bacon,  perhaps  fearing  that 
he  should  be  overlooked,  took  another 
course,  and  in  a  paper  presented  to  the  long 
pointed  out  '  reasons  why  it  should  be  ex- 
ceeding much  for  his  majest}' s  service  to 
remove  the  Lord  Coke  from  the  place  he 
now  holdeth  to  be  Chief  Justice  of  England, 
and  the  attorney  to  succeed  him,  and  the 
solicitor  the  attorney.'  (vii.  340.)  In  it 
his  ill-feeling  towards  Coke  again  snows  it- 
self. He  says,  '  It  will  stren^hen  the  king'a 
causes  greatly  amonffst  the  judges;  for  mj 
Lord  Coke  will  think  himself  near  a  privj 
counsellor's  place,  and  thereupon  become 
obsequious ; '  and,  '  the  remove  of  my  Lord 
Coke  to  a  place  of  less  profit,  though  it  be 
with  his  will,  ^et  will  be  thought  abroad  a 
kind  of  discipline  to  him  for  opposing  him- 
self to  the  king's  causes ;  the  example 
whereof  will  contain  others  in  more  awe.' 
After  this  shameless  encouragement  to  d»* 
stroy  the  independency  of  the  bench,  ho 

Sroceeds  in  one  breath  to  speak  in  terma  of 
isparagement  of  his  deceased  relative  and 
his  present  senior,  thus:  'The  attoniay- 


15Aro\  IJACON  43 

general  sortetb  noc  well  with  his  pnaent    in  the  course  of  them  ;  and  he  describes  his 
dUck,  being'  a  man  timid  and  scrupulous,  {  artful  manafremi>nt  in  obtaining  the  separate 
both  in  parliament  and  other  business,  and    opinions  of  tht' judges.     C*oke  for  some  time 
one  that  in  a  word  was  made  fit  for  the  j  resisted  the  '  auricular  takin;r  of  opinions 
tRLsurer  (Cecil  )*8  bent,  which  was  to  do    single  and  apart ;  *  but  eventually  was  forced 
little  witb  much  formality  and  protestation.*    to  submit  to  this  moi^t  unconstitutional  mode 
Not  forgetting  himself,  however,  he  takes    of  prejudging  the  case. 
(Aie  to  enhance  his  p^uliar  adaptation  to  I      Then  followed  the  trials  connected  with 
the  otfice,  adding,  *  Whereas  the  now  soli-  ;  Overbur}'*s  murder,  in  the  progress  of  which 
citor.  going  more  ronndlv  to  work,  and  beinff  I  the  letters  of  Bacon  show  his  desire  to  a^ist 
of  a  quicker  and  more  earnest  temper,  and    the  king  in  his  determination  to  convict, 
more  effectual  in  that  he  dealeth  in,  is  like  ',  and  afterwards  to  save,  the  principal  offen- 
to  recover  that  strength  to  the  king*s  pre-    ders.     (vi.  219-241.) 
rofrauve  which  it  had  in  times  past,  and  {      When  Sir  l!Alward  Coke  resisted  the  ju- 
vhich  is  due  imto  it.*     This  cunning  plan  *  risdiction  of  the  Court  of  Chancery,  though 
wu  adopted.    Coke^  two  months  after,  was    Bacon  made  to  the  king  a  fair  exposition  of 
removed  to  the  King*s  Bench ;  Hobart,  the    the  controversy,  he  could  not  refrain  from 
KTtomev-geoeral,   went    to    the    Common    aiming  a  blow  at  his  rival,  suggesting  that. 
Pleas;  and  Bacon  obtained,  at  last,  bis  step    *at  this  time^  he  should  not  be  disgraced, 
of  prominion,  being  made  attorney-general    though  '  this  great  and  public  alfrout  *  to 
on  October  !27,  1013.  the  chancellor, '  thought  to  be  dyin^,  which 

la  the  two  parliaments  called  by  James  was  barbarous,'  and  to  the  High  Court  uf 
in  the  first  fourteen  years  of  his  reign,  the  Chancery,  may  not,  he  says,  '  paw  lightly, 
i<De  sitting  from  1004  to  1010,  and  the  other  nor  end  only  in  some  tonnal  atonement' 
from  April  to  June  1614,  Bacon  was  of  His  total  disregard  for  the  indt^pendcnce  of 
euurse  an  active  member.  So  acceptable  the  bench  is  further  shown  in  this  letter ; 
had  he  made  himself  to  the  llouse,  and  so  for  he  proceeds  to  sny  that  ^  if  any  of  the 
highly  were  his  qualities  as  an  orator  ap-  puisne  judges  did  stir  this  business,  I  think 
preciated,  that  in  the  second  parliament,  that  judge  is  worthy  to  lose  his  place  :  1  do 
thuugh  it  was  alleged  that  no  attorney-  not  think  there  is  anything  a  greater  poly- 
general  had  ever  been  elected  a  member,  he  ckreston  ad  viulta  utile  to  your  alluirs  than 
was  allowed  to  sit ;  but  this  was  not  to  be  upon  a  just  and  lit  occasion  to  make  som^ 
a  precedent  for  the  future.  example  against  the  presumption  of  a  judge 

Among  the  first  cases  in  which  Bacon  in  cases  that  concern  your  mnjesty  ;  where- 
exercised  bis  ofiice  was  his  proceeding  by  the  whole  body  of  those  magistrates  may 
against  James  Whitelocke  (afterwards  the  btt  containeil  in  bettor  awe ; '  and  he  then 
judge)  for  giving  a  verbal  opinion,  or  per-  recommendH  4hat  the  judges  should  answer 
haps  for  arguing  as  a  barrister,  on  the  legal-  it  on  their  knees  before  your  majesty  and 
ity  of  a  commission  from  the  crown.  (St^iie  your  council,  and  reirei  ve  a  sharp  reprimand.' 
friaU,  ii.  7kji\,)  The  defendant  probably  =  (xii.  <%.)  In  the  case  of  the  (^mtmendams, 
owed  his  pardon  as  much  to  the  oungling  I  or  *  rtye  inconsulto,*  he  not  only  took  the 
efforts  of  liacon  to  justify  the  absurd  charge  part  of  the  king,  but  was  the  principal  in- 
as  to  the  submission  which  he  discreetly  :  stigator  in  calling  the  judges  to  account 
made.  The  attorney's  speech  in  the  follow-  j  before  the  privy  council  (vii.  307-^^38);  a 
ingyear  against  Oliver  St.  John,  for  writing  course  which  has  too  much  the  appearance 
k  letter  snowing  the  unlawfulness  of  be-  of  being  influenced  by  his  inveteracy  against 
nevnlences  (for  which  he  was  fined  5,000/.),  I  Coke,  especially  wlion  connected  with  a 
u  loaded  with  fiatter^'  to  the  king,  and  paper  he  drew  up,  enlarging  on  the  various 
futile  arguments  to  prove  that  a  benevo-  :  *  innovations  into  the  Taws '  which  Coke, 
knee  is  not  a  tax.  In  reference  to  the  '  as  he  alleged,  had  introduced,  (vii.  401.) 
sentence  on  St.  John,  he  adopted  the  un-  The  chancellor*s  illness  occurring  during 
Qftual  course  of  corresponding  with  the  king,  the  progress  of  these  proceedings,  IWon  set 
t  novel  practice  which  he  introduced,  and    himself  about  his  usual  practice  of  bt^gging 

letter 
e  n(tt 

The  charge  against  Peacham  was  founded  |  the  Seal,  but  deprt^ciates  those  who  might 
fih  certain  passages  contained  in  a  sermon  be  competitors  for  it ;  particularly  Coke,  of 
whiL-h  had  never  been  preached,  but  which  whom  he  says,  *  Your  majesty  shall  put  an 
bad  been  discovered  in  his  study.  The  king  overruling  nature  into  an  overruling  place, 
Vk>  mobt  desirous  of  proving  that  the  mere  ;  which  may  breed  an  extreme  :  next  you 
vriting  constituted  treason,  and  liacon  |  shall  blunt  his  industries  iu  matter  of  fi- 
int«re^ed  himself  too  much  to  procure  a  '  nances  which  seemeth  to  aim  at  another 
cooriction.  He  wrote  several  letters  to  the  ,  place :  and,  lastly,  popular  men  are  no  sure 
kinjr,  with  accounts  of  his  examinations  of  j  mounters  for  your  majesty's  saddle.'  (xii. 
the  prisoner,  to  whom  torture  was  applied    31.)     He   had   taken  care  to  secure  the 


44 


BACON 


afTectionfl,  or  at  least  the  interesty  of  Sir 
George  Villiers,  the  new  favourite,  by  a  loog 
paper  of  instructions  how  to  govern  him- 
self in  the  station  of  prime  minister  (vi. 
400),  containinj^  excellent  advice,  some 
points  of  which  it  would  have  been  better 
if  he  himself  had  practised.  One  he  evi- 
dently forgot : '  If  any  one  sue  to  be  a  judge, 
for  my  own  part,  I  should  suspect  him ; ' 
for  after  having  sent  a  paper  to  Mr.  Murray, 
of  the  king*8  bedchamber,  '  concerning  my 
honest  and  faithful  services  to  his  majesty,* 
he  applied  to  Villiers,  more  than  a  year 
before  the  chancellor  s  resignation,  to  get  it 
from  him  and  go  on  '  with  my  first  motion, 
my  swearing  privy  councillor,  not  so  much 
to  make  myself  more  sure  of  the  other,  and 
to  put  off  competition.'  Six  days  later  he 
again  urges  the  suit,  and  repeats  it  on  May 
^30;  and  when  in  the  following  June  the 
king  gave  him  the  choice  either  to  be  sworn 
privy  councillor,  or  to  have  the  assurance 
of  succeeding  Lord  Ellesmere,  he  wisely 
accepted  the  foimer  (xii.  143, 148, 149),  and 
accordingly  took  his  seat  at  the  board  on  the 
9th  of  that  month. 

In  the  nine  months  that  followed,  Bacon 
kept  up  a  constant  correspondence  with 
Villiers,  not  only  on  public  matters,  but 
with  reference  also  to  the  favourite's  private 
concerns, — the  peerage  which  was  conferred 
on  him  in  August,  and  the  grants  which 
were  made  to  him  to  support  his  title,  with 
the  cx)ntrivances  adopted  for  his  benefit. 
Even  in  these,  apparently  for  no  other  object 
than  that  of  flattering  Villiers,  he  speaks 
slightingly  of  '  the  Cecils,  father  and  son.' 
(xii.  69,  (50,  152,  237.)  During  this  time 
also  the  proceedings  took  place  which  ex- 
pelled Coke  from  his  seat  in  the  King*8 
liench,  in  which  Bacon,  so  far  from  attempt- 
ing to  moderate  the  king's  groundless  angfer, 
took  every  means  to  justify  and  inflame  it. 
The  minute  of  council,  and  the  *  remem- 
brances,' prepared  by  him,  are  evidently 
comnosed  in  this  spirit,  (vii.  307-338, 
349.)  Nor  did  he  snow  more  generosity 
towards  the  chief  justice,  in  reference  to  the 
absurd  direction  as  to  '  expurging  of  his 
Reports'  (xii.  304);  and  if  the  lon^  letter 
addressed  to  Coke,  as  soon  as  his  disgrace 
had  been  rendered  certain,  was,  as  it  has 
always  been  considered,  the  production  of 
Bacon,  it  exhibits  the  mean  spirit  of  tri- 
umphing over  a  fallen  adversary,  by  dwell- 
ing, under  the  pretence  of  friendly  admo- 
nition, on  all  his  faults  and  infirmities,  and 
painting  them  in  colours  which,  however 
true  to  the  life,  reflect  on  the  writer  the 
imputation  of  their  being  dictated  by 
cowardly  and  malicious  feelings,  (vii.  296.) 

Lord  Ellesmere's  last  days  were  ap- 
proaching. During  the  two  previous  years 
ne  had  petitioned  to  be  relieved  from  his 
office,  bat  could  not  prevaU  on  the  king  till 
March  3, 1616-17.    Four  days  afterwards 


BACON 

Bacon  attidned  the  object  of  his  late  endea- 
vours, by  receiving  the  Great  Seal  from  the 
king's  hand,  with  the  title  of  lord  keeper. 
(Claus,  16  Jac.  p.  15,  n.  13.)  In  another 
week  Lord  Ellesmere  died;  and  pn  May  7 
Bacon  took  his  seat  in  the  Court  of  Chan<« 
eery,  delivering  a  long  speech,  stating  his 
resolutions  as  to  the  practice.  Even  in  this 
speech  he  could  not  refrain  from  giving  a 
sty  and  contemptuous  blow  at  Sir  Edward 
Coke,  by  saying,  in  allusion  to  complaints 
against  judgments  at  law,  <  wherein  your 
lordships  may  have  heard  a  great  rattle 
and  a  noiae  of  praemunire,  and  I  cannot  tell 
what'  (  Works,  vii.  243.)  He  first  removed 
from  Grav's  Inn  to  Dorset  House  in  Fleet 
Street,  and  soon  afterwards  to  York  House 
in  the  Strand,  where  he  was  bom. 

On  receiving  the  Seal  he  immediately 
wrote  to  Villiers  (now  created  Earl  of 
Buckingham),  in  strong  terms  of  gratitude, 
stating  that  ne  '  shall  count  every  day  lost ' 
wherem  he  shall  not '  do  your  name  honour 
in  speech,  or  perform  you  service  in  deed.* 
(xii.  241.)  The  earl  made  good  use  of  this 
promise,  by  writing  numerous  letters  to 
Bacon  in  favour  of  suitors ;  and  the  succest 
of  his  influence  maj  be  judged  .by  the  fre- 
quency of  the  applications.  (PoMtm,  from 
314  to  411.)  Herein  both  the  earl  and  the 
lord  keeper  forgot  the  advice  formerly  given 
by  the  one  to  the  other: — '  By  no  means  be 
you  persuaded  to  interpose  yourself,  either 
by  word  or  letter,  in  any  cause  depending 
in  any  court  of  juatice.'     (vi.  413.) 

Within  four  months,  however,  his  in- 
veteracy against  Coke,  and  his  fear  lest  hii 
old  enemy  should  again  triumph,  induced 
him  to  interfere  in  a  matter  which  the  eail 
was  likely  to  resent.  He  wrote  letters  to 
the  king  and  the  earl  (then  both  in  Soot- 
land),  advising  against  the  projected  mar- 
riage between  the  earl's  brother.  Sir  Joha 
Villiers,  and  Coke's  daughter  by  Lady 
Hatton,  and  representing  the  inconvenience 
to  the  state  *  it  there  be  but  an  opinion  of  . 
his  (Coke's)  coming  in.'  (xii.  245.^  From 
the  former  he  received  a  severe  letter  of 
rebuke ;  when  he  not  onl^r  made  an  abject 
submission,  but  reversed  his  policy  by  fiuv 
thering  the  match,  and  altering  his  canriagv 
toward  Sir  Edward  Coke.  (260,  324^ 
327.)  Buckingham  was  not  so  easily  ap* 
peased,  but '  professed  openly  against '  him, 
as  reported  m  a  letter  from  l^r  Heniy 
Yelverton,  who  gave  him  some  sound 
advice  how  he  should  act.  The  earl  waa, 
however,  soon  afterwards  apparently  re- 
conciled (331,  342) ;  and  not  only  was  the 
correspondence  between  them  resumed,  but 
Bacon  was  so  entirely  restored  to  the  king's 
favour  that  he  received  the  title  of  lud 
chancellor  on  January  4, 1617-18w 

The  kin^  had  indeed  much  reason  to  bi 
satisfied  with  Bacon's  industry;  for  thero 
was  scarcely  a  single  bunness  touching  tfa^ 


BACON  BACOK  45 

loral  interests  to  which  he  did  Dot  devote  he  dedicated  to  the  kinur«  who  received  it 
hinuelf.  His  correspondence  with  the  :  most  {rracioiuily,  promising  *  to  read  it 
kiD^  was  inceflsant,  comprehending  all  [  thorough  with  care  and  attention,  though  I 
fubjects  —  political,  judicial,  and,  what .  steal  muie  hourn  from  my  flleep,  having 
Menu  out  of  his  proTince,  economical.  It  otherwise  as  little  npare  time  tu  read  it  aa 
iroald  be  more  satisfactory  if  it  did  not  you  had  to  write  it'  (154.) 
contun  too  many  proofs  of  his  endeavours  The  parliament  aAsembled  on  January 
to  conciliate  favour  by  occasional  symptoms  30;  and  Bacon,  aftt^r  the  king  had  addrediteil 
of  bis  inclination  to  stretch,  and  even  to  |  it,  made  a  short  speech  in  the  exaggerated 
overstep,  the  law  for  Jameses  benefit  (2t54,  i  style  of  flattery  no  was  in  the  habit  of 
374Kand  by  perpetual  flattery  and  allusions  j  using:  'I  am  struck  with  admiration  in 
to  the  superiority  of  the  king's  judgment,  respect'  of  your  profound  diHcours^es,  with 
vhich  are  repeated  ad  naiueam.  In  re-  reverence  to  your  n)yal  precitpt*,  and  con- 
Tsid  for  his  '  many  faithful  services,*  the  tentnient  in  a  numbt^r  of  gru^.-iuus  past*agt*H, 
Idofr,  on  July  11,  1618,  created  him  Baron  :  which  have  fallen  from  your  niHJesity  in 
Venilam  (J?yyiwr,  xvii.  17);  and  Bacon  your  speech/ &<*.  The  Coiiiinons  were  not 
tliree  months  afterwards  applied  to  Buck-  so  well  satisKed  with  the  king  nor  with  hi?* 
Ingham  to  obtain  for  him  a  grant  of  the  farm  system;  and,  though  they  were  liberul 
of"  the  Alienation,  '  a  little  to  warm  the  j  in  their  grants  and  respectful  in  their 
hoonur.*  (  Fl  orA»,  xiL  260.)  In  the  follow-  •  language,  they  resolved  to  investigate  and 
ing  May  he  received  a  more  substantial  repress  the  evils  under  wliich  the  )>enpl«) 
iivour  in  the  grant  of  1,200^  a  year  (36D);  suffered,  and  to  puninh  the  oppn*ririon4. 
ind  in  writing  to  Buckingham  on  Dec  12,  F'or  this  purpose  they  formed  u  conimittiio 
It5l9,  as  to  the  appropriation  of  the  fines  I  of  grievances,  which  proceede<l  to  enquire 
imposed  on  the  Dutch  merchants  for  ex-  j  into  the  various  monopolies,  {mtents,  Hn<l 
porting  gold  and  silver  coin,  he  says,  'And  I  grants  of  concealments,  whicii  hiui  rauMKi 
if  the  sing  intend  any  gifts,  let  tliem  stay  !  so  much  sutleriug  and  inju.Mti(M^  One  of 
for  a  second  course  (ior  all  is  not  yet  done),  the  first  objects  of  their  attack  wiis  Sir 
but  nothing  out  of  these,  except  the  king  ,  Giles  Mompesson,  a  member  nl'  tlieir  hoiiw*, 


shoold  give  me  the  20,000/.  I  owe  Peter 
Vanlore  out  of  his  fine,  which  is  the  chief 
debt  I   owe.*     He  adds,   'This  I  speak 


the  charge  agaiuHt  whom  whs  taken  irit4» 
the  House  of  I^rds :  and  while  Biicon,  as 
chancellor,  wa^  agisting  in  the  exaiiiina- 


merrily/  Might  he  not  have  said  'ad-  ,  tion,  tlio  committee  of  the  Commonj*,  on 
visedly'  too?     (380.)  '  March  15,  made  a  report,  churging  him 

His*  efforts  in  this  case  of  the  Dutch  !  with  corruption  in  liis  high  oiHce,  which 
merchants,  and  in  several  other  proceedings  I  was  communicated  on  the  iJSth  to  the 
which  resulted  in  fines,  were  dictated,  to  j  I^ords. 

all  appearance,  too  much  by  the  desire  of  \  liacon  seems  to  have  been  wholly  tnktMi 
relieving  the  king^s  pecuniary  difficulties,  |  by  surprise  at  this  accusation,  which  was 
and  avoiding  the  necessity  of  calling  a  par- I  at  first  confimHl  to  two  caseM.  He  im- 
liamenL  To  this,  however,  it  became  ;  mediately  took  to  his  bed,  and  addreHr««>d  a 
Decvssary  at  last  to  resort ;  and  on  Novem-  '  letter  to  Sir  James  hoy,  tlien  ac*ting  as 
ber  6,  1620,  a  proclamation,  in  the  pre-  speaker  in  liis  stead,  praying  that  tht^ 
ptration  of  which,  both  as  to  the  business  \  house  would  maintain  him  in  their  good 
to  be  transacted  and  the  members  to  be  j  opinion  till  his  cause  was  heard,  and  for 
chosen.  Bacon  took  an  active  part,  was  |  time  to  advise  with  his  couiLsel,  and  t(» 
iwaed  for  one  in  January,  being  six  years  ;  make  his  an^swcr.  On  March  :^2nd  f)ur 
ud  a  half  i<ince  that  assembly  had  met.  -  more  cliargen  were  brought  againsit  him  ; 
Bacnn  was  advanced  in  the  peerage,  with    and  on  tlie  2(hh  tlie  parlisment  adiournetl 


tht?  title  of  Viscount  St  Albans.    (Rymer, 
rvil  279. ) 
Before  the  parliament  met,   Yelverton, 


till  April  17,  three  eommitteed  of  th»! 
Lords  being  authorised  to  examine  wit- 
neiises  during  the  n>n?ss.     On  the  rt*newal 


the  attorney-general,  who  had  incurred  of  the  hcssion  th<'  lord  chumhiThiin  an- 
Bcii:kinghani*s  enmity,  was  prosecuted  in  ■  nounced  that  Bacon  had  )iad  an  interview 
the  Star  Chamber  for  introducing  certain  |  with  his  majesty,  who  had  reft^rred  him  to 
cUu«es  in  a  charter  to  the  city  of  London  the  Lords;  and  on  the  24th  Biicon  S4>nt 
cot  authorised  by  the  king*s  warrant,  them  a  general  confessiou,  stating  that, 
}kcf)iu  who  had  been  on  friendly  and  fami-  !  though  not  communicated  tbrniaUy  from 
£v  terms  with  him,  seems  to  have  pressf.*d  i  the  house,  ho  found  in  the  chnrgen  '  matter 
the  ca%  too  hardly  against  him  ;  and  his  >  sufficient  and  full '  to  move  him  to  desert 
Wtters  bear  the  naark  of  his  having  been    '  *     ^  '  ""  '         '     •  ^  .   v  •. 

icfluenced  in  doing  to  by  a  desire  to  curry 
favoiir   with    Buckingham.     (Works,  vii. 


his  defence.  This  submission  not  being 
deemed  satisfactory,  the  Lords  rosrdved 
that  he  should  be  charged  with  the  several 
briberies  and  corruptions,  and  that  he 
In  the  preceding  October  he  published  I  should  make  a  ptirticular  answ<>r  by  the 
hifc^reat  work,  '>byum  Organum/  which  .  30th.    The  charges  had  been  greatly 


m- 


46 


BACOX 


creased  in  number.  They  consisted  of  his 
having  in  no  less  than  twenty-two  instances 
received  bribes  and  presents  amounting  to 
above  11,000/.,  from  one^  or  the  other,  or 
from  both,  of  the  parties  in  suits  before 
him. 

On  April  30  he  sent  in  his  submission,  con- 
fessing «min^»m  the  receipt  of  the  several  sums 
charged.  Some  few  he  acknowledged  were 
given  while  the  suit  was  depending ;  but 
he  asserted  that  others  were  not  presented 
till  after  he  had  pronounced  his  decree. 
Some  he  said  were  new  year*s  gifts,  and 
some  presents  towards  the  furnishing  of  his 
house ;  and  that  there  were  *  few  or  none 
that  are  not  almost  two  years  old.'  On 
the  same  day  the  Great  Seal  was  se- 
questered, and  three  days  later,  Bacon 
being  excused  from  attending  on  account 
of  iUness,  the  Lords  pronounced  sentence 
against  him — of  a  fine  of  40,000/. :  im- 
prisonment in  the  Tower  during  pleasure ; 
incapacity  to  hold  any  office.  Sec,  in  the 
state ;  and  prohibition  against  sitting  in  i 
parliament,  or  coming  within  the  verge  of 
the  court.  They  negatived  the  proposition  j 
that  he  should  be  suspended  from  all  his  ' 
titles  of  nobility  during  his  life. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  Bacon  was 
induced  to  '  desert  his  defence'  at  the  in- 
e>tigation  of  the   king  and   Buckingham.  ; 
What  passed  at  the  interview  between  the 
former  and  Bacon   cannot  of  course  be 
known  ;  but  it  is  not  improbable  that  the 
king,  desirous  as  he  must  have  been  of 
putting  a  stop  to  the  investigations  of  the 
Commons,  lest  other  persons  nearer  to  him 
should  be  implicated,  advised  him,  if  he  I 
had  not  a  clear   defence   against  all  the  i 
charges,  not  to  lengthen  the  proceedings.  ; 
I3ut  it  IS  impossible  to  read  the  evidence  \ 
on  which   the  charges  were   founded,  or  i 
even  the  circumstances  alleged  by  Bacon 
in  extenuation  of  some  of  them,  without 
feeling  that  it  must  have  been  more  the 
consciousness  of  guilt  than  any  tenderness 
towards  other  parties  that  dictated  the  sub- 
mission that  he  oft«red.    Indeed,  his  own 
letters,  both   previous   and  subsequent  to 
this  confession,  contradict  the  idea  that  he 
Facrificed  himself  for  the  sake  of  others,  hi 
his  first  letter  to  the  king  after  tlie  charges 
were  made,  though  he  hopes  he  may  not 
be  found  to  have  *a  depraved   habit  of 
taking  bribes  to  pervert  justice,'  he  adds, 

*  Howsoever  I  may  be  frail,  and  partake  of 
the  abuses  of  the  times.'  (xii.  (36.)  In 
another,  petitioning  his  majesty  to  save 
liim  from  the  sentence,  he  ventures  to  say, 

*  But  because  he  that  hath  taken  bribes  is 
apt  to  give  bribes,  1  will  go  further,  and 
present  your  majesty  with  a  bribe.'  And 
in  a  third  letter  pleading  for  pardon,  be 
instances  Demoethenea,  Titus  LaviiuL  and 
Seneca,  aa  bnying  been  rettored  after  being 
condemned   for  bribery  and   oomiption. 


bacon; 

(xiii.  30,  32.)  To  Sir  Thomas  May  also, 
in  acknowledging  and  qualifying  a  present 
he  had  received  from  the  Apothecaries,  be 
says,  *  As  it  may  not  be  defended,  so  I 
would  be  glad  it  wer<)  not  raked  up  more 
than  needs.  I  doubt  only  the  chair,  be- 
cause I  hear  he  useth  names  sharply.' 
(xii.  406.)  The  language  in  these  and 
other  letters  cannot  by  any  interpretation 
be  read  as  that  of  an  innocent  man. 

After  his  sentence,  he  expresses  in  his 
letters  no  compunction  for  his  offence,  nor 
exhibita  any  shame  at  his  exposure.     How 
little  he  felt  his  disgrace  appears  in  a  letter 
to  the  Bishop  of  Winchester,  in  which  he 
talks  of  his  consolation  bein^  in  the  ex- 
amples of  Demosthenes,  Cicero,  and  Seneca, 
— '  all  three  ruined,  not  by  war,  or  by  any 
other  disaster,  but  by  justice  and  sentence 
as  delinquent  criminals ;  all  three  famous 
writers,  insomuch  as  the  remembrance  of 
their  calamity  is  now  as  to  posterity  but  as 
a  little  picture  of  night-work,  remaining 
amongst  the  fair  and  excellent  tables  of 
their  acts  and  works.'     (vii.  113.)     In  a 
letter  also  to  Buckingham  he  says,  '  I  con- 
fess it  is  my  fault,  though  it  may  bo  some 
happiness  to  me  withal  that  T  do  most 
times  forget  my  adversity.'     (xii.  424.) 
Neither  was  it  any  impediment  to  his  wit, 
for  when  Sir  Henry   Montagu,  Earl  of 
Manchester,  who  haicl  been  chief  justice, 
and  was  lately  removed  from  the  office  of 
lord  treasurer  to  the  less  important  one  of 
lord  president  of  the  council,  expressed  to 
the  fallen  chancellor  how  sorry  he  was  to  see 
him  made  such  an  example^  &acon  replied, 
'  It  did  not  trouble  him,  since  his  loroship 
was  made  a  precedent,^  \  {Aubreif,  22o.) 

Camden  says  his  imprisonment  lasted 
but  two  days,  and  his  lettei-s  prove  that 
one  of  them  was  the  dlst  of  Mav,  and  that 
the  next  day  he  was  at  Sir  John  Vaughan's, 
at  Parson's  Green.  (  JForks,  xii.  4iK),  xiii. 
31.)  From  this  retirement  he  was  allowed 
at  the  end  of  the  month  to  remove  to  Gor- 
hambury.  (xii.  408.)  In  the  following 
September  he  pressed  his  suit  for  some 
assistance  in  his  fallen  fortunes;  and  on 
October  8  he  thanked  the  king  for  the  re- 
misHion  of  his  fine,  and  oflered  his  History 
of  Henry  VH.  for  correction.  (410.)  The 
fine  was  pardoned,  and,  at  the  same  time, 
assigned  to  trustees  to  prevent  the  im- 
portunity of  his  creditors ;  to  the  passing 
of  which  Lord  Keeper  Williams  at  first 
made  some  objections,  the  proposed  assign- 
ment being,  as  he  said, '  full  of  knavery  and 
a  wicked  precedent.'  From  a  letter  ad- 
dressed to  him  by  John  Selden  in  February 
1621-2,  he  seems  to  have  at  one  time  con- 
templated overturning  the  judgement  against 
him,  on  account  of  a  doubt  he  raised  whe- 
ther that  meeting  of  parliament  was  a  legal 
aeesion ;  but  be  received  no  encouragement. 
(421.)    He  continued  bis  importonitiee  till  . 


BACOX 

his  friends  succeeded  in  March  in  obtaining  ' 
a  release  from  hU  confinement  at  Gorham- 
bury,  and  a  pemiiBsion  to  go  to  Highgate. 
Subsequently  he  tells  the  Lord  Ti-easurer 
Crantield,  who  was  negotiating  with  him 
for  the  purchase  of  York  House,  that  he  had 
taken  a  house  at  Chiswick  (425|428) ;  and 
at  the  end  of  1622  Buckingham  obtained 
for  him  an  interview  with  the  king,  (xiii.' 
•'{7.)  He  continued,  by  means  of  friends 
and  letters,  his  correspondence  with  Buck- 
ingham till  the  manjuisyin  February  1623, 
accompanied  the  prmce  on  his  romantic 
pilgriiuage   to   Spain,  when,   as  he  says, 

*  the  better  to  hold  out/  he  retired  to  his 
chambers  in  Gray *s  Inn.  (4^J9.)  He  never 
returned  to  York  House,  which  became 
Buckingham's  in  1624. 

During  the  marquis*s  absence  in  Spain, 
Bacon  appealed  to  the  king  himself  in  a 
long  letter,  which  would  have  been  pathe- 
tic but  that  it  is  over-laboured,  praying 
his  majesty  to  pity  him  so  far  as  that  he 

*  that  hath  borne  a  bag  be  not  now  in  his 
tge  forced  in  effect  to  bear  a  wallet,  nor  he 
that  desired  to  live  by  study  may  not  be 

I  driven  to  study  to  live.'  So  reduced  does 
he  appear  to  be,  by  all  his  letters^  that  upon 
a  vacancy  in  May  1623  he  applied  to  the 
king,  but  unsuccessfully,  for  the  provost- 
»hip  of  Eton,  '  a  cell  to  retire  unto.'  (xii. 
49,440). 

To  Buckingham,  while  abroad  (then 
created  duke),  his  letters  wera  frequent 
and  flattering ;  and  to  Mr.  Toby  Matthew, 
who  was  also  in  Spain,  his  desires  to  keep 

I  him  in  the  prince's  and  the  duke's  remem- 
brance show  his  anxiety  to  be  again  re- 
ceived into  favour.  C)n  their  return  in 
<^)rtober  he  offered  the  duke  counsel  for  his 
conduct,  advising  him  to  ^  do  some  remark- 
able act  to  fix '  his  reputation,  and  remind- 
ing him  of  an  old  Spanish  proverb.  ^Ile 
that  tieth  not  a  knot  upon  his  thread  ioseth 
the  stitch.'  In  January  1624  he  tells  the 
duke  that  he  is  'almost  at  last  cast  for 
means ; '  but  it  was  not  till  November  that 
h^  succeeded  in  getting  'three  years  ad- 
vance,* to  relieve  him  of  his  necessities. 
.Shortly  before  this  he  had  received  a  full 
pardon  of  his  whole  sentence.  (445^  xiii. 
. .  70.) 

King  James  died  on  March  27,  1625, 
and  King  Charles  immediately  calling  a 
parliament,  Bacon  had  the  iirstfruits  of  his 
f  (ill  pardon  by  receiving  a  writ  of  summons. 
Ill  health,  which  had  begun  to  make  in- 
roads upon  him,  preventedhim  from  taking 
his  seat,  and  for  the  whole  of  that  year  his 
correapondence  was  much  curtailed.  Such 
letters  as  remain  show  a  continuance  of 
nraitened  means.  He  writes  to  Sir 
I  Robert  Pye  '  to  despatch  that  warrant  of  a 
petty  sam,  that  it  may  help  to  bear  my 
rliarge  of  coming  up  to  London  ; '  and  at 
the  end  of  the  year  he  tells  the  Duke  of 


BACOX 


47 


Buckingham  that  '  his  wants  are  great.'  ^ 
Even  as  late  as  January  18, 1626,  he  shows 
that  his  hopes  of  court  favour  are  not  ex- 
hausted, by  requesting  the  French  ambas- 
sador, the  Marquis  d'Effiat,  to  procure  for 
him  some  mark  of  the  queen's  goodwill, 
and  to  take  occasion  to  whisper  something 
to  his  advantage  in  the  Duke  of  Bucking- 
ham's ear.  (xii.  460,  482,  483.)  Indeed, 
a  great  part  of  the  industry  which  he  dis- 
played during  the  five  years  that  intervened 
Detween  his  disgrace  and  his  death  seems 
to  have  been  employed  in  attempts  to  re- 
gain his  lost  consequence,  and  to  forward 
his  personal  advantage.  The  rest  of  his 
time  was  consecrated  to  higber  and  better 
purposes.  No  moment  seems  to  have  been 
unoccupied ;  and  his  industry  is  manifested 
in  the  number  of  his  original  productions 
during  that  period,  and  in  the  publication 
of  translations  of  his  *  Advancement  of 
Learning,'  with  great  additions,  and  of 
some  other  of  his  works,  into  Latin. 

His  death  was  caused  by  the  trial  of  an 
experiment  whether  flesh  could  not  be  pre- 
served in  snow  as  well  as  in  salt  For  this 
purpose,  while  taking  an  airing  with  Dr. 
Witherspoon,  the  king's  physician,  he  went 
to  a  poor  woman's  cottage  at  the  bottom  of 
Highgate  Hill,  and  bought  a  hen,  the  body 
of  which  he  stuffed  with  snow.  In  doing 
this  the  chill  seized  him  so  suddenly  and 
violently  that  he  was  unable  to  proceed, 
and  was  obliged  to  be  carried  to  the  Enrl 
of  Anindel's  house  in  the  neighbourhood, 
where  the  bed  in  which  he  was  placed 
be'mg  damp,  he  caught  so  severe  a  cold 
that  he  died  of  suffocation.  (Attbrei/y  227.) 
Ills  last  letter,  addressed  to  the  earl  on  his 
deathbed,  is  preserved  in  his  works  (xii. 
274) ;  and  his  last  breath  was  drawn  in  the 
arms  of  his  benevolent  relative,  Sir  Julius 
Cresar.  He  expired  on  Easter  Sunday, 
April  9,  1626,  having  exceeded  the  com- 
pletion of  his  sixty-lifth  year  by  nearly 
three  months. 

He  was  buried  at  St.  Michael's  Church, 
at  St.  Albans,  where  his  faithful  friend 
and  servant  Sir  Thomas  Meautys  erected  a 
monument,  representing  him  seated  in  con- 
templation. 

His  wife,  by  whom  he  had  no  children, 
survived  him  till  June  30,  1650,  and  was 
buried  at  Eg  worth  in  Bedfordshire,  having 
had  for  her  second  husband  Walter  Doble, 
of  Sussex,  (xvi.  note  H  H  H  ,*  Hasted* s 
Kenty  V.  304.) 

Authors  differ  in  their  accounts  of  Bacon's 
pecuniary  means  in  the  last  years  of  his  life. 
Howell  says  he  died  so  poor  that  he  scarce 
left  money  to  bury  him.  Wilson,  the  his- 
torian, confirms  this  account,  and  adds  that 
Lord  Brook  denied  him  beer  to  quench  his 
thirst.  Aubrey  tells  that  Sir  Julius  Gajsar 
sent  him  100/.  in  his  necessities;  and  the 
perpetual  appeals  to  the  king  and  Bucking- 


48 


BACON 


liam  for  assistance  seem  to  support  the 
conclusion.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is 
related  that  the  prince,  on  seeing  him  in  a 
coach  followed  hy  a  numher  of  gentlemen 
on  horseback,  obserred,  ^  Well,  do  what  you 
can,  this  man  scorns  to  go  out  like  a  snuff.' 
Indeed,  his  income  after  his  pardon  was 
apparently  adequate,  if  prudently  managed, 
to  the  demands  of  his  station,  consisting  of 
his  pension  of  1,200/.  and  his  grant  of  600/. 
a  year  from  the  Alienation  Office,  besides 
the  proBts  of  his  own  estate.  Both  stories 
may,  however,  be  true,  and  their  discre- 
pancy accounted  for  by  remembering  with 
what  irregularity  pensions  were  then  paid, 
and  the  negligence  and  imprudence  in  money 
matters  generally  attributed  to  him. 

As  a  lawyer  jaacon's  reputation  does  not, 
perhaps,  stand  so  high  as  it  ought.  Queen 
Elizabeth  said  of  him,  '  Bacon  had  a  great 
wit  and  much  learning ;  but  in  lawshoweth 
to  the  uttermost  of  his  knowledge,  and  is 
not  deep ;  *  and  hers  was  probably  the  echo 
of  the  general  opinion.  But  this  was  said 
when  he  was  a  candidate  for  the  office  of, 
solicitor-ffeneral ;  and  he  had  not  then  had 
the  practical  advantages  which  he  after- 
waras  enjoyed.  With  the  knowledge  of  the 
principles  of  law  which  hb  writings  evi- 
dence, it  is  not  improbable  that  the  expe- 
rience he  subsequently  obtained  made  him 
as  finished  a  lawyer  as  most  of  his  con- 
temporaries. His  acquirements  in  this 
branch,  whatever  they  were,  were  over- 
Fhadowed  by  his  eminence  as  a  philosopher. 

He  composed  several  legal  treatises,  but /seems  io  be  of  a  totaUy  distinct  nature 
none  of  them  were  published  during  his, 'I  from  Bacon  as  a  writer  and  propounder  of 
life.    His  speeches  wnich  remain  are  fair  J  everlasting  truths.     Considenng  him  solely 


BACON 

anything,  which  my  lords  were  pleased  to 
note  they  never  saw  before.'  (xiii.  17.)  To 
this  accoimt  of  his  industry  should  be  added 
his  own  view  of  his  integrity.  When  im- 
prisoned in  the  Tower,  he  says  to  the  duke, 
*  I  have  been  ....  the  justest  chancellor 
that  hath  been  in  the  five  changes  since 
my  father's  time.'  When  writing  also  to 
Buckingham  of  his  poverty,  he  says,  'I 
never  took  penny  for  any  benefice  or  eccle- 
siastical living;  I  never  took  penny  for 
realising  anything  stopped  at  the  Seal;  I 
never  took  penny  for  any  commission,  or 
things  of  that  nature.'  (xiL  466.  400.)  The 
conviction  of  Wraynham,  prosecuted  in  the 
Star  Chamber  for  slandering  Bacon,  who 
had  pronounced  a  decree  against  him  in 
favour  of  his  opponent  Sir  Edward  Fisher, 
would,  on  the  statement  of  the  case,  appear 
to  be  just,  but  for  the  subsequent  discovery 
that  the  chancellor  had  shortly  afterwards 
received  from  Fisher  a  suit  of  hangiujrs 
worth  about  160/.  (State  Trials,  ii.  1059, 
1107.) 

/  The  biographers  of  Bacon  have  been 
puzzled  how  to  give  to  his  personal  cha- 
racter the  praise  that  he  merited  for  his 
literary  attainments  and  productions.  By 
the  former  he  must  be  judged  of  as  the 
man,  by  the  latter  as  the  philosopher ;  and 
who  but  must  regret  that  there  is  so  much 
of  contrast  between  them  P  who  but  must 
feel  that  the  system  of  the  one  was  in  direct 
contradiction  to  the  acts  of  the  other  .^ 
'^acon  as  a  lawyer,  a  politician,  and  a  man 


specimens  of  forensic  eloquence  in  his  pecu- 
liar style,  with  sufficient  mastery  of  legal 
learning,  and  with  ample  illustration  from 
history. 

In  the  performance  of  his  judicial  duties 
he  boasts  of  extraordinary  activity.  lie  tells 
Buckingham,  on  June  6, 1617,  a  month  after 
he  took  his  seat  in  the  court^  that  there  is 
'  not  one  cause  unheard ;  the  lawyers  drawn 
dry  of  all  the  motions  they  were  to  make  ; 
not  one  petition  unanswered.  And  this,  I 
think,  could  not  be  said  in  our  age  before.' 
(xii.  348.)  His  boasting  might  be  passed 
over ;  but  it  becomes  offensive  when  depre- 
ciating his  predecessor,  as  he  does  in  the 
following  December : — 'This  very  evening 
I  have  made  oven  with  the  causes  of  Chan- 
cery, and  comparing  with  the  causes  heard 
by  my  lord  tnat  dead  is,  of  Michaelmas 
Term  was  twelve  month,  I  find  them  to  bo 
double  so  many  and  one  more ;  besides  that 
the  causes  which  I  despatch  do  seldom  turn 
upon  me  again,  as  his  many  times  did.' 


in  the  former  view,  taking  by  themselves 
the  incidents  of  his  life  and  the  evidences 
of  his  character,  as  interpreted  by  his  own 
letters,  it  seems  impossible  that  any  bio- 
grapher can  venture  to  pronounce  a  eulogy 
upon  him.  Are  there  grounds  for  it  in  his 
ardent  desire  for  place,  betrayed  through 
every  phase  of  his  career  ?  in  his  perti- 
nacious and  degrading  applications  for 
patronage  ?  in  his  depreciation  of  his 
rivals  P  in  his  adulation  of  his  sovereign  P 
in  his  fiattery  of  the  favourite  P  in  his 
double  ingratitude  to  Essex,  in  pleading 
against  his  life  and  in  blackening  his 
memory  P  in  his  envy  of  Coke,  and  hb 
underhand  proceedings  against  him  P  in 
Ills  attacks  on  the  independence  of  the 
judges  P  in  his  encourageuient  of  the  de- 
spotic principles  of  James  P  in  his  accept- 
ance, however  extenuated,  of  the  bribes 
which  he  acknowledged  P  in  the  indiffer- 
ence to  shame  which  he  exhibited  in  his 
disgrace  P  or  in  the  unblushing  attempts 


(;W0.)  Again,  in  May  1010,  he  writes, '  which  he  made  to  regain  his  ascendency  P 
*  Yesterday  was  a  day  of  motions  in  the  |  Would  not  these,  if  he  had  been  a  common 
Chancer}'.  This  day  was  a  day  of  motions  i  man  and  undistinguished  as  a  writer,  have 
in  the  Star  Chamber ;  and  it  was  my  hap  to  been  visited  with  the  contempt  and  indig- 
clear  the  bar  that  no  man  was  left  to  move  «  nation  they  merited  P    .^Vnd  now  does  hid . 


BACON 

positian  as  an  aathor  alter  the  feeling  thus 
forciblj  impressed  P  Must  it  not  be  more 
deeply  imprinted  by  the  conviction  that  he 
was  acting  contrary  to  his  principles,  that 
he  had  not  the  moral  coura^  to  withstand 
any  temptation,  and  that  m  every  act  of 
his  life  he  was  porsoing  a  course  which  his 
consdence  condemned  r  There  is  scarcely 
a  fauh  of  which  he  has  been  guilty  against 
which  he  has  not  written  strongly  and 
troly  ;  and  he  stigmatises  the  vices  to 
which  he  is  subject  at  the  very  time  he 
is  oommittinff  them.  To  himaelf  may  be 
wplled  the  ctose  of  his  twenty-third  essay, 
'  On  the  Wisdom  for  a  Man's  self: '— <  Wis- 
dom for  a  man's  self  is,  in  many  branches 
thereof,  a  depraved  thing.  It  is  the  wis- 
dom of  rats,  that  will  be  sure  to  leave  a 
house  somewhat  before  it  falls.  It  is  the 
wisdom  of  the  fox,  that  thrusts  out  the 
badger  who  digged  and  made  room  for 
him.  It  is  the  wisdom  of  crocodiles,  that 
shed  tears  when  they  would  devour.  But 
that  which  is  specially  to  be  noted  is,  that 
those  which  (as  Cicero  says  of  Pompey )  are 
**  soi  amantes,  rine  rivali,"  are  many  times 
unfortunate;  and  whereas  they  have  all 
their  times  sacrificed  to  themselves,  they 
become  in  the  end  themselves  sacrifices  to 
the  inconstancy  of  fortune,  whose  wings 
thev  thought,  hj  their  self-wisdom,  to  have 
pinioned.' 

BACOV,  FRAKdSy  owed  his  origin  to 
the  same  root  from  which  the  four  preced- 
ing judges  sprang,  being  of  that  branch  of 
th«  family  whicn  setUed  at  Hesset  in 
Saffolk.  His  great  grandparents  are 
stated  to  be  Thomas  Bacon,  of  that  place, 
snd  Anne  Rowse,  and  his  father  was  John 
BscQo,  of  King's  Lynn  in  Norfolk,  gentle- 
msD. 

He  was  bom  sbout  1587,  and  oommenc- 
bfr  his  legal  studies  at  Barnard's  Inn,  he 
poTBued  them  at  Gray's  Inn,  where  he  was 
admitted  a  member  in  February  1007, 
called  to  the  bar  in  1615,  and  became 
reader  in  autumn  1634.  His  name  does 
sot  appear  in  any  of  the  contemporary 
Morta  y  his  practice  probably  being  in 
Cnancerv  or  the  provinces. 

In  16^  he  had  a  orant  in  reversion  of 
the  ofiBce  of  drawing  licences  and  pardons 
of  alienations  to  the  Qtte^t  Seal.  (Rymer, 
XJL  12.1.)  In  May  1640  he  was  included 
in  the  batch  of  seijeants  then  called ;  and 
^41  October  14,  1642,  he  received  the  then 
dangerous  promotion  to  a  seat  in  the  King's 
Keiich,  his  patent  being  dated  at  Bridge- 
n'>rth  (Ibid.  541),  on  the  king's  march 
towards  London,  when  he  was  knighted. 
That  the  new  judge  was  not  obnoxious  to 
the  parliament  may  be  inferred  from  their 
request  in  the  propositions  made  to  the 
long,  in  February  1643,  that  he  might 
he  continued  in  his  place.  He  does  not 
appear  to  have  joined  the  king  at  Oxford, 


BAINBRID6E 


49 


but  he  attended  his  duty  in  his  court  at 
Westminster  Hall,  where,  in  Michadmas 
Term  1643,  he  was  the  only  judge  sitting 
(Oanmlony  iii.  407,  iv.  342;) ;  and  on  the 
trial  of  Lord  Macguire  for  high  treason,  as 
the  fomenter  of  the  great  rebellion  and 
horrible  massacre  in  Ireland  in  1641,  before 
that  court  in  Hilary  Term  1645,  he  alone 
appears  to  have  been  present.  (Slate  Triabf 
iv.  666.)  He  la  next  mentioned  in  Sep- 
tember 1647  as  having,  with  Serjeant 
Creswell  or  Gresheld,  committed  James 
Symbal  and  others  for  speaking  words 
against  the  king,  with  whom  negotiations 
were  proceeding.  He  continued  to  act  till 
the  king  was  beheaded,  when  he  had  the 
courage  to  refuse  the  new  commission 
offered  him  by  the  Common&  (  WhUelocke. 
269,  378.) 

He  spent  the  remainder  of  his  days  in 
privacy,  and  died  on  August  22,  1657. 
By  his  wife  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  William 
Eiobinson,  he  had  several  children.  His 
eldest  son.  Frauds  (who  was  a  reader  in 
Gray's  Inn  in  autumn  1662),  raised  a  hand- 
some monument  over  his  grave  in  St. 
Gregory's  Church,  Norwich. 

BAnrasiBOS,  Christopher  (Arch- 
bishop OF  York),  sprang  from  an  ancient 
family  seated  at  Hilton,  near  Appleby,  in 
Westmoreland,  where  he  was  bom.  Edu- 
cated at  Queen's  College^  Oxford,  he  took 
his  degree  in  laws,  and  having  been  admitted 
at  the  same  time  into  holy  orders,  he  ob- 
tained early  preferment  in  the  Church.  This 
he  probably  owed  to  the  patronage  of  Arch- 
bishop Morton,  his  intimate  friend,  with 
whom  he  had  suffered  under  Richard  lU. 
He  became  almoner  of  Henry  VII.,  and  was 
rector  of  Aller,  in  the  diocese  of  Bath  and 
Wells.  In  1485  he  received  a  canonnr,  first 
in  Salisbury  and  afterwards  in  YorK.  In 
1495  he  was  elected  provost  of  his  college, 
to  which  he  was  a  lioeral  benefactor.  In 
1497  he  was  presented  to  the  treasurership 
of  St.  Paul's ;  in  1500  to  the  archdeaconry 
of  Surrey;  and  on  December  9,  1503,  to 
the  deanery  of  York.  He  held  the  latter 
dignity  when  he  succeeded  William  Barons 
as  master  of  the  RoUs,  on  November  13, 
1504 ;  and  on  February  18  in  the  following 
year  he  was  made  Dean  of  Windsor.  (Le 
Neve.) 

He  resigned  his  judicial  office  on  bis 
being  preferred  to  the  bishopric  of  Durham, 
the  temporalities  of  which  were  granted 
to  him  on  November  17, 1507.  Scarcely 
thirteen  months  had  elapsed  ere  he  was 
translated  to  the  archbishopric  of  York, 
receiving  the  temporalities  of  that  province, 
which  had  been  in  the  kings  hands  for 
above  a  year,  on  December  12, 1508.  It 
was  probably  in  preparation  for  tbis  removal 
that  he  obtainea  on  November  11a  char- 
ter of  general  pardon  {Rymety  xiii.  171, 
233,  235) ;  a  caution  Tendered  peculiarly 


50 


BALDOCK 


expedient  in  times  when  the  extortions  of 
iniormers  were  almost  openly  encouraged. 

King  Henry  VIIL,  soon  after  his  acces- 
sion, deeming  itpolitic  to  have  a  represen- 
tative at  the  Roman  court,  Archbishop 
Bainbridge  was  selected  for  this  honourable 
poet ;  and  his  patent,  with  full  powers  as 
procurator  of  tne  king,  was  dated  on  Sep- 
tember 24, 1509.  {im.  264.)  How  much 
of  his  future  life  he  spent  at  Rome  does  not 
precisely  appear;  but  while  there  he  so 
negotiated  m  the  war  against  the  King  of 
France  as  to  please  both  his  soyereign  and 
the  pope,  from  the  latter  of  whom  ne  re- 
ceived the  reward  of  a  cardinal's  hat  in 
March  1511,  with  the  title  of  St.  Praxedis. 
But,  not  exercising  in  his  own  family  the 
prudence  which  he  exhibited  in  diplomacy, 
ne  is  said  to  have  fallen  a  sacrifice  to  the 
violence  of  his  temper.  Having,  in  a  fit  of 
passion,  given  a  blow  to  Rinaldo  de  Modena, 
a  priest  in  his  household,  the  malicious 
Italian,  according  to  this  account,  avenged 
the  insult  by  poisoning  his  master.  The 
letters,  however,  of  mlliam  Burbank  and 
Richard  Pace,  the  cardinal's  secretaries, 
give  a  very  different  complexion  to  the 
transaction.  They  mention  nothing  about 
the  blow,  but  state  that  the  priest,  in  his 
first  confession,  acknowledged  he  was  in- 
stigated by  the  Bishop  of  Worcester,  Sil- 
vester de  Griglis,  the  cardinal's  known  enemy, 
who  gave  him  fifteen  ducats  of  gold,  and 
that,  liiou^h  he  was  afterwards  induced  to 
deny  the  bishop's  complicity  in  the  murder, 
the  doctors  and  learned  men  to  whom  the 
case  was  referred  would  not  admit  the  con- 
tradiction. Richard  Pace  (afterwards  prin- 
cipal secretary  of  state)  seems  to  have  had 
some  difficulty  in  saving  the  bishop, '  having 
respect  unto  him  as  your  grace's  orator/ 
from  the  execution  of  the  judge's  determi- 
nation that  he  '  should  not  only  be  put  in 
prison,  but  also  sufier  torments  and  be  com- 
pelled to  show  the  truth.'  The  poison  was 
administered  at  Spoleto ;  and  the  cardinal's 
death  took  place  on  July  14,  1514.  It  was 
announced  to  the  king  in  a  letter,  dated  the 
same  day,  from  the  Cardinal  de'  Medici, 
afterwards  Pope  Clement  VII.;  and  it  is 
added  in  another  letter  that  the  priest 
'  smote  himself  with  a  small  knyff,'  ana  died 
twelve  davs  afterwards.  {Rymery  xiii.  404 ; 
EUis'B  LeUers,  First  Series,  i.  100-108.) 

The  archbishop  was  buried  in  the  cloister 
of  the  church  of^  S.  Tommaso  degli  Inglesi 
at  Rome,  under  a  fine  monument,  still  to 
be  seen,  with  a  full-length  recumbent  figure 
of  his  handsome  person.  He  beaueathed 
20,000  golden  ducats  towards  the  building 
of  St  Peter's.  (Four  Years  at  the  CouH 
of  Henry  VIIL  li.  146 ;  Siuiees'  Durham, 
i.  Ixiv ;  Gwinod,  609,  758,  796 :  Ath.  Oxon, 
ii.  702.) 

BAIDOOX,  Ralph  db  (Bishop  oir 
Loudon),  was  collated  Archdeacon  of  Mid- 


BALDOCK 

dlesex  in  1276,  4  Edward  I.,  from  which 
he  was  raised,  on  October  18, 1294,  to  the 
deanery  of  St  Paul's,  and  was  elected 
Bishop  of  London,  February  24, 1304 ;  but, 
owing  to  some  dispute,  his  consecration  was 
delayed  till  January  30, 1306.    (Le  Xeve.) 

He  received  the  Great  Seal  as  chancellor 
on  April  21,  1307,  from  Edward  I.,  who 
died  on  the  7th  of  the  following  July,  at 
Burgh-on-the-Sands ;  and  there  is  a  curious 
entry  on  the  Fine  Roll,  showing  that  Ralph 
de  Baldock,  being  then  in  London,  and  igno- 
rant of  that  event  having  occurred,  con- 
tinued to  seal  writs  of  course  till  July  25th« 
On  the  following  Saturday  he  received  the 
new  king's  commands  to  send  him  the  Great 
Seal,  which  was  accordingly  delivered  to 
the  king  at  Carlisle  on  August  2.  (SoL 
Fin.  36  Edw.  L  m.  1.) 

In  3  Edward  II.  he  was  appointed  one  of 
the  ordainers  for  the  management  of  the 
affairs  of  government  and  the  king's  house- 
hold. 

He  commenced  the  erection  of  the  chapel 
of  St  Mary  in  his  cathedral,  and  be<nieathed 
a  sum  sufficient  for  its  completion.  He  died 
at  Stepney,  on  July  24, 1313,  and  was  buried 
in  that  chapel.  He  left  some  works  which 
proved  his  devotion  to  literature;  among 
which  was  one  entitled  '  Historia  Anglia,  or 
a  History  of  British  Affairs  down  to  his  own 
Time.'  lie  also  made  *  A  Collection  of  the 
Statutes  and  Constitutions  of  the  Church  of 
St.  Paul's.' 

BALDOCK,  RoBEBT  de,  was  probably  in 
some  way  related  to  the  last  named,  Ralph 
de  Baldock.  The  earliest  notice  found  of 
his  historv  is  a  grant  to  him,  in  15  Ed- 
ward I.,  of  all  the  king's  right  in  the  knights' 
fees,  which  Roger  de  Clifford  held  con- 
jointly with  John  de  Crombwell  and  Idonea 
his  wife,  and  also  of  the  manor  of  Shalford 
in  Surrev,  lately  belonging  to  Roger,  who 
was  attainted.  (CaL  Hot,  Pat.  91.)  The 
next  entry,  however,  is  of  a  different  cha- 
racter, being  a  fine  of  twenty  marks  im- 
posed upon  him  in  Durham,  in  1306,  for 
some  unadvised  obedience  to  a  papal  precept 
without  notice  given  to  the  King  and  his 
council,  the  Archdeacon  of  Cleveland  being 
at  the  same  time  fined  100/.  for  the  same 
offence.  (Abb.  Pladt.  258.)  It  may  be 
presumed,  therefore,  that  Master  Robert  de 
Baldock  (as  he  is  always  called)  then  held 
some  ecclesiastical  benefice  in  the  north. 

In  1314,  8  Edward  II.,  he  became  Arch- 
deacon of  Middlesex  (Le  Nei^),  a  dignity 
which  Ralph  de  Baldock  had  held  twenty 
years  before.  Probablv  at  that  time,  and 
certainlv  two  vears  afterwards,  he  filled 
some  office  about  the  court,  as  from  Fe- 
bruary 1317  he  was  regularly  summoned 
to  the  council  and  parliaments  among  the 
judges  and  other  legal  personag|M.  In  June 
1320  he  was  keeper  of  the  Jong's  Fri^ 
Seal|  and  in  the  following  year  wm  tent  bj 


BALDOCK 

the  king  and  oooncil,  with  other  solemn 
envoja,  to  treat  for  a  peace  with  the  S<u>t9 
at  Bamboiough ;  for  his  expenses  in  which 
mission  he  was  allowed  the  sum  of  60/.  in 
the  wardrobe  accounts.  (ArchaolopiOf  xxvi. 
334.)  The  Despencers,  father  and  son^  were 
then  in  the  hei^t  of  their  ascendency;  and, 
bj  his  ooonection  with  their  councilB,  he 
shared  in  the  aversion  with  which  they  were 
rsfrarded  bjr  the  nobles  and  the  people. 

He  was  at  last  raised  to  the  chancellor- 
ship on  August  20,  132^  17  Edward  IL, 
but  had  little  cause  to  rejoice  in  his  advance- 
ment. Though  the  defeat  and  execution  of 
the  Duke  of  Lancaster  had  produced  a  tem- 
porary quiet,  within  a  few  months  after  he 
bad  received  the  Seal  a  conspiracy  by  Koffer 
Mortimer  and  others  was  discovered,  or  m- 
Tented,  the  object  of  which  was  the  murder 
of  Baldock  and  the  royal  favourite.  Though 
he  escaped  from  this  danger,  he  could  not 
but  experience  many  misgivings  as  to  the 
results  that  were  likely  to  follow  from  the 
arrogant  indiscretions  of  Despencer. 

He  was  elected  to  the  bisnopric  of  Nor- 
wich on  July  28,  1325 ;  but  a  rumour 
having  reached  him  that  the  pope  had 
reserved  the  presentation  for  himself,  he 
renounced  the  election  on  September  3,  an 
art  which  speaks  well  for  his  moderation, 
■nd  his  anxiety  to  prevent  a  collision  be- 
tween his  sovereign  and  the  papal  court. 

Baldock's  concurrence  in  the  advice  which 
prompted  Edward  to  fall  into  the  trap  laid 
Dy  the  French  king,  by  which  Queen 
Isalk;lla  was  permitted  to  proceed  to 
Fruice,  and  the  weak  king  was  induced 
to  give  up  Ouienne  and  Ponthieu  to  his 
SOD,  and  to  aend  the  latter  to  do  homage 
for  them,  is  conclusive  evidence  that  he 
cannot  be  considered  a  wise  counsellor ;  for 
though  perhaps  the  plan  had  not  yet  been 


BAIJ)OCK 


51 


prison  there  was  soon  invaded  by  an  out- 
rageous mob,  who  treated  him  with  vio- 
lence, and  thrust  him  into  Newgate,  where, 
after  languishing  about  three  months,  he 
died,  on  May  28, 1327.  All  his  possessions 
had  been  previously  seized,  and  among 
them  were  the  manors  of  Heibrigge  and 
Tylingham  in  Essex.  (Abb.  Hot.  Orig, 
i.  304.)  ^ 

As  he  was  never  brought  to  trial,  the 
nrecise  charges  against  him  do  not  appear ; 
out  in  the  mandates  from  the  queen  and 
prince,  both  before  and  after  his  capture 
and  death,  his  name  is  always  united  with 
those  of  the  Despencers,  ascribing  to  them 
the  guilt  of  estranging  the  king  from  his 
wife  and  real  friends  by  false  suggestions 
and  evil  procurement,  and  designatmg  them 
as  *  enemies  of  God,  of  the  Church,  and  the 
whole  kingdom.'  Remembering,  however, 
how  great  was  the  inveteracy  between  the 
contending  parties,  and  how  little  there  is 
to  approve  in  the  conduct  of  that  which 
was  successful,  we  must  hesitate  before  we 
join  in  the  popular  cry  against  the  chan- 
cellor without  more  substantial  proof  of  bis 
demerits.  (Pari,  Writs,  ii.  p.  ii.  472 ;  Abb, 
Rot,  Grig,  i.  303.) 

BALBOCK,  Robert,  son  and  heir  of 
Samuel  Baldock,  of  Stanway  in  Essex, 
bore  the  same  arms  as  those  of  the  last- 
named,  Robert  de  Baldock,  Bishop  of  Nor- 
wich. He  became  a  student  at  Gray's  Inn 
on  July  7,  1044,  was  called  to  the  bar  on 
February  11,  1651,  and  arrived  at  the  de- 
gree of  ancient  in  May  1607.  By  his  first 
marriage,  with  Mary  the  daughter  of 
Bacqueville  Bacon  (of  the  family  of  Red- 
prave),  he  became  settled  at  Great  Hocham 
m  Norfolk.  This  lady  died  in  1662,  after 
which  he  took  a  second  wife,  whose  name 
has  not  been  handed  down.  Of  his  early 
formed  that  Ted  to  results  so  fatal  to  his    legal  career  there  is  no  other  record  than 


•ofereign  and  himself,  there  were  sufficient 
indications  of  danger  at  home,  and  of 
tieachery  in  the  conduct  of  Charles  ie  Bel, 
to  have  mduoed  more  cautious  proceedings. 


that  of  Roger  North  (2.33),  who  says  of 
him  that  he  *  had  wit  and  will  enough  *  to 
contrive  a  fraudulent  conveyance.  In  1671 
he  was  recorder  of  Great  Yarmouth  when 


The  invasion  of  Queen  Isabella  quickly  j  Charles  II.  visited  that  place,  on  which 
feUowed.  She  landed  on  September  24,  |  occasion  he  was  knighted.  He  took  the 
1326;  and  the  king,  deserted  by  almost  all '  degree  of  serjeant  in  Michaelmas  Term 
parties,  ded  to  Wales  with  the  chancellor  i  1677,  and  was  included  in  the  list  of  king's 
aad  the  two  Despencers.  The  elder  of  j  Serjeants  on  the  accession  of  James  IL 
these  was  taken  and  executed  at  Bristol,  !  He  was  one  of  the  counsel  employed  by 
and  on  November  10  the  king  and  his  two  '  the  crown  in  the  prosecution  of  the  seven 
remaining  companions  fell  into  the  hands  of ,  bishops ;  and  showed  himself  so  thorough- 
the  queen*s  fnends.     The  fate  of  the  fa-  >  paced  a  stickler  for  prerogative  that  within 


vonrite  was  soon  sealed,  and  that  of  the 
king  was  delayed  till  a  resignation  of  his 
aown  had  be^  forced  from  him.    Baldock 


a  week  after  the  trial  he  was  appointed,  on 
July  6,  1688,  a  justice  of  the  King's  Bench, 
in  the  place  of  Sir  John  Powell,  who  had 


had  been  specially  denounced  in  the  queen's  declared  his  opinion  in  favour  of  the  pre- 
fint  pfDcls^mation  {State  TriaU,  i.  35) ;  but,  |  Utes  {BramstorCs  Atdobiog.  311)  ;  but  ho 
being  an  ecclesiastic,  was  committed  to  the  '  had  very  little  opportunity  of  showing  his 


castody  of  Adam  de  Orleton,  Bishop  of 
Hereford.  He  remained  at  Hereford  till 
Februanr  following,  when  he  was  removed 
to  the    bishop's    nouse  in  London.    His 


judicial  qualifications,  for  before  the  next 
term  the  Prince  of  Orange  had  embarked 
for  England,  and  the  king  was  on  the  point 
of  flying  from  it 

e2 


52 


BALDWIN 


In  the  new  appointments  he  of  course 
was  not  thought  of.  He  died  three  years 
afterwards,  on  October  4,  1691,  and  his 
monument  still  remains  in  the  church  of 
Great  Hocham. 

BALBWIK,  John,  was  the  son  of 
William  Baldwin,  and  Agnes  the  daughter 
of  William  Dormer,  Esq.,  of  Wycombe 
in  Buckinghamshire,  the  ancestor  of  Lord 
Dormer.  At  the  Inner  Temple,  where  he 
studied  the  law,  he  attained  so  high  a 
reputation  that  he  received  the  uncommon 
distinction  of  being  thrice  appointed  reader 
— in  autumn  1516,  in  Lent  1524,  and  in 
autumn  1531.  The  last  occasion  was  on 
account  of  his  having  been  called  upon  to 
take  the  degree  of  the  coi^  •  which  he 
accordingly  assumed  in  the  following 
November,  when  he  was  immediately  con- 
stituted one  of  the  king's  Serjeants.  In 
1630  hd  held  the  office  of  tifeasurer  of  his 
inn. 

He  probably  practised  in  the  Court  of 
Chancery,  as  he  was  one  of  the  persons 
assigned  in  June  1520  to  aid  Cardinal 
Wolsey  in  hearing  causes  there.  He  and 
Serjeant  WiUoughby  were  knip^hted  in 
1534,  being  the  first  Serjeants,  as  is  noticed 
in  Spelman's  MS.  Reports,  who  ever  sub- 
mitted to  receive  that  honour.  In  1535  he 
was  elevated  t6  the  chief  justiceship  of  the 
Common  Pleas.  Within  a  few  weeks  he 
Was  called  upon  to  act  as  a  commissioner 
on  the  trials  of  Sir  Thomas  More  and 
Bishop  Fisher,  in  which,  however,  he  does 
not  appear  to  have  taken  anv  active  part. 
He  continued  chief  justice  for  ten  years, 
resigning  between  Trinity  Term  1545,  the 
date  of  tne  last  fine  levied  before  him,  and 
November  6.  He  died  on  December  22 
following. 

Notwithstanding  his  early  promise,  he 
does  not  seem  to  have  been  much  esteemed 
as  a  judge.  He  differed  frequently  from 
his  brethren,  and  was  certainly  thought 
little  of  by  Chief  Justice  Dyer,  who  on 
one  occasion  says  in  his  Reports,  'But 
Baldwin  was  of  a  contrary  opimon,  though 
neither  I,  nor  any  one  else,  I  believe,  un- 
derstood his  refutation.' 

He  possessed  the  manor  of  Aylesbury  in 
Bucks,  and  in  the  last  year  of  his  life  he 
obtained  some  valuable  grants  firom  the 
king.  All  his  property,  for  want  of  male 
heirs,  was  divided  among  his  daughters, 
one  of  whom,  Catherine,  was  married  to 
Robert  Pakington,  M.P.  for  London  (as- 
sassinated in  the  streets  in  1536),  who  was 
ancestor  of  the  biironetd  of  that  name,  of 
Aylesbury,  whose  title  became  extinct  in 
1830. 

BAVABTEB,  Thomas,  described  as  a 
'  clericus,'  was  constituted  a  baron  of  the 
Exchequer  on  November  4,  1423,  2  Henry 
VL  (Acts  Privy  Cornea,  iii.  121);  but  his 
name  nowhere  else  appears. 


BANKS 

BAVA8TBE,  Alard,  was  sheriff  of  Ox- 
fordshire in  20  &  21  Henry  II.,  1174-5 ; 
and  in  the  former  of  those  years  Us  name 
is  found  as  one  of  the  justices  itinerant 
fixing  the  assize  for  that  county.  But, 
in  reference  to  the  ordinary  proceedings  of 
the  court,  he  is  never  mentioned  ;  nor  in- 
deed is  any  other  information  given  con- 
cerning him. 

In  the  four  previous  years  that  sheriffal^ 
was  held  by  Adam  Banastre,  probably  his 
fitther.   (IkOer'M  Worthies;  Madox,  i.  124.) 

BAHI8TXB,  WiLLiAX,  was  of  a  family 
which  resided  at  Turk  Dean  in  the  county 
of  Gloucester,  in  possession  of  a  very  c(m- 
siderable  estate.  He  received  his  l^al 
education  at  the  Middle  Temple,  and  being 
honoured  with  the  degree  of  the  coif  in 
1706,  was  then  appointed  one  of  the  judM 
of  South  Wales ;  from  which  poeitian  ne 
was  advanced,  on  the  recommendation  of 
Lord  Harcourt,  to  be  a  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer, on  June  8,  1713,  when  he  was 
knighted.  He  occupied  this  seat  for  little 
more  than  a  year,  being  superseded  on 
October  14^  1714,  not  three  months  after 
the  accession  of  George  I.,  having  been  re- 
ported by  Lord  Cowper  as '  a  man  not  at 
all  qualified  for  the  mace.'  (Atkyru^s  Oitm- 
cestersh,4lS;  LordJiaymondjl2Ql,  1318.) 

BAHKE,  Richard.  The  barons  of  the 
Exchequer  in  the  early  reigns  were  of  so 
little  comparative  importance,  generally 
rising  to  the  bench  from  being  clerks  in 
that  department,  and  not  engaged  in  the 
general  judicial  business  of  the  countiy, 
that  little  information  can  be  obtainea 
regarding  them  either  from  records  or 
tradition.  Of  the  legal  career  of  Richard 
Banke  nothing  is  known,  except  that  he 
was  made  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  on 
June  11,  1410,  11  Henry  IV.,  and,  con- 
tinuing in  his  place  to  the  end  of  that 
reiffn,  was  re-appointed  in  the  next^  He 
and  his  wife  Margaret,  the  daughter  of 
William  de  la  Rivere,  were  buried  in  the 
Priory  of  St  Bartholomew,  London.  {StoVy 
419.) 

BAHKE,  Thomas,  who  was  perhaps  the 
son  of  the  preceding,  is  another  instance 
of  the  paucity  of  materials  respecting  the 
barons  of  the  Exchequer  of  thb  age.  The 
sole  menfion  of  Thomas  Banke  is  that  he 
received  that  appointment  on  May  18, 1424^ 
2  Henry  VL  (Acts  of  Privy  Council,  iiL 
147.) 

BANKS,  John,  was  of  Keswick  in  Cum- 
berland, where  his  father  of  the  same  name 
was  a  merchant,  and  his  mother  was  Eliia- 
beth,  daughter  of — HasselL  He  was  bom 
in  1589,  snd  in  1604  he  entered  Queen*s 
College,  Oxford.  Without  taking  anr  de- 
gree there,  he  became  a  student  at  CTray's 
Inn  in  May  1607,  and,  after  being  called  to 
the  bar  on  November  30,  1614,  and  to  the 
bench  of  the  society  in  1629,  he  was  elected 


BAKKB 

reader  in  Lent  16S1,  and  treasurer  in  the 
following  year.  He  had  previous  to  arriTing 
at  theae  posts  acquired  a  high  reputation  in 
his  profession. 

Returned  to  the  parliament  of  1628,  he 
confined  himself  to  legal  questions  {ParL 
Hid.  ii.  480),   and  was  selected  in  Julj 
1690  to  be  attomey-general  to  the  newly 
bom  Prince    Charles^  Duke  of  Cornwall 
(lUfrngTy  six.  254)|  afterwards  Charles  II., 
whereupon  he  was  knighted.   On  the  death 
of  William  Not,  he  was  appointed  attorney- 
general  to  the  King,  on  September  27, 1634, 
and  it  ia  some  proof  of  the  estimation  in 
which  he  was  held,  that  a  contemporary 
letter-writer  says,  with  somewhat  of  ex- 
aggeration, that  he  was  commended  to  his 
majesty  as  exceeding  Bacon  in  eloquence, 
Eliesmere  in  judgment,  and  Noy  in  law. 
( Corfi  CasUe,  54.)   He  had  then  a  residence 
at  ILuiwell,  near  Staines^  but  soon  after  his 
adyanoe  he  purchased  the  manor  of  Corfe 
Castle  in  Dorsetshire,  of  Sir  Edward  Coke*s 
widow,  Lady  Hatton. 

Under  his  official  direction  the  question- 
able proceedings  in  the  Star  Chamber  were 
taken  against  Bastwick,  Burton,  and  Prynne, 
a^pRinst  Bishop  Williams,  and  against  John 
Lilbom ;  and  though  he  did  not  originate 
the  plan  for  the  imposition  of  ship  money, 
he  was  employed  in  preparing  and  adyising 
on  the  wnta  and  to  support  them  as  the 
proeecntor  against  John  Hampden.  (State 
Triali,  iiL)  These  duties  he  performed 
10  latisfactorilj  to  the  court  that  upon  the 
eleratioD  of  Sir  Edward  Lyttelton  to  the 
post  of  lord  keraer,  he  receiyed  that  of  chief 
justice  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  Januaiy 
29, 1641.     (Ifyfner.  xx.  447.) 

Very  aooa  after  nis  appointment  a  com- 
miMian  waa  granted  to  him  to  sit  as  speaker 
in  the  House  of  Lords,  in  conse<^uence  of  the 
illness  of  the  lord  keeper ;  and  m  that  cha- 
ncter  he  had  the  melancholy  duty  of  pre- 
siding when  the  Earl  of  Stranbrd,  who  nad 
been  his  client,  and  with  whom  he  was 
b  habita  of  friendly  intimacy,  was  brought 
to  the  bar  on  his  impeachment  by  the  Com- 
mooa.  (Cof/tf  CasUe,  83.)  Early  in  the 
next  year,  on  the  king  retiring  to  York, 
BaidES  waa  among  the  first  to  join  him, 
when  he  waa  admitted  into  the  privy 
eoimcil,  and  anbscribed  the  profession  made 
bj  the  lords  of  their  beliei  that  the  king 
had  no  intention  to  make  war  upon  the 
parliament,  but  that  his  anxious  desire 
was  to  preaerye  the  peace  of  the  kingdom. 
(Chrmdtm,  iiL  72.) 

Notwithstanding  the  part  which  Sir  John 
had  fbnnerly  taken  in  the  prosecution  and 
in  the  case  of  ahip  money,  and  his  present 
saastance  to  the  royal  counsels,  he  does  not 
seem  to  baye  been  an  object  of  enmity  to 
the  parliament ;  for  in  the  propositions  tbey 
madeto  the  king  for  peace  in  Februaij 
1643  th«j  defied  that  lie  should  keep  his 


BANKES 


53 


place  in  the  Common  Pleas.     (Pari  Hid. 
lii.  70.)    This  recommendation  he  owed  to 
his  haying  friends  in  both  houses,  the  Earls 
of  Northumberland  and  Essex,  the  Lord 
Wharton,  Denzil  Holies,  and  Green,  who 
were  aware  that  Banks  by  his  moderate 
counsels  had  hazarded  the  king's  indigna- 
tion.   (Cof/i?  C«<fe,  122-124.)    SirJoWs 
real  deyotion  to  the  royal  cause  wns  proyed 
by  his  liberal  subscription  to  the  king's 
necessities,  and  by  his  wife's  noble  defence 
of  Corfe  Castle  in  1643,  and  after  his  death 
again  in  1645. 

The  former  ffood  feeling  of  the  parlia- 
ment towards  the  chief  justice  was  totally 
changed  by  his  steady  adherence  to  his  royal 
master ;  and  their  inyeteracy  against  him  was 
excited  by  his  charge  to  the  grand  jury  at 
Salisbury  in  the  summer  assizes  of  1643, 
denouncmg  the  Earls  of  Northumberland, 
Pembroke,  and  Salisbuiy,  and  seyeral  mem- 
bers of  the  House  of  Commons,  as  guilty  of 
high  treason  in  taking  up  arms  against  the 
king.  Though  the  bills  were  not  found,  he 
was  ordered  to  be  impeached  for  his  charge, 
an  order  which  was  repeated  in  the  following 
year  on  the  occasion  of  his  condemning 
Captain  Turpin  to  be  hanged  at  Exeter. 
( WkUdocke,  78,  96.)  Though  by  his  ab- 
sence he  escaped  the  consequences  of  these 
yotes,  he  paid  the  price  of  his  loyalty  by 
the  forfeiture  of  all  nis  property.  £yen  his 
books  were  seized  and  given  oy  the  par- 
liament to  Mr.  Maynard. 

Sir  John  did  not  liye  to  see  the  destruc- 
tion of  his  castle.  He  died  at  Oxford  on 
December  28,  1644,  and  was  buried  in 
Christ  Church  Cathedral.  Lord  Clarendon 
describes  him  as  '  a  man  of  great  abilitiea 
and  unblemished  iuteffrity,'  but  at  the  same 
time  intimates  that  he  wanted  courage  to 
meet  the  exigencies  of  the  time.  All  agree 
that  he  was  thoroughly  versed  in  the  learn- 
ing of  his  profession,  and  his  whole  conduct 
shows  that,  though  cautious  and  moderate,  he 
was  steady  in  his  attachment  to  the  crown. 
He  made  a  settlement  of  30/.  a  }^ar,  and 
other  emoluments,  on  the  poor  of  Keswick, 
and  chiefly  to  set  up  a  manufacture  there  of 
coarse  cottons.    (Puller,  i.  237.) 

His  wife,  who  was  Mary,  the  daughter  of 
Balph  Hawtrey,  Esq.,  of  Ruislip,  Middle- 
sex,l)y  compounding  got  rid  dT  tne  seques- 
tration. By  her  he  had  a  numerous  family, 
whose  descendants  represented  Corfe  Castle 
as  long  as  that  borough  returned  memben 
to  parliament. 

BAVKS8,  Geobgk,  was  the  lineal  de- 
scendant of  the  great  chief  justice,  whose 
fiunily  introduced  into  the  name  the  penul- 
timate letter  e.  He  was  the  third  eon  of 
Henry  Baidces,  Esq.,  of  Kingston  Hall, 
Dorsetshire,  who  represented  Corfe  Castle 
from  1780  to  1826,  and  then  was  elected 
member  for  the  county  till  1831.  His  mother 
was  Francesj  daughter  of  William  Woodley, 


54 


BANKWELL 


Esq.,  governor  of  the  Leeward  Islands.  He 
was  a  member  of  Trinity  Hall,  in  the  Uni- 
Tersity  of  Cambridge,  and  studied  the  law 
at  first  at  Lincoln's  Inn.  and  then  at  the 
Inner  Temple,  by  which  society  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  in  April  1816,  but  had 
little  opportunity  to  acquire  any  eminence 
in  the  profession.  He  succeeded  Francis 
Maseres  in  the  oiBce  of  cursitor  baron  in 
July  1824,  and  continued  to  perform  the 
duties  of  his  office  (which  at  last  consisted 
of  little  more  than  joining  in  the  Michael- 
mas solemnities  of  the  sheriffalty  of  London) 
till  his  death,  in  1866,  having  held  the  po- 
sition of  judge  advocate  general  during  the 
short  administration  of  Lord  Derby  in  1852. 
No  one  was  appointed  to  succeed  him  as 
cursitor  baron,  and  the  office  was  imme- 
diately abolished. 

Succeeding  eventually  by  the  death  of 
his  brother  to  the  family  estates,  he  was 
chosen  member  for  the  county  of  Dorset, 
which  he  represented  till  his  death;  and 
was  further  honoured  by  being  placed  on 
the  privy  council.  He  died  on  July  6, 
1856,  leaving  issue  by  his  wife  Georgina 
Charlotte,  daughter  and  heir  of  Admiral 
Edmund  Charles  Nugent. 

BAirXWELL,  or  BATTKWELL,  John 
DE,  whose  name  is  variously  spelled  Bak- 
well,  BacweU,  Bauauel,  Bankwell,  or  Ban- 
quelle,  was  so  called  from  a  place  formerly 
written  Bankwell,  but  now  Bankers,  at  Lee 
in  Kent.  Besides  this,  he  had  other  property 
in  the  county,  and  in  31  Edward  i.  oli- 
tained  for  himself  and  his  wife  Cicily  a 

Eant  of  free  warren  over  all  their  lands  in 
$e,  Lewisham,  Bromley,  and  Brokisham. 
{Hasted,  i.  460, 493.) 

In  1297  he  was  appointed  to  perambu- 
late the  forests  of  five  counties,  and  was  paid 
at  the  rate  of  six  shillings  a  day ;  and  in  the 
next  year  he  acted  as  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant  into  Kent  (Pari,  Writs,  i.  396, 
897.^ 

Shortly  after  the  accession  of  Edward  II., 
on  November  10, 1307,  he  was  nominated  a 
baron  of  the  Exchequer,  but  must  have  died 
within  a  few  months,  as  his  wife  Cicily  was 
assessed  at  four  marks  in  the  city  of  London 
for  the  quinzime  imposed  in  1308. 

He  left  two  sons,  named  Thomas  and 
William,  and  perhaps  others,  tx)  whom  the 

Sroperty  descended  in  gavelkind.      (Abb, 
lot.  Prig,  ii.  266.)  

BAKXWELL,  or  BATTKWELL,  Roger 
DE,  was  most  probably  of  the  family, 
and  perhaps  a  younger  son,  of  the  above 
John.  Roger  is  noticed  as  an  advocate  in 
the  earlj  part  of  the  reign  of  Edward  III. 
In  the  sixth  year  he  was  employed  to  tallage 
the  countiea  of  Nottingham  and  Derby  (22^. 
Pari,  ii.  147) ;  and  from  his  being  assigned 
in  14  Edwaxd  lU.  to  enquire  into  a  confla- 
gration at  Sj^ndoOy  in  the  latter  ooonty 
(N,  Fadera^  u.  1138),  it  would  aeem  pro- 


BARDOLF 

bable  that  he  was  settled  there ;  the  more 
especially  as  Sir  Godfrey  Foljambe,  one  of 
his  associates  in  that  enquiry,  many  years 
afterwards  gave  a  messuage  and  land  to  a 
clergyman  named  Roger  de  Bankwell  (Abh, 
Rot,  Orig,  ii.  286),  who,  it  may  be  presumed, 
was  this  Roger's  son. 

He  was  constituted  a  judge  of  the  King's 
Bench  before  Easter  in  1341,  and  is  men- 
tioned in  the  Year  Books  as  late  as  23 
Edward  III. 

BABDELBT,  RoBEBT  de,  is  designated 
in  various  records,  from  30  Edward  L, 
1302,  to  15  Edward  II.,  1321,  as  a  clerk  of 
the  Chancery,  and  acting  under  no  less  than 
eight  chancellors.  Dunng  that  period  he 
was  one  of  those  who  were  entrusted  with 
the  keeping  of  the  Great  Seal  in  the 
chancellor's  absence,  or  in  a  temporary  va- 
cancy of  the  office.  He  is  often  styled  one 
of  the  *  gardiens  du  Seal.'  He  is  afterwards 
mentioned  as  a  clerk  of  the  Chancery  as  late 
as  July  5,  1325. 

In  0  Edward  H.  he  was  selected  aa  an 
assessor  of  the  fifteenth  in  the  city  of  Lon- 
don ;  and  in  the  previous  year  he  was  ap- 
pointed keeper  of  tne  hospital  of  St.  Thomas 
the  MartvT  of  Aeon  in  London,  until  his 
brother,  Richard  of  Southampton,  returned 
to  England ;  and  he  held  the  ecclesiastical 
rank  of  canon  of  Chichester.  (Bat,  Pari  L 
287,  367 ;  Abb.  Rot,  Orig,  i.  227.) 

BABDOLF,  Hugh,  was  a  younger  son 
of  Baron  William  Bardolf,  of  Stoke  Bardolf, 
who  was  sheriff  of  Norfolk  and  Suffolk 
from  16  to  21  Henry  II.  The  inclinaticniB 
of  his  youth  may  be  collected  from  the  fact 
that  in  22  Henry  II.  he  was  amerced  for 
trespassing  in  the  king's  forests.  In  a  very 
few  years,  however,  nis  talents  were  dia- 
covered.  In  30  Henry  H.,  1184,  he  was 
dapifer  regis  in  conjunction  with  Hugh  de 
Morewick,  and  afterwards  with  William 
Rufus.  It  is  sometimes  considered  the  same 
as  seneschal  or  steward,  and,  indeed,  be  is 
occasionally  designated  by  the  latter  title ; 
and  probably  his  appointment  had  reference 
to  the  Duchv  of  Normandy  only,  as  in  the 
Norman  roll  of  that  year  he  and  Hugh 
de  Morewick  are  allowed  lOOA  for  money 
disbursed  for  the  king's  expenses  while  at 
Gisors.  In  the  same  year  he  received  a 
gift  of  one  hundred  marks  from  the  king. 
(Madox,  i.  51, 168.) 

From  this  time  till  the  end  of  the  reifn 
he  acted  as  a  justicier,  being  present  in  the 
Curia  Regis  when  fines  were  levied  there^ 
and  assisting  as  a  justice  itinerant  in  ai^ 
sessing  the  talla^  of  Wiltshire,  of  which 
he  was  sheriff.  (Ibid.  634.)  He  aleo  held 
the  sheriffalty  of  Cornwall,  and  was  fenoxk 
of  the  honor  of  Gloucester  (Madax*9  Banm. 
63,  67),  and  was  nominated  one  of  the 
lieutenants  of  the  kingdom  duxing  Heniy'l 
abeence  in  Normandy. 

Bichard  L^  after  ma  afoewlan,  tKbouij^ 


BARDOLF 

ii8  fofoed  lum  m  well  m  others  to  contri- 
bute to  the  expemee  of  the  crusade  under 
the  name  of  a  fine  for  not  joining  in  it, 
trented  him  with  equal  distinction.  He 
ms  apj^inted  of  the  covncil  to  assist  the 
two  cliief  justiciaries  in  the  rule  of  the 
kingdom  and  the  administration  of  the 
1bw8  ;  and  his  pleas  on  the  itinera  in  seve- 
nl  counties  are  recorded  on  the  great  rolls 
of  1  &  2  Richard  I.  When  also  the  com- 
plaints against  William  de  Longchamp 
became  too  loud  to  be  disregarded,  he  was 
ooe  of  the  persons  whom  the  king  nomi- 
Btted  in  the  bishop's  place.  Although 
lome  historians  question  the  authenticity 
of  the  letter  containing  this  order,  the  in- 
sertion of  the  names  in  the  forged  document 
(if  forged  it  were)  shows  the  nigh  position 
of  the  parties^  and  the  estimation  in  which 
^ey  were  held  at  the  period.  There  is  no 
doubt  that  he  joined  Frince  John  and  the 
barons  in  the  remoTal  of  the  unpopular 
biabop,  and  that  the  Idng  (who  never  with- 
drew his  confidence  mm  the  chancellor) 
punished  him  on  his  return  .by  discharging 
aim  from  the  sherifiUty  of  York  and  West- 
moreland. That  he  did  not^  however, 
remain  long  in  disgrace  is  proved  by  his 
subsequent  employments.  His  name  fre- 
quently appears  as  a  justider  in  the  Curia 
it^^  on  nnes  levied  from  the  5th  to  the 
9th  Richard  I.,  and  in  the  last  four  years 
of  that  reign  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant 
in  varions  counties.  {madox'$  Exch.  i. 
35,  699,  704,  733.)  He  was  one  of  those 
fcent  to  X  ork  to  determine  the  controversy 
between  the  archbishop  and  the  monks 
there,  and  was  also  entrusted  with  the 
sherinalty  of  the  counties  of  Northumber- 
Isnd,  Dorset  and  Somerset,  Stafibrd,  Wilts, 
and  Leicester.  In  some  of  them  he  con- 
tinued onder  King  John,  with  the  addition 
of  Derby,  Nottingham,  Devon,  and  Com- 
iralL  In  the  first  jear  of  King  John's 
leign  he  was  constituted  custos  of  the 
castle  of  Tickhill,  and  had  a  ^nt  of  the 
manor  of  Brumegrave-cum-Norton,  for 
which  he  procured  the  privilege  of  a 
market,  together  with  a  fair  for  it,  and  also 
for  Carleton  and  Grimeston.  (Rot,  Chart, 
John,  66,  61, 91.) 

In  all  the  three  reigns  his  scutage  in  the 
KTeral  counties  of  Warwick,  Leicester, 
Kent,  Oxford,  Norfolk,  and  Suffolk,  where 
bis  property  lay,  was  excused'  pro  libertate 
sedendi  ad  Scaccarium ; '  and  m  the  reign 
of  John  the  records  show  that  he  continued 
to  act  on  the  circuits  as  a  justice  itinerant, 
and  in  the  Curia  Regis  as  a  justicier  before 
whom  fines  were  levied  till  the  fifth  year. 

About  that  time  he  died,  as  in  the  next 
Tear  Amabilis  de  Limesey,  who  was  his 
wife,  fined  in  two  thousand  marks  and  five 
pslfreya  that  ahe  should  not  be  compelled 
to  mazTY  again;  and  that  she  sboiud  be 
quit  of  all  aids  to  the  sheriff,  &c.,  as  long 


BARONS 


55 


as  she  should  be  a  widow  after  the  death 
of  John  de  Bndosa.  her  late  husband. 
(Jioi.  de  Fm.  82.)  This  seems  to  show  that 
soon  after  the  death  of  Hugh  Bardolf  she 
had  married  a  second  huffband,  who  had 
since  died;  and  it  appears  that  in  the 
previous  year  William  de  Braioea  had 
given  a  fine  to  have  her  for  the  wife  of  one 
of  his  sons.     (Jhtydale'$  Baron,  i.  415.) 

BAEXWl,  Edward,  was  bom  at 
Wandsworth  in  1678,  and  was  called  to 
the  bar  at  the  Inner  Temple,  of  which  he 
was  not  admitted  a  member  till  1724 ;  but 
was  one  of  the  benchers  of  that  society 
when  he  was  appointed  curator  baron  of 
the  Exchequer  on  May  9,  1743.  He  re- 
signed the  place  on  April  19,  1755,  and 
died  in  1759.     (Li/sons,  i.  507,  670.) 

BASKIVOj  KiCHARD  DE,  was  raised 
from  the  office  of  prior  to  that  of  abbot 
of  Westminster  m  September  1223. 
{Monad,  ii.  282.)  He  is  first  mentioned 
by  Madox  (ii.  318)  among  the  barons  of 
the  Exchequer  in  27  Henry  IIL,  1242; 
and  as  he  stands  immediately  after  William 
de  Haverhull,  the  treasurer,  he  no  doubt 
occupied  a  high  position  there.  In  this, 
however^  his  ecclesiastical  dignity  would 
necessarily  place  him  ;  and  it  by  no  means 
follows  that  he  was,  as  Dugdale  and 
Weever  describe  him,  chief  baron,  accord- 
ing to  the  signification  by  which  they 
evidently  interpret  the  term.  There  is 
nothing  to  Hhow  that  at  that  time  there 
was  an  officer  bearing  that  title ;  and  if  it 
had  then  existed,  the  rolls  would  not  have 
been  silent  on  the  subject,  nor  would 
Madox  have  failed  to  notice  it. 

In  the  same  vear  he  alone  tested  the 
mandates  issued  to  the  sheriffs  of  the 
different  counties,  directing  them  to  get  in 
the  scutage-money  granted  for  the  king^s 
voyage  into  Gascony.  This  shows  that  he 
stood  high  in  the  royal  confidence,  and  was 
in  immediste  attendance  on  the  king ;  and 
about  1245  he  was  at  the  royal  intercession 
excused  from  his  attendance  on  a  aeneral 
council  called  by  the  pope,  because  he  and 
the  Bishop  of  Carlisle  were  the  king^s 
deputies  or  regents  of  England  when  he 
went  abroad.  (Dart's  Westm,  iL  xx.)  He 
died  on  November  23, 1246  (  Weevery  486), 
having,  during  his  long  presidency,  greatly 
increased  the  revenues  of  his  house.  Hia 
character  was  that  of  a  prudent,  learned^ 
and  religious  man. 

BABHEWELL,  Thoxas,  was  appointed 
second  baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  October 
1, 1494, 10  Henry  VII.,  and  a  successor  was 
put  in  hie  place  on  May  2,  1496.  Beyond 
this  fact  history  is  silent 

BABOHS,  William,  or,  as  he  is  some- 
times called,  William  Barnes  (Bishop  of 
London),  took  the  degree  of  Doctor  of 
Laws  at  Oxford ;  but  in  which  of  the 
colleges  or  halls  he  studied  has  not  been 


56 


BABOWE 


disoovered.  He  became  oommissaxy  of  the 
Frerogatiye  Court  of  Canterbuiy ;  and  hav- 
ing entered  into  orders,  he  receiyed  in  1500 
the  livings  of  East  Peckham  in  Kent,  and 
of  Beaconsfield  in  Buckinf^hamshire ;    in 

1501,  that  of  Gedney  in  Lincolnshire ;  in 

1502,  that  of  Bosworth  in  Leicestershire, 
and  in  1503,  that  of  Tharfield  in  the  arch- 
deaconry of  Huntingdon. 

He  was  appointed  master  of  the  Bolls  on 
February  1,  1502.  In  June  he  was  one  of 
the  negotiators  of  the  treaty  of  marriage 
between  Prince  Henry  and  Catherine  of 
Amgon ;  and  on  the  24th  of  the  following 
January  he  assisted  in  laying  the  first  stone 
of  Henry  VU.'s  chapel  at  Westminster 
Abbey.  He  succeeded  Bishop  Warham  as 
Bishop  of  London  on  August  2, 1504,  but 
did  not  obtain  the  restitution  of  the  tem- 

Soralitios  till  November  13.  On  the  latter 
ay  he  resigned  his  judicial  office,  and  died 
in  less  than  a  year  ailerwaids,  on  October  0 
or  10,  1505.  He  was  buried  in  St  Paulas. 
(Godwuiy  190;  Aihen,  Ox.  iL  694;  Ht/mer, 
xiii.  78,  111.) 

BABOWE,  TnoxAS,  was  appointed 
master  of  the  Rolls  on  September  22,  1483, 
1  Bichard  HI.  He  was  rector  of  Olney 
in  Buckinghamshire ;  and  three  weelcs 
after  the  accession  of  Bichard  had  the  grant 
of  a  prebend  in  St.  Stephen's  Chapel  in 
the  palace  of  Westminster.  How  he  had 
ingratiated  himself  with  that  monarch  does 
not  appear ;  but  perhaps  by  some  services 
he  haa  rendered  in  the  Ezcheouer,  of 
which  he  probably  was  a  clerk.  He  was 
the  first  master  of  the  Rolls  who  had  a 
grant  of  the  tun  or  two  pipes  of  wine,  which 
bas  been  continued  ever  since,  and  nomi- 
nally exists  at  present.  His  patent  for  it 
is  dated  December  6,  1483.  (Hot.  Pat.  1 
Rich.  HI.)  On  August  1,  14iB5,  he  was 
appointed  keeper  of  the  Great  Seal  (Hot. 
Claus,  n.  5),  and  it  was  in  his  custody 
at  the  time  of  Richard's  death  on  the 
field  of  Bosworth,  on  the  22nd  of  that 
month,  when  it  was  of  course  given  up  to 
the  conqueror. 

His  possession  of  the  mastership  of  the 
Rolls  seems  to  have  been  considered  an 
intrusion ;  for  his  predecessor,  Robert 
Morton,  resumed  his  place  without  a  new 
patent.  Barowe's  punishment  for  his  ad- 
herence to  the  fallen  party,  however,  ex- 
tended no  further ;  but  on  the  contraiy  he 
appears  veir  soon  to  have  conciliated  the 
goodwill  of  the  new  king;  for  on  Sep- 
tember 21  he  obtained  not  only  a  general 
pardon,  but  a  confirmation  of  his  prebend 
m  St  Stephen's  Chapel,  and  his  appoint- 
ment as  one  of  the  masters  in  Chancery. 
(Itot,  Pat.  1  Henry  VH.  p.  i.  m.  ii.)  Id. 
the  latter  character  he  attended  parliament 
in  the  aocustomed  doty  of  xteoeiving  the 
f»etitions  as  late  as  12  Henij  VII.,  1497, 
Afiter  wiiich  his  name  no  JMOie  oocun. 


BARTON 

BABBE,  Richard,  was  a  diligent  and 
zealous  servant  of  Henry  IL  After  the 
peace  concluded  between  that  monarch  and 
Louis  of  France  in  January  1169^  he  was 
sent  with  the  Aichdeacon  of  Saluburr  to 
B^ieventum  to  negotiate  with  Pope  Alex- 
ander in  relation  to  Archbishop  Becket; 
and  while  there  he  succeeded  in  obtaining 
from  the  pontiff  a  new  letter  to  the  Arch- 
bishop of  York,  commanding  him  to  crown 
Prince  Henry  at  any  time  the  king  re- 
quired him.  After  the  murder  of  the 
archbishop,  he  was  again  appointed  one  of 
the  ambasfiadors  to  the  papal  city;  and 
when  their  passage  througn  the  mountains 
was  impeded  by  the  severity  of  the 
weather,  he  was  selected  to  proceed  with- 
out his  companions  and  urge  the  king  s 
innocence  of  the  murder.  Though  on  his 
arrival  the  pope  refused  to  admit  him 
to  his  presence,  he  at  last  contrived  to 
mollify  the  indignant  feeHngs  of  the  pon- 
tiff, and  by  his  representations,  backea  by 
the  proofs  he  produced,  his  royal  master 
escaped  excommunication. 

In  recompense  for  these  and  other  faith- 
ful services,  the  king  appointed  him  chan- 
cellor to  his  son  Henry  when  he  crowned 
him ;  but  on  that  prince  rebelling  against 
his  father  in  1173,  Richard  Barre  proved 
his  loyalty  by  restoring  the  Seal  to  the 
king.  In  1184  he  was  raised  to  the  dignity 
of  Archdeacon  of  Ely. 

In  7  Richard  I.,  1105-6,  he  was  one  of 
the  justices  itinerant  holding  pleas  in 
Devonshire  j  and  from  that  year  till  1  John 
inclusive  his  name  appears  among  the 
justices  taking  fines  in  the  Curia  Regis  at 
Westminster.     (Madox,  i.  502.) 

BABTOH,  John  de,  is  the  second  of  the 
two  justices  (Ralph  Fitzwilliam  being  the 
first)  to  whom  tne  commission  of  Trail- 
baston,  confined  to  Yorkshire,  and  corned 
in  Spelman  (Qlosaary)  is  directed.  The 
date  18  there  omitted ;  but  in  Hemingford 
(p.  208)  it  is  placed  under  the  year  1304. 
Among  the  parliamentary  writs  (L  407)  is 
one  dated  November  23,  1304,  addressed 
not  only  to  these  two,  but  to  two  others ; 
so  that  it  is  probable  there  were  two  com- 
missions, and  that  the  first  was  issued 
before  the  great  extent  of  the  offence  was 
known ;  especially  as  in  April  1305  a  still 
more  formal  appointment  of  judges  for 
almost  every  county  in  £ngland  took  place. 
(iV:  ^<«fera,  i.  970.') 

In  the  above  commission  he  is  erroneously 
called  '  de  Ryton,'  as  he  is  afterwards  de- 
signated 'de  Fryton,'  not  only  in  the 
parliamentary  writ,  but  also  in  subsequent 
commissions.  He  was  summoned  to  pe> 
form  military  service  against  the  Scots  in 
24  Edward  X,  and  in  the  28th  and  81st 
years  of  that  reign  was  named  in  com- 
misrioDS  of  array  in  Yorkahiie  (ParU 
^nite^  L277|846, 370);  andin8Edw.IIL 


.1 


BAJBSET 

be  was  amignftd  to  collect  and  levy  the 
acutege  <^  the  coonty  of  York,  (Abb,  Rat. 
Orig.  L  214) 

BASSET,  Ralph,  was  baron  of  Welden 
in  Northamptonahuey  and  had  large  poe- 
sessiona  in  several  of  the  midland  counties. 
He  waa  a  Norman  by  birth,  but  is  stated  to 
hare  been  raised  from  an  ignoble  family  by 
King  Heniy  at  the  beginning  of  his  reign. 

Spelman  places  him  as  chief  justiciary  in 
the  reign  of  William  11.,  and  states  that  he 
succeeded  Ranulph  Flambard,  Bishop  of 
Durham,  in  that  office.  But  this  is  contra- 
dicted by  the  fact  that  the  bishop  had 
certainly  all  the  power  usually  attributed 
to  the  chief  justiciary  at  the  time  of 
William's  deatn.  I>u||;aale  does  not  intro- 
duce him  as  chief  justidair  till  the  reign  of 
Henry  L ;  but  it  may  be  doubtful  whether 
he  was  eyen  then  distinguished  by  that 
precise  designation,  notwithstanding^  the 
ssHertion  of  Henry  of  Huntinsdon  in  his 
epistle  *  De  Mundi  Contemptu,^  as  it  is  un- 
quesdonable  that  the  principal  power  was 
exercised  by  Roger,  Bishop  of  Salisbuiy, 
for  the  greater  put  of  the  reign,  and  espe- 
cially during  the  king's  frequent  absences 
from  England.  The  place  he  takes  as  last 
of  fifteen  subscribing  witnesses  to  King 
Henry's  charter  to  Westminster  Abbey 
(Momati.  i.  308),  granted  either  in  1121  or 
1122,  demonstrates  that  he  could  not  then 
ksTe  held  the  office. 

He,  however,  certainly  filled  a  very  high 
poeiticMi  in  the  administration  of  justice, 
and  seems  to  have  been  selected  to  carry 
mto  execution  the  just  and  severe  laws 
enacted  by  Henry  for  the  suppression  of  the 
system  of  rapine  and  robbery  which  the 
last  reign  had  introduced.  He  is  mentioned 
in  1124  as  presiding  over  a  court  of  the 
barcms  held  at  Huncote  in  Leicestershire 
for  the  trial  of  ofienders,  where  he  caused 
no  less  than  forty-four  men  convicted  of 
robbery  to  be  hanged. 

By  the  roll  of  31  Henry  I.  it  appears, 
not  that  he  was  chief  justiciary,  for  that 
title  never  occurs  in  it,  but  that  he  had 
been  justice  of  the  forests  in  the  counties 
of  Norfolk,  Suffolk,  and  Surrey;  and  that 
in  the  itinera  which  were  appointed  by 
King  Henry  for  the  purpose  of  relieving 
the  Curia  Regis,  and  of  administering 
justice  to  the  people  almost  at  their  own 
doors,  no  less  tnan  six  counties,  and 
probably  more,  were  placed  under  his 
direction.  He  was  mamfestly  dead  before 
the  date  of  that  roll ;  and  the  entries  in  it, 
in  which  his  name  occurs,  have  reference 
to  debta  due  to  the  crown  from  his  pleas  in 
previous  years. 

The  precise  date  of  his  death  is  un- 
certain ;  but  it  took  place  at  Northampton, 
where,  falling  sick,  he  called  for  a  monk's 
habit  of  the  order  of  those  of  Abingdon ; 
and  after  dispoainir  of  hia  estate  and  send- 


BASSET 


67* 


ing  no  small  sum  to  that  abbey,  tiith  a 
grant  of  four  hides  of  land  in  Uhedele»- 
worth,  he  died,  and  was  honourably  buried 
in  the  chapter-house  there.  He  le^  several 
sons,  some  of  which  were  justiciers;  and 
firom  their  issue  various  baronies  sprang, 
the  last  of  which  lately  became  extinct. 
(Dugdale's  Barm,  i.  878;  Madox^  i.  12, 
146,  641,  ii.  224;  Tharatan's  NaUs,  i.  161 ; 
Mag,  Rat,  31  Henry  I.,  Hunter's  ed.,  31, 
101, 124, 145.) 

BASSET,  RiCHABD,  was  one  of  the  sons 
of  the  above  Ralph  Ba8f>et,  and  succeeded 
him  in  the  barony  of  Welden  in  North- 
amptonshire. From  an  early  period  of  his 
life  he  was  attached  to  the  court,  and 
assisted  in  the  administration  of  justice  in 
the  Aula  Regis.  It  is  probaole  that 
during  the  life  of  his  father  he  had  ad- 
vanced to  a  considerable  position ;  for  in 
the  great  roll  of  31  Henry  I.  the  same 
number  of  counties  are  mentioned  as  under 
the  judicial  superintendence  of  both;  and 
the  father  could  only  have  been  recently 
deceased. 

He  is  introduced  as  chief  justiciary  to 
Henry  1.  in  Dugdale's  list,  on  tne  authority 
of  lienry  of  Huntingdon  and  Ordericus 
Vitalis;  out  some  doubt  may  be  entertained 
whether  he  can  be  correctly  so  described. 
If  he  had  held  the  office  in  31  Henry  I., 
the  roll  of  that  year  would  have  afforded 
some  evidence  of  it;  but  it  makes  no 
distinction  between  him  and  the  other 
justiciaries,  whose  pleas  it  records.  In 
the  grant,  also,  of  the  office  of  great 
chamberlain  of  Kngland  to  Alberic  de 
Vere,  his  name  stands  so  low  on  a  list  of 
twelve  witnesses  as  to  preclude  the  possi- 
bility of  Ids  being  invested  with  the  title. 
That  ffrant  is  dated  'apud  Femcham  in 
Transfretatione  Regis.'  This  must  have 
been  on  occasion  of  the  king's  last  visit  to 
his  Norman  dominions  in  1134;  as  is 
apparent  from  the  fact  that  Geofirey, 
Bishop  of  Durham,  the  chancellor,  whose 
name  stands  as  the  second  witness,  waa 
not  elected  to  that  see  till  1133.  The  first 
witness  is  Roger,  Bishop  of  Salisbury, 
which  is  strong  presumptive  evidence  that 
he  was  then  firat  minister  or  chief  justiciary 
of  the  kingdom. 

The  expression  of  Ordericus  Vitalis  goes 
no  further  than  that  he  had  great  power 
in  this  reign,  'utpote  capitalis  justitia.' 
Dugdale*s  opinion,  also,  tnat  he  held  it 
jointly  with  Alberic  de  Vere  is  probably 
founded  on  the  fact  that  they  were  joint 
sheriffs  of  no  less  than  eleven  counties.  Al- 
though the  latter  author  says  in  his  '  Baron- 
age '  that  he  also  held  the  office  during  the 
whole  of  King  Stephen's  rei^,  he  does 
not  so  insert  his  name  in  his  'Chronica 
Series.' 

He  married  Matilda,  the  daughter  and 
heir   of  Geoffirey   Ridel,    the  justiciary 


58  ' 


BAiSSET 


(whose  land  appears  to  have  been  in  his 
custody) y  and  increased  his  already  laive 

Sroperty  by  her  possessions.  Of  tLese  he 
evoted  a  great  portion  to  pious  uses.  The 
Sriory  of  Laund  in  Leicestershire!  ded- 
icated to  St.  John  the  Baptist,  was 
founded  by  him  and  his  wife,  and  muni- 
ficently endowed  by  them  with  the  town 
and  manor  of  Lodington,  in  which  it 
stands ;  with  Friseby  also ;  besides  no  less 
than  fifteen  churches  in  the  neighbour- 
hood, and  oue  in  Rutland.  He  died  about 
1164.  His  eldest  son,  Geoffrey,  assumed 
his  mother's  name  of  RideL  Aiiother  son, 
Ralph,  who  continued  the  surname  of  Bas- 
set, was  lord  of  Drayton  in  Staffordshire ; 
and  a  third  son,  William,  subsequently  men- 
tioned, was  lord  of  Sapcote  in  Leicester- 
shire. (AftffL  Sac,  ii.  701 ;  ThorotofCs  Notts, 
i.  101;  Mtmatt.  yi  189;  Mag,  Rot.  31 
Hen.  I. ;  Madox,) 

BASSET,  Thoxas,  was  the  son  and 
heir  of  Gilbert,  a  grandson,  or,  as  Dugdale 
believes,  a  younger  son  of  the  aboye  Ralph 
Basset.  His  military  services  in  divers 
wars  were  rewarded  by  King  Henry  XL  at 
an  early  period  of  his  reign  with  the  lord- 
ship of  Hedendon  in  Oxfordshire,  together 
with  the  hundred  of  Botendon,  and  that 
Iving  without  the  north  gate  of  the  city  of 
Oxford.  He  was  sheriff  of  that  county  in 
10  Henry  XL,  and  in  the  14th  year  of  that 
reign,  1*168,  he  was  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant  for  the  counties  of  Essex  and 
Hertford.     {Madox,  i.  687.) 

From  the  year  1176  his  name  frequently 
appears  among  the  barons  acting  juaicially 
in  the  Curia  Resis;  and  the  superior 
character  of  his  fS[)ilities  is  evident  from 
his  being  employed  as  a  justice  itinerant 
for  the  six  foUowinj^  years  in  no  less  than 
fifteen  other  counties;  and  in  his  having 
been  one  of  those  selected  by  the  great 
council  held  at  Windsor  in  1170,  when 
the  kingdom  was  divided  into  four  parts 
for  the  better  administration  of  justice. 

He  married  Alice,  the  daughter  of  — 
de  Dunstanville,  and  died  before  1183,  in 
which  year  his  elder  son,  Gilbert,  had  come 
into  his  possessions,  and  founded  the  priory 
of  Burcester,  or  Bicester,  in  Oxfordshire. 

Besides  Gilbert  he  had  two  other  sons, 
Thomas  and  Alan,  the  latter  of  whom  is 
hereafter  mentioned.  (Dugdale^s  Baron, 
i.  383;  Madox,  i.  94,  &c:  Pipe  RoOa, 
Hen.  IL) 

BASSET,  WiLLiAX,  lord  of  Sapcote  in 
Leicestershire,  was  a  younger  son  of  the 
above  Richard  Basset  and  Matilda  Ridel, 
his  wife 

From*9  to  16  Henry  IX.,  1163-1170j  he 
executed  the  office  of  sherbf  of  the  united 
counties  of  Warwick  and  Xioicester,  and 
was  afterwards  fined  by  the  commissioners 
appointed  in  the  latter  year  in  the  sum  of 
one  bundled  marks  for  aome  transgreasionB 


BASSET 

he  had  committed  in  performance  of  his 
duties.  He,  however,  afterwards  held  the 
sheriffalty  of  Lincolnshire  in  24  Hemy  XL, 
and  the  six  following  years. 

His  pleas  as  a  justice  itinerant  commenee 
in  14  Henry  H.,  1168,  and  extend  till  26 
Henry  IL,  1180,  durinff  which  time  he 
acted  in  twentj-four  different  counties. 
From  1175  he  is  frequently  mentioned  as 
assisting  in  the  judicial  business  of  the 
Curia  Regis,  in  which  he  continued  to  sit 
tiU  1184.     {Madox,  i.  94,  103,  143,  &c) 

He  died  about  the  latter  date,  and  was 
succeeded  in  the  barony  by  his  son  Simon, 
next  mentioned. 

BASSET,  SixoN,  is  named  among  the 
justices  itinerant  who  fixed  the  tallage 
for  the  counties  of  Nottingham  and  Derby 
in  9  Richard  I.,  1197-8.  {Madox,  i.  733.) 
He  was  the  son  of  the  last-named  William 
Basset,  lord  of  Sapcote.  His  connectian 
with  Derbyshire  arose  from  his  marriage 
with  Elizabeth,  one  of  the  dau^ters  and 
eoheirs  of  William  Avenel,  of  Iladdon  in 
the  Peak  in  that  county.  In  7  John  she 
fined  eighty  marks  to  the  king  to  have  her 
inheritance,  which  the  king  had  seised  on 
her  husband^s  death,  and  that  she  should 
not  be  compelled  to  marry.    {Roi,  de  JRm. 

3070 

His  male  descendants  failed  in  1378,  by 
the  death  of  Ralph,  the  then  baron,  leaving 
two  daughters  only.     {Baronage,  i.  382.) 

BASSET,  Alax,  was  the  third  son  of 
the  before-named  Thomas  Basset,  of  Heden- 
don. Under  Richard  I.  and  John  he  appean 
to  have  been  a  frequent  partaker  of  the  royal 
bounty.  In  tiie  former  reign  he  had  a  grant 
of  the  manors  of  Woking  and  Mapekiure- 
well  {Rot,  ChaH,  37) ;  and  in  the  latter,  of 
those  of  Wycumb  and  Berewick.  Besides 
these,  Kinff  John  granted  him  the  custody 
of  the  lands  and  heir  of  Hugo  de  Druvall, 
and  excused  him  his  scutage  in  Surrey, 
Oxfordshire,  and  Berkshire.  An  order  to 
Stephen  de  Tumham  and  him,  in  9  John, 
to  deliver  a  sum  of  2,250  marks  from  the 
treasury,  shows  that  he  was  connected  with 
the  Excnequer;  and  in  16  John  he  was  the 
bearer  of  100/.  from  the  treasury  to  the  king 
at  Oxford.  That  he  was  a  personal  favourite 
of  the  king  may  be  inferred  from  a  present 
he  received  from  him  of  a  dolium  of  the 
best  wine.  {Rot,  Ctow.  69,  99, 139.)  He 
accompanied  his  sovereign  in  his  visit  to 
Ireland  in  12  John  {Rot,  de  PnB$A,  18^ 
&c.),  attended  him  at  Runnymede,  and  was 
a  faithful  adherent  to  his  fortunes  till  bis 
death. 

On  the  accession  of  Henry  HL  he  was 
equally  favoured  and  equally  employed.  In 
2  Henry  IH.  he  acted  as  a  justider  at  Weet- 


HenzyllLhe  and  Emfliiciiade  Saicefirwi 


'.      BASSET 

Appointed  to  meet  the  King  of  Jerusalem 
oo  his  landing  in  Kent  He  was  sheriff  of 
Rutland  from  2  to  12  Henry  UI.,  bad  the 
custody  of  the  land  and  heir  of  William  de 
Montacute  given  to  him,  obtained  a  grant 
of  a  market  at  Wutton  in  Wiltshire,  and 
"WHA  allowed  two  bucks  out  of  Windsor 
FoTf^t.  {Soi.  Clous,  i.  313, 386,  410,  460, 
659.) 

He  died  about  October  1232,  leaving 
several  children  by  his  wife  Alice,  the 
daughter  and  heir  of  Stephen  de  Gray.  To 
judge  from  an  entry  on  the  Close  Roll  (i. 
104)^  she  was  one  oi  the  ladies  attached  to 
the  person  of  the  queen. 

Three  of  his  sods  were  successively  in 
poM^ession  of  his  honours  and  estate — viz., 
Gilbert,  whose  son  died  soon  after  him; 
Fulk,  who  was  raised  to  the  deanery  of 
York  and  the  bishopric  of  London;  and 
Philip,  who  is  the  subiect  of  the  next  notice. 
{Chmmcey'9  HerU,  348;  Aikyn»'s  Glou- 
cuUrdi.  ^X) ;  Brydge^  CoUin£$  Peeragey  iii. 
2,  vii.  335.) 

BASSST,  Philip,  was  the  third  son  of 
the  above  Alan,  and  eventually  succeeded 
to  the  baronv  of  Wycombe. 

In  1233,  tlie  year  after  his  father's  death, 
he  joined  the  insurrection  of  Richard,  Earl 
of  Pembroke,  but  returned  to  his  allegiance 
in  the  following  year  {Baronage^  i.  384), 
and  from  that  time  seems  to  have  been  high 
in  his  sovereign's  favour.  In  1242  he  was 
appointed  one  of  the  commanders  of  the 
knights  who  were  sent  to  the  king  in 
PoitoQ  {Col.  Bot,  Pat.  20),  and  in  1243 
be  had  a  grant  of  the  custody  of  the  lands 
and  heir  of  Matilda  de  Luci ;  in  1262,  that 
of  the  lands  and  heir  of  Richard  de  Ripariis ; 
and  in  1257  the  manor  of  DimmocK  was 
granted  to  him  and  his  wife,  Ela,  Countess 
of  Warwick.  (Excmvt.  e  Bot,  Fin.  i.  407, 
ii.  148,  248,  249.) 

Besides  being  called  upon  to  attend  the 
king  in  his  wars  in  France  and  in  Wales,  he 
was,  in  29  Henry  IH.,  one  of  the  ambas- 
sadors sent  to  the  Council  of  Lyons  to  com- 
plain of  the  papal  exactions  m  England; 
and  in  44  &  45  Henry  IIL  he  was  consti- 
tuted governor  of  the  castles  of  Oxford, 
Bristol,  Corff,  and  Shirebum,  with  the 
sberiflklties  of  the  counties  in  which  they 
are  sitoate,  and  of  Berkshire.  He  is  called 
bailiff  cf  the  King  of  the  Romans  in  an 
entry  of  43  Henry  HL    {Abb,  Placit.  146.) 

When  the  king,  in  July  1261,  openly  re- 
sisted the  contrd  under  which  the  barons 
had  placed  him  since  the  parliament  of 
Oxfond  of  1268,  he  appointed  Philip  Basset 
chief  Justiciary  of  England.  The  barons' 
chief  justiciary  was  his  son-in-law,  Huffh  le 
Dei^penaer;  and  they  both  seem  to  have 
acted  at  the  same  time  till  the  short  accom- 
modation that  took  place  between  the  con- 
tending parties  in  the  following  April,  when 
Philip  Baaet's  i^pointment  was  fully  esta- 


BASSET 


59 


blished.    Between  July  16  and  October  18, 

1262,  while  the  king  was  absent  in  France, 
all  the  mandates  on  the  fine  roll  were  signed 
by  him,  and  he  presided  at  a  council,  when 
the  Earl  of  Leicester,  taking  advantage  of 
the  king's  absence,  is  said  to  liave  produced 
a  brief  from  the  pope  confinning  the  pro- 
visions of  Oxford,  and  recalling  the  lnng*s 
absolution.  {Btrnm,  iii.  146.^  His  name 
apj^rs  on  the  plea  roll  of  tne  Exchequer 
as  justiciarv  of  England  at  the  end  of  June 

1263.  {Midoxy  I  100.) 

Another  temporaiy  reconciliation  took 
place  in  the  following  year  between  the 
King  and  the  earl,  the  effect  of  which  was 
the  reinstatement  of  Hugh  le  Despenser, 
whose  name  appears  as  justiciary  or  Eng- 
land to  a  mandate  dated  October  1, 1263 ; 
while  Philip  Basset  is  named  without  that 
addition  in  the  reference  of  the  Oxford  pro- 
visions to  the  King  of  France,  dated  in  De- 
cember following.  {Excerpt,  e  Bot.  Fin, 
ii  406 ;  Bradg,  i.  App.  233.) 

Philip  Basset,  however,  adhered  firmly 
to  the  King,  and  in  the  outbreak  of  the 
London  citizens,  led  by  Hugh  le  Despenser, 
at  the  be^ning  of  1264,  his  house  and  pos- 
sessions m  London  fell  a  sacrifice  to  their 
fury.  {Chron.  Bishatiger,  22.)  In  the  fol- 
lowing March  he  greatly  assisted  the  king 
in  taking  Northampton ;  and  at  the  battle 
of  LeweSy  on  May  14,  valiantly  fighting 
near  the  royal  person,  he  continued  the 
contest  until  he  fell  through  loss  of  blood, 
when  he  shared  the  fate  of  his  sovereign, 
and  was  taken  prisoner.  {Ungardy  iiL  138.) 
He  was  placed  in  Dover  Castle,  under  the 
custody  of  Simon  de  Montfort,  younger  son 
of  the* Earl  of  Leicester;  but  now  long  he 
remained  in  durance  does  not  appear. 

After  the  triumph  of  the  royalists  at  the 
battle  of  Evesham,  on  August  4,  1266, 
there  is  nothing  to  show  that  Philip  Basset 
was  replaced  in  his  ofiice  of  chief  justiciary, 
although  there  is  ample  evidence  to  prove 
that  he  continued  to  enjoy  the  king^s  favour 
and  to  hold  a  high  place  in  his  counsels. 
He  was  one  of  those  who  were  appointed  to 
oarry  into  execution  the  Dictum  of  Kenil- 
worth,  in  October  1266  {Bapin,  iii.  171)  ; 
and  his  name  appears  as  one  of  the  king's 
council  in  February  1270.  {Madox,  ii.  170.) 

He  died  about  the  end  of  October  1271, 
66  Henry  HL 

He  married-  two  wives :  the  first  was 
Hawise,  or  Helewise,  daughter  of  John 
Gray,  of  Eaton ;  and  the  second  (who  sur- 
vived him)  was  Ela,  daughter  of  William 
Longspee,  Earl  of  Salisbury,  and  widow  of 
Thomas,  Earl  of  Warwick.  By  the  former 
he  left  an  only  daughter,  Alyna,  or  Aliva, 
who  had  first  married  Hugh  le  Despenser, 
the  chief  justiciary,  but  was  then  the  wife 
of  Roger  Bigot,  Earl  of  Norfolk,  the  son  of 
Hugh  Bigot  {Excerpt,  t  Bat.  Fin.  ii.  661), 
being  thus  connected  vrith    three   chief 


60 


BASSET 


justiciariee,  as  the  dauffhter  of  one.  the  wife 
of  a  second^  and  the  £iughter-in4aw  of  a 
third. 

BASSET,  THOXASy  was  jpfohahly  the 
grandson  of  the  before-mentioned  Thomas 
Basset,  lord  of  Hedendon,  by  his  second 
son,  Thomas ;  and  the  nenhew  of  Alan 
Basset,  aboye  mentioned.  I)ugdale  intro- 
duces him  as  a  justice  of  the  £Sng*s  Bench, 
on  the  authority  of  a  charter  of  46  Henry 
II.,  1262 ;  but  none  of  the  customary  proofs 
appear  of  his  so  acting,  either  by  his  going 
any  iter,  or  having  any  writs  of  assize 
directed  to  him.  He  died,  however,  shortly 
after  that  date,  as  his  widow  Johanna  is 
mentioned  on  the  fine  roll  of  62  Henry  UI. 
(ii.470.) 

BASSET,  WnxiAM,  was  the  son  of  the 
above  Simon  Basset,  lord  of  Sapcote,  by 
his  wife  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  William 
Avenel,  of  Haddon  in  the  Peak  in  Derby- 
shire. In  10  Henry  III.  this  lady  died, 
and  all  the  land  which  she  held  of  the 
honour  of  Peverel,  in  the  county  of  Buck- 
ingham, was  ordered  to  be  put  into  the 
possession  of  her  son  William,  to  whom  she 
had  ^ven  it '  as  her  heir.'  (JSjcoerpt.  e  Hut, 
JFVit.  i.  140.)  From  the  terms  of  tnis  entry, 
however,  it  may  be  inferred  that  he  was 
not  her  eldest  son.  Long  previous  to  this 
event  he  was  possessed  of  property  in  the 
counties  of  Leicester,  Derby,  Lincoln,  and 
Stafford;  all  which  was  forfeited  for  his 
adherence  to  the  barons  in  18  John,  and 
restored  in  the  following  year,  when  he 
acknowledged  his  fealty  to  Henry  UI.  In 
the  tenth  year  of  that  reiffn,  1226,  he  yras 
appointed  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  for 
Nottingham  and  Derby,  and  for  various 
other  counties  ujp  to  1232.  (Hoi,  Clous,  i., 
ii.)  In  July  1249  Robert  Basset,  his  nephew 
and  heir,  did  homage  for  his  land  in  Buck- 
inghamshire.    (Excerpt,  %  Hot,  Fin,  ii.  67.) 

BASSET,  William,  was  a  native  of 
Staflbrdshire,  but  of  what  branch  of  the 
family  has  not  been  traced.  He  was  an 
advocate  in  the  reign  of  Edward  H.,  and  in 
the  first  ten  years  of  that  of  Edward  III. 
In  the  latter  of  these,  1337,  he  was  raised 
to  the  bench  of  the  Common  Pleas.  When 
the  king,  in  December  1340,  dismissed 
some  of  his  brethren  for  malpractices,  he 
escaped,  and  was  comprehended  in  the  new 

Sitent  issued  on  January  8,  1341.  On 
ctober  28  he  changed  ms  court  for  that 
of  the  King's  Bench,  where  he  remained 
till  24  Edward  HI.,  his  name  occurring  up 
to  that  date  in  the  'Year  Book'  and  '  "Sook 
of  Assizes '  of  that  reign.  (DugdMs  Orig, 
46 :  Bot,  Pari.  ii.  164.) 

BASSUrOBOBVX,  HUXFHBBT  DX.  Seve- 
ral fines  were  acknowledged  at  St  Edmunds, 
Cambridge,  and  Bedfora  in  8  John,  1206, 
before  Humphrey,  Archdeacon  of  Sarum, 
and  Richard  de  Seiiiff. 

The  Axcbdeaoon  or  Samiii  at  that  time 


BATHOKIA 

was  Humphrey  de  Bassingbome.  (Ls  Neve, 
276.)  He  suffered  with  the  rest  of  the 
clergy  on  account  of  the  interdict,  his  rents 
being  seized  into  the  king's  hands;  but 
they  were  restored  to  him  in  April  1208. 
At  the  end  of  the  reign  he  again  got  into  dis« 

grace,  and  was  obli^d  to  pay  a  fine  of  one 
undred  marks  and  a  paurey  for  his  re- 
storation to  the  king*s  tavour,  and  he  then 
had  a  royal  letter  of  protection.  (JRot.  Cknts. 
L  118,  251 ;  Hot,deFm,  582.) 

BASTABD,  WiLLiAX,  yras  the  third  of 
five  justices  itinerant,  appointed  in  20 
Henry  II.,  1174,  by  writ  of  Richard  de  Luci, 
to  set  the  assize  of  Hampshire  {Madox^  i. 
125),  but  who  he  was  cannot  be  traced  with 
sufficient  certainty. 

BATE8F0BD,  John  de,  was  one  of  the 
eight  justices  appointed  by  Edward  L, 
in  1293,  to  take  assizes,  jurats,  and  certifi- 
cates throughout  the  kmgdom  in  aid  of 
the  judges  of  each  bench  and  the  itinerant 
judges,  who  were  often  prevented  from  at- 
tenainff  at  the  regular  times  and  places. 
On  Feoruaiy  18,  1307,  he  was  the  fourth 
of  the  justices  of  Trailbaston  then  nomi- 
nated K»r  ten  of  the  midland  counties  {Rot, 
Pari.  i.  99,  218)  ;  and  as  in  4  Edward  H, 
1310,  he  was  sent  as  a  justice  of  assize  into 
Hampshire,  Wiltshire,  Somersetshire,  Dor- 
setshire, Cornwall,  and  Devonshire,  he  may 
be  presumed  to  have  continued  to  act  in 
the  interim,  the  more  especially  as  he  was 
regularly  summoned  among  the  judges  to 
parliament  from  the  beginning  to  the 
eleventh  year  of  that  reign.  He  died  soon 
after,  his  executors  being  commanded,  in 
13  Edward  U.,  to  bring  all  proceedings 
before  him  into  the  Exchequer.  {ParL 
Write,  ii.  499.) 

BATEOHIA,  Henbt  db,  according  to 
Prince  (55),  was  a  native  of  Devon,  and  a 
younger  brother  of  Walter  de  Bathonia. 
of  Bathe  House,  in  North  Tawton.  and  of 
Colebrook,  near  Crediton.  There  aoes  not 
appear  any  proof,  nor  indeed  much  proba- 
bility, that  this  statement  is  well  founded. 
The  roll  of  fines  shows  that  in  20  HeniT 
in»  1236,  the  king  directed  the  sheriff 
of  Dorsetshire  to  appraise  all  the  chattels 
which  had  belongea  to  Hugh  de  Bathonia, 
and  to  deliver  them  to  Henr^,  taldng  se- 
curity that  he  would  answer  for  their  value 
in  discharge  of  the  debts  due  from  Hu^h 
to  the  crown.  {Excerpt,  e  Bot,  Fm.  i.  310.) 
In  this  record,  as  Hujgh  is  freauently  men- 
tioned as  '  clericus,'  it  must  oe  duuritaUy 
supposed  that  he  was  Henry's  unde,  unless 
indeed  the  designation  *  clericus'  was  at- 
tached to  his  name  merely  with  an  official 
instead  of  an  ecdesiastiad  agnificatknL 
Hugh  de  Bathonia  was  an  omer  of  tfaa 
king's  wardrobe  in  the  reign  of  John  (JBtioL 
Pat.  173, 174),  sheriff  of  Siftkinriiam  in  7 
Heniy  UI,  and  of  Berkshire  in  11  Heoiy 
in.;  and  was  afterwards  one  of  tiMJvitfeeA 


BiiTHOKIA 

of  the  JewB.  {Eai.  Clam.  i.  669,  ii.  106; 
iKulcu-y  L 134)  ThiB  official  position  which 
Hagh  heU  in  the  conrt  wul  account  for 
Henxy  de  Bathonia  being  brought  up  to 
the  legal  profeaaion ;  ana  accordingly,  so 
early  aa  10  Henry  lU.,  his  name  apneara 
aa  the  repreaentatiTe  or  attorney  for  Warin 
le  Deapenaer  in  a  suit  against  Nicholas  de 
St  Bndget,  for  a  debt  of  four  marks  and  a 
hain     (JM.  CUmt,  iL  ISd) 

It  was  not  till  after  Hagh*a  death  that 
Henry  de  Bathonia  waa  adyanoed  to  the 
bench.  In  1238,  22  Heniy  IIL,  his  name 
fint  appears  to  the  acknowledgment  of  a 
fine.  Two^ears  afterwards  he  was  one 
of  the  justiciers  on  the  circuit  then  sent 
through  the  southern  counties.  In  that 
eommiasion  he  stood  second  on  the  list; 
md  from  that  time  the  fine  roll  teems  with 
payments  made  for  writs  of  assiie  to  be 
ta^en  before  him.  In  Noyember  1247  he 
itsnda  in  a  higher  place,  an  amerciament 
being  mentioned  as  bein^  made  before  him 
indnia  companion  justices  of  the  bench 
{ErcerjoL  e  Mat.  Fm.  '±  23;  Abb.  HacU. 
b^,  126^ ;  and  in  the  circuits  of  that  and 
ihe  two  following  years  his  name  is  inserted 
at  the  head  in  every  county  which  he  is 
appointed  to  yisit  In  1260  he  had  a  grant 
of  lOCML  a  year  for  his  support  'in  officio 
josticiani,'  an  expression  which  would 
seem  to  show  that  the  term  '  capitalis,'  or 
chief  justice,  as  subsequently  used,  was  not 
yet  adopted,  as  it  is  quite  manifest  that 
ne  then  sat  aa  the  senior  of  his  fellows. 

Not  longafter  this  ^rant  he  was  accused 
by  Philip  Darcy  of  bribery  and  extortion, 
whereby  he  liad  raised  a  great  estate 
on  the  ruin  of  others.  Four-and-twenty 
knights  became  security  for  his  appearance 
to  answer  the  charge  before  the  parliament 
summoned  for  February  17, 1261.  On  the 
day  of  hearing  he  was  charved  with  in- 
censing the  Mrons  against  tne  king,  and 
promoting  a  seneral  rebellion ;  and  among 
Tarious  compudnta  urged  against  him  was 
one  that  he  had  received  a  bribe  to  allow 
a  convicted  criminal  to  escape.  The  vehe- 
mence of  the  king's  anger  may  be  estimated 
by  his  brutal  exclamation,  'If  any  man 
will  slay  Heniy  de  Bathonia,  he  shall  not 
be  impeached  of  his  death  j  and  I  now  pro- 
nounce his  pardon.'  Thisviolence,  however, 
waa  prevented  by  John  Mansers  timely 
interferoice,  and  the  threats  of  the  Bishop 
of  Lond<in,  and  the  justider's  other  friends, 
of  ecclesiastical  and  temporal  revenge. 

The  intercession  of  Richard,  Earl  of 
Cornwall,  the  king's  brother,  at  last  pro- 
cured  him  a  pardon,  on  a  fine  of  two  thou- 
nnd  marks,  the  whole  of  which  was  not 
paid  at  the  time  of  his  death.  His  disgrace 
cnntinoed  more  than  two  years — viz.,  from 
November  1260  till  August  1263,  after 
which  date  appHcaticms  to  him  for  writs  of 
assize  are  frequent  for  the  rest  of  his  life. 


BATHUBST 


61 


A  grant  of  land,  also,  in  the  latter  year, 
addressed  'Henrico  de  Bathon.  et  sodis 
suis,  justidariis  assignatis  ad  tenendum 
pladta  coram  rege '  (manning^  298),  proves 
that  he  had  been  restored  to  his  K>rmer 
high  position.  Comparing  the  title  here 
used  with  that  in  the  amerciament  in  32 
Heniy  IIL  already  referred  to,  'coram 
Hennco  de  Bathon.  et  sodis  suis,  j  ustidariis 
de  banco,'  it  would  appear,  according  to 
the  modem  interpretation  of  the  terms, 
that  he  had  changed  his  court;  but  this 
seems  to  be  contradicted  by  an  entry  in 
20  Edward  L,  whidi  refers  to  a  mrooeeding 
in  41  Henry  IH.,  *  coram  H.  Bathon.  et 
sodis  suis,  justidariis  regis  de  banco.'  (Abb. 
Placit.  228.^  In  the  preceding  year  he  and 
his  companions  are  mentioned  without  any 
designation  to  distinguish  the  court,  the 
words  used  being  '  et  sodis  suis,  justidariis 
re^'  These  changes  suggest  the  caution 
vnth  which  such  appellations  should  be 
used  in  support  of  an  nypothesis. 

So  late  as  1260  he  went  the  circuit 
through  eiffht  counties. 

He  died  before  the  22nd  of  the  fol- 
lowing February,  as  on  that  day  the 
king,  'intuitu  JaudabiliB  obsequii  quod 
Henricus  de  Bathon.  R  impendit  in  vita 
sua,'  grants  to  John  de  Bathon,  bis  son  and 
heir,  that  the  arrears  which  remained  due 
of  the  fine  of  two  thousand  marks  which 
he  made  for  having  the  king's  fiivour,  and 
of  all  other  debts  which  he  owed  the  long 
at  his  death,  might  be  paid  by  instalments 
of  twenty-five  marks  at  each  of  the  yearly 
Exchequer  terms,  Michaelmas  and  Easter. 
{Exce^.  e  Bot.  Fm.  ii.  346.) 

His  widow,  Aliva,  afterwards  married 
Nicholas  de  Yatingdon,  and  died  in  1278. 
The  above-mentioned  John  de  Bathonia 
had  a  son,  also  named  John,  whose  only 
child  Joan  was  married  to  John  de  Bohun, 
and  died  in  1316.  (Blatn^/iMs  Norfolk, 
i.  186.) 

BATEUBBT,  Henbt  (Lord  Apslbt, 
Earl  Bathurst).  The  Bathursts  were 
originally  seated  at  Bathunt,  near  Battel, 
in  Sussex,  but  aftervrards  removed  into 
Kent.  One  member  received  a  baronetcy 
(of  Leachdale  in  Gloucestershire)  in  164.^, 
which  is  now  supposed  to  be  extinct ;  and 
several  others  were  merehants  and  alder- 
men of  London.  The  immediate  ancestor 
of  the  chancellor  resided  at  Staplehurst  in 
the  reigUf  of  Henry  VIIL,  and  one  of  his 
grandsons  was  the  father  of  the  celebrated 
Dr.  Ralph  Bathurst,  president  of  Trinity 
College,  Oxford,  and  dean  of  Wells.  The 
dean's  brother.  Sir  Benjamin,  was  the  father 
of  Allen,  who,  after  serving  in  two  parlia- 
ments for  the  borough  of  Cirencester,  was 
one  of  the  twelve  peers  created  by  Queen 
Anne  in  1711,  for  tne  purpose  of  obtaining 
a  majority  in  the  House  of  Lords.  To  his 
title,  Baron   Bathurst   of  Battlesden    in 


62 


BATHUBST 


Sussex,  he  received  sixty-one  years  after- 
wards the  additional  rank  of  an  earl,  as  an 
acknowledgment  and  reward  for  his  ser- 
vices to  the  state,  and  his  eminence  in  the 
social  and  literary  world.  He  died,  at  the 
age  of  ninety-one,  in  1775,  having  lived  to 
see  his  son  elevated  to  the  peerage  and  to 
the  dignity  of  lord  high  chancellor  of  Great 
Britain.  That  son  was  one  of  the  nine 
children  he  had  by  his  wife  Catherine, 
dauffhter  and  heir  of  Sir  Peter  Apsley,  of 
Ap^ey  in  Sussex. 

Henry  Bathurst,  the  second  but  eldest 
surviving  son  of  the  earl,  was  bom  on  May 
20,  1714.    He  took  the  degree  of  B.A.  at 
Christ  Church,  Oxford,  in  1733,  and  was 
called  to  the  bar  by  the  Society  of  Lin- 
coln's Inn  in  Hilary  Term  1736.    He  had 
ali^ady  been  returned  to  parliament  in  the 
previous  year  as  member  for  Cirencester, 
which  he  continued  to  represent  till  1754. 
Though  his  business  in  the  courts  was  by 
no  means  commanding,  he  was  in   1746 
chosen  solicitor-general,  and  shortly  after 
attorney-general,  to  Frederick,  Prince  of 
Wales,  after  whose  death,  in  1751,  he  filled 
the  same  office  to  the  princess  till  his 
elevation  to  the  bench.    He  had  on  enter- 
ing the  prince's    service    been  honoured 
with  a  patent  of  precedency :  and  in  1752 
he  was  the  leading  counsel  for  the  crown 
in  the  trial  at  the  Oxford  Assizes  of  Eliza- 
beth Blandy  for  the  murder  of  her  father, 
his  speech  in  which  has  been  praised  for 
its  eloquence,  but  is  too  exaggerated  an 
appeal  to  the  feelings  of  the  jury  to  be 
approved  by  modem  ears.     Soon  after  he 
was  raised  to  the  bench  as  a  judge  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  on  May  2, 1754,  at  the  age 
of  forty;  and  in  the  case   of  the  sham 
patriot  John  Wilkes  in  1763  he  concurred 
m  the  constitutional  decisions  of  his  chie^ 
Lord  Camden.     After  occupying  his  seat 
for  sixteen  years,  on  the  sudden  death  of 
the  Hon.  Charles  Yorke,  the  Great  Seal 
was,  on  January  21,  1770,  placed  in  the 
hands  of  three  commissioners,  the  second 
of  whom  was  Mr.  Justice  Bathurst.    They 
held  it  for  a  year,  but  their  rule  met  with 
so  little  approbation  that  the  minister  found 
it  necessary  to  appoint  a  lord  chancellor. 
Though  very  limited  in  his  choice,  the  pro- 
fession was  greatly  surprised  on   finaing 
Judge  Bathurst,  wko  was  considered  '  the 
most  incapable  of  the  three '  commissioner, 
selected  to  fill  that  hiprh  and  responsible 

Sost.  The  Seal  was  delivered  to  him  on 
anuary  23,  1771,  and  he  was  on  the  same 
day  created  Lord  Apsley.  Ho  naturally 
found  himself  in  a  wrong  position,  and  it  was 
said  that  he  never  entered  his  court  with  a 
firm  and  dauntless  step.  Overawed  by 
Thurlow,  Wedderbum,  and  other  coun- 
sel practising  at  his  bar,  he  was  so  little 
conversant  with  either  the  principles  or 
practice  of  equity  that  his  derisions  have 


BAU3IBUR0H 

no  value  in  the  profession.  But,  being  a 
staunch  supporter  of  Lord  North's  mea- 
sures, he  was  retained  in  his  place  for  more 
than  seven  years;  at  the  end  of  which, 
from  a  failure  in  his  health,  or  perhaps  a 
consciousness  of  his  inefficiency,  he  resigned 
the  SeaL  on  June  3,  1778,  one  of  his  last 
and  most  praiseworthy  acts  being  the  ap- 
pointment of  his  nephew,  Francis  Buller, 
to  a  vacant  judgeship.  He  declined  any 
retiring  pension,  and  was  in  the  following 
year  continued  in  the  cabinet  with  the 
office  of  lord  president  of  the  council, 
which  he  held  till  Lord  North's  ministry 
terminated,  in  1782.  In  the  twelve  years 
he  survived  he  ^adually  retired  from 
political  life,  and  died  from  natural  decay 
at  his  seat,  Oakley  Grove,  near  Cirencester, 
on  Au^st  6, 1794,  in  his  eighty-first  year. 
In  his  public  life  he  was  honourable  and 
sincere;  as  a  judge,  he  was  esteemed 
by  the  bar  for  his  kindness  of  manner ;  and 
in  private  life  he  was  thoroughly  amiable. 
Though  of  a  cheerful  and  good-humoured 
disposition,  he  was  not  quite  so  jovial  as 
his  father,  who  took  his  wine  freely  to  the 
last  day  of  his  long  life.  On  one  occasion 
at  a  party  at  Oakley,  the  chancellor  having 
retired  somewhat  early  from  the  convi- 
viality, the  old  earl  chuckled  and  said  to 
the  rest  of  the  company,  *  Now,  my  good 
friends,  since  the  old  gentleman  is  oif,  I 
think  we  may  venture  to  crack  another 
bottle.'  Neither  was  he  so  liberal  a  patron 
to  literature  as  his  father;  but  it  should 
be  remembered  to  his  credit  that  he  was 
the  first  to  encourage  Sir  William  Jones 
by  substantial  tokens  of  regard. 

In  1775,  while  he  was  yet  chancellor, 
he  succeeded  to  his  father*s  earldom.  He 
married  twice.  By  his  first  wife,  Anne, 
daughter  of  —  James,  Esq.,  and  widow  of 
Charles  Phillips,  K^kj.,  he  had  no  issue; 
but  by  his  second  wife,  Tryphena,  daughter 
of  Thomas  Scawen,  Esq.,  of  Maidwell  in 
Northamptonshire,  he  left  six  children. 
His  successor  held  a  distinguished  place  in 
the  goverainent,  and  the  Hou.se  of  Lords  is 
still  graced  by  his  descendants. 

BATTKWELL.  See  J.  and  B.  de  Bank- 
well. 

BAXTMBTTBOH,  TnoMAS  de,  is  among  the 
clerks  or  masters  in  Chancery  mentioned 
from  1  to  14  Edward  III.,  and  was  so 
named  from  the  place  now  called  Bara- 
borough  in  Northumberland,  where  he  had 
property.  IIo  seems  to  have  been  an 
especial  favourite  with  the  king,  who  pre- 
sented  him  with  the  church  of  Emildon, 
and  made  him  various  beneficial  grants  of 
lands  in  that  county.  He  acted  as  keeper 
of  the  Great  Seal  on  several  occafions,  in 
1332,  1334, 1336,  and  1330.  In  the  latter 
year,  14  Edward  UI.,  he  was  one  of  the 
receivers  of  the  pedtions  to  parliament^ 
and  probably  died  soon  after,  u  lie  ia  not 


•  J 


BAYEUX 

fabseqaentlj  named.  {Roi.  Barl.  ii.  22, 
68,  112;  CoL  Imq.  p.m.  iL  63;  CaL  Hot 
iW.  118;  Abb.  BoL  Oria.  ii.  27,  75,  79.) 

BATXVX,  Jomr  ds  (Bajocis),  was  Uie 
•OQ  of  Hugh  de  Baiods,  a  baron  in  Lincoln- 
shire, by  Alienora  hia  wife.  Before  his 
father's  decease  he  was  outlawed  for  the 
df«th  of  a  man,  and  his  property  in  Bristol 
and  in  Dorsetshire,  being  forfeited,  was 
given  away  in  16  and  17  John.  He  oon- 
triTed,  neTertheless,  to  make  his  peace; 
for  in  3  Henry  HI.  he  was  admitted  to 
take  poaseasion  of  his  paternal  estates  in 
Liocolnshire  on  payment  of  1001.  for  his 
Kiief ;  and  in  the  same  year  he  was  added 
to  the  list  of  justices  itinerant  for  the 
counties  of  Cornwall,  Deyon,  Somerset, 
and  Dorset.  (Hot.  Ctaus,  L  237,  404 ;  Rot. 
Chart,  201 ;  Excerpt,  e  Hot.  Fin.  i.  32.)  It 
would  appear,  however,  that  he  was  not 
eren  then  entirely  deMred  of  the  charge, 
unless  indeed  he  had  subjected  himself  to 
a  new  accusation ;  for  in  4  Henry  HI.  he 
tod  his  mother  Alienora,  his  brother,  and 
three  others,  fined  for  having  an  inauisition 
before  the  chief  justiciary,  whetner  the 
appeal  against  them  by  Kobert  de  Tille- 
broc  for  the  death  of  his  father  wss 
malicious,  or  they  were  guilty.  That  the 
result  of  the  enquiry  was  favourable  may 
be  presumed  from  his  being  again  selected 
as  a  justice  itinerant  in  Devonshire  in 
1225,  and  £rom  his  holding  several  re- 
sponsible appointments  about  the  same 
time,  as  justice  of  the  forests,  and  constable 
of  the  castle  of  Plimpton.  (ExcerpL  e  Hot. 
Fin.  l  45 ;  Rot.  Clous,  i.  622,  &c,  ii.  76, 
&C.)  In  18  Henry  IIL  another  charge  of 
homicide  was  raised  against  him ;  and  he 
paid  a  fine  of  no  less  than  four  hundred 
marks  for  permittsion  to  accommodate  with 
the  widow  of  Roger  de  Mubray  for  the 
death  of  her  husband,  in  which  he  was 
•omeway  concerned. 

On  bis  death,  in  1249,  his  brother  Stephen 
did  homage  for  his  lands  as  male  heir. 
iErcrrpt.  e  Rt/L  Fin.  i.  264,  ii.  51.) 

BATLXT,  Jonif.  No  judge  smce  the 
art  was  passed  in  1799  granting  a  pension 
on  retirement  after  fifteen  years  service  has 
d^lined  to  avail  himself  of  the  privilege 
for  so  long  a  period  as  Sir  John  Bayley. 
He  occupied  tne  bench  for  no  less  than 
twenty-aiz  years,  with  the  highest  reputa- 
i\<m  as  a  lawyer,  and  undiminished  respect 
and  esteem  from  every  one  who  acted 
either  with  or  under  him. 

He  was  bom  on  August  3,  1763,  at 
Elton  in  Huntingdonshire,  the  residence  of 
kiji  father,  John  Bayley,  Esq.  His  mother 
was  Sarah,  the  daughter  and  heir  of  the 
IU;T.  \^*hite  Kennett,  prebendary  of  Peter- 
boTou^rh,  and  grandoaughter  of  Bishop 
K^-nnett,  of  that  see.  He  was  educated 
at  Eton  under  the  superintendence  of  his 
latiier*s  elder  brother,  Dc  Edward  Bayley, 


BAYLEY 


63 


fellow  of  St  John's  College,  Cambridge, 
and  rector  of  Quinton  and  Courtcenhall ;  to 
whose  cultivation  of  his  taste  and  talents 
for  classical  composition  the  judge  always 
ascribed  his  futuro  success  m  Hfe.  The 
'Mus»  Etonenses'  contain  some  favourable 
specimens  of  his  proficiency.  Though  he 
was  nominated  in  1782  for  King's  College, 
Cambridge,  it  does  not  appear  uiat  he  was 
ever  matriculated. 

He  entered  Gray's  Inn  in  November 
1783,  but  was  not  called  to  the  bar  till 
June  22, 1792.  In  the  interim  he  probably 
practised  as  a  special  pleader,  as  in  1789  he 
published  the  'Summary  of  the  Law  of 
Bills  of  Exchange,'  &c.,  which  has  ever 
since  been  the  standard  work  on  the  sub- 
iect,  and  of  which  many  editions  have 
been  issued.  He  also  edited  Ix>rd  Ray- 
mond's Reports,  with  valuable  notes,  m 
1790.  The  fame  he  acquired  by  these 
publications  naturally  insured  him,  when 
he  became  a  barrister,  ample  employment, 
which  did  not  diminish  when  he  was 
raised  to  the  decree  of  the  coif  in  1799. 
About  this  time  he  was  elected  recorder  of 
Maidstone.  After  successfully  pursuing 
his  profession  as  a  seijeant  both  on  the 
Home  Circuit  and  in  Westminster  Hall, 
he  was  appointed  in  May  1808  a  judge  of 
the  King^s  Bench,  and  was  knighted. 

There  his  peculiar  adaptation  for  the 
judical  office  was  at  once  seen,  and  his  pro- 
fessional erudition  soon  placed  him  in  the 
first  rank.  Though  his  quiclmess  of  appre- 
hension enabled  him  to  see  the  true  oear- 
ings  of  a  case,  he  was  always  open  to  con- 
viction, and  most  patient  in  listening  to  the 
arguments  raised  by  counsel  in  opposition 
to  his  opinion.  No  one  who  has  attended 
the  courts  can  foiget  the  seven  little  red 
books  which  he  always  carried  with  him, 
to  which  he  could  instantaneously  turn  for 
every  reported  case.  The  ease  and  delight 
with  which  he  got  through  his  work  at 
Nisi  Prius  caused  M.  Cotte,  the  PVench 
advocate,  to  exclaim,  'II  s'amuse  a  juger.' 
In  this  court  he  sat  for  more  than  twentv- 
two  years,  for  seventeen  of  which  he  held 
the  next  place  to  the  chief  justice,  pro- 
nouncing the  judgments  of  the  court  upon 
delinquents  with  characteristic  mildness. 
But  at  length  he  found  the  increasing 
labour  too  much  for  him,  but  still  was 
willing  to  undertake  a  lighter  duty.  He 
therofore  took  advantage  of  the  act 
authorbing  the  appointment  of  a  fifth 
judge  in  each  court,  and  on  November  14, 
1830,  was  removed  into  the  Court  of  Ex- 
chequer as  the  additional  baron,  taking  his 
place  however  according  to  his  seniority 
next  to  the  chief  baron. 

On  the  new  stage  of  the  Exchequer  he 
played  the  same  prominent  part  for  above 
throe  years  more,  when  his  advancing  age 
prompted  him  to  retire,  before  his  mentol 


64 


BAYNARD 


powers  decayed.  He  therefore  reof^ed  the 
poBitioii  he  had  so  long  graced  in  Fehniary 
1834,  receinng  in  the  next  month  the 
well-merited  honour  of  a  baronetcy,  and 
an  opportunity  being  given  him  of  still 
serving  the  state  in  the  character  of  a  privy 
counsellor.  He  survived  nearly  twelve 
years,  and  died  on  October  10,  1841,  at 
the  Vine  House,  near  Sevenoaks. 

Few  men  in  his  prominent  position  ever 
passed  through  life  with  such  unmingled 
respect.  He  had  all  the  requisites  of  a 
good  judge— clearness  of  intellect,  integrity 
of  purpose,  urbanity  of  manner,  strict  im- 
partiality, and  a  total  absence  of  political 
oias.  He  was  a  favourite  with  all  classes — 
his  colleagues  on  the  bench,  the  advocates 
over  whom  he  ruled,  and  the  litigants, 
whether  he  decided  for  or  against  them* 
Amiable  and  benevolent  in  his  private  life, 
he  was  deeply  impressed  witn  religious 
feelings,  which  were  manifested  in  an  edi- 
tion of  the  Common  Prayer  Book  pub- 
lished by  him  in  1816. 

By  his  wife,  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  John 
Markett,  Esq.,  of  Meopham  Court  in  Kent, 
he  left,  besides  three  daughters,  three  sons, 
the  eldest  of  whom  now  enjoys  the  title ; 
the  second  is  a  clergyman ;  and  the  third  a 
barrister,  who  editM  one  of  the  editions  of 
his  Other's  work  on  Bills. 

BATVABD,  FuLCO,  was  of  the  noble 
family  of  that  name,  the  ancestor  of  which, 
Ralph  Baynard,  possessed  in  the  Con- 
queror's time  various  rich  lordships  in  the 
counties  of  Essex,  Suffolk,  Norfolk,  and 
Ilertford.  By  the  conspiracy  of  his  grand- 
son, William,  the  elder  son  of  Geoffirey, 
against  Henry  I.,  the  barony  was  lost ;  and 
its  castle,  called  Baynard  s  Castle,  near  St. 
Paurs,  in  London,  was  granted  to  Robert, 
the  son  of  Richard  Fltz-Gilbert,  from  whom 
descended  the  FLtz-Walters.  Fulco  traced 
his  lineage  from  a  younger  brother  of 
Geoffirey.  He  held  eight  knights'  fees  and 
a  half  in  Norfolk  under  Robert  Fitz- 
Walter,  and  obtained  a  market  in  1226  for 
his  manor  of  Merton.  (Itot,  Claun,  ii.  105.) 
In  November  of  that  year,  11  Henry  HI., 
1226,  he  and  three  others  were  constituted 
jiisticiers  to  try  some  prisoners  chaiged 
with  murder  in  the  custody  of  the  Bishop 
of  Ely.  {Ibid.  ii.  160.)  tn  four  previous 
instances  he  had  been  one  of  four  appointed 
to  take  particular  assizes  of  novel  disseisin 
in  the  county  of  Norfolk ;  a  practice  then 
not  uncommon,  but  which  would  not 
warrant  the  insertion  of  those  so  em- 
ployed among  the  justices  itinerant,  from 
whom  they  were  clearly  distinct  Fulco^s 
case  is  varied  by  his  nomination  to  try  the 
felonies  above  mentioned.  Both  in  2  and 
11  Henry  UL  he  was  one  of  those  selected 
to  assess  the  taUage  in  Norfolk.  {Ibid,  i. 
doO,  iL  78,  &c.^ 

In  1266  he  mied  for  not  being  knighted, 


BEALKNAF 

but  was  afterwards  obliged  to  take  that 
honour.  In  the  reign  of  Edward  I.  he  was 
nominated  one  of  the  conservators  of  the 
peace  for  his  county,  and  died  at  a  great 
age  in  1306.  By  his  wife,  Alice,  the 
daughter  of  John  le  Ditton,  he  left  a  son, 
the  next-mentioned  Robert  (Bhm^iM$ 
Norfolk,  i.  667.) 

BATVABD,  Robert,  the  son  of  the 
above  Fulco  Baynard,  so  early  as  18 
Edward  I.  was  returned  as  knight  of  the 
shire  for  Norfolk,  and  represented  that 
county  till  20  Edward  II.  Li  6  Edward  H. 
the  custody  of  Norfolk  was  committed  to 
him  (Abb.  Hot.  Orig,  L  186),  and  in  the  two 
following  years  he  was  among  the  magnates 
who  were  specially  summoned  to  parlia- 
ment Several  of  these  were  not  barons, 
and  were  never  afterwards  summoned ;  and 
he,  in  all  the  subsequent  entries,  is  merely 
called  'Miles.'  He  was  one  of  tiie  con- 
servators of  the  peace  for  the  county,  and 
was  employed  as  a  commissioner  of  array, 
and  in  assessing  the  various  grants  made  br 
the  parliament  To  him  also  was  entrusted 
the  custody  of  the  bishopric  of  Durham,  in 
1311,  on  tlie  death  of  Anthony  Bek. 

On  the  accession  of  Edward  III.  he  was 
appointed,  according  to  Dugdale,  a  judge  of 
the  King^s  Bench ;  and  it  is  curious  that 
the  writ  directing  the  payment  of  bis 
expenses  as  knight  of  the  shire,  in  the 

Sarliament  of  the  preceding  January,  is 
ated  on  March  0,  1327,  the  same  day  on 
which  he  was  raised  to  the  judicial  bench. 
He  died  in  4  Edward  III.,  m  possessioii  of 
Hautboys,  Whatacre,  and  five  other  manon 
in  Norfolk,  leaving  a  wife  named  Matilda, 
and  a  son  named  Fulk,  among  whose  three 
daughters  the  inheritance  was  afterwards 
divided.     (Col  Inq,  p.  m.  ii  30, 148.) 

BEALXHAP,  Robert  db,  had  very  con- 
siderable possessions  in  the  county  or  Kent 
before  he  could  have  acquired  them  from 
the  profits  of  his  profession ;  yet  there  is  no 
certainty  who  hb  parents  were,  except  that 
their  names  were  John  and  Alice.  Pro- 
bably his  father  was  a  lawyer,  as  an  advo- 
cate of  that  name  occurs  in  the  Year  Book 
of  20  Edward  III.  Robert's  career  in  the 
courts  commences  in  36  Edward  III. ;  and 
in  40  Edward  III.  he  became  a  king*s  Ser- 
jeant, for  which  he  had  a  salary  of  20JL  a 
year,  with  another  of  the  same  amount  as 
a  justice  of  assize — a  duty  which  he  fre- 
quently performed  tiU  his  elevation  to  the 
bench  at  Westminster.  {Uber  Asaimrum,) 
Tbis  event  occurred  on  October  10, 1874(^ 
48  Edward  III.,  when  he  was  constituted 
chief  justice  of  the  court  of  Common  Pleas. 
Three  months  before,  he  had  bcwn  sent  to 
treat  with  the  pope*s  nuncios  as  to  the  n* 
former WioUff.  ( !Nr.Faidera,m.lO07, I0l(k) 
He  was  knighted  in  1385. 

Retaining  his  place  on  the  acieowifln  of 
Richard  IL,  he  oontinaed  in  the  ^toi<^y^ 


BEALKNAP 

performance  of  his  duties  in  court  and  in 
parliament  for  thirteen  jears.  Only  one  in- 
cident of  importance  Taried  the  quietness  of 
this  period  of  his  life.  In  May  1381  he 
was  sent  into  Essex  with  a  commission  to 
bring  to  trial  and  punishment  the  insurgents 
who  had  risen  against  the  poll-tax  recently 
imposed.  No  sooner  had  the  grand  jury 
began  to  find  the  indictments  than  they 
were  broken  in  upon  by  the  rioters,  their 
heads  chopped  off  and  carried  away  on  poles, 
and  the  chief  justice  was  compelled  to  swear 
that  he  would  hold  no  more  such  sessions. 
( Turners  Engl,  ii.  245.)  The  circumstance 
that  no  personal  injury  ^as  offered  to  him 
prores  the  respect  with  which  he  was  re- 
gaidedy  and  that  the  outrages  of  the  people 
were  not  directed  against  lawyers  as  lawyers. 

In  October  1386  the  parhament  insisted 
on  the  removal  of  the  king*s  favourites,  im- 
peached and  convicted  the  chancellor,  Mi- 
chael de  la  Pole,  and  passed  the  ordinance  by 
which  the  executive  government  of  the 
country  was  substantiaUy  placed  in  the  hands 
of  eleven  commissioners,  with  a  complete 
eootrol  over  the  public  revenue.  The  Arch- 
bishop of  York  afterwards  charged  Bealknap 
with  having  devised  it ;  but  this  was  evi- 
dentiy  without  foundation. 

In  the  following  year  that  prelate,  with 
the  Duke  of  Ireland,  the  Earl  of  Suffolk, 
sod  Cluef  Justice  Tresilian,  having  stirred 
■p  the  king  to  resist  the  encroachment  on 
bu  authority,  the  judges  were  summoned 
to  Shrewsbury  to  support  this  purpose  by 
declaring  the  ordinance  to  be  illegaL  There 
a  series  of  questions,  with  answers,  as  some 
allege,  ready  prepared,  were  submitted  to 
them  for  signature.  Bealknap  refused  for 
mme  time  to  sign  the  document,  but  the 
duke  and  earl  threatening  his  life  if  he  pei^ 
citted,  he  at  last  submitted,  exclaiming  as 
he  did  so,  '  Now  here  lacketh  nothing  but 
B  rope,  that  I  may  receive  a  reward  worthie 
for  my  desert ;  and  I  know  if  I  had  not 
doone  this  I  might  not  have  escaped  your 
hands ;  so  that  for  your  pleasures  and  the 
king's  I  have  doone  it,  and  deserved  thereby 
death  at  the  hands  of  the  lords.'  {HoUanhedy 
XL  782.)  The  seals  of  all  the  judges  present 
were  accordingly  attached  to  an  act  of  council, 
dated  at  Xottin^hain,  August  25, 1387, 11 
Kichaid  IL,  containing  the  questions  and 
saswers,  by  which  they  declai-ed  the  whole 
piooeedingt  to  be  contrary  to  the  king's 
pierogBtiye,  and  all  the  promoters  of  them 
to  be  girilty  of  high  treason,  thus  in  effect 
eoodan  mug  tha  commissioners  and  all  the 
lords  o  f  piirliament  to  the  death  of  traitors. 

The  lords  were  not  idle  in  securing  them- 
lelvea  from  the  danger  to  which  they  were 
thus  exposed;  and  adding  this  chiufge  to 
Bsay  otners,  they  appealed  the  four  favour- 
ttea,  together  with  Nicholas  Brambre,  of 
tMMon,  of  which  they  were  all  convicted 
in  the  next  parliament.    It  is  said  that  on 


BEAUCHAMP 


65 


Febniary  3,  the  day  of  its  meeting.  Sir 
Kobert  Besklknap  and  the  rest  of  the  sub* 
scribing  judges  were  arrested  while  sitting 
in  court ;  but  this  could  not  be,  as  Beallmap 
was  removed,  and  Kobert  de  Charleton  ap- 
pointed his  successor,  three  df^s  before.  He 
was,  however,  conveyed  to  close  imprison- 
ment in  the  Tower.  At  the  trial,  on 
March  2,  Bealknap  pleaded  the  compulsion 
under  which  he  signed,  and  prayed  mercy ; 
but  the  temporal  lords,  not  admitting  that 
excuse,  found  him  ana  the  others  guilty, 
and  adjudged  them  to  be  drawn  and  hanged 
as  traitors,  their  heirs  to  be  disinherited, 
and  their  lands  and  ^oods  to  be  forfeited  to 
the  kinff.  The  spiritual  peers,  who  had 
previously  retired  from  the  house,  the  case 
being  capital,  now  came  forward  and  in- 
terceded for  the  lives  of  the  unfortunate 
judges,  whose  sentence  was  ultimately  com- 
muted to  that  of  banishment  for  life.  The 
town  of  Drogheda,  with  three  miles  round 
it,  was  fixed  as  the  retreat  of  Bealknap,  and 
an  allowance  of  401.  was  granted  to  him  for 
his  support.  There  he  remained  till  Ja- 
nuary 1307,  when  the  parliament  remitted 
this  part  of  his  punishment,  and  he  was 
allowed  to  return  to  England;  and  in  the 
following  year  the  whole  of  the  judgment 
was  reversed,  and  the  restoration  of  such  of 
the  forfeited  lands  as  had  not  been  alienated 
was  decreed.  (iSo^.  Par/,  iii.  233-244,  346, 
358.)  But  all  the  acts  of  this  parliament 
were  annulled  immediately  on  the  accession 
of  Henry  IV.,  so  that  the  forfeiture  remained 
in  full  force. 

The  date  of  his  death  is  not  precisely 
known.  His  wife  was  next  of  kin  and  heir 
of  Thomas  Phelipp  de  Baldock,  and  is  called 
sometimes  Sybell,  and  sometimes  Juliana. 
Their  son  Hamon  did  not  obtain  the  complete 
removal  of  the  attainder  tiU  4  Henry  VI., 
when  he  recovered  possession  of  his  estates, 
which  descended  eventually  to  his  grandson 
Sir  Edwud  Bealknap,  who  was  a  privy 
counsellor  in  the  time  of  Henry  VIL  and 
VIU.  Dying  without  issue,  the  property 
was  divided  among  his  three  sisters,  one  of 
whom  married  Sir  William  Shelley,  a  judge 
in  the  latter  reign. 

BEATTCHAMF  (Bello-Cakpo),  Robert 
DE,  wss  the  son  of  a  baron  of  the  same 
name,  of  Hache  in  Somersetshire,  on  whose 
death,  about  7  John,  he  was  left  a  minor, 
under  the  guardianship  of  Hubert  de  Bur^h. 
In  17  John  he  was  sheriff  of  Oxfordshire, 
and  constable  of  the  castle  of  Oxford.  The 
manor  and  park  of  Woodstock  were  also 
committed  to  his  charge,  and  in  reward  for 
his  adherence  to  his  sovereign  in  that  time 
of  revolt,  he  received  various  grants  of  land. 
{Rot,  Pat.  62, 178;  Rot.  Clam.  L  220, 235, 
251,  267.) 

On  July  6, 1234,  18  Henry  HL,  he  was 
constituted  one  of  the  king's  lustices  of  the 
Ben<^  and  in  26  Henry  In.  he  paid  eighty 


66 


BEAUCHAMP 


marks  to  be  exempted  from  attending  the 
king  into  Gascony. 

He  died  in  36  Henry  IH.,  his  son  and 
heir,  Robert,  being  admitted  to  do  homage 
February  1,  1252,  on  paying  100/.  for  his 
relief.     (Excerpt,  e  Hot  Fin.  ii.  123.) 

After  a  long  succession  of  honours  granted 
to  his  descenaants,  the  judge  is  represented 
in  the  House  of  Lords  by  the  Dukes  of 
Norfolk  and  Somerset  and  the  Marquis  of 
Hertford. 

BEATTCHAMF  (Bello-Campo),  Walteb 
D£,  the  family  of  Walter  de  BeUo-Campo 
was  settled  at  Elmley  Castle  in  Worces- 
tershire, of  which  county  his  ancestors  were 
hereditary  sheriffs.  His  father^  William, 
died  before  13  John,  leaving  him  as  yet  a 
minor.  Eoger  de  Mortuo  Mari,  and  IsaWla 
his  wife,  had  a  grant  of  his  wardship  and 
marriage  on  a  fine  of  three  thousand  marks. 
He  had  attained  his  majority  in  February 
1216,  17  John,  for  he  was  then  entrusted 
with  the  sheriflFalty  of  Worcestershire; 
but  a  few  months  afterwards  he  joined  the 
barons'  party  for  a  short  time.  He  soon, 
however,  recovered  the  king's  favour,  but, 
having  been  excommunicated  for  his  seces- 
sion, he  was  obliged  to  apply  to  the  pope's 
legate  for  absolution  before  his  lands  were 
restored  to  him ;  and  from  that  time,  with 
a  short  interval,  till  his  death  he  retained 
the  sheriffalty. 

In  7  Henry  HI.  he  obtained  the  grant  of 
a  market  for  Kibworth  in  Leicestershire, 
and  was  allowed  to  have  the  scutage  of  his 
knights  and  tenants.  He  was  twice  selected 
to  perform  the  duties  of  Justice  itinerant, 
in  1226  and  in  1227.  For  some  offence, 
which  is  not  stated,  he  was  disseised  of  his 
sheriffalty  in  14  Henry  HI.,  in  which  year 
he  was  summoned  to  show  cause  why  he 
had  not  accounted  for  the  preceding  year ; 
but  before  the  close  of  that  year  he  was  re- 
instated in  his  office  on  a  fine  of  six  palfreys. 
He  died  in  1236,  when  William,  his  son,  on 
April  16,  did  homage  for  his  father's  lands, 
and  paid  the  usual  baronial  relief  of  100/. 
for  tne  livery  of  them.  The  son  of  this 
William  became  Earl  of  Warwick,  and  one 
of  his  descendants  was  created  Duke  of 
Warwick,  a  title  now  extinct,  as  are  several 
baronies  derived  from  the  same  source. 
The  only  peers  who  can  now  claim  a  de- 
scent from  this  judge  are  the  Earl  of  Aber- 
gavenny and  Earl  Beauchamp. 

BEATTGHAMP  (Bello-Campo),  William 
DE,  would  seem  to  be  the  lord  of  the  ba- 
rony of  Bedford,  for  livery  of  which,  on 
the  death  of  his  father  Simon,  in  0  John, 
he  gave  five  hundred  marks  and  six  pal- 
freys. Although  he  was  with  the  kind's 
anny  in  the  expeditions  to  Scotland  in  13 
John,  and  to  Poitou  in  16  John,  he  after- 
wards deserted  the  roval  cause,  and  enter- 
tained  the  rebellious  barons  at  the  castle  of 
Bedford^  which,  in  the  following  Decem- 


BEAUFORT 

her,  was  captured  by  Faukes  de  Breaute. 
He  was  one  of  the  barons  who  were  ex- 
communicated by  name ;  and  even  on  King 
John's  death  he  did  not  return  to  his  alle- 
giance, but  was  taken  in  arms  by  the  royal 
forces  at  the  sie^  of  Lincoln,  in  May  1217. 
Before  October  m  that  year,  however,  he 
made  hispeace  and  had  restitution  oi  his 
lands.  When  the  castle  of  Bedford  "Wwt 
destroyed,  in  1224,  in  consequence  of  the 
resistsjice  of  Faukes  de  Breaute,  William 
de  Beauchamp  had  the  site  restored  to  him, 
with  part  of  the  materials  to  erect  a  man- 
sion tnere.  In  the  previous  ^ear,  7  Henry 
III.,  he  was  in  the  expedition  to  Wales, 
for  his  support  in  which  he  had  a  grant  of 
the  scutage  of  the  tenants  of  his  different 
possessions,  which  were  situate  in  eight 
counties.  (Rot  Clam.  i.  325, 326, 671, 632, 
654,  ii.  23.^  He  was  again  engaged  in  that 
country  in  November  1^^,  and  was  present 
when  Kichard,  earl  marshal,  surprisied  the 
king  at  the  castle  of  Grosmunt,  when  he 
and  manj  of  his  barons  narrowly  escaped 
with  their  lives. 

In  the  following  summer,  on  July  6, 
1234,  he  was  assigned  to  sit  at  the  Exche- 
quer 'tanquam  baro;'  and  his  attestadon 
in  that  character  appears  three  years  after 
that  date.  (Madox,  ii.  54,  317.)  In  19 
Henry  III.  he  was  constituted  sheriff  of 
the  united  counties  of  Bedford  and  Buck- 
ingham, which  he  held  for  the  next  two 
years.     (Fuller,) 

He  lived  to  a  good  old  age,  the  fine  roll 
containing  an  entry  of  his  lands  being 
seized,  as  usual,  into  the  king's  hands  on 
his  death,  on  August  21,  1262.  He  had 
five  years  previously  settled  his  estates  on 
his  son  William,  for  the  king^s  confirmati<Ni 
of  which  the  latter  paid  a  fine  of  five  him« 
dred  marks.  (Excerpt, eBot.  Fin.  ii.  254,881.) 

He  married  three  wives — Gunnora^  the 
sister  of  William  de  Lamvallei,  receiTing 
with  her  the  town  of  Bromley ;  Ida,  with 
whom  he  had  the  manor  of  Newport  in 
Buckinghamshire ;  and,  thirdly,  in  the  latter 
years  of  his  life,  Amicia,  to  whom,  soon 
after  his  death,  the  manor  of  Belcham  was 
committed  in  tenancy.     (  Ibifl.  ii.  383.) 

Both  his  sons,  William  and  John,  dying 
without  issue,  the  property  was  ultimatalT 
divided  among  his  daughters.  (DugdaUi 
Baron.  L  223 ;  R.  de  Wendocer,  iiL,  ivjl 

BEATTFOBT,  Henry  (Bishop  of  Wnr- 
chester).  When  the  statute  was  passed,  in 
January  1397,  legitimating  the  children  of 
John  of  Gaunt  by  his  mistress  Catherine 
Swinford,  whom  ne  had  married  in  the 
preceding  year,  Henry  Beaufort,  the  Beoand 
son,  was  probably  just  of  age,  as  he  ii 
called  clericus  on  the  roll,  and  his  next 
brother,  Thomas,  is  styled  domiceUniL 
(Rot.  Pari  iii.  343.)  He  was  edocstedn 
part  at  Aix-la-Chapelle,  and  in  pert  ■! 
Qaeen*8  College,  Oxrord;  and  whei^  Jien 


BEAUFORT 

lore  tluui  a  boy  he  formed  an  ama- 
mnection  with  Alicia,  daughter  of 
d.  Earl  of  Arondel,  sister  to  the 
shop  of  Canterburjy  and  nearly  re- 
T  mamafle  to  Jolm  of  Gaunt  nim- 
1  had  hyner  an  illegitimate  daughter 
Joao.  The  amour  did  not  impede 
m  fortune^  nor  prevent  his  brother, 
fenzj  IV.,  from  placing  his  own  son, 
ids  Henry  V^  under  bis  tuition  in 
le  oollege.  This  was  about  the  year 
rhen  ^ieaufort  had  been  appointed 
lor  of  the  university^  an  office  which 

only  one  year.  Ijq  the  capacity  of 
3  no  doubt  ingratiated  himself  with 
>il,  and  certainly  was  not  a  very 
>receptor,  if  we  may  judge  from  the 
which  he  advanced  to  him  while 
of  Wales ;  being  no  less  a  sum  than 
St.  4<L,  the  whole  of  which  was 
\a  8000  as  Henry  came  to  the  throne, 
f  Issue  RoO,  329.) 
up  as  an  ecclesiastic,  he  received  in 
r  of  his  legitimation  the  deanery  of 
together  with  a  prebend  in  the 
of  Lincoln,  and  was  elected  bishop 
latter  see  on  July  14,  1398.  He 
mied  King  Bichara  on  his  fatal  ex- 

to  Ireland,  during  which  Henry  of 
sr  came  back  from  his  exile ;  and  he 
I  of  three  bishops  who  were  with 
'  at  Milford  on  his  too  long  delayed 

His  indifiference  to  the  event  and 
ic  character  which  he  then  bore  are 
y  his  appearing  in  the  first  parlia- 
the  usurper,  and  consenting  to  the 
1  imprisonment  of  his  late  master. 
\rl.  iii.  4::^.)  His  presence  at  the 
>uncils  of  Henry  I\ .,  and  his  being 
1  with  the  education  of  the  young 
rove  that  there  was  no  interruption 
intercourse  between  him  and  his 
other.  In  1402  he  was  sent  to 
be    king^s   second   wife,  Joan  of 

Duchess  of  Brittany,  to  England, 
rriage  took  place  on  the  7th  and 
•nation    on   tne  25th  of  February 
thin  four  days  of  which  the  young 
■eceived  the  Great  Seal  as  chan-  = 
England.    For  his  accommodation  ' 
liBg  the  court  the  towns  of  '  Wol- 
e  and  Old  Stratford  *  were  assigned 
very,  and  '  pro  herbergiagio'  of  his 
and  horses.     {Rymer,  viii.  324.) 
Ath  of  William  of  Wykeham  occur- 
ut  this  time,  the  king  procured  his 

to  the  vacant  bishopric  of  Win- 

the  temporalities  of  which  were 
to  him  on  March  14,  1405.  {Ibid.  \ 
hi  his  translation  to  this  see  he  ' 
the  office  of  chancellor ;  but  during 
under  of  the  reign  he  acted  as  one 
ouncil;  and  on  January  27,  1410, 
ing  then  no  chancellor,  he  declared 
les  for  which  the  parliament  was 
«L     {Itoi.  Pari  iii.  622.) 


BEAUFORT 


67 


On  the  accession  of  his  pupil  and  nephew 
Henry  V.,  March  13,  1413,  the  Great  Seal 
was  immediately  replaced  in  his  hands. 
He  retained  it  during  the  whole  of  the  first 
four  years  and  part  of  the  fifth  year  of  tiie 
reign,  opening  all  the  filaments  that  were 
held  during  that  penod,  and  having  the 
satisfaction  to  announce  to  that  of  Novem- 
ber 1415  the  glorious  victory  of  Agincourt, 
won  little  more  than  a  week  before.  (Ibid, 
iv.  62.) 

Just  previous  to  the  king*s  next  expe- 
dition into  France,  for  the  support  of  which 
the  bishop  had  advanced  him  the  sum  of 
14,000/1,  secured  on  certain  duties,  and  for 
the  repayment  of  which  a  golden  crown 
was  deposited  with  him  as  a  pledge  on  July 
18, 1417  (IM.  iv.  Ill),  the  Great  Seal  was 
resigned  by  Beaufort  on  the  23rd  of  that 
month,  when  he  obtained  a  grant  of  pardon 
for  all  Crimea  and  offences.  (Mi/mer,  ix.  471.) 
The  apparent  cause  of  this  retirement  was 
to  undertake  a  pilgrimage  to  the  Holy 
Land ;  but  the  probable  one  was  to  proceed 
to  the  Council  of  Constance,  then  sitting,  for 
the  purpose  of  settling  the  claims  of  three 
contending  popes,  and  of  arranjnng  certain 
reformations  in  the  Church.    Though  not 
originally  appointed  on  the  part  of  England 
to  attend  this  council,  he  aeemed  his  ap- 
pearance there  necessary  in  order  to  ter- 
minate a  struggle  which  had  already  lasted 
too  long.    He  reached  Constance  in  the 
garb  of  a  pilgrim,  and  his  presence  was 
deemed  by  some  to  be  very  prejudicial  to 
the   cause   of  the   reform   of  the  Church. 
The  question  then  agitating  was,  whether 
that  or  the  election  of  the  pope  should  take 
precedence.    By  his  suggestion,  and  on  the 
promise  of  the  cardinals  not  to  delay  the 
consideration  of  reform,  the  election  was 
proceeded   with ;    but    on   its   falling  on 
Mirtin    V.  every  attempt  to  renew  the 
question  of  reform  was  frustrated,  and  the 
council  was  dissolved  without  any  soimd 
improvement    being     effected.       {Tyler*a 
Hennj  F.  ii.  61.)   In  November  following, 
the  new  pope  named  the  bishop  cardinal 
and  apostolic  legate  in  Englana,  Ireland, 
and  Wales;  but  by  the  remonstrances  of 
Archbishop  Chichely,  who  considered  this 
an  encroachment  on  his  authority,  the  king 
forbade  him  to  accept  the  dignity.     From 
Constance  the  bishop  proceeded  on  his  pil- 
grimage to  Jerusalem,  of  his  adventures  in 
which,  or  of  the  precise  date  of  his  return, 
we  have  no  certain  information. 

We  find  the  bishop  again  in  England  in 
1421,  when  he  was  one  of  the  sponsors  for 
the  king's  son,  afterwanls  Henry  VI. ;  and 
again  lent  his  sovereign  14,006/.  towards 
the  prosecution  of  the  war,  for  which  and 
for  tne  arrears  of  the  former  loan  a  golden 
crown  was  again  given  in  pledge.  (BxA, 
Pari  iv.  132.) 

On  the  death  of  Henry  V.  the  bishop 

r  2 


68 


BEAUFORT 


and  his  brother  Thomafl,  Duke  of  Exeter, 
were  appointed  govemore  of  the  person  of 
the  infant  king,  their  great-nephew ;  while 
John,  Duke  of  Bedford,  the  King's  uncle, 
was  made  protector  of  England  when  within 
the  kingdom ;  but  when  absent  his  brother 
Humphrey,  Duke  of  Gloucester,  was  to 
execute  the  same  ofBce.  The  Duke  of 
Bedford  being  in  France  at  the  accession, 
the  immediate  government  fell  on  the  Duke 
of  Gloucester;  out  jealousies  arose,  which 
soon  resulted  in  a  determined  hostility 
between  the  duke  and  the  bbhop,  to  whom 
the  former  attributed  the  checks  which 
were  placed  by  the  council  on  his  exercise 
of  the  supreme  authority.  Historians  differ 
as  to  wnich  was  in  fault;  but  probably 
both  were  in  some  measure  to  blame  in  the 
commencement  of  their  disputes,  and  cer- 
tainly in  the  extent  to  which  they  were 
carried. 

The  bishop's  ascendency  in  the  council 
was  naturally  very  great.  The  records 
prove  that  he  never  failed  in  his  attendance 
there;  and  in  February  1424  he  assisted 
the  government  by  advancing  4,000/.,  after- 
wards increased  to  11,302/.  IQs.  Id.,  for 
which  he  received  certain  crown  jewels  in 
pledge  for  repayment.  On  July  6  in  the 
same  year  he  was«  by  the  advice  of  the 
council,  invested  for  a  third  time  with  the 
office  of  chancellor ;  and  his  labours  being 
greatly  increased  by  the  absence  of  both 
the  dukes  from  the  kingdom,  the  council 
assigned  him  2,000  marks  per  annum  beyond 
his  accustomed  salary.  (Acts  Privy  Coimcil, 
iii.  146,  165.)  He  opened  the  parliament 
of  April  1425 ;  but  before  that  of  the  fol- 
lowing year  the  disputes  between  him  and 
the  Duke  of  Gloucester  ran  so  high  as  to 
require  the  presence  of  the  Duke  of  Bedford, 
who  came  from  France  to  endeavour  to 
effect  an  accommodation.  The  immediate 
necessity  for  this  interference  arose  from 
the  refusal  of  the  governor  of  the  Tower  to 
admit  Gloucester  on  his  return  to  England 
into  that  fortress,  in  consequence  of  an 
order  of  council  to  exclude  every  one  more 
powerful  than  himself.  Gloucester,  attri- 
buting this  order  to  the  bishop,  caused  the 
gates  of  the  city  to  be  closed  against  him, 
whereupon  the  retainers  of  both  prepared 
to  attack  each  other,  and  were  with  diffi- 
culty prevented  by  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  and  the  Duke  of  Coimbra,  a 
cousin  of  the  king's.  By  their  intercession 
the  parties  were  induced  to  keep  the  peace 
till  the  Duke  of  Bedford  was  rererred  to. 

The  protector  on  his  arrival  seems  to 
have  acted  most  fairly,  although  his  im- 
pressions were  evidently  in  favour  of  the 
Dishop.  He  issued  instructions  from  St. 
Albans  to  the  Ajchbishop  of  Canterbury 
and  others  to  see  the  Duke  of  Gloucester, 
and  endeaTour  to  induce  him  to  attend  at 
Northampton,  and  be  reconciled  to  the 


BEAUFORT 

bishop  previous  to  the  parliament  which 
had  been  summoned  for  the  18th  of  that 
month.  But,  the  duke  being  inflexible,  it 
became  necessary,  in  order  to  prevent  col- 
lision between  the  followers  of  the  angiy 
parties,  to  forbid  any  arms  to  be  brought  to 
the  place  of  meeting.  Evading  this  man- 
date, they  attended  with  bats  and  clubs  on 
their  shoulders ;  from  which  circumstance 
the  parliament  was  called  the  Parliament 
of  Bats.  The  bishop  opened  the  session  as 
chancellor ;  and  on  the  Commons  praying 
that  the  differences  might  be  settled,  and 
the  protector  and  the  lords  having  taken 
an  oath  to  judge  with  impartiality,  the  two 
contending  parties  thereupon  agreed  to 
submit  to  the  arbitrament  of  certain  lords 
then  named.  The  rolls  of  parliament  do 
not  contain  the  charges  made  by  the  duke 
against  the  bishop  as  stated  by  the  his- 
torians, but  only  tne  award  made  by  the 
lords,  by  which  they  unanimously  acquitted 
him ;  and  he,  by  their  award,  made  a  pub- 
lic denial  in  parliament  of  their  truth,  and 
a  public  decJaratiim  of  his  having  no  ill- 
will  to  the  duke ;  who  in  his  turn  was  re- 
quired by  the  award  to  say, '  Fair  unclcy 
smce  you  so  declare  you  such  a  man  as  you 
say,  I  am  right  glad  that  it  is  so,  and  for 
such  I  take  you.  The  two  then,  accord- 
ing to  the  award,  took  each  other  by  tike 
hand.  This  occurred  on  March  12, 1428, 
and  on  the  next  day  the  bishop  at  his  own 
request  was  exonerated  from  the  office  of 
chancellor.  (Rot.  Pari,  iv.  296-290.)  On 
May  14  he  prayed  for  permission  to  under- 
take a  pilgrimage  which  he  had  lonr 
deferred,  and  accoinpanied  the  Duke  St 
Bedford  to  Calais.  His  mortification  was 
in  some  measure  diminished  by  the  an- 
nouncement of  his  nomination  as  a  car- 
dinal by  Pope  Martin  V.,  with  the  titk 
of  Presbyter  of  St  Eusebius,  Cardinal  of 
England!  He  returned  to  England  in 
September  1428,  having  been  previously 
appointed  legate  of  the  pope,  and  captain- 
general  of  the  cnisaders  against  the  Bohe- 
mian Hussites.  Here  the  Duke  of  Glou- 
cester, who  still  retained  his  emnity,  took 
an  opportunity  of  annoying  him  by  induc- 
ing the  council  to  refuse  to  allow  him  to 
officiate  on  St.  George's  Day  as  chancellor 
of  the  order  of  the  Garter,  on  the  pretence 
that  it  was  unusual  for  a  cardinal  to  retain 
the  bishopric  of  Winchester.  The  cardi- 
nal submitted  forthetime,  but  had  influence 
enough  to  obtain  permission  to  raise  260 
lances  and  2,500  archers  for  that  crusade. 
These  forces,  however,  in  less  than  a  fort- 
night were,  by  reason  of  Hhe  great  and 
grievous  adversities  and  fortunes  of  mr 
happened  to  the  king's  subjects  in  his  realm 
of  Fnmce/  directed  to  proceed  to  esrv* 
under  the  Duke  of  Bedfoid  for  half  a  yoMTi 
for  permitting  which  the  cardinal  wm  t6 
receive  a  xe^Eurd  of  IjOOO  nuurka.    {AA 


BEAUlf^ORT 

/Vuy  Cem0ici;i;  liL  390-345;  Ifymer,  x. 
414.)  The  pope's  dlBpleasure  at  tluB 
equiTocal  tnusacdon  was  well  compensated 
bj  the  popularity  it  procured  for  the  pre- 
late in  Ei^land,  where  he  was  allowed  to 
lesuiae  his  seat  at  the  council,  notwith- 
standing his  being  a  cardinal.  He  accom- 
panied the  joung  king  to  France,  and 
performed  the  ceremony  of  his  coronation 
at  Paris  on  December  17, 1430. 

The  Duke  of  Gloucester  died  on  Fe- 
broaxj  3d,  1447,  prenous  to  which  the 
eanlinal  had  for  some  years  retired  from 
court,  and  his  own  dissolution  took  place  on 
April  11;  within  mx  weeks  of  the  Uuke*s. 
So  powerful,  howoTcr,  has  been  the  en- 
ehantment  of  Sbakspeare's  ^nius  that  his 
dramatic  picture  of  tne  cardinars  character 
is  too  oftea  accepted  as  historic  truth, 
without  reflecting  that  the  simple  object  of 
the  bard  was  to  enliven  scenes  deyelopin^ 
political  events,  and  to  create  a  powerfiu 
intere^^t  in  his  audience  by  exhibiting  the 
great  actors  of  the  time  in  strong  and 
exciting  contrast  No  doubt  the  cardinal 
wss  not  exempt  from  the  frailties  which 
were  then  too  common ;  he  was  evidently 
Ibnd  of  money,  ambitious  of  power,  jealous 
of  rivalry,  and  more  attentive  to  his  political 
than  his  episcopal  duties.  But  looking  at 
the  public  evidences  that  are  still  extant, 
not  excluding  the  multiplied  chaives  with 
idiich  the  duke  perpetually  assailed  him, 
there  is  little  that  can  aifect  his  character 
IS  a  man  anxious  at  once  to  serve  his  sove- 
7a(m  and  to  promote  his  country's  welfare. 
The  popular  voice  had  been  strongly  in  his 
favour;  and  when  it  is  recollected  that 
daring  his  ministerial  career  France  was 
both  won  and  lost  to  England,  it  is  not 
surprising  that  the  preiudice  excited 
agamst  him  towards  the  close  of  his  life 
should  extinguish  the  memory  of  his 
former  praises,  and  that,  being  the  last 
popular  impression  of  his  character,  it 
should  alone  survive  him,  and  form  a 
tradition  sufficiently  recoffnised  to  warrant 
its  introduction  into  a  c&amatic  represen- 
tatioo. 

Cardinal  Beaufort  was  a  bishop  far 
forty-nine  years — seven  at  Lincoln,  and  the 
rest  at  Winchester.  No  works  of  his  are 
nentioned  in  the  former  diocese;  but  in 
the  latter  he  expended  vast  sums  in 
eompleting  the  catnedral,  and  particularly 
in  his  new  endowment  of  the  hospital  of 
St  Croea,  which  owes  many  of  its  present 
buildings  to  his  munificence,  and  to  which 
he  added  the  means  of  supporting  an 
xBcmsed  number  of  poor  brethren.  The 
chsnty  which  he  dispensed  among  the  poor 
daring  bis  life  was  continued  under  his 
viQ ;  and  the  pious  dispositions  which  he 
made  in  his  nrst  codicil,  dated  only  four 
dm  before  his  death,  are  a  sufficient  con« 
tnidictioD  to  the  dlegAtion  that  he  died  in 


BEAUFORT 


69 


despair.     (Godwin  de  FrawL  231,  29G; 
Tedamenta  Vetusta,  249.) 

BEAUTOBT,  Thomas  (Ditke  of  Ezeteb), 
was  the  younger  brother  of  Cardinal  Henry 
Beaufort,  being  the  third  and  youngest  son 
of  John  of  Oaunt,  Duke  of  Lancaster,  by 
his  mistress  Catherine  Swinford,  whom  he 
afterwards  married,  and  whose  children  by 
him  were  all  legitimated  by  a  statute 
passed  in  January  1397. 

Thomas  was  then  a  minor,  being  called 
'  domicellus '  in  the  record ;  but  two  years 
afterwards  he  received  a  grant  from  the 
king  of  the  castl^  and  town  of  Castle  Acre 
in  Norfolk.  The  first  notice  of  his  knightly 
career  is  in  1402,  when  he  was  custos 
of  Ludlow  Castle,  and  received  88/.  18«  6dl, 
for  the  wages  of  himself  and  his  garrison, 
to  resist  the  invasion  of  the  rebeb  there. 
In  the  following  year  he  was  appointed 
admiral  of  the  fleet  towards  the  north, 
an  office  which  he  held  for  many  years; 
and  in  9  Henr^  IV.  was  made  captain  of 
Calais.  That  m  these  commands  he  ex- 
hibited considerable  ability  as  a  statesman 
may  be  inferred  from  his  being  selected  as 
the  successor  of  Thomas  de  Arundel,  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  in  the  office  of 
chancellor,  being  the  only  lay  chancellor 
of  that  reign. 

Sir  Thomas  received  the  Great  Seal  on 
January  31,  1410.  From  an  entry  in  the 
following  year  it  would  seem  that  the 
duties  were  not  agreeable  to  him,  as  he 
humbly  prayed  to  be  discharged.  This, 
however,  was  refused  by  his  royal  brother 
(Bot  Ciaut.  11  &  12  Henry  IV.) ;  and  he 
had  completed  nearly  two  years  of  service 
before  he  was  allowed  to  retire,  on  January 
5,  1412.  During  his  tenure  of  office  he  had 
a  grant  of  800  marks  per  annum,  besides  the 
accustomed  fee.  (Acts  of  Privy  Councilj 
i.  338.)  Little  other  record  of  hb  pro- 
ceedings as  chancellor  remains  than  of 
his  opening  and  adjourning  the  parliament 
of  November  1411, and  as  an  assistant  of  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  in  trying  John 
Badby  for  heresy.     (State  Triab,  I  219.) 

On  the  5th  of  July  following  his  re- 
signation of  the  Great  Seal  he  was  created 
Earl  of  Dorset ;  and  during  the  remainder 
of.  his  life  he  devoted  himself  to  pursuits 
more  congenial  to  his  taste  than  the  law, 
distinguishing  himself  to  the  last,  in  the 
wars  of  Henry  V.,  as  a  brave  knight  and  a 
wise  commander.  In  the  first  year  of  that 
reign  he  was  made  lieutenant  of  Acqui- 
taine.  He  next  was  appointed  governor  of 
Harfleur  on  its  surrenaer  to  the  English ; 
and  after  the  battle  of  Agincourt,  October 
25, 1415,  in  which  he  commanded  the  rear 
of  the  forces,  he  was  constituted  lieutenant 
of  Normandy.  On  the  18th  of  November 
1416  he  was  raised,  in  full  parliament,  to 
the  title  of  the  Duke  of  Exeter  j  and  was 
also  made  a  Knight  of  the  Garter.   Scarcely 


70 


BEAUMONT 


a  year  of  Henry's  reign  was  unmarked  by 
his  prowess^  either  in  Scotland  or  in 
France.  In  all  of  these  encounters  he  was 
yictorious,  except  in  the  battle  of  Anjou, 
on  April  3, 1421,  when  the  Duke  of  Cla- 
rence was  killed,  and  he  was  unfortunately 
taken  prisoner. 

He  was  an  executor  of  the  will  of  Henry 
v. ;  and  on  the  death  of  that  monarch,  in 
1422,  he  was  one  of  the  coungellors  ap- 
pointed by  the  parliament  to  assist  the  pro- 
tectors of  the  kmgdom  during  the  minority 
of  his  successor. 

The  four  remaining  years  of  his  life  were 
employed  in  this  duty,  and  in  acting  in  the 
field  in  the  foolish  and  unjust  war  which 
the  English  carried  on  against  France; 
adding  to  his  other  honours  the  office  of 
justice  of  North  Wales. 

He  died  at  his  manor  of  Greenwich  on 
January  1, 1427 ;  and,  as  he  left  no  issue 
by  his  wife  Margaret,  the  daughter  of  Sir 
Thomas  Nevill,  of  Hornebjr,  his  titles  be- 
came extinct.  He  was  interred  at  the 
abbey  of  St  Edmund's  Bury,  where,  360 
years  after  (see  Timely  Oct.  19,  1841),  his 
coffin  was  discovered  among  the  ruins,  and 
his  body  was  found  to  be  '  as  perfect  and 
entire  as  at  the  time  of  his  death.'  (Dug- 
dale's  Baron,  ii.  125.) 

BSA7X0VT,  Robert  de  ^Earl  of  Lei- 
cester^, succeeded,  as  the  elaer  of  two  twin 
sons,  his  father  of  the  same  name,  who,  as 
Earl  of  Mellent  in  Normandy,  was  one  of 
the  prindnal  ministers  of  Henry  I.,  and 
acqmred  uie  reputation  of  being  the  first 
statesman  in  Europe.  He  was  allied  to 
the  family  of  the  Cfonqueror ;  and,  accom- 

Sanyiag  him  as  a  young  man  in  his  expe- 
ition  to  England,  ne  distinguished  himself 
by  making  the  first  onset  in  the  battle  of 
Hastings.  He  reward  was  the  grant  of 
above  ninety  lordships  in  the  counties  of 
Warwick,  Leicester,  Wilts,  Northampton, 
and  Gloucester.  Adhering  to  King^enry 
I.  in  his  contests  with  his  brother  Kobert, 
he  was  created  Earl  of  Leicester;  and, 
dring  in  1118,  Waleran,  the  younger  of 
tne  twins,  succeeded  to  the  earldom  of 
Mellent,  and  the  landa  in  Normandy ;  while 
those  in  England,  with  the  earldom  of 
Leicester,  devolved  on  this  Robert,  who 
was  sumamed  Bossu. 

Although  this  earl  was  also  in  great 
favour  with  Henry  I.,  and  was  with  him 
at  his  death  in  1135,  he  supported  King 
Stephen  in  the  early  part  of  his  reign,  and 
obtained  a  grant  of  the  town,  castle,  and 
county  of  Hereford.  On  the  arrival,  how- 
ever, of  Henry,  Duke  of  Normandy,  he 
declared  for  that  prince,  supplied  him  with 
necesaaiies,  and  assisted  him  with  powerful 
miHtary  aid.  He  was  a  witness  to  the 
conventkn  between  the  prince  and  King 
Stephen,  which  temuDAted  thii  intestine 
waniue. 


BEAUMONT 

On  Stephen's  death,  the  earl  was  among 
the  principal  counsellors  of  his  successor ; 
and  bein^  as  eminent  for  the  qualifications 
of  his  mind  and  his  knowledge  of  the  law, 
as  he  had  shown  himself  in  state  policy 
and  civil  afiairs,  he  was  immediately  raised 
by  Henry  to  the  office  of  chief  justiciary, 
or  president  of  the  Exchequer,  which  he 
retained  during  the  remainder  of  his  life. 
This  appointment  is  said  b^  some  to  have 
been  neld  by  him  in  conjunction  with 
Richard  de  Luci ;  and  there  are  some  writs 
which  seem  to  show  that  it  was  so. 

Throughout  the  king's  contest  with 
Becket,  he  aided  his  royal  master  in  main- 
taining the  rights  of  the  state  against  the 
encroachments  of  the  clergy.  His  prudence 
was  so  great,  and  his  piety  so  notorious, 
that  even  the  violent  archbishop  did  not 
venture  to  include  him  in  the  sentence  of 
excommunication  which  he  pronounced 
against  several  of  the  king's  counsellors^ 
although  he  had  been  one  of  the  principal 
actors,  and  had  joined  in  prevailing  on 
Becket  to  sign  the  Constitutions  of  Claren- 
don. 

Before  that  contest  was  terminated  by 
the  murder  of  Becket,  the  Earl  of  Leicester 
died,  in  1167,  at  the  abbey  of  Leicester, 
which  he  had  founded  in  1143.  He  is 
stated  to  have  been  a  canon  regular  of  that 
abbey  for  fifteen  years  before  his  death; 
but  if  so,  his  employments  prove  that  be 
had  a  dispensation  from  the  observance  of 
the  strict  rules  of  the  order.  Besides  this 
abbey,  he  founded  three  other  religious 
houses,  and  was  also  a  liberal  benefactor  to 
many  more. 

He  married  Amicia,  daughter  of  Ralph 
de  Waet,  Earl  of  Norfolk,  and  had  by  her 
a  son,  Robert,  sumamed  Blanche-Maines, 
whose  son  and  successor,  Robert  Fitz-Par- 
nell,  dying  in  1206  without  issue,  the  male 
branch  of  the  family  became  extinct 
(Madox,  i.  34,  ii.  138,  394 ;  lArrd  LyttekoiCi 
JSenry  II. ;  Dugdale's  Baron,  i.  84.) 

BEAUMOVT,  John,  belonged  to  a  very 
ancient  family  whose  barony  dates  from 
the  year  1309,  but  which  in  1607  fell  into 
an  abeyance  which  was  not  terminated  till 
the  year  1840,  when  the  father  of  the  pre- 
sent baron  (Miles  Thomas  Stapleton)  was 
summoned  to  parliament  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  eldest  daughter  of  the  last 
lord's  sbter. 

The  immediate  ancestor  of  John  Beau- 
mont was  Sir  Thomas,  the  second  son  of 
the  fourth  baron,  whose  grandson,  Thomas^ 
was  seated  at  Thringston,  near  Cole-Orton, 
and  died  in  1530,  leaving,  by  his  wife  Anne 
Harcour^  two  sons — this  John,  and  Ed- 
ward, whose  representatives  still  flonrish 
at  Banrow-on-Trent  in  the  0001117  cC 
Derby. 

John  Beaumont  began  his  kcnd  canerat 
the  Inner  Temple^  anai  gzidnally  xiiiiig  to 


BEAUMONT 

the  bench  of  that  societj,  filled  the  office 
of  reader  in  autumn  1537,  and  a  second 
time  in  Lent  1543,  and  was  elected 
treasurer  in  1547.  As  his  name  does  not 
appear  in  anj  of  the  Reports,  he  probably 
dia  not  practise  in  tne  common  law 
courts,  but  confined  himself  to  the 
Chancery  and  the  Star  Chamber,  and 
to  such  duties  as  devolved  upon  him  as 
suirejor  of  Leicestershire  for  the  crown. 
In  1550  he  was  chosen  recorder  of 
Leicester ;  and  his  elevation  to  the  master- 
ship of  the  RoUs  took  place  on  December 
13  of  the  same  year. 

On  February  9,  1552,  according  to  King 
£dward*s  journal,  he  'was  put  in  prison 
for  forging  a  false  deed  from  Uharles  Bran- 
don, Duke  of  Suffolk,  to  the  Lady  Anne 
Powia,  of  certain  landjs  and  leases ;  and  it 
appeared  by  his  subsequent  confession  that, 
hi  a  cause  before  him  in  Chancery  between 
the  succeeding  duke,  Henry,  and  the  lady, 
he  had  bouf  nt  her  title,  and  had  forged 
the  hand  of  the  late  duke  to  support  it. 
In  addition  to  this,  he  was  charged  with 
peculation  to  a  large  extent,  an  offence 
which  was  then  too  prevalent.  In  his  sub- 
mission, which  is  dated  May  28,  he  de- 
signates this  by  the  softer  name  of  a  debt 
charged  upon  bim  in  the  Court  of  Wards 
and  Liveries,  amounting  to  20,871/.  18«. 
Sd.^  in  satis&ction  of  which  he  was 
'pleased  and  contented'  that  the  kine 
•hould  have  all  his  manors  and  lands,  and 
ail  his  goods  and  chattels,  with  the  issues 
and  profits  of  the  same,  provided  that  all 
just  allowances  out  of  the  said  debt  were 
made  to  him.  To  this  submission  the 
surreiKier  of  his  office  was  added.  The 
kin^r  records  his  subsequent  denial  of  his 
guilt,  and  his  ultimate  confession  of  it  in 
the  Star  Chamber  on  June  20.  Sir  Robert 
Bowes  was  designated  as  his  successor  as 
early  as  May  10 ;  and  the  patent  of  his  ap- 
pointment on  June  18  contains  an  entry  of 
the  disgraceful  nature  of  Beaumont's  dis- 
missaL  Hayward  adds  that  *  he  was  a 
man  of  a  duD  and  heavy  spirit,  and  there- 
fore the  more  senselessly  devoted  in  his 
senanal  avarice.'  (BumeL  Heform.  ii.  pt. 
iL  68, 80-5 ;  KermeU,  u.  [319].) 

He  waa  evidently  treated  with  much 
leniency.  The  monastery  of  Orace-Dieu, 
with  a  considerable  estate  in  Chamwood 
Forest  in  Leicestershire,  given  to  him  and 
his  wife  and  their  heirs  by  Sir  Humphrey 
Foster  in  1539,  which  he  nad  given  up  at 
his  disgrace,  was  in  the  following  year 
granted  by  the  \anf  to  Francis,  Ean  of 
Huntingdon,  and  his  heirs.  As  the  earl 
was  uncle  to  John  Beaumont's  wife,  it  maj 
be  readily  supposed  that  this  was  a  merci- 
ful mode  of  restoring  the  estate  to  the 
family;  and  consequently,  on  Beaumont's 
death  five  years  afterwards,  the  lady 
entered  on  the  land|  which  was  confirmed 


BEAUMONT 


71 


to  her  by  the  then  Earl  Henry  (^Cok^s  9 
Rep,  183),  and  was  enjoyed  by  their  son,  to 
whose  posterity  it  descended. 

She  was  Elizabeth,  the  daughter  and 
heir  of  Sir  William  Hastings,  the  younger 
son  of  William,  Lord  Hastings ;  and  by 
her  he  had  two  sons — one  of  whom,  Francis, 
is  the  subject  of  the  next  article.  (  Wotton^s 
Baronet,  lii.  235^ 

BEATTXOirT,  Fra27CIS,  the  eldest  son  of 
the  last-named,  John  Beaumont,  was  a 
fellow-commoner  of  Peterhouse.  Cambridge, 
in  1564,  when  Queen  Elizabetn  visited  Uie 
University.  He  represented  Aldborough 
in  1572,  and  in  1581  he  was  elected  autumn 
reader  in  the  Inner  Temple,  and  though 
neither  Dugdale  nor  Wynne  include  him 
among  the  Serjeants,  yet  Nichols,  in  his 
'  History  of  Leicestershire '  (iii.  655),  quotes 
a  letter  from  him  to  the  Earl  of  Shrewsbury, 
which  proves  that  he  took  that  degree. 
It  is  dated  at  Normanton  by  Derby,  one  of 
his  manors,  on  July  3,  1589,  and  in  it, 
after  apologising  '  for  omitting  to  pay  100/. 
on  a  certain  day,  he  requests  the  earl's  per- 
mission to  name  him  as  his  chief  patron  in 
his  introductory  speech  in  the  court  of 
Common  Pleas  as  a  seijeant-at-law,  such 
being  the  custom  on  those  occasions.'  He 
was  evidently,  therefore,  included  in  the 
call  of  that  year. 

He  was  promoted  to  the  bench  as  a 
judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  January  25, 
1593;  but  sat  there  little  more  than  five 
years,  his  death  occurring  at  his  paternal  seat 
of  Grace-Dieu  on  April  22, 1598.    He  was 
buried  in  the  church  of  Belton,  within  which 
parish  his  seat  is  situated.    (^Ath.  Cantab, 
li.  246.)  Burton,  the  historian  of  Leicester- 
shire, who   was    three-and-twenty    when 
Beaumont  died,  calls  him  a  'grave,  learned, 
and  reverend  judge;'  and  it  may  well  be 
believed  that  his  legal  attainments  alone 
would  not  have  procured  his  elevation  to 
the  judidal  ermine,  had  not  his  character 
for  mtegrity  been  such  as  to  remove  the 
stigma  attached  to  his  father's  name.    It 
would  be  curious  to  discover  the  origin  of 
an  absurd  story  told  by  Nichols  from  a 
manuscript  note  to  Burton's  work,  which 
states  that  two  men  came  before  the  judge 
at  Orace-Dieu   for  justice,   and    one  of 
them  prated  that  the  ground  might  open 
and  he  might  sink  if  what  he  attested  was 
not  true ;  that  the  ground  immediately  did 
open,  but  the  judge,  by  pointing  witn  his 
finger,  ordered  them  to  go  off,  and  it  closed 
again ;  and  that,  accor£ng  to  the  affirma- 
tion of  his  great-granddaughter's  son,  the 
place  sounded  in  his  time,  being  struck  on. 
By  his  wife,  Anne,  daughter  of  Sir  John 
Pierrepoint,  of  Holme-Pierrepoint  in  Not- 
tinghamshire, and  relict  of  Thomas Thorold, 
of  Marston  in  Lincolnshire,  he  had  three 
sons.    His  eldest  son^  Heiuy.  was  knighted, 
and  died  at  an  early  age,  leaving  only  & 


72 


BECKET 


daughter.    His  second  son.  John,  then  suc- 
ceeded to  Grace-Dieu  (BeaumoR^i   Case, 
Coke's  9  Hep.  188)  and  obtained  a  baronetcy 
in  1626,  which  expired  in  1686,  after  hav- 
ing been  enjoyed  by  his  two  sons  in  suc- 
cession.    Sir  John,  however,  has  a  better 
claim  to  memory  than  his  title,  in  being 
the  author  of  *  Bosworth  Field '  and  other 
poems,  which  not  only  were  admired  by 
his  contemporaries   Jonson  and  Drayton, 
but  have  received  hish  praise  in  our  own 
time  from    Campbell    and  Wordsworth. 
The  judge's  thira  son,  Frauds,  has  given 
an  immortality  to  the  name  of  Beaumont 
which,  it  cannot  be  denied,  the  highest 
legal  attainments  &il  to  secure.    Fletcher, 
the  partner  of  his  labours,  vras,  curiously 
enough,  the  son  of  a  bishop ;  and  unbecom- 
ing as  it  might  then  have  neen  deemed  that 
the  representatives  of  two  respected  mem- 
bers of  the  episcopal  and  judicial  bench 
should  devote  themselves  to  the  theatre, 
yet,  such  is  the  power  of  genius  over  learn- 
ing, the  twin  stars  of  dramatic  excellence 
have  so  entirely  eclipsed  the  glories  of  their 
fathers,  that  little  more  is  known  of  the 
bishop  or  the  judge  than  that  the  poets 
were  their  sons. 

BECKET,  Thomab  (Archbishop  op 
Casteelbitry),  wbs  a  native  of  London, 
having  been  bom  in  the  parish  of  St  Mary 
Colechurch,  on  the  north  side  of  Cheapside, 
in  the  year  1118.    (Monad,  vi.  646.) 

His  ancestors,  according  to  his  own  ac- 
count, were  citizens  there,  somewhat  above 
the  lowest  rank,  *  non  omnino  infimi ; '  but 
the  condition  of  the  family  had  evidently 
improved  in  the  time  of  his  father,  Gilbert, 
since  he  had  filled  the  office  of  sheriff  or 
portorave  of  the  city.    His  mother's  name 
wasMatilda,  and  the  story  of  her  union  with 
Gilbert,  of  which  neither  Becket  nor  any 
of  his  contemporaries  state  anything  ex- 
traordinary,   was    enlivened    about    two 
centuries  after  his  death  with  a  romantic 
addition,  which  soon  after  was  popularly 
accepted  as  an  undoubted  truth.    Gilbert 
was  said  to  have  become  a  captive  in  the 
Holy  Land,  and  to  have  inspired  with  love 
his  master's  daughter,  by  whose  assistance 
he  escaped  ;   that   Btie  followed  him  to 
England,  and,  with  no  other  knowledge  of 
the  English  vocabulary  than  the  words 
*  London '  and  'Gilbert,'  was  lucky  enough 
to  work  her  wav  to  the  metropolis,  and  to 
discover  the  object  of  her  search;  that 
Gilbert  forthwith  procured  her  baptism,  at 
which  six  bishops  assisted,  and  rewarded 
her  devotedness  oy  making  her  his  wife. 

Omitting  the  omens  of  future  greatness 
by  which  Thomas's  birth  was  said  to  be 
attended,  and  the  miraculous  incidents 
which  were  attributed  to  his  youth,  it  will 
be  enough  to  relate  the  simple  course  of 
his  early  years. 

Jntended  in  the  Chnxch,  he  was  placed 


BECKET 

at  the  age  of  ten  under  Robert,  the  prior 
of  Merton,  and  afterwards  studied  at  the 
schools  in  London.  He  next  proceeded  to 
Paris  to  finish  his  education,  and  on  his 
return  is  said  to  have  been  employed  as  a 
clerk  to  the  sheriffs  of  London,  an  occu- 
pation not  unlikely  for  him  to  obtain, 
considering  that  his  father  had  held  that 
dignity,  and  was  now  reduced  in  his  cir- 
cumstances. 

The  superiority  of  his  parts  and  the  cuh 
tivating  grace  of  his  manners  had  alreaay 
procured  him  the  friendship  of  those  who 
nequented  his  father's  house.  From  one 
of  them,  a  rich  baron,  he  obtained  little 
more  than  a  zest  for  the  amusements  to 
which  he  was  introduced ;  but  to  two  Nor- 
man ecclesiastics  he  was  indebted  for  more 
solid  advantages,  and  in  fact  for  the  means 
by  which  he  ultimately  raised  himself  to 
his  highest  position.  They  procured  his 
admittance  aoout  1145  into  the  &mily  of 
Archbishop  Theobald,  who,  soon  discern- 
ing his  abilities,  took  him  into  his  favour, 
and  obtained  for  him  canonries  in  St. 
Paul's  and  Lincoln,  besides  presenting  him 
with  the  livings  of  St  Mary-le-Strand  (or 
as  some  say  St  Mary-at-HiU)  in  London, 
and  of  Otford  in  Kent  By  the  primate's 
kindness,  also,  Becket  was  sent  to  the 
schools  of  Bologna  and  Auxerre,  to  study 
the  canon  and  civil  law;  and^  retumiag 
to  England  no  mean  proficient  m  them,  he 
was  employed  by  his  patron  in  several 
embassies  to  the  court  of  Rome.  Among 
these  was  one  to  obtain  the  restoration  of 
the  legatine  power  to  the  see  of  Canter- 
bury, and  another  to  procure  a  bull  prohi- 
biting the  coronation  of  Eustace,  the  son  of 
King  Stephen.  The  abilities  which  he 
evinced  in  these  negotiations,  and  his  suc- 
cess in  both  of  them,  not  only  confirmed 
the  archbishop's  goodwill  towards  him, 
but  formed  the  groundwork  of  the  favour 
with  which  Henry,  when  he  ascended  the 
throne,  immediately  distinguished  him. 

In  the  meantime,  however,  he  was  re- 
warded with  the  archdeaconry  of  Canter- 
bury, about  1153.  Whether  this  dignity 
was  followed  or  preceded  by  the  provostship 
of  Beverley  is  uncertain,  but  the  date  of 
1139,  as  it  stands  in  the  lists,  is  obviously 
erroneous. 

The  death  of  Stephen,  on  October  25, 
1154,  enabled  King  Henry  to  show  his  ap- 
preciation of  Becket's  talents ;  and  there 
seems  very  little  doubt  that  immediately 
on  his  coronation  he  appointed  him  hu 
chancellor,  although  Tnynne,  Philipot, 
Old  mixon,  and  even  Dugdale  affix  a  later 
date  to  his  nomination;  inasmuch  as  a 
charter  has  been  found,  granted  in  the  first 
year  of  Henry's  reign,  among  the  witneaws 
to  which  is  'Thomas  the  Ohancellor/ 
(ArchtBoL  Journal,  xii.  285.) 

Credit  18  taken  on  behalf  <tf  that  monaicli 


6£C£ET 

for  naxningan  Englishman  to  the  office,  and 
thus  breaking  through  the  practice,  which 
had  obtained  from  the  time  of  the  Con- 
quest, of  confemng  all  places  of  trust  and 
confidence  on  Norman&  It  is,  however, 
impoesible  not  to  see  that  the  amalgama- 
tion of  the  two  races,  which  one  hundred 
jears  had  produced,  must  have  necessarily 
tended  to  destroy  the  exclusive  system, 
and  that  the  reason  upon  which  it  was 
founded  no  longer  existed.  Although  the 
monarch  might  naturaUy  regard  his  native 
land  with  a&ction,  he  would  consider  Eng- 
land as  his  dearest  inheritance;  and  the 
disputed  successions  of  William  Rufus, 
Henry  I.,  and  Stephen  must  have  shown 
how  little  ground  there  was  for  fearing 
oppiiaition  from  an  Anglo-Saxon  claimant 
Hecket  was  undoubtedly  an  Englishman  in 
n^ference  to  his  own  birth,  and  probably  to 
that  of  his  father  also;  but  whether  he 
wa^  o(  Norman  or  Saxon  descent  is  an 
undecided  que8tion.  Though  he  speaks  of 
his  progenitors  as  citizens  of  London,  it  does 
not  foUuw  necessarily  that  they  must  there- 
fore have  been  Saxons ;  and  Fitz-Stephen, 
his  chaplain  and  biographer,  states  tnat  a 
Norman  origin  was  the  t>ond  of  connection 
between  Oilbert  and  Archbishop  Theobald. 
But  even  were  he  unqiiestionably  a  Saxon 
by  lineage  as  well  as  birth,  the  mere  desire 
to  flatter  that  race  by  his  appointment  had 
probably  little  operation  on  the  mind  of 
Henry,  who  was  much  more  likely  to  be 
influenced  in  his  selection  by  the  recom- 
mendation of  Theobald,  by  his  own  obser- 
vation of  Becket's  character,  and  by  his 
conviction  that  his  acknowlecU[ed  abilities 
and  popular  manners  best  qpimfied  him  to 
meet  tne  exigencies  of  the  time. 

During  the  eight  years  of  Becket's  chan- 
cellorship, Robert  oe  Beaumont,  Earl  of 
Leicester,  and  Richard  de  Luci  were  chief 
jotitidaries ;  and  to  the  united  efforts  of 
these  three,  aided  and  encoura^^  by  the 
wisdom  of  the  king,  is  to  be  attnbuted  that 
amelioration  in  the  state  of  the  country 
which  became  visible  before  many  years  of 
the  reign  had  elapsed,  in  the  removal  of 
private  oppression,  the  suppression  of  rob- 
bers, the  rtfstoradon  of  property  wrongfully 
withheld,  the  improvement  of  agriculture, 
and  the  encouragement  of  all  peaceful  arts. 

His  more  laborious  occupations  were  re- 
lieved by  those  diversions  in  which  the 
coart  indulged,  his  apparent  devotion  to 
which  could  not  but  oe  gratifying  to  a 
Toutbful  and  Joyous  king,  and  is  said  by 
Mme  to  hare  been  assumed  for  the  purpose 
of  riveting  the  influence  he  possessed  over 
the  royaf  mind.  Nor  are  less  innocent 
amusements  omitted  to  be  charged  against 
him,  which,  on  the  other  side,  are  met  by 
an  indignant  denial.  His  intimate  footing 
with  Uenry,  however  it  may  have  been 
gained,  is  undoubted.    The  free  and  happy 


BECKET 


73 


intercourse  between  them,  which  bore  the 
appearance  of  fraternal  concord,  is  enlarged 
upon  by  Fitz-Stephen,  who  relates  their 
playful  contest  when  ^e  king  transferred 
Becket's  rich  cloak  to  the  shoulders  of  a 
beggar;  and  dwells  upon  the  familiarity 
with  which  the  kinff  would  appear  without 
ceremony  at  his  taole,  and  either  take  a 
cup  of  wine  in  passing,  or  seat  himself  un- 
invited as  a  euest 

Henry  in  Siese  visits  could  not  be  igno- 
rant of  the  extent  of  Becket*s  liberality,  nor 
of  his  general  magnificence  and  profusion. 
He  must  have  seen  the  extravagance  in 
which  he  lived,  the  number  of  his  atteudants 
and  the  gorgeousness  of  their  appointments, 
the  splendour  of  his  furniture  and  the  rich- 
ness of  his  apparel,  the  hospitality  of  his 
table  and  the  luxurious  delicacy  of  his 
vrines  and  his  viands.  He  must  have  been 
aware  that  the  expenses  of  such  nn  esta- 
blishment could  not  be  defrayed  solely  from 
the  profits  of  the  Chancery  and  the  produce 
ot  his  ecclesiastical  and  other  preferments ; 
and  yet  the  knowledge  produced  no  dis- 
satisfaction, nor  any  alteration  in  Henry's 
behaviour.  On  the  contrary,  he  loaded 
Becketwith  new  benefits,  granting  him  the 
prebend  of  Hastings  and  the  warden  ship  of 
the  castles  of  E;^e  and  Berkhampstea^  to 
the  former  of  which  one  hundred  and  forty 
knights  were  attached.  The  custody  also 
of  various  vacant  bishoprics  and  abbeys 
was  entrusted  to  him,  from  the  proceeds  of 
which  much  of  his  lavish  expenditure  was 
no  doubt  supplied. 

The  external  dignity  of  the  office  of  chan- 
cellor must  have  been  considerably  en- 
hanced by  the  publicity  of  Henry's  favour, 
and  by  the  profuseness  of  the  favourite. 
They  formed  in  fact  the  first  step  towards 
that  advanced  position  which  the  possessor 
of  the  Great  Seal  eventually  obtained  in  the 
councils  of  the  kingdom,  it  would  almost 
seem  that  it  was  with  some  view  of  pro- 
moting such  an  advance  that,  in  the  em- 
bassy Becket  undertook  to  the  court  of 
France  in  1 158,  to  ask  the  Princess  Margaret 
in  marria^  for  Henry's  eldest  son,  he  re- 
doubled his  habitual  magnificence,  and  ex- 
hibited so  pompous  a  cavalcade,  the  details 
of  which  are  minutely  described  by  Fitz- 
Stephen,  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  French 
towns  through  which  he  passed,  on  hearing 
that  it  accompanied  the  Chancellor  of  Eng- 
land, loudly  speculated  on  the  power  of  the 
master  whose  officers  made  such  a  displav. 
At  Paris  he  pursued  the  same  course.  lie 
prevented  Louis  from  paying  him  the  cus- 
tomary compliment  or  providing  for  the 
ambassador's  expenses,  by  contriving  to 
anticipate  the  supply;  he  distributed  his 
gold  and  silver,  his  jewels  and  plate,  and 
even  his  rich  apparel,  in  gifts  around  him  ; 
and  the  sumptuousness  of  his  table  surprised 
even  the  Parisians,  by  whom  a  dish  of  eela 


74 


BECKET 


which'cost  a  hundred  Bhillings  was  not  soon 
forgotten.  But  he  attained  nis  object,  and 
brought  back  a  favourable  answer. 

In  the  following  year  he  appeared  in  a 
new  character.  The  war  of  Toulouse  broke 
out,  occasioned  by  Henry*s  claim  to  that 
duchy  in  right  of  his  wife  Eleanor^  whose 
former  husband,  Louis,  King  of  France,  in- 
sisted on  his  side  of  his  power  to  dispose 
of  it.  It  was  on  this  occasion  that,  under 
the  advice  of  Becket,  a  payment  for  every 
knight's  fee,  under  the  name  of  scutage^  was 
iirst  substituted  for  personal  milita^  ser- 
vice ;  and  a  new  element  was  thus  intro- 
duced into  national  warfare  by  the  employ- 
ment of  mercenaries.  Becket  at  his  own 
expense  led  to  the  field  no  less  than  seven 
hundred  knights,  and  a  numerous  and 
splendid  retinue,  heading  them  on  every 
enterprise,  and  performing  many  acts  of 
personal  bravery.  A  French  knight  named 
Engelram  de  Trie  was  unhorsed  by  him  in 
single  combat,  and  left  his  steed  as  a  trophy 
to  the  victor.  After  the  retreat  of  King 
Ilenry,  Becket  remained  behind,  and  with 
the  aia  of  Henry  de  Essex  took  Cahors  and 
other  towns,  and  supported  the  king's  name 
by  his  valour  and  conduct. 

These  acts,  though  somewhat  inconsistent 
with  h*is  clerical  character,  and  productive 
therefore  of  some  remarks  among  his  con- 
temporaries, do  not  appear  to  have  detracted 
from  the  general  estimation  in  which  he 
was  held,  nor  to  have  raised  any  doubt  as 
to  his  being  elevated  eventually  to  the 
highest  ecclesiastical  dignity.  On  the  death 
of  Archbishop  Theobald,  in  April  1I6I,  the 
king  resolvea  to  advance  his  favourite  to 
the  primacy;  but  the  election  did  not  take 
place  till  May  in  the  following  year.  The 
delay  is  attributed  by  some  to  Becket's  own 
repugnance  to  accept  the  appointment,  and 
the  conviction  he  felt  that  it  would  place 
the  king  and  himself  in  collision.  By  others 
it  is  ascribed  to  the  remonstrances  of  the 
English  bishops  and  the  Canterbury  monks, 
together  with  the  warnings  of  Matilda,  the 
queen-mother,  against  the  nomination  of  a 
man  of  so  active  and  resolute  a  disposition. 
Nevertheless,  the  king,  who  considered  that 
his  own  views  would  be  forwarded  by  this 
promotion,  persisted  in  his  purpose;  and 
Becket  was  consecrated  on  June  3,  1 162, 
having  been  ordained  priest  on  the  day 
before. 

Henry  soon  discovered  his  mistake.  He 
at  once  lost  a  companion,  a  friend,  and  a 
counsellor ;  and  obtained  in  their  stead  an 
opponent  to  his  claims,  a  rival  to  his  great- 
ness, and  a  disturber  of  his  peace.  To 
which  of  the  two  the  blame  is  to  be  prin- 
cipally attached  will  be  decided  according 
to  the  views  of  their  several  partisans,  and 
as  they  may  consider  the  daims  of  the  state 
or  of  the  Church  should  have  the  ascen- 
dency. 


•   BECKET 

Whether  the  sudden  change  which  Becket 
made  in  his  mode  of  life  on  his  attaining 
the  archbishopric,  from  a  free  enjoyment 
of  the  luxuries  of  the  world  to  a  course 
bordering  on  asceticism,  extending  to  the 
wearing  of  horsehair  and  the  infliction  of 
flagellation,  which  even  his  contemporaries 
attribute  to  him,  is  or  is  not  to  be  entirely 
credited,  there  is  no  doubt  that  a  consider- 
able alteration  in  his  conduct  was  soon 
apparent.  The  sacred  nature  of  his  office 
would  demand  an  abstinence  from  all  that 
would  savour  of  irregularity,  and  a  stricter 
attention  to  his  external  demeanour ;  and  of 
these  the  king  was  not  likely  to  complain. 
But  it  must  be  allowed  that  he  had  reason 
to  consider  himself  deceived  when,  almost 
without  notice,  and  certainly  contrary  to  his 
expectation,  Becket  shortly  afterwards  sent 
in  nis  resignation  of  the  chancellorship,  on 
the  pretence  of  his  incompetence  topeitorm 
the  duties  of  the  two  offices.  As  this  doubt 
of  his  own  powers  could  not  have  been  the 
result  of  experience,  inasmuch  as  sufficient 
time  had  not  elapsed  to  try  them,  and  as 
the  two  offices  could  not  be  considered  in- 
compatible, several  bishops  bavins  already 
held  the  Great  Seal,  Hennr  might  De  justly 
indignant  that  Becket,  rar-sighted  as  he 
was,  should  not  have  anticipated  the  diffi- 
culty, and  prepared  him  for  such  a  determi- 
nation. He  could  not,  therefore,  avoid  sus- 
pecting that  it  was  a  foregone  conclusion, 
and  that  some  other  cause  had  produced  it 
The  stricter  course  of  life  wmch  he  had 
already  adopted,  and  the  resumption  of  some 
of  the  Church's  ancient  rights  which  he  was 
then  beginning  to  attempt,  in  conjunction 
with  his  resignation  of  the  Great  Seal,  natu- 
rally led  the  king  to  fear  that,  instead  of  the 
able  assistant  in  his  plans  of  government 
which  he  had  expectea,  the  archbishop  was 
about  to  become  a  declared  antagonist  in 
all  those  improvements  connected  with  the 
clerical  order  which  he  contemplated. 

The  precise  time  of  his  retirement  from 
the  office  of  chancellor  has  not  been  men- 
tioned ;  nor  do  any  of  the  numerous  charters 
that  bear  his  name  in  that  character  affi>rd 
any  evidence  by  which  the  date  can  be 
ascertained.  To  none  of  these  is  his  name 
attached  as  bearing  the  two  offices  of  arch- 
bishop and  chancellor ;  and  it  is  generall} 
believed  that  he  resigned  the  latter  before 
the  close  of  the  year  1162.  The  name  ol 
his  successor  has  not  been  discovered ;  an^ 
there  is  an  hiatus  of  about  eleven  years  ii 
the  list  of  chancellors,  which  has  still  to  b 
filled  up. 

The  history  of  his  after-years  offers  a 
many  problems  difficult  to  sofve^  even  wher 
both  parties  agree  upon  the  nets,  and  a 
many  discrepancies  where  they  differ,  thi 
the  pursuit  of  the  enquiry  is  a  thaoklei 
labour  to  one  indifferent  to  the  pretendoa 
I  of  either  of  the  combtttaiiti^  araiflad  tiM 


BECKET 

Buch  pretensioiis  can  neyer  agun  come  into 
controversjy  and  feeling  that,  ivith  what- 
ever justice  each  side  was  originally  sup- 
ported, the  contest  eventually  hecame,  as 
most  contests  do,  an  alternate  exhibition  of 
pride,  temper,  suspicion,  and  folly  on  both 
parts. 

That  Becket  in  the  first  instance  claimed 
privileges  for  the  Church  to  which  no  good 
government  could  submit  few  will  attempt 
to  deny ;  but  it  must  also  be  admitted  that 
Henry  was  aiming  at  a  royal  indepnendence 
of  papal  authoritv,  for  which  the  time  was 
not  yet  ripe,  ^he  first  opposition  of 
Becket  no  aoubt  led  to  an  increased  de- 
mand by  the  king,  unaccustomed  to  be 
thwarted  in  his  views  ;  and  thus  those 
ultimate  proceedings  were  caused  which, 
bv  the  violence  of  both  parties,  introduced 
tLe  French  long  for  his  own  political  ob- 
jects into  the  contest,  and  terminated  in 
the  catastrophe  which  not  only  obliged 
Heniy  to  desist  from  his  efforts,  but  made 
the  crown  for  a  time  more  than  ever  the 
slave  of  the  papal  power.  Without  enter- 
ing into  all  the  details  of  the  conflict,  it 
will  be  enough  to  notice  the  principal  in- 
ddents  in  the  order  of  their  occurrence. 

On  Becket's  resigning  the  chancellorship, 
the  king  required  him  to  give  up  the  arch- 
deaconry of  Canterbury,  which  he  wished 
to  retain ;  but  at  the  same  time  he  con- 
tinued to  entrust  him  with  the  education 
of  Prince  Henry,  his  eldest  son,  who  for 
several  years  had  been  under  his  care ;  and 
the  jprince  remained  with  him  till  the  fol- 
lowing May,  when  Becket  proceeded  to 
the  Cooncil  of  Tours. 

The  archbishop  having  resolved  to  re- 
sume all  the  possessions  which  had  ever 
belonged  to  his  see,  claimed  among  others 
the  custody  of  the  castle  of  Rochester, 
because  it  had  been  bestowed  on  his  prede- 
cessor ;  and  required  the  Earl  of  Clare  to 
do  him  homage  for  the  castle  of  Tunbridge, 
though  it  had  been  held  by  that  family  of 
the  crown  for  nearly  a  hcmdred  years.  He 
went  further :  on  tne  pretence  that  he  had 
t  right  to  bestow  all  churches  situated  on 
the  manors  of  hb  tenants,  he  presented  one 
of  hia  clerks,  named  Lawrence,  to  the 
church  of  Eynesford.  William,  the  lord 
of  that  manor,  however,  who  was  also  a 
tenant  of  the  king,  and  possessed  the  ad- 
vowson,  immediately  turned  out  the  in- 
truder, whereupon  me  archbishop  incon- 
tinently excommunicated  him ;  and  it  was 
not  without  some  hard  words  between  the 
prelate  and  the  king  that  the  sentence  was 
taken  off. 

This  kind  of  procedure,  violent  and  in- 
temperate as  it  was,  would  of  course  be 
displeasing  to  the  lung,  and  prompt  him 
to  dwell  upon  and  endeavour  to  restrain 
other  encroachments  of  the  clergj.  That 
body  dasmed  the  privilege  of  having  every 


BECKET 


75 


case  in  which  any  member  of  it  was  en- 
gaged tried  before  its  own  tribunals,  how- 
ever gross  in  its  character  or  however 
obnoxious  to  the  peace  of  the  community. 
The  sentence  in  the  ecclesiastical  courts 
was  that  of  deprivation  and  loss  of  orders ; 
operating,  of  course,  as  a  very  slight  re- 
straint. The  consequence  was,  that  mur- 
ders and  other  atrocities  by  claimants  of 
clerical  exemption  were  sadly  numerous. 
As  a  remedy  for  the  evil,  the  king  pro- 
posed that  clerks  should  for  such  oifences 
De  subject  to  the  same  jurisdiction  as  lay 
offenders ;  and  that,  on  conviction,  they 
should  be  degraded  by  the  Church  before 
the  secular  sentence  was  executed.  This 
the  archbishop  resisted  as  an  innovation, 
contending  for  these  immunities  as  an  in- 
herent right  of  the  Church ;  but,  a  horrible 
case  of  the  kind  just  then  occurring,  Henry 
determined  to  bring  to  issue  a  (question  in 
which  all  who  were  interested  in  preserv- 
ing the  public  peace  joined  in  wishmg  him 
success.  Hadne  confined  his  endeavours 
to  that  object,  he  must  have  overcome  all 
opposition. 

At  a  meeting  of  the  prelates  at  West- 
minster in  October  1163  he  stated  his 
views ;  and  on  the  bishops,  at  the  instiga- 
tion of  Becket,  hesitating  to  concur,  the 
king  asked  them  whether  they  would  obey 
the  customs  of  his  ancestors.  All  of  them, 
save  one,  Hilary,  Bishop  of  Chichester,  in 
answering  that  they  were  willing  to  do  so, 
added  the  words  '  saving  their  order.'  On 
hearing  this  reservation,  the  kin^  angrily 
broke  up  the  council,  and  deprived  the 
archbishop  of  the  custody  of  the  castles  of 
Eye  and  iBerkhampstead. 

After  some  little  time  the  bishops  with- 
drew their  opposition,  and  even  Becket 
consented  to  retract  the  objectionable  salvo. 
A  council  was  accordingly  held  at  Claren- 
don in  Januarv  1164  in  order  to  record 
their  assent.  There  the  kin^  required  that 
the  ancient  customs  of  the  kingdom  should 
be  reduced  to  writing ;  and  they  were 
forthwith  drawn  up  in  the  form  now  known 
as  the  Constitutions  of  Clarendon.  They 
not  onlv  made  clerks  accused  of  crimes 
amenable  to  the  king's  courts,  and  referred 
all  questions  of  presentation  to  benefices 
to  be  decided  there,  but  prohibited  all 
ecclesiastics  from  leaving  the  kingdom 
without  the  king*s  licence,  and  forbad  ex- 
communication to  be  pronounced  against 
his  tenants  in  chief,  and  the  members  of 
his  household.  They  brought  also  the 
patronage  of  the  sees  and  abbeys  more 
under  tne  royiJ  control,  and  gave  the  king 
power  to  compel  the  archbishop  to  do 
justice  to  the  suitors  in  his  court. 

The  barons  gladly  adopted  them,  and  the 
bishops  acquiesced.  Becket  alone  resisted 
for  some  time;  but  eventually,  on  the 
pressing  remonstance  of  his  bietbietv  ^xid. 


76 


BECKET 


others,  went  at  their  head  to  the  kin^,  and 
promised  to  keep  the  laws  '  legitime  et 
Don&  fide/  In  doing  this  he  can  scarcely 
be  excused  from  the  charge  of  deliberate 
peijurr,  committed,  as  he  himself  pre- 
viously said, '  to  be  repented  hereafter  as  I 
may/  His  successful  solicitation  for  the 
pontifTs  absolution  from  his  oath  would 
receive  its  natural  interpretation  from  the 
king,  and  would  at  once  snow  the  insincerity 
with  which  he  joined  in  the  application 
for  the  pope's  confirmance  of  the  constitu- 
tions. 

It  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  Henry 
should  feel  indignant  at  conduct  whicn 
Becket*s  warmest  admirers  do  not  pretend 
to  justify,  or  that  the  archbbhop's  request 
for  an  interview  with  the  king  at  Wood- 
stock should  be  refused.  The  royal  dis- 
pleasure was  greatly  increased  by  two  at- 
tempts then  made  by  Becket  to  proceed  to 
Konie  in  defiance  of  the  constitutions. 
On  both  occasions  he  was  bafiled  by  con- 
trary winds ;  and  in  a  subsequent  conference 
with  the  king  he  was  asked  whether  one 
kin^om  had  not  room  for  both,  and  was 
advised  to  return  to  the  duties  of  his  pro- 
vince. 

His  fiiendly  biographer,  Herbert  of  Bo- 
sham,  shows  that  his  subsequent  proceed- 
ings were  far  from  temperate,  and  not  con- 
ducted in  a  manner  to  soften  the  anger  of 
the  king.  In  a  short  time  they  came  a^rain 
into  conflict.  John  the  marshal,  an  officer 
of  the  Exchequer,  having  a  suit  in  the 
archbishop*8  court  relative  to  the  manor  of 
Pageham  in  Sussex,  obtained  a  writ  to 
remove  it,  requiring  Becket  to  answer  him 
in  the  king's  court  Instead  of  appearing 
personally  according  to  the  law,  ne  sent 
tour  kniffhts  with  excuses,  which  the  king 
deemed  frivolous  and  insufficient.  Another 
day  was  appointed,  namely  the  6th  of  Oc- 
tober (1164),  when  a  great  council  of  the 
bishops  and  barons  had  been  summoned 
to  meet  at  Northampton.  He  was  there 
charged  with  treason  for  his  omission, 
and  was  condenmed  to  be  'at  the  king's 
mercy,'  or,  in  other  words,  to  a  forfeiture 
of  all  his  eflTects,  which  was  commuted  for 
a  fine  of  600/. 

Henry  was  not  satisfied  with  this,  but 
somewhat  unfairly  caused  him  to  be  ar- 
raigned on  other  charges,  of  which,  as  far 
as  it  appears,  he  had  received  no  previous 
notice.  He  was  called  upon  to  refund  600/. 
which  he  had  received  as  constable  of  the 
castles  of  Eye  and  Berkhampstead.  He 
submitted,  though  he  alleged  that  he  had 
spent  more  in  uieir  repair,  and  gave  secu- 
rity for  the  amount  It  is  curious  that 
one  of  his  bondsmen  for  this  money  was 
William  de  Eynesford  (Brady,  i.  385),  the 
subject  of  his  former  excommunication. 
The  next  charge  was  for  (KXML  alleged  to 
baye  been  lent  to  him  by  the  king  daring 


BECKET 

the  war  of  Toulouse.    For  the  payment  of 
this  also,  though  he  declared  it  was  a  fVee 

g'ft,  he  was  obliffed  to  bind  himself.  And 
btly,  a  demand  was  made  upon  him  to 
account  for  the  moneys  he  had  received 
from  the  vacant  sees  and  abbeys  while 
under  his  charge,  the  amount  of  which  is 
variously  stat^  as  230,000,  30,000,  and 
44,000  marks.  To  answer  a  charge  of  such 
magnitude,  he  demanded,  and  ootained,  a 
day  for  deliberation,  during  which  his 
anxiety  produced  an  illness  which  delayed 
the  meeting  till  the  following  Tuesday. 
He  then  proceeded  to  the  council,  bearinff 
his  cross  in  his  own  hands;  an  unusuid 
proceeding,  caused  by  foolish  reports  that 
violence  was  intended  him.  The  long,  how- 
ever, came  not  into  the  hall,  but  sent  to  him 
to  know  his  answer.  He  dechired  that  he  had 
expended  all  he  had  received  in  the  king's 
service ;  and  that,  on  being  raised  to  the 
primacy,  he  had  been  expressly  discharged 
from  all  secular  liabilities  in  the  name  of 
the  king,  by  Prince  Henry,  and  Richard  de 
Luci,  the  chief  justiciary.  He  refused, 
therefore,  to  account,  and  appealed  to  the 
pope.  The  bishops  endeavoured  to  dis- 
suade him,  but  he  prohibited  them  from 
interfering  in  the  cause.  Others  attempted 
to  intimidate  him,  but  without  efliect ;  and 
when  the  Earl  of  Leicester,  at  the  head  of 
the  baroBS,  came  to  pronounce  judgment 
against  him,  Becket  interrupted  the  earl, 
and,  refusing  to  hear  him,  referred  the  cause 
to  the  pope,  and  slowly  retired  from  the  hall. 
Stigmatised  by  several  of  the  courtiers 
as  a  perjurer  and  a  traitor,  he  showed  bjr 
his  replies  that  he  was  by  no  means  den- 
cient  in  the  grosser  language  of  vitupera- 
tion. Whether  he  really  belieyed  that  the 
king  would  resort  to  personal  violence  may 
be  doubted,  but  upon  this  pretence  he  con- 
trived to  escape  in  the  middle  of  the  night 
from  St  Andrew^s  Monastery,  where  he 
lodged,  and  by  a  circuitous  route  to  reach 
Sandwich  about  a  fortnight  after,  where  he 
embarked  in  a  small  boal^  and  safely  landed 
near  Gravelines. 

Both  Pope  Alexander  and  King  Louis 
of  France  attached  themselves  to  Becket's 
interests — the  one  warmly,  from  political 
rivalry ;  the  other  with  more  caution,  lest 
Henry  should  unite  himself  to  the  cause  of 
the  anti-pope.  From  both  of  them  Becket 
had  a  most  honourable  reception — first  at 
Soissons'  from  Louis,  who  mmished  him 
with  a  train  of  300  knights  to  proceed  to 
the  pope  at  Sens.  There  he  is  said  by 
some  to  have  resigned  the  archbishopric 
into  the  hands  of  me  pontiff,  and  to  have 
been  immediately  reinstated.  Alexander 
committed  him  to  the  care  of  the  Abbot 
of  Pontigny,  a  Cistercian  monastery  about 
twelve  leagues  from  Sens. 

King  Henry,  on  Becket's  flight,  had  sent 
ambassadora  to  Louis  to  demand  that  the 


BECK£T 

azcfalnshop  ahoiild  be  giren  upy  and  to  Pope 
Alexander  to  pray  for  Mb  deprivation,  ^o 
tnoner  had  he  heard  a  report  of  the  fiulure 
of  both  mimioiia,  than  he  ordered  all  the 
archbiahop^s  property  and  revenues  to  be 
seised,  banished  all  his  kindred  and 
attendiants.  and  deprived  the  clerks  at- 
tached to  nim  of  the  income  of  their  pre- 
ferments. These  orders  were  rifrorouslj 
execatedy  ehieflj  bj  Ranulph  de  Broc,  an 
old  enemj  of  Becket ;  and  the  unfortunate 
relations,  without  regard  to  age  or  sex, 
were  transported  bejond  sea  in  the  depth 
of  winter,  but  were  hospitably  .received 
and  provided  for  in  Flanders  and  France. 

Becket  remained  at  Pontipy  nearly  two 
years,  habited  as  a  Cistercian  monlc,  but 
served  as  became  his  dignity.  In  this 
Mvlum  he  pursued  a  course  of  study  ill- 
suited  for  one  of  his  temperament  and 
aoAtere  habit  of  life.  Although  his  friend, 
John  of  Salisbury,  remonstrated  with  him, 
and,  pointing  out  his  inflammatory  ten- 
dency, recommended  the  perusal  of  the 
Psalms  and  St.  Gregory's  Books  of  Morals, 
wisely  asking  him,  *  Who  ever  rises  pricked 
in  heart  from  reading  laws  or  even  canons?* 
the  prelate  still  persisted;  and  the  fruits 
were  soon  apparent. 

The  corr^wndence  during  this  period 
was  meet  voluminous.  According  to  the 
opinion  of  one  who  has  read  much  of  it,  it 
does  not  '  give  a  favourable  idea  of  the 
time.  There  is  abundance  of  violence, 
fraud,  and  insincerity;  mean  selfishness 
and  artifice  trying  to  veil  themselves  under 
fine  professions  and  language;  cant,  too 
evidently  known  by  those  who  used  it  to 
be  nothing  better  than  cant ;  strange  toss- 
ing to  and  fro  of  Scripture  perverted  by 
allegory  and  misapplication ;  on  the  part  of 
the  pope  there  is  temporising  and  much 
that  must  be  caJled  duplicity ;  the  cardinals 
nnd  other  high  dignitaries  appear  corrupt 
and  crafty ;  Becket  is  arrogant,  intemperate, 
and  quarrelsome ;  Henry  at  once  violent 
iDd  slippery;  Louis  weakly  hypocritical; 
and  Fohot  smooth,  politic,  and  tricky.' 
(RobfrtsoHS  BeckHf  172.) 

A  negotiation  opened  between  the  king 
and  archbishop  had  failed.  It  began  in 
smoothness,  proceeded  in  heat,  and  ended 
in  threats  and  fury.  Becket  had  been  re- 
strained by  the  pope  from  taking  any  steps 
amnst  the  king  until  after  Easter  1166; 
and  Henrj,  when  that  time  arrived, 
thought  it  best  to  anticipate  the  sentence 
of  excommunication  which  he  expected 
Becket  would  pronounce  by  appealmg  to 
the  pope.  Envoys  were  sent  to  Pontigny 
to  serve  the  notice  of  appeal,  but  were 
obliged  to  content  themselves  with  reading 
it  aloud,  as  Becket  had  gone  on  a  pilgrimage 
to  Soisaona.  There  he  remained  a  few 
dayis  and  then  proceeded  to  Vezehnr,  where, 
oo'the  Sunday  after  Asoension-oay,  after 


BECKET 


77 


preaching  at  high  mass,  he,  in  the  presence 
of  a  yast  concourse  of  people,  without  any 
previous  communication  to  his  clerks  of 
nis  intention,  pronounced  sentence  of  ex- 
communication against  John  of  Oxford, 
Richard  de  Luci,  and  others;  anathe- 
matised six  of  the  Constitutions  of  Claren- 
don, and  all  who  should  act  upon  them-; 
suspended  the  Bishop  of  SaHsoury;  and 
summoned  King  Henry  to  repent  on  pain 
of  being  anathematised  if  he  should  persist 
in  his  courses.  The  English  bishops  ap- 
pealed to  the  pope,  fixing  the  fol^wing 
Ascension-day  as  the  term  for  bearing. 

It  was  not  to  be  supposed  that  Heniy 
would  permit  such  a  provocation  to  pass 
unnoticed ;  and  accordmgly,  in  the  follow- 
ing September,  he  caused  an  intimation  to 
be  given  at  a  general  chapter  of  Cistercians 
that  if  the  aixshbishop  were  admitted  into 
any  of  their  monasteries,  he  would  con- 
fiscate all  the  English  possessions  of  their 
order.  The  consequence,  of  course,  was 
his  retirement  from  Pondgn^;  and  the 
French  king  having  desired  him  to  choose 
a  residence  in  his  dominions,  he  selected  a 
monastery  near  Sens. 

The  pope  had  by  this  time  removed  to 
Rome,  whither  Henry  despatched  a  mission. 
At  the  head  of  it  was  John  of  Oxford, 
who  contrived  not  only  to  procure  a  re- 
versal of  his  excommunication,  and  a  con- 
firmation of  his  appointment  to  the  deanery 
of  Salisbury,  but  also  to  obtain  the  no- 
mination of  two  cardinal  legates,  William 
of  Pa  via,  and  Otho,  during  the  continu- 
ance of  whose  commisHion  Becket*s  power 
was  entirely  inoperative;  and  the  pope 
prohibited  everybody  but  himself  from 
excommunicating  the  king.  Becket's  in- 
dignation appears  in  violent  and  most 
offensive  letters,  in  which  the  pope  him- 
self is  not  exempted  from  his  vehemence. 
The  cardinals  made  some  efforts  to  pro- 
cure a  reconciliation,  but  through  the 
obstinacy  of  both  parties  failed,  and  re- 
turned to  Rome. 

These  proceedings  occupied  nearly  a 
year,  during  which  the  terra  assigned'  for 
the  appeal  of  the  English  bishops  had  ex- 
pired. Becket  refused  a  second  appeal  they 
wished  to  enter,  and  towards  the  close  of 
1167  extended  his  excommunications  to  the 
Bbhop  of  London,  Geoffrey  Ridel,  his  own 
archdeacon  (whom,  as  an  instance  of  his 
choice  of  expressions,  he  called,  in  one  of 
his  letters,  '  Archidiabolus  noster '),  and  a 
long  Hst  of  others,  among  whom  were  so 
many  about  the  court  of  King  Henry  that 
'  there  was  hardly  one  that  could  offer  him 
the  kiss  of  peace  at  mass,  but  such  as  were 
excommunicated  either  by  name  or  im- 
plicitly.' 

The  Roman  pontiff  was  puzzled  what 
to  do  between  Henry *8  remonstrances  adn 
Becket's  representations^  supported  as  the 


78 


BECKET 


latter  were  by  the  French  kinp^.  Irresolute 
to  act  firmly  on  either  side,  he  took  a  middle 
course.  lie  endeavoured  to  effect  a  recon- 
ciliation ;  and,  despatching  envoys  for  the 
purpose,  he  suspended  the  sentence  Becket 
had  pronounced  till  the  following  Lfent; 
that  IS,  Lent  in  1160,  for  great  part  of 
the  preceding  year  had  been  then  ex- 
hausted in  the  diplomatic  negotiations. 

The  world  had  now  begun  to  be  tired  of 
the  quarrel.  To  the  pope,  Becket's  perti- 
nacity could  be  productive  of  nothing  but 
annoyance;  Henry,  feeling  that  his  king- 
dom and  his  clergy  were  kept  in  a  state  of 
continual  anxiety,  was  sincerely  desirous  of 
some  accommodation ;  Louis  was  not  un- 
vnlling  to  get  rid  of  a  troublesome  guest ; 
and  l&ckeVB  own  friends  and  dependents 
were  sighing  after  a  restoration  to  their 
former  ease.  Becket  alone  refused  to  make 
any  concession.  At  an  interview  between 
Henry  and  Louis  at  Montmirail,  in  January 
1169,  Becket  was  admitted,  when,  after 
lamenting  the  differences  which  had  arisen, 
and  throwing  himself  upon  the  king^s 
mercy,  the  innexible  archbisnop  qualified  his 
submission  by  the  words '  salvo  honore  Dei.' 
Henry  was  indignant,  justly  considering 
that  the  reservation  was  intended  to,  or  at ! 
least  would,  warrant  any  future  resistance ; 
but,  after  reproaching  him  with  his  pride 
and  ingratitude,  declared  that  he  would 
be  satisfied  if  Becket  would  act  towards 
him  with  the  same  submission  which  the 
gi;eatest  of  former  primates  had  shown  to 
the  least  powerful  of  his  predecessors. 
Becket,  however,  evaded  the  proposal. 
Even  the  King  of  France  was  disgusted, 
and  the  meeting  terminated  without  further 
colloquy. 

Becket  accordingly  prepared  to  retire 
from  the  French  territory,  when  Louis, 
from  a  new  quarrel  with  Henry,  again 
changed  his  policy.  On  the  termination  of 
Lent,  therefore,  Becket  resumed  hostilities 
by  renewing  at  Clairvaux  the  excommuni- 
cation;*,  and  including  among  the  denounced 
the  Bishop  of  Salisbury  and  others.  Not- 
withstanding the  effbrta  made  to  prevent 
the  admission  into  England  of  any  letters 
from  Becket,  he  contrived  that  the  sentence 
ngfun.ot  Foliot,  Bishop  of  London,  should 
be  delivered  at  the  nltar  of  St.  Paul's  on 
the  next  Ascension-day. 

The  pope  was  annoyed,  and  directed  that 
further  proceedings  should  be  stayed  till 
he  had  tried  the  effect  of  another  mission. 
This  led  to  a  second  interview  between 
Becket  and  the  two  kings,  which  took 
place  at  Montniartre,  near  Paris,  on  No- 
vember 18, 1109,  and  had  nearly  led  to  a 
friendly  result,  when  Becket  demanded 
the  kiss  of  peace,  which  Henry,  in  conse- 
quence of  a  foolish  oath  he  had  taken, 
having  refused,  the  treaty  was  i^in 
1k)roken  offl     Becket  now  threatened  to 


BECKET 

place  the  kingdom  under  an  interdict,  and 
even  to  excommunicate  the  king ;  and  the 
pope  renewed  his  eflbrts  to  produce  a  re- 
conciliation. Kotrou,  Archbisnop  of  Rouen, 
one  of  the  new  papal  commissioneis, 
absolved  the  Bishop  of  London  ;  and 
BeckeVs  letter  of  complaint  shows  that  he 
was  as  little  inclined  to  pay  respect  to  the 
pope  as  to  the  king,  when  his  own  cause 
was  not  supported.  He  says,  'In  the 
court  of  Home  the  Lord's  side  is  always 
sacrificed ;  Barabbas  escapes,  and  Christ  ia 
put  to  death.' 

Becket  soon  found  a  new  grievance  in  the 
Archbishop  of  York  having  officiated  at 
the  coronation  of  the  king's  eldest  son 
Henry,  which  was  solemnised  at  West- 
minster on  Sunday,  June  14,  1170,  that 
privilege  rightfully  belonging  to  him. 
This,  however,  did  not  prevent  a  meeting 
taking  place  near  Freteval,  on  the  22nd 
of  the  following  July,  between  him  and 
Henry,  when  a  formal  reconciliation  was 
concluded,  the  king  promising  togive  him 
the  kiss  of  peace  in  his  own  dominions.  A 
full  restoration  of  Becket's  possessions,  and 
those  of  his  adherents,  the  advance  of  a 
sum  of  money  to  pay  his  debts,  and  amends 
for  the  injury  he  had  sustained  in  the  late 
coronation,  were  among  the  articles  agreed 
on;  and  the  archbishop  was  to  return  to 
the  exercise  of  his  functions,  and  to  show 
all  due  obedience  to  his  earthly  sovereign. 

The  performance  both  of  the  king's  pro- 
mises and  Becket*s  return  was  delayed; 
but,  after  two  more  interviews  at  Tours, 
the  last  of  which  was  a  friendly  one, 
Becket  resolved  to  set  out,  although  Louis 
advised  him  first  to  insist  on  receiving  the 
kiss  of  peace.  Disappointed  of  meeting 
Henry  at  Rouen,  as  promised,  and  of  re- 
ceiving a  supply  for  his  expense^  he  was 
obliged  to  submit  to  the  escort  of  his 
warmest  adversary,  John  of  Oxford,  and 
to  borrow  300/.  from  the  Archbishop  of 
Kouen. 

In  the  meantime  he  had  received  from 
Rome  letters  suspending  the  Archbishop 
of  York  and  other  prelates  for  assisting 
in  the  coronation,  and  renewing  the  ex- 
communication which  had  been  pronounced 
against  the  Bishops  of  London  and  Salis- 
bury. Receiving  these  after  the  recon- 
ciliation, he  might  have  suppressed  them, 
and  little  doubt  can  exist  that  had  he  been 
acting  with  sincerity  and  good  faith,  he 
would  have  taken  measures  for  the  purpose. 
On  the  contrary,  however,  he  forwarded 
them  to  England  before  he  embarked ;  thus 
exhibiting  the  intolerance  of  his  spirit,  and 
exciting  the  greatest  exasperation.  He 
sailed  from  Witsand,  near  Calais,  and 
landed  on  December  1,  1170,  at  Sandwich, 
where  John  of  Oxford  protected  him  from 
the  threatened  interruption  of  the  sheriff 
of  Kent  and  others. 


BECKET 

JEb  reoeption  at  Canterbiuy,  after  an  ] 
abeence  of  moie  than  eix  jean,  was  most 
enthusiastic :  and  his  progress  in  the  fol- 
lowing week  to  see  the  young  king  was 
something  in  the  nature  of  a  triumph. 
His  oonducty  howerer,  with  reference  to 
the  hiahops  being  known,  he  received 
arders  to  return  to  his  diocese,  without 
obtaining  an  interview.  When  there,  he 
oocupie^Thimself  till  Christmas  in  exercis- 
ing his  aichiepisoopal  functions,  Ranulph 
de  firoc  and  his  other  enemies  still  offering 
him  every  species  of  annoyance. 

On  Christmas-day,  at  high  mass,  he 
pmched  to  the  people,  and  luter  affecting 
them  by  a  reference  to  one  mart^  among 
their  archbishops,  and  the  possibility  that 
there  might  be  a  second,  he  concluded 
▼ith  one  of  those  furious  denouncements 
by  which  he  dealt  '  damnation  round  the 
land ; '  uttering,  in  a  tone  '  fierce,  indignant, 
fieiy,  and  bold,  a  vehement  invective  against 
his  enemies,  and  pronouncing  sentence  of 
excommunication  against  Kanulph  de  Bruc 
•od  his  brother  Robert,  and  also  against 
Nisei  de  Sackville,  a  court  chaplain. 

The  Archbishop  of  York  and  the  ex- 
communicated bisnops  had  not  been  idle. 
Thej  had  sailed  to  Normandy,  and  meeting 
the  king  near  Bayeux,  had  communicated 
to  him  the  recent  proceedings  of  Becket 
Heniy^s  anger  knew  no  bounds,  and  in  the 
heat  of  it  he  unguardedly  dropped  words 


BKCKET 


79 


more  safe  in  the  church,  hurried  him 
through  the  cloisters.  But  the  knights 
also,  regardless  of  the  sanctity  of  the  place, 
had  obtained  an  entrance,  fully  armed ; 
and  calling  out,  '  Where  is  the  traitor  ?  ' 
and  then,  on  receiving  no  answer, '  Where 
is  the  archbishop  P '  Becket  replied,  '  Here 
I  am;  no  traitor,  but  a  priest  of  God.' 
They  repeated  their  demand  for  the 
bishops*  absolution,  which  he  met  by  a 
repetition  of  his  denial,  adding  that  he 
was  ready  to  die,  but  commanding  them 
not  to  touch  his  people.  The  knights  then 
endeavoured  to  remove  him  from  the 
church,  but,  finding  their  efforts  to  drag 
him  away  unavailing,  Fitz-Urse  struck  him 
on  the  head  with  his  sword,  wounding  at 
the  same  time  Grim,  his  crosA-bearer  and 
biographer ;  and  TracvTand  Brito  repeat- 
ing the  blows,  the  archbishop 'was  soon  a 
breathless  corpse  at  their  feet.  Hugh  do 
Moreville  did  not  strike  Becket,  being  em- 
ployed in  keeping  off  interference ;  and  the 
four,  rushing  out  of  the  church,  repaired  to 
Hugh  de  Moreville's  castle  in  Yorkshire. 

Tnouffh  the  above  four  knights  only  are 
recorded^  other  persons  were  apparently 
engaged  in  the  atrocious  project.  Bobert 
de  Broc,  who  joined  them,  pointed  out  tho 
private  passage  to  the  cloisters ;  and  Robert 
Fitz-Ralph,  or  Fitz-Kanulph,  is  spoken  of 
bv  Dugdale  as  having  been  concerned  in  it 
„  ^  William,  the  son  of  the  latter,  was  a  jus- 
reflecting  on  the  cowardice  of  nis  courtiers  I  ticier  in  this  reign,  and  will  be  mentioned 


for  suffering  him  to  be  so  long  insulted  by 
i  turbulent    priest.     Four  knights  then 

Cut — Reginald  Fitz-Urse,  William  de 
/,  Hugh  de  Moreville,  and  Richard 
Brito— interpreting  these  imhappy  words 
too  readilv,  at  once  embarked  for  England, 
uui  repau^ed  to  Saltwood,  the  castle  of 
Ranulpn  de  Broc,  where  they  arrived  on 
December  28.  Henry,  on  their  departure 
from  the  court,  suspected  their  intention, 
sod  instantly  despatched  the  Earl  of  Man- 
deville  and  two  others,  with  orders  to 
overtake  them  and  to  arrest  the  arch- 
hishop.  But  thev  did  not  arrive  till  the 
traji^eay  was  conipleted. 

C)n  'fuesday,  December  29,  the  knights 
arrived  at  Canterbury,  and  intruding  into 
the  chamber  of  the  archbishop,  they  de- 
manded   of   him  the  withdrawal  of  the 
hishops*    excommunication.    Becket*s  an- 
swer was  proud  and  firm.    He  offered  to 
absolve  the  Bishops  of  London  and  Salis- 
hary  if  they  would  swear  to  submit  to  the 
df'termination  of  the  Church ;   but  he  said 
the  pope  alone  had  jurisdiction  over  the 
ftrchbisnop.    On  remmding  three  of  the 
knights  tnat  they  had  been  his  vassals, 
th«y  broke  into  fiiry,  and  the  discussion 
«nded  with  most  violent  threats  on  their 
letiiement  firom  the  mom. 

It  was  now  the  hour  of  vespers ;  and  the 
moaks  and  clergy,  thinking  ne  would  be 


in  a  subsequent  pa^e. 

Thus  terminated  the  life  of  one  whose 
character,  though  distinguished  by  sterling 
qualities,  was  alloyed  with  many  human 
imperfections :  to  which  the  preponderance 
is  to  be  given  is  still,  and  seems  likely  to  be, 
a  question  to  be  agitated  by  historians  and 
biographers.  Too  frequently  thev  become 
the  aavocates  of  the  one  or  the  other 
party,  instead  of  being  impartial  judges 
netween  them ;  and  the  difficulty  must  be 
admitted  of  defining  the  precise  line  which 
divides  firmness  from  obstinacy,  enerjry 
from  intemperance,  and  an  honest  zeal  in 
claiming  the  privileges  of  one  order  from 
an  insidious  encroachment  on  the  prero- 
gatives of  another.  Whatever  opinion  may 
be  formed  of  the  claims  made  by  Becket  on 
behalf  of  the  Church,  few  will  praise  him 
for  temperance  in  his  enforcement  of  them, 
or  consider  that  he  adopted  the  wisest 
course  to  obtain  their  recognition;  and, 
while  none  will  deny  the  extent  of  his 
acquirements  or  the  brilliancy  of  his 
talentSj^  many  will  attribute  his  canonisa- 
tion more  to  the  swords  of  his  murderers 
than  to  the  virtues  of  his  life. 

Two  years  after  his  assassination  he  was 
canonised  ;  and  his  body,  which  the  monks 
had  hurriedly  buried  without  ceremonv  in 
the  crypt,  from  fear  that  it  might  other- 
wise be  exposed  to  indignity,  was  removed 


80 


BECKINGHAM 


in  1221  to  n  chapel  prepared  for  its  recep- 
tion, where  hifl  shrine  for  many  subsequent 
ages  was  yisited  by  pilgrims  from  all  parts, 
whom  the  successive  popes,  to  keep  alive 
the  natural  horror  wnicn  his  martvrdom 
had  excited,  and  to  connect  it  with  religious 
zeal  for  papal  supremacy,  assiduously  en- 
couraged by  granting  them  extraorainary 
indulgences.  The  riches  which  supersti- 
tion lavished  on  this  shrine  were  enormous, 
and  continued  to  flow  in,  till  Henry  VI IL, 
assuming  the  title  of '  Defender  of  the  Faith,' 
and  deeming  Becket's  example  a  provoca- 
tion to  opposition,  ordered  the  shnne  to  be 
destroyed,  seized  the  accumulated  treasures, 
and,  directing  his  bones  to  be  burned  and 
his  ashes  to  be  scattered  to  the  winds,  stig- 
matised him  as  a  rebel  and  traitor  to  his 
prince,  and  struck  his  name  itom  the  ca- 
lendar of  saints. 

Becket  had  two  sisters  who  survived 
him.  One  of  them,  Mary,  was  made  Abbess 
of  Barking  in  Essex,  m  1173;  and  the 
other,  Agnes,  was  married  to  Thomas  Fitz- 
Theobald  de  Helles,  by  whom,  about  the 
end  of  Henry's  reign,  was  founded  a  hos- 
pital in  London,  on  the  land  which  had 
belonged  to  Gilbert  Becket,  and  where 
Thomas  was  bom.  It  was  called  the  Hos- 
pital of  St  Thomas  the  Martyr,  of  Aeon, 
and  consisted  of  a  master  and  several 
brethren  of  a  particular  order,  professing 
the  rule  of  St  Augustine,  about  that  time 
instituted  in  the  Holy  I^and.  It  of  course 
did  not  escape  the  dissolution  under  Henry 
Vni.,  and  now  belongs  to  the  Mercers' 
Company,  part  of  it  being  called  the 
Mercers'' Chapel.    {Monast.  i.  437,  vi.  645.) 

BECKIKOHAIC,  Elias  de,  was  one  of 
the  two  judges  who  alone  were  found  pure, 
when  all  the  others  were  convicted  of  cor- 
rupt practices,  and  dismissed  in  disgrace 
from  the  seat  of  justice.  Nothing  is  re- 
corded of  him  beyond  this  fact  and  the 
dates  of  his  judicial  career.  He  is  first 
mentioned  at  the  bottom  of  the  list  of 
justices  itinerant  into  Middlesex  in  2 
lOdward  I.,  1274 ;  but  he  clearly  was  not 
then  a  regular  ju^tieier,  as  he  id  mentioned 
in  a  libemte  of  the  following  year  as  a 
king*s  Serjeant.  In  4  Edward  1.  he  was 
one  of  the  justices  of  assize  then  appointed. 

He  f^terwsrds  filled  the  office  ot  keeper 
of  the  records  and  writs  of  the  Common 
Pleas ;  and  an  allowance  of  twenty  shillings 
was  made  to  him  for  the  expenses  of  their  ' 
carriage  from  Westminster  to  Shrewsbury, 
where  the  king,  on  his  expedition  to  Wales 
in  11  Edward  I.,  had  ordered  the  court  to 
be  held.    {Madox,  iL  7.) 

It  was  not  till  Michaelmas,  13  Edward 
L,  1285,  that  he  was  raised  to  the  bench 
as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas;  and 
when  the  judges  were  all  apprehended  by 
the  king  on  charges  of  bribery  and  oomtp- 
tion,  he  and  John  de  Metingham  only  were 


BEDINGFIELD 

honourably  acquitted.  This  occurred  to- 
wards the  end  of  17  Edward  I.,  1289 ;  and 
the  Parliament  Roll  of  20  Edward  I.  con- 
tains an  honourable  record  of  his  purity. 
{Rot.  Pari  i.  84.) 

He  retired  from  the  bench,  or  died,  in 
34  Edward  I.,  1305,  the  last  fine  levied 
before  him  being  dated  in  fifteen  days  of 
St  Martin  in  that  year.    (Orig,  JuruL  44) 

He  was  buried  at  Bottisham  Church  in 
Cambridgeshire,  and  on  his  sepulchral 
memorial  he  is  designated  'Juatidarioa 
Domini  Re^  Anglise.'^ 

BEDDrOFDELB,  Thomas,  was  the 
second  son  of  Thomas  Bedingfield,  Esq., 
of  Darsham  Hall  in  Suffolk,  which  he 
afterwards  purchased  from  his  elder  brother, 
Philip.  He  was  bom  about  1503,  and, 
having  been  admitted  a  student  at  Gray's 
Inn  in  1008,  was  called  to  the  bar  on 
February  17,  1615,  and  was  reader  there 
in  Lent  1636.  He  acquired  such  eminence 
in  his  profession  that  he  was  made  attomey- 
generiu  of  the  Duchy  of  Lancaster,  and 
wa»  thereupon  knighted. 

He  was  assigned  by  the  House  of  Lords 
in  1642  to  conduct  the  defence  of  Sir 
Edward  Herbert,  the  attorney-general, 
against  the  impeachment  of  the  Commons; 
but  declining  to  plead,  in  consequence  of 
the  latter  threatening  any  counsel  who 
presumed  to  appear  against  them  with 
their  displeasure,  he  was  committed  to  the 
Tower  by  the  peers  for  his  contempt  of 
their  commands.  He  did  not,  however, 
long  suffer  under  this  choice  of  predica* 
ments,  being  released  from  his  incarceration 
in  three  days.  (State  Trials^  iL  1126, 
1120.)  The  Commons  showed  their  esti- 
mation of  him  in  1646  and  1647  by  several 
times  inserting  his  name  as  one  of  the  per- 
sons they  proDosed  as  commissioners  ofthe 
Great  Seal ;  out  the  appointment  never 
was  completed,  in  consequence  of  the  dis- 
agreement of  the  Lords.  But  both  houses 
concurred  in  October  1648  in  a  vote  ap- 
pointing him  one  of  the  judges  of  the 
Common  Pleas.  Not  long,  however,  did  he 
retain  his  new  dignity,  for  on  the  decapi- 
tation of  the  king,  in  January  1640,  Sir 
Thomas  refused  to  act  under  the  commis- 
sion offered  by  the  executioners.  (  JFilits- 
locke,  224, 27^.)  Retiring  into  private  life, 
he  outlived  the  interregnum,  and  on  the 
return  of  Charles  H.,  in  1660,  he  received 
immediately  and  in  legitimate  manner  the 
degree  of  the  coif.  He  died  at  Danham, 
on  March  23, 1660-1,  where  his  monument 
still  remains.  By  his  wife,  Elixabetiif 
daughter  of  Charles  Hoskins,  of  the  county 
of  Surrey,  he  left  a  son  of  the  same  nama^ 
and  three  daughters.  (Sucklma'a  StMkm 
ii.  222,  226.) 

BEDDTOTIXU),  Henbt,  was  the  iboHK 
of  five  sons  of  John  Bedingfield,  of  Bales- 
worth  in  Suffolk,  the  joungisr  orothcr  cf 


f 


tbe  above  ThomM)  and  himMlf  a  bencher 
t>f  Linoohi's  Inn,  by  His  wife,  Joyce, 
dangbter  and  coheir  of  Edmund  Momn,  of 
lambeth.  He  was  bom  in  16^^,  and,  hav- 
ing been  called  to  the  bar  at  Lincoln's  Inn 
od  May  7, 1657,  was  raised  to  the  degree 
of  the  ccnf  in  1663 ;  being  made  king^s 
Serjeant  some  time  after,  and  knight^. 
In  1684  he  wAs  elected  sub-steward  of 
Great  Yarmouth. 

Roger  North  calls  him  'a  grave  but 
rather  heavj  lawrer ;  but  a  good  church- 
man and  loval  by  principle.'  He  relates 
(p.  246)  that  Lord  Ouildford  <  had  cast  his 
eye  upon  him,'  and  informed  him  of  his 
intention  to  nominate  him  for  a  vacancy  on 
the  bench.  The  seijeant  mteftilly  de- 
cUred  he  would  '  ever  own  his  preferment 
u  long  as  he  lived  to  his  lordship,  and  to 
DO  other  penon  whatever.'  But  on  hear- 
ms  this.  Chief  Justice  Jeffreys,  jealous 
of  the  lord  keeper's  power,  sent  to  the 
«erjeant's  brother,  a  woollen-draper  in 
liondon,  afterwards  lord  mayor,  who  was 
ooe  of  his  creatures  and  boon  companions, 
and  told  him  that  if  his  brother  so  much 
as  went  to  the  lord  keeper,  he  would  oppose 
him,  and  he  should  not  be  a  judge  at  all. 
The  poor  seijeant,  whose  '  spirits  were  not 
fanned  for  the  heroics,'  was  obliged  to 
conform,  and  accordingly  was  not  raised 
to  the  bench  during  Lord  Guildford's  life. 
He  however  received  the  promotion  soon 
iftpr  that  nobleman's  death,  being  ap- 
pointed a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  on 
rebniazT  13,  1686.  It  is  to  be  presumed 
that,  either  f^m  his  own  conviction  or  the 
annimentsof  Jeffireys,  he  acknowledged  the  [ 
kizig*8  power  to  dispense  with  the  penal  | 
lawa,  as  two  months  after,  upon  the  recom- 
mendation of  the  same  arrogant  patron,  he 
was  raised  to  the  head  of  that  court,  on  | 
April  21,  on  the  discharge  of  Chief  Justice  i 
Jones.  He  did  not  enjoy  this  dignity  | 
much  more  than  nine  months,  dying  ' 
mddenlv  while  receiving  the  sacrament  in 
Lincoln^s  Inn  Chapel,  on  Sunday,  Febru- 
aiy  0,  1087.  A  mural  monument  of  white 
marble  was  erected  to  his  memory  in 
Hslesworth  Church.  (Sucklmg*i  Suffolk^ 
iL337 :  BramAoiCn  AvAMog.  221, 223, 268.) 

BSK,  Thokas  (Bishop  of  St.  David's), 
was  second  son  of  Walter  Bek,  or  Becke, 
haron  of  Esseby  in  Lincolnshire ;  and  Mr. 
Hardy  (p.  12)  places  him  in  his '  Catalogue 
of  Keepers  of  the  G^reat  Seal,'  on  the 
questionable  ground  that  when  John  de 
Kizkebr,  in  whose  possession  it  was  left 
hv  Robert  Bumel,  the  chancellor,  was 
coounanded  to  attend  the  king  in  May 
1^,  7  Edward  I.,  he  was  directed  to  leave 
the  Seal,  mtied  up  wiih  Aw  own  teal^  in  the 
CQstody  of  Tliomas  Bek ;  and  that  in  the 
■me  month  they  were  both  ordered  to  at- 
tmd  with  it  at  Dover,  and  there  to  await 

the  hii^a  mnMongnr     Bek  was  no  doubt 


BELET 


81 


at  that  time,  as  he  certainly  was  three 
years  before  {lune  JMi,  iii.  01),  keeper  of 
the  king's  wardrobe,  the  usual  place  of  the 
Seal's  deposit  In  tbe  same  year,  also,  he 
was  constituted  treasurer :  but  remained  so 
a  short  time  only,  as  Joseph  de  Cancy, 
prior  of  St  John  of  Jerusalem,  held  it  very 
soon  after. 

like  most  of  the  officers  of  the  court  in 
those  days,  he  was  an  ecclesiastic,  and  in 
3  Edward  I.  was  in  possession  of  the  arch- 
deaconry of  Dorset,  which  he  held  till  he 
was  elected  Bishop  of  St  David's,  on  June 
3,  1280.  He  sat  there  for  thirteen  years, 
during  which  time  he  foun<led  two  colleges 
in  Wales— one  at  Aberguilly,  and  the  other 
at  Landewy-brevv.  lie  died  on  April  14, 
12a3.     (  Godtcin,  '580 ;  Ze  Xere,  2 18,  512.) 

His  brother,  Anthonv  Bek,  w^as  an  officer 
in  the  Exchequer,  and  ultimately  became 
Bishop  of  Duniam. 

BSLSB,  UooKR,  whose  family  was  fixed 
at  Kirkby,  on  tbe  Wrethek,  in  Iieicester- 
shire,  in  which  and  in  the  neighbouring 
counties  they  held  large  posHCssions,  was 
the  son  of  William  Beler  and  Avicia  his 
wife,  and  the  grandson  of  another  Roger 
Beler,  who  was  sheriff  of  Lincolnshire  in 
40  Henry  III.  (Monast  vi.  511 ;  MadoXy 
ii.  142.)  In  12  Edward  IL  the  king 
granted  him  the  hundred  of  Framelond, 
and  certain  farms  in  Leicestershire,  for  his 
laudable  services.  (Ahb,  Rot.  On)/.  L  230.) 
It  is  not  stated  in  what  capacity  they  were 
rendered ;  but  in  the  same  year  lie  received 
a  general  pardon  as  an  adherent  of  Thomas, 
Earl  of  Lancaster,  and  was  confirmed  in 
his  office  of  bailifl*  and  steward  of  Stapel- 
ford  in  Leicestershire.     (CV//.  Hot.  I\U.  86.) 

He  was  afterwards  occoHionnlly  employed 
in  judicial  commissions  till  July  20,  1^22, 
KSEdwud  II.,  when  he  was  raised  to  the 
Exchequer  bench. 

He  came  to  a  violent  end,  being  attacked 
and  murdered  on  January-  20,  132({,  on  his 
journey  from  Kirkby  to  Leicester^  by  Sir 
Eustace  de  Folville,  lord  of  the  neighbour- 
ing manor  of  Ash  by,  who  was  himself 
mortally  wounded  with  an  arrow.  A  com- 
mission was  issued  to  try  the  offenders  ; 
and  the  goods  of  Roger  la  Zousch,  lord  of 
Lubesthorp,  and  Hobert  de  HeleweU, 
charged  as  accessories  and  Hying  from 
justice,  were  thereupon  ordered  to  be  seized 
into  the  king's  hands.  Sir  Roger  was 
buried  in  the  chantry  chapel  he  had  erected 
at  Kirkby,  where  his  tomb,  with  a  fine 
alabaster  effigies  of  him  in  complete  armour, 
still  remiuns.  By  his  wife,  Alicia,  he  left 
an  infant  son.  (Aadoxt  ii.  <jO ;  Pari.  Writs^ 
ii.  622 ;  Rat,  Pari.  ii.  432 ;  Abb.  Rot.  Orig. 
ii.  6-171 ;  Rmfol  Progrenes  to  LiiveMfrf  by 
W.  Kelly.) 

BEUBT,  Michael,  was  the  second  son 
of  HerTey  Belet,  and  eventually  succeeded 
to  the  lordship  of  Wrokeston  in  Oxford- 


82 


BELET 


fotdshire,  and  to  the  manor  of  Shene  or 
Bichmondy  which  King  Henry  I.  had 
granted  to  the  fiunily  by  the  seijeanty  of 
chief  butler  or  cupbearer  to  the  king. 

The  sheriffalty  of  yarioua  counties  was 
eBtrusted  to  nim— of  Worcestershire, 
WUtshire,  Gloucestershire,  Warwickshire, 
and  Leicestershire — at  various  dates  from 
23  Henry  IL  to  the  end  of  the  reign. 
(I\iUer'8  Worthies.) 

In  23  Heniy  IL,  1177,  and  the  two  fol- 
lowing years,  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant 
in  yanous  parts  of  England ;  and  when  the 
great  council  of  Windsor,  in  the  last  of 
those  years,  divided  the  kingdom  into  four 
parts,  and  sent  judges  into  each  to  admi- 
nister justice,  he  was  one  of  the  five  selected 
for  the  circuit  comprehending  ten  counties 
of  the  home  district  There  are  records  of 
his  acting  in  this  character,  not  only  in 
these  but  other  counties,  through  many 
succeeding  years,  as  late  as  3  John,  1201-2. 
Many  instances  occur,  also,  of  his  partaking 
in  the  judicial  duties  of  the  Curia  Hegis  at 
Westminster,  fines  being  levied  before  him 
£rom  28  Henry  H.,  1182,  through  the 
reiffn  of  Richard,  till  the  third  of  John. 

About  this  period  he  died,  leaving  by  his 
wife,  Emma,  oaughter  and  coheir  of  John 
de  Keynes,  several  sons,  two  of  whom, 
Hervey  and  Michael,  succeeded  in  turn  to 
his  honours.  Hervey  died  without  issue, 
and  Michael  is  the  subject  of  the  next 
article. 

BELET,  Michael.  There  were  two 
Michael  Helets  in  the  reign  of  Henry  HI. — 
one,  the  son  of  Robert  Belet,  of  Cumbe,  who 
died  in  3  Henry  III. ;  and  the  other,  the 
subject  of  this  notice,  who,  from  his  pro- 
fession, was  always  called  Magister  Michael 
Belet.  He  was  the  second  son  of  the  above 
Michael  Belet  In  2  John  the  kin^  granted 
to  him,  as  his  'dilecto  et  familian  derico,' 
the  church  of  Hinclesham ;  and  in  5  John 
that  of  Setburgham,  in  the  diocese  of 
Carlisle.  (Bat.  Chart,  76,  IM.)  In  3  John 
he  paid  forty  marks  for  having  the  marriage 
of  Robert  de  Candos '  ad  opus  sororis  suce ; ' 
and  on  the  death  of  his  brother,  Hervey 
Belet,  he  fined  100/.  for  having  the  king's 
butlery,  which  he  inherited  as  attached  to 
his  manor  of  Shene  or  Richmond  in  Surrey. 
(Hot.  de  Ohlatity  180, 358.) 

He  was  some  time  afterwards  disseised 
of  his  lordship  of  Wroxton  in  Oxfordshire, 
having  incurred,  as  the  record  says,  the 
kiug's  '  malevolentiam '  for  some  offence 
which  is  not  named ;  but  in  14  John  he 
recovered  his  lands  and  the  kind's  goodwill 
by  a  timely  fine  of  five  hundred  marks.  In 
the  next  year,  however,  the  roll  says  that 
he  is  not  to  be  sunmioned  for  sixty  marks 
which  he  still  owed  for  the  outlery, 
*  because  the  king  keeps  that  office  in  his 
own  hands,  and  as  yet  nolds  it'  (Madax, 
I  4B2, 474.)    Duzing  Kbg  John's  troubles 


BELL 

he  remained  faithful  to  the  rojral  cause,, 
and  in  the  last  year  of  lus  reign  had  a. 
grant  of  the  land  of  Wischard  Ledet^who* 
was  with  the  king's  enemies.    In  8  Heoij 
lU.  he  was  custos  of  the  rents  of  tha* 
bishopric  of  Coventry;  and  in  the  tenth 
year  was  appointed  to  audit  the  accounta- 
of  the  justiders  of  the  quinzime,  beiiur 
himself  one  of  those  assigned  to  collect  & 
in  Northamptonshire.    (Sot,  C^tma.  L  286, 
583,  686,  609,  ii.  96,  147.)    These  offices 
indicate  that  he  was  then  in  the  Exchequer, 
and  Madox  (ii.  317)  includes  him  among^ 
the  barons  of  that  court,  on  the  authority  (U 
a  writ  attested  by  him  in  22  Henry  UL^ 
1238. 

He  executed  the  office  of  chief  butler 
at  the  marriage  of  King  Henry  in  tfae- 
twentieth  year  of  his  reign ;  and  founded 
the  priory  of  Wroxton,  for  canons  of  the 
order  of  St.  Augustin.  The  date  of  his* 
death  is  not  stated. 

BELL,  Robert,  a  barrister  of  the- 
Middle  Temple,  became  reader  there  in 
autumn  1606.  Though  he  is  afterwards- 
occasionally  noticed  in  the  Reports  of 
Dyer  and  Flowden,  he  seems  to  have  beea 
more  sedulously  engaged  in  senatorial  than 
in  professional  duties,  having  been  a  mem- 
ber for  Lyme  Regis  in  ul  Elizabeth's- 
parliaments  from  1662  till  the  period  of 
his  death.  In  October  1666  he  vras  one 
of  the  committee  appointed  to  petition  the 
queen  about  her  marriage,  and  expressed 
himself,  as  some  other  members  did,  with 
considerable  boldness,  on  the  unsatisfactory^ 
nature  of  her  majesty's  answer.  This  led 
to  a  dissolution  in  the  following  Januarf, 
and  no  new  parliament  was  called  till 
April  1671,  wnen  Mr.  Bell  was  named 
among  those  who  were  assigned  to  confer 
with  the  spiritual  lords  for  the  reformatioa 
of  the  abuses  in  religion.  In  a  debate  on 
the  subsidy,  having  urged  'that  the  people 
were  galled  by  two  means, .  .  .  namely,  oy 
licences  and  the  abuse  of  promoters,'  and 
having  pressed  '  for  the  callmg  in  of  certain 
licences  granted  to  four  courtiers  to  the 
utter  undoing  of  6,000  or  8,000  of  the  queen's- 
subjects,'  he  was  sent  for  by  the  council, 
'and  so  hardly  dealt  with,  that  he  came 
into  the  house  with  such  an  amazed  coun- 
tenance, that  it  daunted  all  the  house  in 
such  sort,  that  for  several  days  there  was 
not  one  that  durst  deal  in  any  matter  of 
importance.'  Another  parliament  was 
summoned  in  the  following  year,  of 
which  Mr.  Bell  was  elected  speaker  on 
May  10.  (Pari.  Hist.  i.  716-794.)  By 
various  prorogations  this  parliament  was 
kept  alive  till  February  8,  1676,  when  it 
again  met,  and  the  session  was  rendered 
remarkable  by  the  committal  of  Mr.  P^ter 
Wentworth  for  the  boldness  of  his  speech 
on  the  first  day.  At  the  dose  of  it  the 
disagreeable  duty  was   impoeed  on   th»* 


B£LLA  FAGO 

speaker  of  moTing  the  aneen  on  the  sub- 
ject of  marriage.  This  tie  seems  to  hare 
done  with  a  great  deal  of  skill,  artfuU j  in- 
terlardinff  his  address  with  graceful  flattery, 
and  oondudiDg  it  with  the  welcome  offer- 
ing of  a  subsidy.  It  is  evident,  from  die 
lord  keeper's  answer,  that  her  majesty  was 
not  offended,  for  she  gare  a  conditional 
assent  to  the  prayer,  and  with  gracious 
woidsprorogued  the  parliament  on  May 
14.  Tnis  nrorogation  lasted  nearly  live 
years,  and  tne  interval  was  an  eventful  one 
to  the  speaker. 

Notwithstanding  the  freedom  of  his 
language  in  the  earlier  part  of  his  parlia- 
mentary life,  his  conduct  in  the  speaker's 
chair  had  been  so  satisfactory  to  the  queen 
that  she  took  the  first  opportunity  to  re- 
ward him.  A  vacancy  occurring  in  the 
office  of  chief  baron,  he  was  invested  with 
it  on  January  24,  1577,  and  was  at  the 
same  time  honoured  with  the  order  of 
knighthood.  Ilis  judicial  career,  however, 
was  brought  to  a  fatal  termination  within 
a  vexy  few  months.  At  the  summer 
asMxes  at  Oxford,  on  the  trial  of  one 
Rowland  Jenkes,  '  a  sawcy  foul-mouthed 
bookseller,'  for  scandalous  words  uttered 
against  the  queen,  every  person  in  court 
was  seized  with  such  a  malady,  arioing,  it 
was  believed,  from  the  stench  of  the  pri- 
soaerBy  that  they  all  died  within  forty 
days,  to  the  number  of  three  hundred. 
Among  the  victims  were  Chief  Baron  Bell, 
the  sheriff,  and  several  knights  and  gentle- 
men of  the  county,  Serjeant  Barham,  and 
other  lawyers.  \CamdefC8  EUzabeLh^  in 
Kametty  ii.  459.)  The  chief  baron  was 
buried  at  Leominster. 

Sir  Itobert's  elevation  to  the  bench 
rendered  him  incompetent  to  sit  in  parlia- 
ment, and  he  conseauently  could  no  longer 
fill  the  speaker's  chair;  but,  as  the  pro- 
rogation still  continued,  neither  of  the 
vacancies  could  be  supplied  till  the  next 
Mssion,  which  did  not  occur  till  nearly 
four  years  after  his  death,  when  the  first 
set  qS  the  House  of  Commons  was  to  elect 
a  speaker  in  his  i>lace.    {Pari,  Hid,  i.  809.) 

Camden  describes  him  as  'a  sage  and 
pave  man,  and  famous  for  his  knowledge 
m  the  law.'  He  was  of  a  respectable 
Norfolk  family,  and  by  his  marriage  with 
Dorothy,  daughter  of  Edmund  l^uprd, 
of  Oatwell  in  that  county,  he  became 
possessed  of  Beauprd  HaU.  His  male 
descendanU  long  flourished  in  the  county. 
(AneodoU9  and  Traditions,  Camden  Soc.  2, 
&c. ;  BJamefield$  Norfolk,  iv.  133.) 

lEIXA  FAGO,  BoGER  DS,  is  proved  by 
the  liolls  of  Parliament  (i.  160,  218)  to  be 
one  of  thejustioes  of  assize  for  Warwick- 
shire in  33  Edward  I.,  1305,  and  to  have 
b«en  afterwards  appointed  a  justice  of 
trailbaston  for  Cornwall  and  nine  other 
counties.     His   harshness  and  cruelty  in 


BENSTEDE 


83 


performing  this  duty  are  commemorated  in 
a  contemporary  son^.  (  Wrigh^i  Pol,  Songs, 
333.)  He  resided  m  Oxforashire.  It  does 
not  appear  in  what  manner  he  was  related 
to  the  opulent  family  of  his  name,  which 
was  settled  in  Norfolk,  and  which  traced 
its  lineage  to  Ralph  de  Bella  Fago  in  the 
time  of  tne  Conquest. 

BKVBUrOS,  WiLLiAic  DE.  When  the 
great  council  which  met  at  Windsor  in 
1179,  25  Henry  II.,  divided  the  kingdom 
into  four  districts,  and  sent  ynae  and 
learned  men  into  each  for  the  admini- 
stration of  justice,  William  de  Bendings 
was  selected  as  one  of  the  six  justiciers  to 
whom  the  northern  counties  were  appro- 
priated, and  who  were  also  specially  con- 
stituted to  sit  in  the  Curia  Ke^,  to  hear 
the  plaints  of  the  people.  This  seems  to 
have  been  the  first  instance  of  the  nomina- 
tion of  extra  judges  in  the  king's  courts ; 
the  prelates  and  barons  of  the  kingdom, 
with  the  great  officers  of  state,  having 
hitherto  acted  almost  entirely  in  that 
capacity. 

I^viously  to  his  elevation  to  the  bench, 
he  was  one  of  four  commissioners  sent  to 
Ireland  in  1174  to  settle  the  differences 
there,  and  to  bring  over  Raymond,  whom 
the  king  had  recalled. 

He  was  alive  in  the  beginning  of  the 
reign  of  Richard  I.  {Madox,  i.  94,  138, 
285;  JBradv's  England,  363;  Pipe  RoU, 
1  Richard  I.) 

BEHSF4CTA,  Richard,    See  R.  FiTz- 

GlLBEBT. 

BEHST.  The  only  notice  recorded  of 
Benet, '  Magister  Benedictus,'  is  the  sen- 
tence of  excommunication  pronounced 
against  him  by  the  chancellor,  William 
de  Longchamp,  Bishop  of  Ely,  because  he 
presumed  to  hold  the  Great  Seal  against  the 
statutes  of  the  king  and  kingdom,  as  the 
denunciator  asserts,  and  contrary  to  his 

5'  rohibition.  {Madox,  i.  77.)  This  no 
oubt  was  when  Prmce  John  and  the 
barons  removed  Longchamp  rom  the 
government,  and  forced  him  to  quit  the 
kingdom,  in  1192.  The  Seal  was  probably 
then  placed  in  the  hands  of  this  Benet,  to 
perform  the  necessary  duties  during  the 
vacancy. 

BEHSTEDE,  JoHN  DB,  was  in  frequent 
employment  under  Edward  I.  and  Edward 
II.  He  was  clerk,  or  secretary,  to  the 
former,  whom  he  accompanied  to  Flanders 
on  August  22,  1297,  on  which  occasion  the 
GreatSeal,  which  the  king  took  with  him, 
was  placed  in  his  hands,  and  another  seal 
left  m  Ikigland  with  the  chancellor.  On 
the  king's  return  in  the  following  March, 
John  de  Benstede  was  the  messenger  em- 
ployed by  him  to  carry  this  latter  seal  to 
the  Exchequer,  the  Great  Seal  being  then 
given  back  to  the  chancellor.  {Madox,  i. 
72.)  He  afterwards  held  a  place  in  the 
t  o2 


«4 


BEREFORD 


king's  wardrobe,  when  the  Seal  was  several 
times  deposited  with  him. 

His  closeness  to  the  king's  person  in  33 
Edward  I.  is  shown  by  a  letter  addressed 
to  him  by  Edward,  Prince  of  Wales,  re- 
questing him  to  present  to  the  king  a  peti- 
tion which  he  enclosed  from  the  Earl -of 
Ulster  and  others,  and  to  pray,  on  his  part, 
that  such  justices  should  be  assigned  as 
would  redress  the  grievances  tliey  com- 
plained of.  He  was  advanced  to  the  post 
of  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  in  the  same 
year  {Cal.  Rot.  Pat  (>5);  but  he  resigned 
it  in  1  Edward  H.,  when  he  became  keeper 
of  the  wardrobe.     (3fa«toj*,  ii.  20.) 

In  2  Edward  H.  he  was  again  in  the 
Scottish  wars,  and  was  sent  with  Roger 
Savage  to  the  King  of  France  to  arrange  a 
meeting  between  him  and  the  King  of  Eng- 
land.    (BarotKtffef  ii.  01.) 

On  October  G,  1300,  in  the  third  year,  he 
was  constituted  one  of  the  justices  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  and  fines  were  levied  before 
him  from  the  next  year  till  1320 ;  in  which, 
on  October  10,  William  de  Herle  was  ap- 
pointed a  judge  in  his  place.  (Orig,  44 ; 
MadoTf  ii.  7,  31.)  He  probably  resigned 
then,  as,  according  to  the  inquisition  ( Cal, 
i.  310),  his  death  did  not  occur  till  1323  or 
1324. 

In  8  Edward  II.  he  was  sent  on  the 
king's  service  to  Scotland,  and  in  the  tenth 
year  had  been  selected  as  an  envoy  to  Rome 
on  the  Scottish  affairs;  but  the  mission 
being  stopped,  he  had  a  payment  of  1/.  per 
diem  for  the  eleven  days  ne  was  employed, 
together  with  an  allowance  of  12^.  6d,  ioT  a 
loss  he  had  in  the  purchase  and  sale  of  150 
iiorins  provided  for  his  journey.  (Archaol, 
zxyi.  322.)  In  the  following  year  he  was 
one  of  the  commissioners  to  treat  for  peace 
with  Robert  de  Brus;  and  in  12  Edward 
U.  he  was  sent  with  the  Bishop  of  Here- 
ford and  others  to  the  papal  court,  to 
solicit  his  holiness  for  the  canonisation 
of  Thomas  de  Cantilupe,  chancellor  and 
Bishop  of  Hereford  in  the  reign  of  Henry  HI. 

He  had  large  possessions  in  yarious  coun- 
ties, with  a  manor-house  called  Rosemont, 
at  Eye,  near  Westminster,  which  he  had 
licence  to  fortify  with  walls  of  lime  and 
stone,  and  in  15  Edward  II.  he  was  re- 
turned by  the  sheriff  of  Hertford  as  a  knight 
banneret.    (Pari,  Wn'tSy  ii.  p.  ii.  501.) 

He  was  married  twice :  his  first  wife  was 
named  Isabella,  and  his  second  Petronilla, 
who  survived  him.  His  son  Edward  suc- 
ceeded him,  whose  descendants  were  living 
in  the  county  of  Essex  till  the  reign  of 
Henry  Vn.  (MoranfsEsseXyi.M,  ii.405; 
Chaunq/'8HertSfSS5;  Hasted's  KetU,Y.  140.) 

BEBEFOBD,  RiCHABD  DS^was  not  im- 
probably the  orother  of  the  undernamed 
chief  juBtioe,  William  de  Berefcnrd ;  and 
the  only  trace  of  the  place  of  his  residence 
while  in  ihigland  is  in  bis  being  appointed 


BEREFORD 

\  assessor  and  collector  in  the  county  of 
Worcester  for  the  thirtieth  granted  in  10 
Edward  I.,  1283. 

He  was  treasurer  of  the  Exchequer  of 
Dublin  from  the  twenty-eighth  to  the  last 
year  of  that  reign,  ancl  probably  at  the 
beginning  of  that  of  Edward  II. ;  bat  in  the 
fourth  year  of  the  latter  (1310)  he  was  the 
last  named  of  the  three  justices  of  assize 
assigned  for  six  counties. 

In  7  Edward  II.,  1314,  he  was  raised  to 
the  chancellorship  of  Ireland,  and  retained 
that  office  till  August  1317,  after  which 
date  there  is  no  mention  of  his  name. 
(Pari,  Writs,  i.  404,  ii.  p.  ii.  626 ;  Abb.  Hoi. 
Orig.  i.  112;  Abb,  Placit,  255;  CaL  Boi. 
Pat.  01,  77.) 

BEBEFOBD,  William  de.  Mr.  Ni- 
cliolls,  in  his  '  History  of  Leicestershire ' 
(343),  commences  the  pedigree  of  William 
de  Bereford,  or  Barford,  with  his  father, 
Osbert  de  Barford,  whom,  on  the  authorifr 
of  a  descent  taken  from  Mr.  H.  Ferren's 
'MSS.  of  Antiquities,'  he  calls  chief  gentle- 
man of  Ralph  de  Hengham,  the  chief  jus> 
tice.  It  seems,  however,  more  probable, 
from  two  entries  on  the  Plea  Rolls,  that 
this  Osbert  was  his  brother,  and  that  both 
were  the  sons  of  Walter  de  Bereford.  (Jib. 
Placit.  215,  280.) 

He  was  a  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas. 
Prynne  (on  4th  Inst.  20)  gives  two  commis- 
sions to  him,  in  conjunction  with  Robert 
de  Hertford  and  Robert  Malet,  to  enquire 
as  to  a  murder  in  20  Edward  I. ;  and  in  the 
parliament  that  met  after  Easter  in  the  fol- 
lowing year  Eustace  de  Paries  and  Jolm 
his  brother  were  conyicted  of  insultinff 
*  William  de  Bereford,  a  justice  of  our  Im 
the  king,'  in  the  Aula  Regis,  by  imnuting 
to  him  corrupt  and  improper  conduct  aoring 
his  iter  into  Staffordshire ;  and  they  were 
imprisoned  in  the  Tower  for  their  contempt 
{Pot,  Pari  i.  06.) 

He  continued  to  act  during  the  remainder 
of  the  reign,  and  was  one  of  those  selected 
to  treat  with  the  Scots  in  33  Edward  L, 
and  was  placed  in  the  commission  of  trul- 
baston  for  the  northern  coimties  in  the  last 
year  of  the  reign.  (Pot,  Pari  i.  218,  267.) 
On  the  accession  of  Edward  II.  his  patent 
in  the  Common  Pleas  was  renewed,  he 
holding  the  second  place. 

He  was  raised  to  the  office  of  chief 
iustice  of  that  court,  as  the  sucoooear  of 
"Ralph  de  Hengham,  on  March  15,  1900^ 
2  Edward  II. ;  and  the  last  fine  that  was 
acknowledged  before  him  in  that  diaracter 
is  dated  in  the  first  week  of  20  Edwaid  XL, 
July  1326.  (Or^.  44.)  In  the  same  montfa 
he  died,  leaving  large  possessions  in  eigjbk 
counties,  the  principal  of  which  ireie  fai 
Warwickshire  and  Oxfordshire.  (CUL  lie- 
^uis.  p.  m.  i.  333^ 

By  his  wife  Mamret  he  kft  two 
named  Simon  and  William. 


i 


L 


B£BEFOBD 

RalphI  db^*  was  in  all 
probability  not  reiy  dintantly  connected 
with  the  above  William  de  Bereford.  Ac- 
cording to  the  certificate  in  9  Edward  II., 
he  poeeeaaed  property  in  the  townahipe  of 
BoortoOy  Milcome,  and  Bereford,  orBar- 
foidy  in  the  county  of  Oxford.  In  the  same 
year  he  was  appomted  one  of  the  custodes 
of  the  Tacant  bishopric  of  Winchester; 
and  on  several  occasions  during  the  re- 
mainder of  that  reign  was  employed  on 
oommiasions  of  Oyer  and  Terminer  in  va^ 
noos  counties.  In  1329^  the  third  year  of 
the  reign  of  Edward  III.,  he  was  the  second 
of  five  justices  itinerant  into  Nottingham- 
shire, and  was  named  in  a  similar  commis- 
aoo  for  five  other  counties.  (Ar/.  Writs,  ii. 
u.  526;  AU.  Bat.  Orig,  L  227,  257,  ii. 
;  N,  JFadera,  ii.  537, 574.) 
UBSWTKy  John  de,  was  an  officer  of 
the  court,  as  appears  firom  the  nature  of 
hiB  yarious  empIoymeDts.  In  7  Edward  I. ' 
he  was  appointed  custos  of  the  vacant 
ahbey  of  St.  Edmund,  and  in  the  next  year 
had  a  similar  grant  over  the  bishopric  of 
lincokL  (Ahb.  Hot.  Grig,  i.  33,  35.)  In 
11  Edward  I.  he  was  assessor  in  Dorset-  . 
shiie  of  the  thirtieth  granted  bv  the  coun-  I 
ties  south  of  Trent  {Pm-L  Jf'nis,  L  13.)  j 
In  13  Edward  I.  he  was  keeper  of  the  | 
oueen's  gold  (Madax,  i.  361) ;  and  in  18 
Edward  L  he  delivered  into  the  wardrobe 
the  Roll  of  Peace  and  Concord  between 
the  chancellor  and  scholars  of  the  uni- 
versity of  Oxford  and  tbe  mayor  and 
bmig^Bes  of  that  city.  {Hot.  Pari.  i.  33.) 
His  high  character  is  evidenced  by  his 
being  one  of  the  executors  of  Queen 
Eleanor.     (Abb.  Bot.  Grig,  i,  80.) 

Although  it  does  not  appear  that  he  was 
a  judge  at  Westminster,  he  held  a  high 
niace  among  the  justi^^es  itinerant.     In  all 
the  drcnita  in  which  he  was  uamed  over 
Ttrious  counties,  extending  from  20  Ed- 
vard  Ly  1202,  to  nearly  the  end  of  the 
Teig;n,  he  was  invariably  at  their  head.    He  '• 
nu  summoned  also  among  the  judges  to  | 
parliament  during  the  same  interval,  and 
CQone  occasion  was  appointed  to  receive 
nd  answer  all  petitions  from  Ireland  and  .. 
Guernsey  which  could  be  answered  without 
lefeience  to  the  king.    (Pari.  U'rits^  i.  408.)  ■ 
That  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  under 
Edward  II.  there  can  be  little  doubt,  as  he 
ii  summoned  among  them  to  the  parlia- 
meots  of  the  first  two  years  of  that  reign. 
(Ibii.  iL  536.) 

He  died  in  0  Edward  IL,  1312,  and  was 
pnwesacd  of  several  manors  and  other  lands 
a  the  counties  of  Essex,  Hants,  Wilts, 
•^oifi)Iky  and  Suffolk.  (Cat.  Inquis.  p.  ni. 
i>350.)  His  heir  in  one  entry  is  called 
*Boger,  his  son,'  and  in  another,  'Roger 
Hose,  consanguinena.'  (Abb.  Hot.  Grig.  i. 
1H195.) 

M1.UBICE    DE,    was    the 


BERKELEY 


85 


son  of  Robert  Fitz-IIarding,  who,  having 
obtained  a  grant  from  Henry  II. ,  while 
Duke  of  Normandy,  of  the  castle  and 
lordship  of  Berkeley,  of  which  Roger  do 
Berkeley  had  been  deprived  for  his  ad- 
herence to  King  Stepnen,  assumed  the 
surname ;  but  Roger  still  urging  his  claim 
to  the  lordship,  an  agreement  was  entered 
into  betwtsen  them,  with  the  consent  of  the 
duke  and  King  Stephen,  that  Maurice,  the 
son  of  Robert,  should  marry  Alicia,  the 
daughter  of  R();jer.  This  taking  effect, 
Maurice  on  his  father's  death, on  February 
6,  1170,  succeeded  to  the  barony,  which  he 
enjoyed  till  bis  own  decensi',  on  June  16, 
1190,  having  just  previou:^  to  that  event 
added  one  thousand  marks  to  the  purie«e 
which  King  Ricliard  whs  making  for  the 
support  of  hi«»  holy  war,  under  tlio  pre- 
tence of  a  fine  for  the  confirmation  of^  his 
title. 

In  the  last  year  of  his  life  he  acted  as  a 
justice  itinerant  in  Gloucestershire,  his 
pleas  appearing  on  the  roll  of  that  year. 
(IHpe  Roll,  1  liic.  L  1(W.) 

He  was  buried  in  the  church  of  Brent- 
ford, Middlesex,  to  the  building;  of  which 
he  had  greatly  contributed.  He  was  a 
liberal  benefactor  also  to  several  religious 
houses,  and  founded  two  hospitals — one  at 
Lorwing,  between  Berkelev  and  Dursley ; 
and  the  other,  that  of  the  lloly  Trinity,  at 
Long-Brigge  in  (iloucesterHhire. 

By  his  wife,  the  above-mentioned  Alicia, 
he  had  six  sons,  the  eldest  of  whom  is  the 
next-mentioned  Robert.  The  present  holder 
of  the  barony  is  his  lineal  descendant,  with 
the  title  of  (>arl. 

BESKELET,  Robert  de,  the  eldest  of 
the  six  sons  of  the  above  Maurice  de  Berke- 
ley, on  the  death  of  his  father,  in  1190, 
succeeded  to  tlie  lar;re  inlieritance,  paying 
a  fine  of  1000/.  for  livery  thereof.  In  10 
John,  1208,  he  was  one' of  the  justiciers 
before  whom  fines  were  acknowledged  at 
Derby. 

He  was  among  the  ^jrincipal  movers  in 
the  contest  between  King  John  and  his 
barons,  and  was  accordingly  included  in  the 
sentence  of  excommunication  pronounced 
n^ainst  them  by  Pope  Innocent  IH. 
{iVendorer/m.  207,  3o<5.)  His  castle  of 
] Berkeley  and  the  whole  of  his  lands  were 
also  seized,  but  by  his  submission  at  the 
commencenient  of  the  next  reign  they 
were  all  restored,  except  Berkeley  and  its 
castle,  which  were  retained  till  his  death. 
This  event  occurred  on  May  13,  1220,  4 
Henry  HI.,  when  he  was  buried  in  a 
monk's  cowl,  in  the  abbey  of  St  Augustin, 
near  Bristol,  to  which  he  had  been  a  mu- 
nificent benefactor,  as  well  as  to  many 
other  religious  houses.  He  also  founded 
the  hospitfil  of  St.  Catherine  at  Bedmins- 
ter,  near  liristol,  and  two  chantries.^ 

He  married  twice.    His  first  wife  wai 


86 


BERKELEY 


Julian,  daughter  of  William  de  Pontearcb, 
and  niece  to  William  Mareschall,  Earl  of 
Pembroke.  The  name  of  his  second  was 
Lucia,  who  after  bis  death  married  Hueb 
de  Gumey.  Leaving  no  issue  by  either,  he 
was  succeeded  by  his  brother,  Thomas,  to 
whom  Berkeley  and  it  castle  were  restored. 
(Excerpt,  e  Sot  Fin.  4  Hen.  III.  i.  52.) 

BEBKSLET,  AsskLD  de,  was  a  baron 
of  the  Exchequer,  attesting  a  charter  with 
that  title  in  4S  Henry  III.,  1264  (Madox, 
ii.  1319) ;  but  nothing  further  has  been 
discovered  about  him,  except  that  he  had 
manors  in  Merkele,  Bradefeld,  and  Brok- 
hampton,  in  Herefordshire,  and  that  a 
process  was  issued  to  the  sheriff  in  61 
Henry  III.,  to  enquire  if  Henry  de  Calde- 
well  came  and  took  his  goods  and  chattels 
there.      (Abb,  PiacitAW.) 

BEBXSLET,  Robert,  traces  his  de- 
scent from  the  above  Maurice  and  Robert 
de  Berkeley,  through  a  succession  of  a 
multitude  of  younger  sons.  His  grand- 
father, William,  was  mayor  of  Hereford  in 
1645,  whose  eighth  son  was  Rowland 
Berkeley,  who,  having  little  to  begin  the 
world  with,  by  his  industrjr  became  a  very 
eminent  and  wealthy  clothier  at  Worcester, 
and  purchased,  amon^  others,  a  consider- 
able estate  in  the  neighbouring  parish  of 
Spetchlev.  By  his  wife,  Cathenue,  daugh- 
ter of  Thomas  Haywanl,  Esq.,  he  had  a 
family  of  seven  sons  and  nine  daughters. 

Robert  Berkeley,  the  second  son,  was 
bom  at  Worcester  in  1684.  He  was  ad- 
mitted at  the  Middle  Temple  in  1600,  and 
called  to  the  bar  May  6,  1608.  On  the 
death  of  his  father,  in  1611,  he  became 
possessor  of  the  Spetchley  estate,  and  in 
1618  he  was  sheriff  of  his  native  county, 
and  thirteen  years  afterwards,  in  1626,  he 
became  autumn  reader  of  his  inn  of  court. 
At  the  commencement  of  the  next  year  he 
was  called  to  the  degree  of  the  coif,  and  on 
April  12  was  nominated  one  of  the  king's 
seijeants.  From  this  time  his  name  ap- 
pears in  the  Reports ;  and  it  fell  to  his  lot 
in  1620  to  argue  for  the  king  that  the 
return  made  to  the  Habeas  Corpus  obtained 
by  William  Stroud  and  the  otner  members 
imprisoned  for  their  conduct  in  the  last 
aniament  was  good  and  sufficient  in  law, 
is  argument  showing  great  ability.  (State 
Trials,  iU.  844.) 

On  October  11,  1632,  having  been  pre- 
viously knighted,  he  was  created  a  judse 
of  the'King*s  Bench.  He  had  a  deep  feel- 
ing in  favour  of  the  king's  prerogative; 
and,  though  he  agreed  that  the  king  could 
not  on  all  occasions  impose  charges  on  his 
subjects  without  consent  of  parliament, 
'Bftying,  'The  people  of  this  kin^om  are 
subjects  not  slaves^  freemen  not  viUains,  to 
be  taxed  de  alto  et  basso/  vet  he  contended 
that  his  muesty  might  do  so  when  the 
good  and  saroty  of  the  kingdom  in  genend 


I 


BERNINaHAM 

are  concerned,  and  that  he  is  the  sole  judge 
of  the  dan^.  He  therefore  in  the  great 
case  of  ship  money,  after  a  most  elaborate 
and  learned  argument,  which,  however 
vnrong  it  may  be  thought  in  its  foundatiofi, 
at  least  showed  his  conscientious  convictioii 
of  its  truth,  pronounced  his  opinion  against 
Mr.  Hampden,    (Ibid,  iil  1087-1125.) 

For  this  he  was  called  to  severe  account 
by  the  Long  Parliament.  He  was  one  of 
the  six  judges  whom  the  Lords,  on  Decem* 
ber  22,  1640,  bound  in  10,000/.  apiece  to 
answer  the  charges  which  the  Commons 
were  preparing  against  them.  On  February 
13  he  was  singed  out  for  the  first  example, 
and,  being  impeached  for  high  treason,  was 
arrested  in  open  court  whUe  sitting  on  the 
bench,  to  '  the  great  terrour  of  the  rest  of 
his  brethren,  and  of  all  his  profession.' 
(  Whitelocke,  40.)  He  was  kept  in  custody 
of  the  sheriff  of  London  till  October  20, 
1641,  when  he  appeared  at  the  bar  of  the 
House  of  Lords,  and,  pleading '  Not  gidlty,' 
obtained  permission  to  go  with  a  keeper  to 
Serjeants  Inn  to  look  out  papers  and  ad* 
vise  with  his  counsel.  The  trial,  which 
was  fixed  for  November  2,  was  put  off  at 
the  instance  of  the  Commons  for  want  of 
witnesses.  In  Michaelmas  Term  1642,  of  the 
three  judges  of  the  Kin^*s  Bench  that  were 
then  left.  Heath  being  with  the  king,  Malet 
in  the  Tower,  and  Berkeley  under  im- 
peachment, the  two  houses  at  a  conference 
resolved  'That  Judge  Berkeley,  having 
carried  himself  with  modesty  and'  humility, 
and  inoffensively  to  both  houses,  be  pitched 
upon  for  keeping  the  essoigns.'  (I^nry'i 
Parliatneni,^ 

The  Lords  in  the  following  September — 
that  is,  the  ten  that  remained — sentenced 
the  judge  to  pay  a  fine  of  20,000/.  and  to  be 
for  ever  disabled  from  holding  any  office 
in  the  commonwealth.  But,  the  parliament 
being  then  nressed  for  money  to  pay  an 
instfument  oi  their  subsidy  to  the  Soots,  he 
was  let  off  on  payment  of  half  to  their 
own  officers.  (Clarendon,  iv.  286.)  In  the 
conflict  that  afterwards  took  place,  Sir 
Robert  Berkeley  suffered  much  from  the 
plundering  and  exactions  of  both  the  par- 
ties. Even  Whitelocke  represents  him  as 
'  moderate  in  his  ways,*  and  acknowledges 
him  to  be  '  a  very  learned  man  in  our  lawa^ 
and  a  good  orator  and  jud^.* 

He  outlived  his  sovereign  above  seven 
years,  dying  on  August  5,  1666,  at  the  age 
of  72.  He  was  buried  under  a  handsome 
monument,  with  an  excellent  marble  figure 
of  the  judge  upon  it,  in  a  chancel  he  nad 
built  to  the  church  of  Spetchley. 

He  married  Elizabeth,  daughter  of 
Thomas  Conyers,  Esq.,  of  East  Baneit^ 
Herts,  by  whom  he  had  one  son.  Thonia% 
whose  descendants  still  enjoy  toe  fanii^ 
estate. 

BBBMnreEAX,  Riohabd  ul    Thm 


BEBSTEDE 

•were  two  familiew  of  this  sumame^  and  two 
indiTidaalB  of  both  names  flouriBhing  in  the 
resgn  of  Edward  IL ;  one  connect^  with 
the  county  of  York,  and  the  other  with 
that  of  ^^ozfolh.     The  former  was  son  of 
John  de  Bendngham.  or  Bazningham ;  and 
the  latter  not  improbably  was  the  son  of 
Walter,  who,  in  ldl6L  was  lord  of  the 
manor  of  Hanteyns  in  Bamham,  Norfolk. 
Sr  Frands  Falgrave  considers  that  the 
piesomption   is   somewhat   in  fayour  of 
iiichard  de    Bemingham,   of   Yorkshire, 
bong  the  person  who  was  so  often  sum- 
aKmed  to  coandl  among  the  justices  and 
•others,  and  the    first    entry  among  the 
Psrliamentary  Writs  in  which  his  name 
.iDpe^rs  seems  ampljr  to  justify  this  opinion. 
He  is  therein  required  to  lay  aside  the 
■ctpdon  of  certain  asdzes  in  the  northern 
comities,  which  had  been  fixed  during  the 
jnsetin^  of  parliament,  and  to  repair  to  ' 
Westnunster  instead.     This  was  on  Sep-  j 
tember  6,  1313,  7   Edward  11.,  and  his ; 
rammoQses  continue   till   the   fourteenth 
Tetr,  during  which  period  he  is  included 
In  sereral  commissions  in  the  county  of 
Y(flrk,  to  which,  perhaps,  his  judicial  func- 
tions were  confined.    He  is  mentioned  as  a 
knight  in  that  county  in  17  Edward  II. , 
nd  his  death  is  recorded  in  3  Edward  in., 
dnff  property  therein.    (BlomefiMs 


BEST 


87 


I      yimfidkyl  636;  FM,  Writs,  iL  p.  ii.  634; 

'       CtL  Imqms,  p.  m.  iL  19.) 

BXB8TEDS,  Walteb  de,  was  sub- 
sheriff  of  Kent  to  Ee^nald  de  Cobbeham 
when  he  died,  in  December  1257,  42 
Henry  IIL,  and  was  appointed  to  act  as 
sheriff  for  the  remainder  of  the  year.  In 
1262  he  was  appointed  constable  of  Doyer 
Castle,  and  custoe  of  the  Cinque  Ports 
(Ca/L  RoL  Fat.  33) ;  and  also  went  as  one 
of  the  justices  itinerant  into  Leicestershire, 
and  the  next  year  into  Norfolk,  Suffolk, 
sod  Lincolnshire.  He  is  placed  among  the 
jostioes  of  the  boich  in  50  Henry  Ul.,  on 
the  authority  of  a  fine  leyied  in  February 
1266;  and  a  writ  of  assize  to  be  taken 
before  him  occurs  in  the  following  Septem- 
ber.    {Excerpt,  e  Hot.  Itn.  ii.  268,  446.) 

BEBTIB,  Vers,  was  the  fourth  son  of 
Montagu,  second  Earl  of  Lindsey^  lord 
chamberlain,  by  his  first  wife,  Martha, 
daughter  of  Sir  William  Cockayn,  of  Rush- 
ton  in  Northamptonshire,  and  widow  of 
John  Ramsay,  Earl  of  Holdemess.  To 
the  deyoted  loyalty  of  both  his  father  and 
^nandlather  he  probably  owed  his  profes- 
flbnal  advancement,  which  was  somewhat 
iapid.  He  was  called  to  the  bar  of  the 
Middle  Temple  on  June  10,  1659,  and, 
thoo^  chosen  a  bencher  in  January  1673, 
the  law  reports  are  ailent  as  to  his  forensic 
merits.  Though  this  may  be  accounted  for 
hy  his  employment  by  goyemment  as  secre- 
tiiy  of  the  treasmry  and  treasurer  of  the 
^njottieii^  it  may  be  presumed  that  he  was 


not  altogether  deficient  in  legal  aoqoire- 
ments,  inasmuch  as  he  was  appointed  a 
•baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  June  4, 1676. 

From  that  court  he  was  remoyed,  on 
June  15, 1678,  to  the  Common  Fle«s,  where 
he  sat  for  only  ten  months,  being  discharged 
from  his  place  in  April  20, 1679,  with  three 
other  juoires — yiz.,  Sir  William  Wilde,  Sir 
Edward  Thurland,  and  Sir  Francis  Bram- 
ston.  It  is  a  remarkable  circumstance  that, 
fiye  days  preyious,  all  these  lour  judges 
were  in  the  commission  for  the  trial  of  Na- 
thanael  Reading,  indicted,  on  the  testimony 
of  the  infamous  Bedloes,  for  endeayouring 
to  stifle  and  lessen  the  king*s  eyidence 
against  the  lords  then  in  the  Tower ;  and 
it  may  be  a  question  how  far  their  conduct 
or  opinions  on  that  trial  caused  their  dis- 
missal. Vere  Bertie  died  unmarried  ten 
months  afterwards,  on  February  23, 1680, 
and  was  buried  in  the  Temple  Church. 
(State  TriaU,  yii.  261.) 

BEBTEAX,  Roger.  There  were  two 
noble  families  of  this  name  in  Northumber- 
land— one  Bertram  of  Mitford,  and  the 
other  Bertram  of  Bothall — and  the  Christian 
name  Roger  was  common  to  both.  The 
subject  of  this  notice  belonged  to  the 
former  family,  and  was  the  son  of  William 
de  Bertram  and  Alice  de  Umfrayille  his 
wife.  {Baronage,  i.  543.)  His  &ther  died 
about  1  John,  lor  in  that  year  the  guar- 
dianship of  Roger  was  granted  to  Wuliam 
Briwer,  but  was  afterwards  transferred  to 
Peter  de  Brus,  who  fined  thirteen  hundred 
marks  for  the  same.  Towards  the  end  of 
the  reign,  being  found  in  the  ranks  of  the 
insurgent  barons,  his  lands  and  castle  of 
Mitford  were  given  into  the  custody  of 
Philip  de  Ulecot,  who  seems  to  have  re- 
sisted the  royal  order  for  their  restoration 
when  Roger  returned  to  his  obedience  on 
the  accession  of  Henry  HI.  lie  was  obliged, 
however,  to  submit,  and  Roger  was  rein- 
stated on  a  fine  of  100/.  {Rot,  Chart.  48 ; 
Rot,  Glaus,  i.  70,  246,  316,  336,  342,  357.) 

From  this  time  he  acted  the  part  of  a 
loyal  subject,  and  was  frequentiy  employed 
as  a  justice  itinerant  in  the  northern  coun- 
ties, from  9  to  18  Henry  lU.  He  died 
before  May  24, 1242,  on  which  day  his  lands 
were  delivered  into  the  custody  of  Walter 
de  Cropping  on  behalf  of  his  son  Roger, 
who  dia  homage  for  them  on  June  28, 
1246,  on  attaining  his  majority.  {ExceriJt. 
e  Rot,  Fm,  i.  370,  456.)  In  the  reign  of 
Edward  U.  the  barony  terminated  by  the 
failure  of  male  issue. 

BEST,  William  Draper,  did  not  ob- 
tain his  title  of  Lord  Wynford  till  he  had 
retired  from  the  bench.  He  was  bom  on 
December  13, 1767,  at  Hasselbury  Plunk- 
nett  in  Somersetshire,  and  was  the  third 
son  of  Thomas  Best,  Esq.,  by  a  daughter  of 
Sir  William  Draper,  well  known  aa  the 
antagonist  of  *  Junius.'    Left  an  orphan  in 


S8 


BEST 


infancy,  he  was  sent  to  the  school  of  the 
neighoourinff  town  of  Crewkeme,  and  at 
the  age  of  fifteen  was  removed  to  Wadham' 
College,  Oxford,  where  he  was  educated 
with  the  view  of  entering  the  Church. 
This  plan  he  relinquished  in  consequence  of 
coming  to  the  possession,  bv  the  death  of  a 
near  relation,  of  a  consideraole  estate :  and, 
entering  the  Middle  Temple,  was  colled  to 
the  bar  on  November  6, 1789,  and  joined 
the  Home  Circuit. 

Very  early  in  his  career  he  had  the  good 
fortune  to  extract  a  flattering  euloffium 
from  Lord  Kenvon  in  a  case  which  he 
argued  in  the  court  of  King^s  Bench.  This 
was  so  unwonted  in  the  chief  justice  that 
it  was  sure  to  attract  attention;  and  he 
consequently  soon  received  ample  employ- 
ment Though  superficial  in  legal  know- 
ledge, his  readiness  of  comprehension  and 
fluencv  of  speech  enabled  him  to  avail 
himself  of  his  early  success,  and  his  increase 
of  business  warranted  him  in  accepting 
the  de^e  of  the  coif  in  1800.  His  services 
were  m  great  requisition,  in  all  the  courts 
of  ^ye8tnlinster  Hall;  and  he  sometimes 
appeared  on  important  criminal  trials. 

He  entered  parliament  in  1802  as  member 
for  Petersfield^  and  took  a  prominent  part 
in  its  proceedmgs,  porricularly  in  reference 
to  naval  afiairs  ana  public  accounts.  He 
was  one  of  the  acting  managers  on  the  im- 
peachment of  Lord  Melville,  and,  with  Sir 
Samuel  HomiUy,  answered  the  legal  ob- 
jections taken  by  tbe  counsel  for  the  de- 
fence. In  1814  he  represented  Bridport; 
and  from  that  time  till  his  death,  leaving 
the  liberal  party  with  whom  he  had  hitherto 
acted,  he  was  a  zealous  supporter  of  con- 
servative principles. 

Li  180d  he  had  been  appointed  one  of 
the  king's  Serjeants,  and  recorder  of  Guild- 
ford ;  and  in  Michaelmas  1813  he  was  se- 
lected as  solicitor-general  to  the  Prince  of 
Wales,  then  regent,  succeeding  in  1810  to 
the  attomev-geueralship  to  his  royal  high- 
ness. With  that  prince  he  was  a  great 
favourite ;  and  by  the  royal  patronage  he 
became  successively  chief  justice  of  Chester 
and  a  judge  of  the' King  s  Bench,  the  latter 

fromotion  taking  place  in  December  1818. 
le  was  knighted  in  the  following  June. 
After  sittmg  in  that  court  rather  more 
than  five  years,  he  was  advanced  in  April 
1824  to  the  head  of  the  Court  of  Common 
Fleas,  from  which  his  increasing  infirmities 
oblif^ed  him  to  retire  in  June  1821).  By  the 
continuance  of  royal  favour  he  was  at  the 
same  time  raised  to  the  peerage  as  Baron 
Wynford,  the  title  being  taken  from  an 
estate  he  had  purchased  in  Dorsetshire; 
and  he  was  then  appointed  a  deputy  speaker 
of  the  House  of  Lords.  In  that  house  and 
in  the  privy  council  he  took  his  due  pzopor- 
licm  of  lalSoiir  in  the  judicial  burineas,  as 
o(bw  «•  hii  yiolent  Attacks  of  the  gout 


BETHELL 

enabled  him  to  attend.  In  the  debates  he 
strenuously|opposedthe  Reform  Bill  through 
all  its  stages,  and  was  always  found  in  op- 
position to  the  party  who  supported  it.  He 
lived  for  sixteen  years  after  nis  retirement, 
and  died  at  his  seat  called  Leesons  in  Kent 
on  March  3, 1845. 

Lord  Wynford's  countenance,  though  not 
handsome,  was  very  attractive.  It  indicated 
great  cordiality  and  good  humour,  with 
much  intelligence;  but  it  also  showed 
something  of  a  hastv  temperament.  As  an 
advocate,  he  was  fluent  if  not  eloquent^ 
acute  if  not  learned,  and  his  zeal  for  hi» 
clients  left  no  means  untried  for  insuringp 
their  success.  As  a  judge,  he  was  apt  tS 
form  hasty  and  questionaole  opinions,  and 
when  presiding  at  Nisi  Prius  to  lean  in  hia 
summing  up  so  much  to  one  side  that  he 
was  nicknamed  the  *  judge  advocate.^ 
Though  he  was  remarkable  for  the  clearness 
and  terseness  of  hia  decisions,  he  was  con- 
sidered by  the  profession  as  an  indifierent 
judge,  and  brought  himself  into  bad  odour, 
as  well  by  the  political  bias  he  often  dis- 
played as  by  his  occasional  irritability  and 
intemperance  on  the  bench.  His  disposi- 
tion as  a  man  was  essentially  kind,  amiable, 
and  charitable. 

He  married  very  early  in  life  Mary  Anne^ 
the  daughter  of  Jerome  Knapp,  Esq.,  of 
Haberdashers^  Hall,  London,  and  haa  by 
her  ten  children. 

BETHELL,  Eichard  (Lord  Westbvrt), 
was  bom  at  Bradford  in  Wiltshire  OA 
June  30, 1800,  and  his  father.  Dr.  Richard 
Bethell,  who  was  a  descendant  from  the 
old  Welsh  family  of  Ap-Ithell,  practised 
as  a  physician  at  Bristol.  From  Bristol 
Grammar  School  he  proceeded  at  the  age 
of  fourteen  to  Wadham  College,  Oxford,  of 
which  he  was  afterwards  elected  fellow, 
having  distinguished  himself  by  attaining  a. 
place  in  the  first  class  in  classics,  and  in 
the  second  class  in  mathematics.  He  took 
his  B.A.  degree  when  only  eighteen,  and 
then  became  for  some  time  a  favourite  tutor 
in  the  university.  Entering  the  Middle 
Temple,  he  was  called  to  the  bar  on  Novem- 
ber 28,  1823. 

For  seventeen  years  he  laboured  as  a 
junior  counsel  in  the  Court  of  Chanceiy^ 
where  his  practice  was  very  considerable; 
and  in  1840  he  attained  the  rank  of  queen^s 
counsel,  in  which  character  he  soon  acquired 
a  most  prominent  lead.  His  university 
employed  him  as  their  advocate;  and  he 
filled  the  office  of  vice-chancellor  of  the 
county  palatine  of  Lancaster.  W'hile  en- 
gaged in  his  vicarious  duties  as  a  banister, 
he  devoted  himself  to  the  improvement  oT 
the  mode  of  legal  education,  his  ezertiont 
in  which  are  beyond  all  praise.  A  com- 
mittee of  the  benchers  of  all  the  four  inn 
was  formed,  of  which  he  was  the  mkB» 
moTer  and  selected  chaumia;  md mhoif 


BEYNVILL 

of  roles  wt8  issaed  for  the  admiaaion,  re« 
gnlatioiiy  and  mstructioii  of  the  students, 
which  promise  the  most  satisfactory  re- 
•ulta. 

ftom  1851  till  his  elevation  to  the 
peerage  he  was  a  member  of  the  House 
of  Commons,  at  first  for  the  borough  of 
Ajlesbory,  and  then  for  that  of  Wolver- 
hampton. Throughout  his  senatorial  career 
he  supported  the  liberal  party ;  and  on  the 
retirement  of  Lord  Derby's  ministry  he  was 
knitted  on  his  appointment  as  solicitor- 
general,  on  December  28,  1852,  and  was 
nominated  attomey-genend  in  November 
1866 ;  but  resigning  in  Februaiy  1858  on 
the  change  of  ministiy,  he  resumed  it  six- 
teen months  after,  in  June  1850,  on  his 
mrty  returning  to  power.  On  June  26. 
1861,  he  succeeded  to  the  office  of  lord 
high  chancellor.  During  the  existence  of 
the  ministry  of  which  he  formed  a  part  he 
resigned  his  hi^h  position,  under  circum- 
stances which,  though  he  was  acquitted  of 
personal  comiption  by  tJie  two  houses  of 
parliament,  his  jud^  in  those  houses 
were  of  opinion  exhibited  so  much  laxity 
of  principle,  and  so  little  consideration  for 
the  public  welfare,  that  in  those  respects 
he  was  a  fit  object  for  their  censure ;  and 
the  general  feelln?  of  the  people  confirmed 
their  decision.  Without  entering  into  the 
details  of  the  cases  of  Edmunds  and  Wilde, 

Jm  which  the  charges  were  founded,  or 
the  disclosures  then  made.  Lord  West- 
bory  found  it  was  impossible  to  contend 
against  the  resolution  of  parliament,  and 
he  accordingly  resigned  the  Seal  on  July  7, 
1865. 

By  hb  wife,  the  daughter  of  Kobert 
Abraham,  Esq.,  he  has  a  numerous  family. 
IFnrnLL,  Richard  de  (or  Batvill), 
was  oi  a  knightly  family  of  the  county  of 
Huntingdon,  where  he  held  lands  of  the 
honor  of  the  Earl  of  Chester.  He  was 
wpointed  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  for 
that  county  and  Cambridgeshire  in  9  Henry 
m.,  and  died  in  1238,  23  Henry  III. 
(Boi.  Chus.  I  77,  209.) 

BICKXE8TETH,  Henrt  (Lord  Lano- 
»ALE),  was  born  on  June  18, 1783,  at  Kirkby 
I/»Bdale,  and  was  the  third  of  five  sons  of 
Mr.  Henry  Bickersteth,  a  medical  practi- 
tiooer  of  considerable  repute  in  that  town, 
and  of  Elizabeth,  the  daughter  of  Mr.  John 
Batty,  a  fanner  of  the  same  place,  and  the 
aster  of  Dr.  Batty,  afterwards  so  eminent  as 
a  physician  in  London.  To  the  moral  and 
itligious  feelings  impressed  on  his  mind  by 
his  mother  he  always  ascribed  what  was 
ptaiaeworthy  in  his  future  career.  After 
wnrlnding  fiia  studies  at  the  Free  Grammar 
Sdiool  of  liis  native  place,  with  the  highest 
pnaef  he  entered  his  father's  business  at 
Jfidaammer  1797,  and  in  the  autunm  of 
iim  next  year  went  to  London  to  walk  the 
under  the  guidance  of  his  uncle 


BIGKEBSTETH 


89^' 


Dr.  Batty.  To  perfect  himself  in  the  science  ■ 
of  hia  profession,  he  went  to  Edinburgh  in 
October  1801,  and  had  the  advantage  of 
attending  the  lectures  of  the  eminent  pro- 
fessors who  then  presided  over  the  medical 
schools.    He  became  a  member    of   the- 
Royal  Medical  Society,  and  distinguished 
himself  in  their  debates  by  his  eloquence, 
ingenuity,  and  energy.    In  the  summer  of 
the  next  vear  he  was  called  home  for  the 
purpose  of  suppljring  the  place  of  his  father, 
whose  health  required  a  temporary  absence 
from  his  professional  duties.  1  nis  experience 
confirmed  his  dislike  to  becoming  a  mere 
country  practitioner,  and  induced  him  to 
decline  his  father's  offer  to  give  up  the 
whole  of  his  business  to  him. 

With  the  intent,  therefore,  of  preparing 
himself  for  the  London  practice  of  a  phy- 
sician, he  entered  Caius  College,  Cam- 
bridge, in  October  of  that  year,  with  a 
scholarship  on  Mr.  Hewitt's  foundation. 
The  application  to  his  studies  there  was  so 
intense  that  he  was  seized  with  a  serious 
illness  when  he  went  to  London  at  the  end 
of  the  term.  His  recovery  was  slow,  and 
total  relaxation  became  necessary  to  insure 
it  With  this  view  his  uncle  Dr.  Batty, 
fully  satisfied  as  to  his  qualifications  for  the 
ofiice,  recommended  him  as  medical  at- 
tendant to  the  family  of  the  Earl  of  Oxford, 
then  on  a  tour  in  Italy,  whom  he  started  to 
join  at  the  end  of  March  1803. 

While  at  Florence  the  war  with  France 
broke  out,  and  he  and  his  noble  Mends  had 
some  difficulty  in  escaping  the  clutches  of 
Bonaparte  in  his  disgraceful  seizure  of  all 
En^hsh  travellers.  After  remaining  some 
little  time  at  Venice,  Vienna,  and  Dresden, 
the  continuance  of  the  war  induced  Lord 
Oxford  to  return  home,  when  his  lordship 
experienced  the  benefit  of  the  medical  se- 
lection he  had  made,  by  being  safely  brought 
through  a  serious  illness  under  the  care  and 
skill  of  his  youthful  adviser.  Though 
proving  himself  a  great  proficient  in  the 
science,  and  taking  great  delight  in  the  in- 
vestigation of  its  mysteries,  as  is  particularly 
apparent  in  his  correspondence  with  Dr. 
Henderson,  Mr.  Bickersteth  retained  his 
dislike  to  the  profession,  and,  determining 
to  relinquish  it,  returned  to  Cambridge  in 
1805,  where,  after  abandoning  a  passing 
desire  to  enter  the  army,  he  resolved  to 
study  for  a  degree  in  arts ;  though  his  long 
absence  was  much  against  him,  and  his 
want  of  practice  in  mathematics  raised  a 
temporary  obstacle  to  his  success.  But 
his  mdemtigable  industry  and  quick  per- 
ception overcame  all  disadvantages,  so  that 
in  January  1808  he  graduated  B.A.^  as 
senior  wrangler  and  senior  Smith's  prize- 
man, in  a  year  when  he  had  no  mean 
competitors  to  conquer,  his  prindnal  oppo- 
nents being  Miles  Bland,  Bishop  Blomfield, 
and  Professor  Sedgwick.  He  was  of  coursa 


«0 


BICE£BSTETH 


immediately  rewarded  with  a  fellowsliip  in 
his  college ;  and,  fixing  upon  the  law  as  his 
new  profession,  he  enterea  the  Inner  Temple 
as  a  student  in  1806,  and  became  a  pupil 
of  Mr.  Bell;  one  of  the  most  eminent  counsel 
in  the  Court  of  Chancery. 

The  tendency  of  his  mind  was  always  to 
the  liberal  side  of  politics,  and  though  his 
extreme  opinions  were  much  moderated  by 
witnessing  the  tyrannical  sequence  of  the 
French  revolution,  he  still  continued  some- 
thing more  than  a  whig.  Becoming  also 
a  friend  and  disciple  of  Jeremy  Bentham, 
Mr.  Bickersteth  received  from  his  conver- 
.sation  the  first  impressions  of  the  necessity 
of  amendment  in  the  administration  of  the 
laws.  He  was  thus  enlisted  into  the  band 
of  law  reformers,  eventually  producing 
those  efibrts  to  which  his  name  is  allied. 

He  WAS  called  to  the  bar  on  November 
-22,  1811;  and  for  the  next  three  or  four 
years  he  had  to  contend  against  the  usual 
slow  progress  of  a  barrister  at  the  outset  of 
his  career,  and  even  meditated  giving  up 
the  profession  rather  than  put  his  father  to 
further  expense.  His  circumstances  were 
somewhat  improved  in  1814  by  becoming 
a  senior  feUow  of  his  college,  and  his  busi- 
ness gradually  increased.  But  his  known 
connection  with  the  philosopher  Bentham 
and  the  politician  Burdett,  then  deemed 
radicals,  and  particularly  his  support  of  the 
latter  against  Sir  Samuel  RomiUy  at  the 
Westminster  election  of  1818,  for  a  time 
proved  an  impediment  to  his  success,  which, 
however,  by  steady  perseverance  and  mode- 
ration he  was  soon  enabled  to  remove. 

With  his  business  his  reputation  ad- 
vanced, and  he  was  considered  so  con- 
versant with  the  practice  of  his  court,  and 
■80  alive  to  its  defects,  that  he  was  called 
upon  to  give  evidence  before  the  commis- 
sioners appointed  in  1824  to  investigate  the 
subject.  In  his  examination,  which  lasted 
four  days,  he  boldly  pointed  out  the  evils 
that  attached  to  the  whole  system,  and 
suggested  several  remedies,  some  of  which 
were  eventually  adopted.  His  evidence, 
though  thought  hy  some  to  be  too  com- 
-prehensive  and  visionary,  was  generally 
Tegarded  with  attention  and  respect,  and 
was  particularly  lauded  by  the  great  oracle 
of  legal  reform,  Bentham ;  and  from  that 
time  all  parties  really  desirous  of  amending 
the  course  of  justice  applied  to  him  as  nn 
authority.  Among  others  Sir  John  Copley, 
then  attorney-general,  requested  his  assist- 
ance in  18SR),  when  preparing  a  bill  for 
reforming  the  Court  of  Chancery,  and  in 
1827,  when  appointed  lord  chancellor,  re- 
commended him  to  the  king  as  one  of  his 
counsel,  which  he  was  appointed  in  May, 
and  was  then  called  to  the  bench  of  ms 
inn. 

In  this  character  he  was  so  folly  em* 
j^lojedthat  he  was  at  length  obliged  to  gire 


BICKERSTETH 

up  all  practice  in  other  courts,  and  to  con- 
fine himself  to  the  Rolls,  ana  he  actoallT 
refused  to  break  his  resolution,  thooffn 
tempt^  to  go  into  the  Exchequer  in  toe 
great  case  of  Small  v.  Attwood,  by  a  fee  of 
8,000  guineas. 

When  the  mimstrv  of  Lord  Grey  came 
in,  and  an  act  passed  for  erecting  a  Comt 
of  Bankruptcv  in  1881,  Mr.  Bickersteth  was 
offered  the  cnief  judgeship  of  it ;  but  he 
at  once  declined  it,  as  he  disapproved  ita 
establishment^  and  thought  it  would  be 
wholly  inefficient ;  and  in  February  1884 
he  also  refused  to  accept  the  vacant  office 
of  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  which  Lord 
Lyndhurst,  then  lord  chief  baron,  was  de> 
sirous  that  he  should  fill,  from  a  conscien- 
tious feeling  that  as  an  equity  judge  of  that 
court,  for  which  he  was  intenaed,  he  coold 
not  efficiently  perform  the  common-law 
duties  which  would  in  addition  devolve 
upon  him.  In  April  of  that  year  he  created 
no  slight  sensation  bva  bitter  rebuke  he 
gave  to  Ijord  Chancellor  Brougham  in  his 
answer  to  his  lordship^s  question.  What  wtu 
to  prevent  the  University  of  London  oon- 
fernng  degrees,  without  the  authority  of  an 
act  of  parliament?  to  which  he  replied, 
'  The  utter  scorn  and  contempt  of  the  world.' 
This  and  the  following  year  were  remark- 
able in  Mr.  Bickersteth's  history.  In 
September  he  refused  the  offer  of  the  soli- 
citor-generalship made  to  him  by  Lord 
Brougham,  though  it  was  afterwards  more 
regularly  urged  upon  him  by  Lord  Mel- 
bourne, the  prime  minister.  On  the  dis- 
solution of  that  ministry  at  the  end  of  the 
year  he  was  pressed  by  a  large  body  of 
electors  to  stand  for  the  borough  of  Mary- 
lebone,  but,  finding  that  he  was  expected 
to  pledge  himself  to  support  certain  mea- 
sures, he  not  only  refused  to  be  nominate^ 
but  vTTote  a  letter  denouncing  the  demand 
of  pledges  and  promises  from  any  candidate 
I  as  Doth  improper  and  impolitic. 

Li  April  of  the  next  year  he  drew  up,  at 
!  Lord  Melbourne's  request,  a  valuable  and 
I  comprehensive  paper  containing  excellent 
suggestions  for  uie  relief  of  the  lord  chan* 
ceUor,  which  in  a  few  years  led,  amooig 
other  things,  to  the  removal  of  the  equity 
business  of  the  Court  of  Excheauer,  and  the 
1  appointment  of  two  additional  vice-chan- 
ceuors.  In  August  Mr.  Bickersteth  married 
Lady  Jane  Harley,  the  daughter  of  his  old 
friend  and  patron  the  Earl  of  Oxford.  In 
the  following  December  Lord  Melbourne 
communicate  to  him  the  intention  to  ap- 
point the  master  of  the  Holls,  Sir  Charles 
C.  Pepys,  lord  chancellor,  offering  Mr. 
Bickersteth  Sir  Charles's  vacant  seat  at  the 
Rolls,  and  urging  him  to  accept  a  peen^ 
in  order  that  he  might  in  parliament  aaasfc 
in  carrying  into  effect  his  yiewi  Ibt  the 
reformation  of  the  courts  of  eqidij.  M& 
Bickersteth,  though  agreeiiiff  to  aeoipfc  tte 


BICKEBSTETH 

jodicial  oflicey  hesitated  to  do  [so  if  united 
with  a  peerage.  His  objections  however 
were  nltmmtelTremoved; and  he  consented 
to  enter  the  House  of  Lords  upon  the 
express  terms,  follj  understood  and  agreed 
to  Dj  the  minister,  of  perfect  political  in- 
dependence. He  was  sworn  ot  the  Privy 
Council  on  Jannaiy  16,  1835,  and  on  the 
19th  and  23rd  he  received  his  two  patents, 
the  former  constituting  him  master  of  the 
KoUs,  and  the  latter  creating  him  Baron 
Langdale  of  Langdale  in  Uie  county  of 
Westmoreland. 

Acting  on  the  understanding  on  which 
he  had  accepted  the  peerage,  he  abstained 
in  parliament  from  intenering  in  party 
conflicts  as  inconsistent  with  his  Judicial 
office  to  do  so ;  and  devoted  himself  wholly 
to  the  consideration  of  the  various  schemes 
of  legal  reform,  not  hesitating,  when  they 
did  not  meet  his  approval,  to  state  his  oli- 
jectiona,  whether  introduced  by  liberal  or 
conservative  legislators.  To  every  bill  that 
toided  to  render  justice  more  easilv  acces- 
sible, and  to  dimmish  its  expense,  ne  gave 
a  most  hearty  support,  and  urged  with 
unanswerable  arguments  the  injustice  and 
impolicy  of  taxing  the  suitor  with  fees  to- 
wards tne  establishment  and  support  of  the 
courts  and  their  officers.  He  himself  in- 
troduced several  bills  of  great  moment, 
some  effecting  substantial  clianges  in  the 
law  and  its  administration,  and  others 
making  important  alterations  in  the  mode 
of  transacting  Chancery  business;  but  he 
never  undertook  the  management  of  any  of 
them  without  carefully  considering  whether 
the  evil  complained  of  would  be  effectually 
remedied  by  the  supposed  improvement, 
and  without  taking  care  that  tne  holders 
of  offices  abolished  were  duly  compensated 
for  their  loss.  It  was  a  pleasure  to  witness 
the  extreme  care  he  exercised  in  their  pre- 
paration, and  the  great  interest  and  anxiety 
ne  evinced  in  their  progress  and  success. 
He  lived  to  see  the  gcK>d  effects  of  many  of 
the  measures  he  promoted. 

As  a  judge  he  was  remarkable  for  the 
atrictness  of  proof  he  required  on  every 
point  submitted  to  his  decision,  for  the  un- 
wearied attention  he  paid  to  all  the  argu- 
ments urged  on  either  side,  and  for  the 
careful  preparation  and  logical  correctness 
of  his  judgments.  By  his  own  dignified 
example  he  made  his  court  a  model  of  pro- 
priety and  respectful  demeanour,  and  all 
attempts  at  professional  fraud,  or  trickery, 
er  any  inexcusable  neglect,  were  effectually 
snppr'osood  by  the  dread  of  his  stem  denun- 
ciation. His  judicial  duties  were  not  con- 
fined to  his  own  court,  but  were  greatly 
increased  by  his  attendance  on  the  judicial 
committee  of  the  Privj  Council,  of  which 
he  was  often  the  presiding  member.  The 
case  which  occasioned  him  most  trouble 
ad  aazietj  there  was  that  of  the  Kev.  Mr. 


BIOKERSTETH 


91 


Gorham  v,  the  Bishop  of  Exeter  (Br. 
Phillpotts),  relative  to  the  bishop's  refusal 
to  institute  Mr.  Gorham  to  the  vicarage  of 
Brampton  Speke,  on  account  of  a  certain 
difference  of  opinion  on  a  disputed  point 
of  doctrine  with  ,'relation  to  baptism.  The 
judgment  pronounced  by  the  committee, 
with  the  concurrence  of  the  Archbishops  of 
Canterbury  and  York,  in  favour  of  Mr. 
Gorham,  was  prepared  by  Lord  Langdale, 
in  a  very  learned  and  elaborate  paper,  and 
naturally  occasioned  a  severe  controversy 
between  the  parties  interested  on  one  side 
or  the  other. 

Not  contented  with  these  labours,  he  de- 
voted himself  with  indefatigable  industry 
to  cleanse  the  Augean  stable  of  the  public 
records,  which  justly  gained  for  him  the 
title  of  Father  of  Kecord  Reform.  His 
continued  endeavours  through  the  whole  of 
his  official  life  to  induce  the  government  to 
devote  the  proper  attention  to,  and  to  pro- 
vide the  requisite  funds  for,  this  important 
and  national  object,  are  fully  recorded  in 
the  memoir  of  Mr.  Duffus  Hardy,  who  was 
one  of  his  most  efficient  assistants  in  the 
undertaking.  The  perseverance  with  which 
he  pressed  the  necessity  of  providing  an 
adequate  repository  for  the  preservation  of 
the  monuments  ot  the  kingdom,  and  the 
unwearied  patience  with  which  he  met  the 
difficulties  and  answered  the  repeated  ob- 
jections raised,  were  at  last  rewarded  by 
the  adoption  of  the  plan  he  proposed.  By 
the  application  of  his  discriminating  judg- 
ment and  patient  perseverance  he  subjected 
the  chaotic  mass  to  an  arrangement  which, 
with  the  facility  of  reference  afforded,  must 
ever  claim  the  gratitude  of  the  statesman, 
the  biographer,  and  the  historian. 

As  a  trustee  and  commissioner  of  the 
British  Museum,  and  as  the  head  of  the 
Registration  and  Conveyancing  Commis- 
sion, he  devoted  himself  with  the  same 
ardour  to  the  several  questions  submitted  to 
them  respectively. 

This  continued  exercise  of  the  brain  had 
such  a  detrimental  effect  on  his  health  that 
when,  on  Lord  Cottenham's  retirement  in 
May  1850,  the  office  of  lord  chancellor  was 
pressed  upon  him,  he  refused  to  accept  it, 
convinced  that  he  could  not  adequately 
perform  the  multifarious  duties  attached  to 
the  place,  nor  hope  to  effect  the  reforms 
whicn  he  contemplated.  But  during  the 
chancellor's  previous  illness  Lord  Langdale 
undertook  his  duties  as  speaker  of  the 
House  of  Lords,  and  on  his  resignation 
consented  to  act  as  the  head  of  the  com- 
mission temporarily  issued  for  the  custody 
of  the  Great  Seal  till  a  lord  chancellor  was 
appointed.  The  Seal  was  delivered  to  him 
and  to  Sir  Lancelot  Shadwell  and  Baron 
Rolfe  on  June  19, 1850,  and  thev  held  it 
till  July  16,  when  Sir  Thomas  A^ilde  was 
appointed  lord  chancellor  and  created  Lord 


92 


BIDUN 


Truro.  The  great  labour  thrown  on  Lord 
Langdale  hv  this  addition  to  his  ordinary 
duties,  with  the  unfortunate  illness  by 
which  his  brother  commissioner  Sir  Lan- 
celot Shadwell  was  incapacitated,  had  a 
palpable  effect  on  his  health  and  strength, 
ana  brought  on  a  serious  illness.  On  his 
partial  recovery  he  found  that  he  must 
relieve  himself  from  the  burden  of  office, 
which,  with  the  sincere  reeret  of  his  bar, 
affectionately  expressed  by  Mr.  (afterwards 
Lord  Justice)  Turner,  he  resigned  on  March 
28, 1861.  after  more  than  fifteen  years  of 
judicial  life.  No  sooner  was  the  sorrowful 
parting  completed  than  his  health  wholly 
succumbed,  and  in  tliree  weeks  he  closed 
his  mortal  career.  He  died  at  Tunbridge 
Wells  on  April  18,  1851,  and  was  buried 
in  the  Temple  Church. 

A  man  with  higher  principle,  greater 
integrity,  more  fixed  iu  his  purpose  to  do 
right,  more  unwearied  in  his  attempts  to 
discover  the  truth,  more  regardless  of  self, 
and  with  a  kinder  nature,  it  would  be 
difficult  to  find.  Whether  in  the  capacity 
of  an  advocate,  a  judge,  a  legislator,  or  in 
the  sacred  seclusion  of  private  and  domestic 
life,  he  secured  the  admiration,  the  respect, 
and  the  devoted  affection  of  all. 

He  left  no  son  to  inherit  his  honours; 
but  his  lady  and  an  only  daughter  still 
survive  to  venerate  his  memory. 

BIDUir,  Walteb  D£,  is  inserted  in 
Dugdale's  list  as  chancellor  to  Henry  H. ; 
but,  on  looking  to  the  authority  to  which 
he  refers,  it  seems  more  likely  that  he  was 
chancellor  to  the  King  of  Scotland.  All 
doubt,  however,  of  Walter  de  Bidun  being 
a  Scottish  chancellor  will  be  removed  by 
the  fact  that  he  is  a  witness,  as  chancellor, 
to  a  charter,  dated  Jedworth,  of  William 
the  Lyon,  King  of  Scotland^  granted  to 
William  de  Veteri  Ponte.  (liobertson^a 
Index  to  &coUish  Rtn/al  Charters^  179,  No. 
137.) 

BIGOT,  KooEB,  second  Earl  of  Norfolk, 
was  the  grandson  of  a  Norman  knight  of 
the  same  name,  whose  lordships  are  recorded 
in  Domesday  Book  as  six  in  Essex  and  117 
in  Suffolk,  and  the  eldest  son  of  Hugh,  who 
was  created  Earl  of  Norfolk  in  6  Stephen. 

Bichard  1.  appointed  him  one  of  the 
ambassadors  to  I^ilip,  King  of  France,  to 
make  arrangements  for  the  crusade;  and 
during  his  sovereign's  absence  on  that  en- 
terprise he  supported  his  authority  against 
the  attempts  ot  Prince  John. 

His  name  appears  on  the  records  as  a 
justicier  after  the  return  of  King  Richard 
from  the  Holy  Land,  fines  being  levied 
before  him  from  the  fifth  year  of  that 
reiffn  till  the  third  of  John.  {Madox,  iL 
21.)  That  king  sent  him  to  summon  Wil- 
liam, King  of  Scotland,  to  do  homa^  at 
Lincoln,  and  made  Tarioua  grants  in  his  fii- 
Tour.   fiuttowazdatheendof  thereignlie 


BiaOT 

was  imprisoned  on  some  account  or  other,  9m 
his  wife  Aelina  fined  in  fifty  marks  for  his 
release,  the  payment  of  part  of  which  wan 
excused,  in  15  John.  \lM.  de  Fin.  465.) 
In  that  year  he  seems  to  have  been  restored 
to  his  sovereign's  ^;ood  graces,  as  he  at- 
tended him  into  Poictou ;  and  for  a  fine  of, 
two  thousand  marks  obtained  a  respite  for 
his  whole  life  from  the  service  of  120 
knights,  and  from  all  anears  of  scutages.. 
{Madoxy  i.  100, 667.) 

In  17  John  he  joined  the  barons,  and  was- 
one  of  the  twenty-five  who  were  appointed 
to  enforce  the  observance  of  Magna  Charte. 
His  name  was  accordingly  included  in  the- 
sentence  of  excommunication  fulminated 
by  Pope  Innocent  HI.,  and  his  lands  were 
cruelly  ravaged  among  the  last  attempts  of 
the  tyrannic  king.  In  the  first  year  of  the 
reign  of  Henry  IH.  he  returned  to  his> 
allegiance;  and,  being  again  taken  into 
favour,  a  disputed  question  between  th& 
king  and  him  as  to  the  stewardship  of  the 
household  was  finally  settled  on  May  1, 
1221.     {Rot,  Claus,  i.  322,  465,  460.) 

Before  the  following  August  he  died, 
and  was  succeeded  by  his  son  Hugh,  whose 
son  Koger,  the  fourth  earl,  is  the  subject  (£ 
the  next  article.  (  Wendover,  iiL  207,  355^ 
381.) 

BIGK>T,  HooER,  the  fourth  Earl  of  Nor- 
folk, and  the  grandson  of  the  preceding 
Boger,  was  at  tJie  head  of  the  commission  oJT 
justices  itinerant  into  Essex  and  Hertford 
issued  in  12o4,  18  Henry  IU.  He  was  the 
son  of  Hugh  the  third  earl,  and  Matilda 
his  wife,  one  of  the  daughters  of  William 
Mareschall,  Earl  of  Pembroke.  IBs  father 
died  in  1225,  0  Henry  IU.,  when  he,  being 
a  minor,  was  placed  under  the  wardship  of 
William  Longspee,  Earl  of  Salisbury.  In 
the  following  May  he  married  Isabella^ 
the  sister  of  Alexander,  Kin^  of  Scotland^ 
to  whom,  on  the  Earl  of  Salisbuij's  death 
in  the  following  year,  the  guardianship  of 
Boger  was  transferred.  {Excerpt,  e  Rut, 
Fin.  i.  125,  128, 168;  Rot,  Claus.  ii.  6S.) 

He  became  eminent  for  his  knigntly 
skill,  and  was  with  the  king  in  France  in 
1242.  When  the  barons  determined,  in 
1245,  no  longer  to  submit  to  the  oppressive 
exactions  made  on  the  kingdom  oy  the 
pope,  he  headed  those  who  addressed  a 
letter  of  remonstrance  to  the  general  council 
then  sitting  at  Lyons,  and  joined  in  the 
dismissal  of  the  papal  nuncio  from  the 
shores  of  England. 

By  the  death  of  the  last  of  the  four  sons 
of  William  Mareschall,  Earl  of  Pembroke, 
in  1245,  their  inheritance  dcTolved  on  their 
five  sisters,  of  whom  his  mother,  Matilda, 
was  the  eldest.  To  her  share  the  marshal- 
ship  of  England  fell,  which  she  transfened 
to  Roger  "mgot  as  her  eldest  son,  the  king 
soon  after  confirming  him  in  the  office. 

He  was  one  of  the  pzindpal  ecton  in  tlia 


BIGOT 

great  coundl  held  at  Weetminster  in  May 
1258,  when,  on  the  harons  appearing  in 
complete  armour,  the  king  asked  of  them, 
*Am  I  then  your  prisoner?'  'No,  sir, 
replied  Roger  Bigot^  *■  hut  hy  your  partiality 
to  foreigners,  and  your  own  prodigality, 
the  realm  is  involved  in  misery.  Where- 
fore we  demand  that  the  powers  of  govern- 
ment be  delegated  to  a  committee  or  harons 
and  prelates,  who  nmy  correct  abuses  and 
^'nact  salutary  laws.'  The  provisions  of 
Oxford  wer«  the  consequence  of  this  pro- 
cedure, under  which  his  brother  the  under- 
mentioned Hugh  was  nominated  chief  jus- 
ticiary. After  the  battle  of  Lewes,  £arl 
Roger  was  appointed  by  the  barons  governor 
of  the  castle  of  Oxford. 

lie  died  in  1270,  leaving  no  issue. 

BIOOT,  HrGH,  the  younger  brother  of 
the  above-mentioned  Roger,  fourth  Earl  of 
Norfolk,  married  two  wives,  the  first  of 
whom  was  Joanna  the  daughter  of  Robert 
Burnet,  and  the  second  Joanna  the  daugh- 
tf-r  of  Nicholas  de  Stuteville  and  widow  of 
Ilnirh  Wake. 

He  received  many  marks  of  the  king's 
favour,  being  made  chief  ranger  of  the 
forest  of  Famedale  in  39  Henry  IH.,  and 
povemor  of  the  castle  of  Pickering  in  the 
next  year.  He  accompanied  the  king  in  41 
Henry  IIL  in  his  expedition  against  the 
Wehrh.  On  June  22  m  the  next  year  he 
was  selected  by  the  council  nominated  at 
the  parliament  of  Oxford  to  fill  the  high 
^tatioIl  of  chief  justiciary,  and  at  the  same 
time  the  Tower  of  London  was  committed 
to  his  charge  (Brady,  App,  218)*,  to  which 
was  afterwards  added  the  command  of 
Ikrver  Castle,  and  the  chamberlainship  of 
Sandwich.    {Cal  Bot  Pat,  31.) 

In  1259  he  selected  Roger  de  Thurkelby 
and  Gilbert  de  Preston,  two  of  the  principal 
judges,  as  his  companions  on  a  circuit  from 
county  to  county  to  administer  justice 
throoghoiit  the  Inngdom  ;  and  during  the 
king*s  absence  abroad,  from  November 
1259  till  April  1200,  he  attested  all  the 
mandates  on  the  fine  rolL  (Excerpt  e 
Bot,  Fhu  ii.  319-324.)  He  is  described  by 
Matthew  Paris  as  'militem  iUustrem,  et 
l«^in  terns  peritum,  qui  officiiim  justi- 
tiariie  strenue  peragens,  nuUatenus  per* 
mittat  jus  regni  vacillare.' 

Although  no  complaint  was  made  against 
him,  and  he  seems  to  have  been  zealous  and 
active  in  the  execution  of  the  duties  of  his 
office,  he  resigned  it  about  the  end  of  1200, 
poe^bly  in  oraer  that  the  council  of  barons 
might  CARy  into  effect  their  desire  to  make 
it  an  annual  appointment,  but  more  nro- 
hably  becanse  he  was  dissatisfied  with  tneir 
pro^edings,  as  he  afterwards  joined  the 
royal  paitv.  He  was  inmiediately  succeeded 
by  Hugh  Is  Despenser,  one  of  his  coadjutors 
on  the  ooonciL 

He  waa  engaged  in  the  battle  of  Lewes 


BILLING 


93 


on  May  14,  1264,  on  the  king's  side ;  and 
when  the  rout  began,  he  escaped  with  the 
Earl  of  Warren  and  others.  Their  flight 
is  thus  described  by  Peter  Langtoft : — 

The  Erie  of  Warenue,  I  wote,  he  scaped  over 

the  9e, 
And  Sir  Hugh  Bigote  ala  with  the  erie  fled  he. 

After  the  battle  of  Evesham,  in  the  follow- 
ing year,  he  was  replaced  in  the  government 
of  the  castle  of  Pickering. 

His  death  occurred  about  November 
1206;  his  son  Roger  on  the  death  of  his 
uncle  Roger  became  Earl  of  Norfolk,  but 
dying  childless  in  1307,  the  title  became 
extinct. 

BILLING,  Thomas.  Fuller  (ii.  160) 
inserts  Sir  Thomas  Billing  among  the 
worthies  of  Northamptonshire,  where  are 
two  neighbouring  villages  of  the  name, 
adding  that  at  Ashwell  in  that  county  the 
judge  'had  his  habitation  in  great  state.* 
Unsupported  by  any  authority  yet  dis- 
covered, Lord  Campbell  (Ch.  Justices,  i. 
145)  represents  him  as  in  every  respect  a 
conteinptible  and  worthless  person.  In  con- 
formity with  this  view  of  his  character,  he 
remarks  that  Fuller  *is  silent  both  as  to 
his  ancestors  and  descendants.'  This  omis- 
sion, however,  is  not  uncommon  with 
Fuller ;  nor  is  there  anything  in  his  account 
of  Billing  to  indicate,  as  Lord  Campbell 
asserts,  that  he  *  is  evidently  ashamed  of 
introducing  such  a  chiaracter  among  wor- 
thies.' Fuller  was  not  a  man  to  conceal  a 
truth,  though  discreditable  to  the  subject  of 
his  notice ;  and  of  this  we  have  two  in- 
stances immediately  follovring  the  account 
of  Billing,  besides  many  others  throughout 
his  work. 

The  family  was  of  great  antiquity  in  the 
,  county.  A  Henry  was  certified  to  hold  a 
!  sixth  part  of  a  knight's  fee  in  Rushden  in 
the  time  of  Henrjr  III. ;  a  Robert  Billing  of 
Cuquenho  was  vicar  of  Brayfield  in  1348 ; 
and  a  John  Billing,  probably  the  father  of 
the  judge,  was  one  of  the  'feoffees  of  Sir 
Wilfiam  Porter,  knight,  and  presented  to 
the  rectory  of  Collyweston  in  1430. 

No  certain  memorial  of  Billing's  ancestors 
or  of  the  personal  history  of  his  early  years 
has  been  found ;  but  no  authority  exists 
for  the  supnoflition  made  by  Lord  Campbell 
that  he  haa  been  Hhe  clerk  of  an  attorney;' 
nor  if  he  had  been,  would  it  justify  the 
improbable  conclusion,  which  his  lordship 
invents,  that  he  would  thus  necessarily 
beccftne  well  acquainted  with  *the  less 
reputable  parts  of  the  law.' 

He  was  a  member  of  Gray's  Inn,  and  if 
MS.  preserved  in  that  society  is  to  be  taken 
as  authority  in  this  instance,  it  appears  not 
merely  that '  he  contrived  to  keep  his  terms 
and  to  be  called  to  the  bar/  as  Lord  Camp- 
bell insinuates,  but  that  he  was  so  well 
reputed  as  to  be  made  a  reader  in  that 
house. 


94 


BILLING 


BILLXHG 


That  he  distinguished  himselt  in  his  early    exactly  what  not  only  the  other  seijeanti^ 


professional  career  appears  certain,  since 
ne  was  returned  in  1448  by  the  citizens  of 
London  as  their  representative  in  parlia- 
ment, and  was  elected  their  recorder  on  Sep- 
tember 21, 1450,  an*office  which  he  resigned 
at  the  end  of  four  years  on  account  'of  his 
manifold  labours,  as  well  at  Westminster  as 
at  the  assizes  in  different  counties/  The 
corporation  voted  him  a  present  of  '  cloth 
en^yned  ...  for  his  diligent  services  in 
the  office  of  recorder,'  and  retained  him  as 
one  of  their  counsel.  {City  List  cf  Recorders,) 
If  this  does  not  raise  a  sufficient  doubt 
of  Lord  Campbeirs  assertion,  that  his 
business  was  '  not  of  the  most  creditable 
description,*  further  proof  may  be  found  in 
a  letter  in  the  '  Faston  Correspondence '  (i. 
53),  that  he  had  already  acquired  a  high 
reputation,  that  his  aclvice  was  deemed 
valuable,  and  that  his  personal  position 
was  such  as  to  warrant  an  intimate  inter- 
course with  the  families  of  Faston  and 
Lord  Grey  de  Ruthyn.    So  high  indeed 


was  his  reputation  that  Bishop  Grey  ap- 
pointed him  his  chief  justice  in  the  Isle 
of  Ely.     {CMsMSS.iay.^7.) 

Billing  was  summoned  to  assume  the 
desrree  of  the  coif  in  1453,  and  was  ap- 
pointed one  of  the  king's  Serjeants  in  14o8, 
30  Heory  VI.,  a  month  after  the  hollow 
accommodation  between  the  two  contend- 
ing parties  in  the  state. 

Lord  Campbell  quotes  a  treatise  of  Bil- 
ling on  the  subject  of  the  claims  of  the  royal 
antagonists,  without  stating  where  it  is  to 
be  found,  and  asserts  that  the  Rolls  of 
Farliament  mention  his  name  as  appearing 
'  at  the  bar  of  the  House  of  Lords  as  coun- 
sel for  Henry  VI.,  leading  the  attorney  and 
solicitor-general/  and  that  on  that  occasion 
it  was  '  remarked  that  his  fire  had  slackened 
much,  and  that  he  was  very  complimentary 
to  the  Duke  of  York,  who  smce  the  battle  of 
Northampton  had  been  virtually  master  of 
the  kingaom.'  On  referring  to  the  Rolls 
of  Farliament,  however,  no  such  entry  is 
recorded,  but,  on  the  contrary,  it  appears 
that  not  only  the  judges,  but  the  King's 
Serjeants  and  attorney,  none  of  whom  are 
mentioned  by  name,  excused  themselves 
altogether  from  giving  any  opinion  or 
advice  on  the  question.  (Rot,  Pari,  y. 
370.) 

Lord  Campbell  states,  without  giving  his 
authority,  that  on  the  accession  of  Edward 
IV. '  instantly  Sir  Thomas  Billing  sent  in 
his  adhesion ;  and  such  zeal  did  he  express 
in  favour  of  the  new  dynasty  that  his  patent 
of  king's  seijeant  was  renewed,  and  ne  be- 
came principal  law  adviser  to  Edward  IV.' 
He  then  designates  him  as  'this  unprincipled 
adventurer,'  although  Coke  speaks  of  nim 
among '  other  excellent  men '  who  flourished 
at  the  time.  {Preface  to  Fird  Lut,)  Mr. 
Seijeant  Billing  did  nothing  more  than 


but  every  one  of  the  judges  except  For- 
tescue,  very  naturally  and  very  propedr 
did  on  the  change  of  dynasty, — he  retained 
his  legal  position  in  the  courts  of  law.  In 
the  very  first  parliament  of  Edward  IV. 
we  find  that,  oesides  Billing,  the  famooa 
Lyttelton  (who  is  named  before  him)  and 
William  Laken,  Serjeants  in  precisely  the 
same  position,  were  nominated  by  the 
parliament  as  referees  in  a  case  between  th» 
Bishop  of  Winchester  and  his  tenants ;  but 
the  KoUs  do  not  supply  any  authority  for 
the  very  improbable  fact  which  Lofd 
Campbell  introduces^  that  Serjeant  Billing 
'  assisted  in  framing  the  acts  by  which  Sff 
John  Fortescue  and  the  principal  Lancas- 
trians, his  patrons,  were  attainted ;'  or  that 
he  took  an  active  part  in  the  subsequent 
measures  of  hostility  against  King  Iienxy 
and  Queen  Margaret. 

No  materials  exist  which  would  justify 
us   in   ascribing  to  Billing   the    private 
suggestions    of    which    Lord    Campbell 
makes  him  the  author,  or  in  judging  of  the 
correctness  of  the  motives  assigned  for  hit 
elevation  to  the  bench.    Neither  ia  any 
evidence  to  be  found  of  his  presumed  dis- 
satisfaction with  the  office  of  puisne  justiee, 
nor  of  his  resolution  that '  mere  scruples  cf 
conscience  should  not  hold  him  back'  fiom 
the  woolsack.    The  simple  fact  is  that  on 
August  9,  1464,  4  Edward  IV.,  he  ww 
added  to  the  three  judges  of  which  ths 
Court  of  King*s  Bench  then  consisted. 

Lord  Campbell,  quoting  from  Baker's 
'Chronicle'  and  Hale's  'Fleas  of  the 
Crown,'  mentions  Billing  as  the  judge  who 
tried  Walter  Walker  for  saying  he  would 
make  his  son  '  heir  to  the  Crown,'  meaning 
his  inn  so  called ;  and  he  gives  the  judged 
ruling  on  the  case,  with  the  conviction  and 
execution  of  the  unfortunate  prisoner.  It 
is  curious,  however,  that  his  lordsh^ 
when  five  pages  before  he  cites  SirNicholia 
Throgmortons  address  to  Chief  Justice 
Bromley,  omits  there  the  chief  iustioe'a 
answer  referring  to  this  very  'Crown' 
case ;  by  which  it  appears  that  Miwlrliyin 
was  the  judge,  and  that  an  acquittal  wis 
the  conetequence  of  his  honest  mlu^. 
{SUtte  TriaU^  i.  894.) 

But  if  this  omission  is  curious^  it  is  morn 
remarkable  that  neither  Baker  nor  Hale 
states  the  case  as  occurring  in  Billing's  time; 
and  fuither,  that  Stow  (p.  415)  gives  the 
precise  date  of  Walker's  trial — ^yiz.,  March 
\2y  1460,  more  than  four  years  before  Billing 
was  on  the  bench ;  adding  that  tiie  chaise 
against  him  was  for  woras  spoken  of  the 
title  of  King  Edwiurd  when  ne  was  pio- 
claimed ;  and  Fabyan  (p.  639}  oonfliina 
him  in  the  date. 

On  January  23, 1468-9,  8  Edward  ISf^ 
Billing  received  his  promotion  m  Ghlif 
Justice  of  the  King's  Bench.     The  tiki 


BILLING 

•nd  conrictioii  of  Sir  Thomas  Burdet,  for 
wifliiiiig  a  faTOurite  back  of  hia  which  the 
kmg  had  lolled  in  huntiogy  honia  and  all, 
via  in  the  ldng*8  bellj,  is  said  by  Lord 
CStmj^ll  to  hare  taken  place  before  Chief 
Justiee  Billing  in  the  yery  next  term  after 
his  i^ipointmenty  and  that '  a  rumour  was 
nopigated  that  the  late  yirtuous  chief 
jofltiee  (Markham)  had  been  displaced  be- 
cme  he  had  refused  to  concur  in  it' 

It  has  not  been  discovered  whence  Lord 
Campbell  extracted  the  ruling  of  Billing  in 
tlus  or  in  Walker's  case,  which  he  nas 
pmted  with  inyerted  commas  as  qnota- 
tbos;  but  nndonbtedly  his  lordship  could 
Bot  haTe  been  aware  that  Burdet*s  case  had 
kenlatelj  referred  to  in  Westminster  Hall; 
that  the  record  of  his  attainder  was  searched 


BINGHAM 


95 


The  name  of  the  wife  here  xepresented 
with  him  is  Katerioa,  the  dauditer  of 
Ro^r  Gifford,  of  Twyford  in  Bucks,  a. 
junior  branch  of  the  noble  familj  of 
Qifford,  Earls  of  Buckingham,  whom  he 
married  so  early  as  1447.  Ilis  second  wife 
was  equally  well  allied,  being  Maxy,  the 
daughter  and  heir  of  Robert  Wesenham, 
of  Conington  in  Huntiogdonshire,  whose 
first  husband  was  Thomas  Lacy,  and  her 
second,  William  Cottony  of  Kedwai«  in 
Staffordshire. 

By  his  first  wife  Sir  Thomas  had  five 
sons  and  four  daughters;  and  there  is 
another  slab  recording  the  death  of  Tho- 
mas, his  son  and  heir,  in  1500,  who  left 
no  male  issue,  but  whose  elder  daughter, 
Joan,  married  John  Haugh,  the  after-men- 
&r,  and  found  in  the '  Baga  de  Secretb; '  and  I  tioned  jud^,  and  whose  younger  daughter 


tkat  this  labour  might  have  been  spared  by 
looking  into  Croke*s  'Charles'  (p.  120), 
viiere  the  proceedings  against  him  are  pub- 
liihed.  The  result  of  all  this  would  nave 
pnred  that  the  whole  story  of  the  buck  and 
tlw  belly  waa  a  figment,  and  that  the  charge 
uiinst  Burdet  was  for  conspiring  to  loll 
the  king  and  the  prince  by  casting  their 
Bstivity,  £Dretelling  the  speedy  death  of 
both,  and  scattering  papers  containing  the 
jrophecy  among  the  people.  By  the  record 
It  appears  also  that,  instead  of  the  trial 
tiking  place  in  *  the  very  next  term '  after 


married  Richard  Tresham,  of  r^ewton,  the 
progenitor  of  the  conspirator  in  the  Gun- 
powder Plot  {Baker's  Northampton^  780 ; 
and  ex  inf.  of  R.  E.  Waters,  Esq.,  a  con* 
nection  of  the  family.) 

BDIOHAX,  Richard.  This  family  waa 
established  at  Carcolston,  in  the  hundred 
of  Bingham,  in  the  county  of  Nottingham. 
Richara  was  a  younger  son,  and  pursued 
the  study  of  the  law.  He  was  called  to 
the  degree  of  serjeant-at-law  on  February 
14,  1443,  21  Henry  VI.  Ifis  last  api>ear- 
ance  as  an  advocate  in  the  Year  Book  is  in 


BUhng  became  chief  justice,  no  part  of   Easter,  22  Henrv  VI. ;  and  there  is  certain 


Bardet's  crime  was  committed  before  1474, 
and  he  was  not  tried  till  1477. 

Little  more  than  two  years  after  Billing 
had  attained  the  chief  judicial  seat  Henry 
YL  was  restored  to  the  crown,  which  he 
retained  for  about  six  months,  when  he 
was  again  expelled  by  his  successful  rival. 
it  is  a  strong  proof  of  the  seat  of  justice 
being  considered  exempt  from  the  conse- 
ooenoes  of  the  civil  strife,  that  on  both 
taese  occasions  the  judges,  with  a  few  ex- 
ceptions, were  all  replaced  in  their  seats  bv 
new  patents  issued  immediately  after  each 
of  these  kings  had  gained  the  ascendency ; 
m  that  all  the  conjectures  as  to  Billing*s 
deportment  at  either  crisis  in  which  Lord 
Cunpbell  indulges  must  be  deemed  ap- 
pheable,  if  at  all,  to  his  brethren  as  well  as 
to  himself.    It  seems  more  natural  to  infer, 
from  Billing's  double  re-instalment,  that 
Ik  had  not  made   himself  obnoxious  to 
cither  party  by  extreme  partiality  or '  out- 
za^reous  loyally.' 

Sir  Thomas  Billing  presided  in  his  court 
vp  to  the  day  of  his  death,  which  took  place 
OD  Mav  5, 1481 .  He  was  buried  in  Bittles- 
^  Aobey,  under  a  large  blue  marble  slab, 
QQ  which  are  the  figures  of  the  chief  justice 
in  hifl  official  robes,  and  his  lady.  This 
ilib,  after  the  dissolution  of  the  monas- 
^snes,  waa  removed  to  the  church  of 
^ippenhaiziy  in  Northamptonshire,  where 
it  BOW  remains. 


proof  of  his  advance  as  a  judge  of  the 
kintr's  Bench  before  February  10,  1447, 
26  Henry  VL,  he  being  among  the  judges 
who  acted  as  triers  of  petitions  in  the  par- 
liament that  met  on  that  day.  {Rot.  ParL 
i  129.)  On  the  de[)osition  of  Henry  VL 
in  1461  he  was  retained  by  Edward  IV.^ 
and  was  continued  in  his  place  during  the 
temporary  restoration  of  Henrv  in  14/0-1, 
being  then  described  as  a  knight.  On  the 
return  of  Edward  IV.,  however,  he  was  not 
included  in  the  new  patent,  being  probably 
omitted  by  his  own  desire,  as  he  must  have 
then  been  considerably  advanced  in  age. 

lie  married  Margaret,  the  daughter  of 
Sir  Baldwin  Frevill,  of  Middleton  in  the 
county  of  Warwick,  and  [widow  of  Sir 
Hugh  WiUoughby,  of  Wollaton  in  Not- 
tinghamshire ;  and  dying  on  May  22, 1476, 
he  was  buried  at  Middleton,  where  there 
is  a  monument  representing  him  in  his 
judicial  robes.  His  son  Richard  married 
Margaret,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Remp- 
ston,  uncle  by  the  half  blood  to  Sir  William 
Plumpton.  In  the  *  Plumpton  Correspon- 
dence Is  a  letter  from  the  judge  to  the  latter 
knight,  in  which,  *be  tne  advise  of  my 
master.  Sir  John  Markham,  chiefe  justice,' 
he  proposes  that  a  variance  between  Sir 
William  and  Henry  Pierpont  should  be 
submitted  to  their  arbitration.  (Archaal, 
Joum,  ii.  260 ;  ThorotorCs  Notts,  i.  240 
Plumpton  Corr.  3,  269.) 


«6 


BIRC5H 


BIBCH,  JoH5^,  would  at  first  sight  ap- 
pear* to  have  been  the  earliest  puisne  baron 
of  the  Exchequer  who  was  selected  from 
4imong  the  ser)eant«-at-law ;   but  a  little 
closer    enquiry  makes    it    very    doubtful 
whether  he  was  the  John  Birch  who  took 
-the  degree  of  the  coif.    There  were  evi- 
dently at  that  time  two  members  of  Gray's 
Inn  of  that  name.     In  autumn  1551   a 
John  Birch  was  appointed  reader,  and  was 
zre-elected  in  Lent  1552;  and  there  was 
4il80  a  John  Birch  who    held  the  same 
•oliice  in  autumn  1558,  and  again  in  Lent 
1560,  being  on  the  latter  occasion  culled 
'duplex  reader,*  which  could  not    have 
been  his  title  if  all  the  four  readers  had 
been  the  same  man.    One  of  these  John 
Birches  was  made  a  Serjeant  on  April  19, 
1559  {Machyn^s  Diaiy,  373),  and  conse- 
•quently  then  became  a  member  of  Serjeants' 
Inn ;  so  that  it  could  not  have  been  he  who 
was  the  reader  in  Gray's  Inn  in  Lent  1500. 
It   follows,  therefore,  that  the  reader  of 
1551  must  have  been  the  serjeant,  and  he 
may  possibly  have  been,  as  Dugdale  de- 
signates him,   *  afterwards  baron  of  the 
Exchequer/    But    as,    according    to    the 
baron's  monumental  inscription,  he  was  born 
about  the  year  1515,  it  is  far  more  probable 
that  he  should  have  been  the  reader  of 
1558,  when  he  would  have  been  in  his 
forty-fourth  year,  than  that  he  should  have 
^attained  that  rank  in  1551,  when  he  would 
have  been  only  thirty-six.    As  it  was  not 
then  the  custom  for  the  barons  to  be  Ser- 
jeants, and  as  there  is  no  fact  to  show  that 
any  change  took  place  on  this  occasion, 
there  is  little  doubt  that  Dugdale  applied 
the  designation  to  the  wrong  man,  and 
that  John  Birch  the  reader  of  1558  and 
1500,  and  not  John  Birch  the  seijeant,  was 
the  person  who  was  promoted  to  the  bench 
•of  the  Exchequer  on  May  9^1564,  and  who 
sat  there  for  the  next   eighteen    years; 
especiaUy  as  in  his  patent  of  appointment 
he  is  described  as  '  Arm.,'  and  not  as  Ser- 
jeant    (Rot,  Pat,  6  Eliz.  p.  8 ;    Cal  State 
Papers  [1547-80],  594.) 

He  died  on  May  30,  1581,  at  the  age  of 
«ixtv-8ix,  and  was  buried  in  the  old  church 
of  St.  Giles-in-the-Fields,  where  this  unique 
inscription  (Stoic's  London^  867)  was  placed 
on  his  tomb : — 

Interr'd  the  Corps  of  Baron  Birch  lies  here, 
Of  Greyes  Inn  sometime,  by  Degree,  Esquire. 
In  Chequer  Eighteen  Yeers  a  Judge  he  was. 
Till  Soule  from  afi^  Body,  his  did  passe. 
Alive  his  Wife,  Eliza,  doth  remaine 
Of  Stydfolke  stocke  ;  one  Sonne,  and  Daughters 

Twaine, 
She  bore  to  him :  the  eldest,  in  his  Life, 
He  j?ave  to  Thomas  Bo3rer,  for  his  Wife. 
His  body  sleepes  till  Angels  Tnimpe  («hall  sound ; 
God  grant  we  all  may  ready  then  be  found. 

BIBCHy  John,  of  the  ancient  family  of 
Birch,  of  ArdwicK,  near  Manchester,  was  the 
nephew  of  the  famous  Colonel  John  Birch, 


StA6KB«ft» 

"^fitd  in  tiie  6reat  ]ElebelHoii  dlstinguiahed 
himffdif  on  the  parHuMettt  flide^  and  the  mm 
of  the  Ifev.  Thomatf  ^trchy  r^c^r  of  Hamp- 
ton Bishop  m  Berefoi^shireyAnd  afterwam 
vicar  of  Pre»fbn  in  Lxim^Axef  by  his  wife 
Mary.    He  comtaieilc^'  1^  leffal  career  at 
Gray's  Inn  in  1686,  but  in  1686  he  trans- 
ferred himself  to  the  Middle  Temple,  by 
which  society  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in 
1()87.    He  was  elected  for  Weobly  in  the 
parliament  of  1700,  nnd  in  all  the  sub- 
sequent parliaments,  except  one,  tiU  his 
death.    The  only  mention  of  his  name  in 
parliamentary  history  is  connected  with  a 
disreputable  transaction.    He  had  been  ap- 
pointed one  of  the  commissioners  for  the 
sale  of  the  estates  forfeited  by  the  rebels  of 
17 J  5,  and  in  reference  to  those  belonging 
to  t':e  Earl  of  Derwentwater  had  aaaisted 
in  a  aost  corrupt  and  illegal  transfer.   The 
transaction  was  declared  void,  and  for  the 
notorious  breach  of  trust  Birch  was  ex- 
pelled the  house  in  March  1732.    He  how- 
ever   had    sufficient    influence    with   his 
constituents  to  be  re-elected  in  the  new 

Earlinment  that  met  in  January  1785,  but 
e  died  before  the  end  of  the  year. 
In  the  progress  of  his  profession  he  had 
been  included  in  the  batch  of  Serjeants 
called  in  1706,  and  before  the  discovery  of 
the  above  disgraceful  transaction  had  been, 
on  December  11, 1729,  made  cnrsitor  baron 
of  the  Exchequer,  in  which  office  he  re- 
mained till  his  death  in  October  1735. 

After  the  death  in  1701  of  his  first  wife, 
Sarah,  the  daughter  of  his  uncle  Colonel 
John  Birch,  he  married  secondly  Letitia 
Hampden,  of  St  Andrew's,  Holbom ;  but 
had  no  children  by  either. 

BIECH,  Thomas,  descended  from  the 
family  of  Birch,  of  Birchfield  in  the  parish 
of  Handworth,  near  Birmingham,  which 
flourished  in  the  early  part  of  the  reign  of 
Queen  Elizabeth.  He  was  bom  at  Har- 
bome  in  the  same  neighbourhood  in  1690, 
and  was  the  eldest  son  of  George  Birch  and 
Mary  his  wife,  the  daughter  of  Thomas 
Foster,  Esq.  Destined  for  the  law,  he  took 
his  barrister^s  degree  at  the  Inner  Tem]>le, 
and,  receivinjg  the  coif  in  June  1730,  was 
made  one  of  the  king's  Serjeants  before 
November  23, 1745.  He  is  so  named  on 
going  up  with  the  judges'  address  to  the 
king  on  occasion  of  the  rebellion,  when  he 
received  the  honour  of  knighthood.  In  that 
year  he  served  the  office  of  high  sheriff  of 
Staffordshire,  and  in  June  following  he 
was  raised  to  the  bench  as  a  judge  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  and  retained  his  seat  for 
eleven  years.  He  resided  at  Southgate, 
near  London,  and  died  on  March  16, 1757, 
leaving  bjr  his  wife  Sarah,  daughter  and 
co-heir  of  J.  Teshmaker,  Esa.,  three  sons 
and  two  daughters.  (^Gent,  Mag,) 

BLACKBTTBN,  Colin,  is  one  of  the  pre- 
sent judges  of  the  Queen's  Bench.    He 


BLAGK8T0NE 

vu  boni  at  Lermiride  in  Dumbarton- 
ihin  in  181&bang  ike  teeoDd  son  of  John 
Ehdcbnm.  Ski,  ai  Killeam  in  Stirlinflr- 
tMn,  After  paannff  through  Eton  C<3- 
kge  he  metricnkted  at  Trinity  CoUeoe, 
Guibridgey  -where  he  was  eighth  wrangler 
in  1836^  and  took  his  degree  of  MA.  in 
ISSw  In  IkBcfaaelmaa  Term  of  that  year  he 
WM  called  to  the  bar  bjr  the  sodety  of  the 
Imer  Temple,  and  jcnned  the  Northern 
Cimnt^  atten^Qng  the  liyerpool  Sessions. 
Thoagb  with  no  considerable  business  as  a 
coansel,  he  was  esteemed  a  sound  lawyeri 
and  alter  abore  twenty  years'  experience 
tithe  bar  he  was  appointed  a  judge  of  the 
Onsen's  Bench  in  June  1860|  and  received 
ihe  cnatomary  kni^thood. 

lLACMI0gg|  WiuJAic.  The  name  of 
Bbcfcstone  is  inseparably  connected  witJi 
the  law  of  England.  What  Lyttelton  and 
hiscrabbed  expositor  were  to  our  legal  an- 
csiton,  Blackstone  is  to  modem  students; 
iod  thou||h  some  of  the  more  earnest  or 
man  ambitious  of  them  may  seek  honours 
W  endeayonxing  to  fathom  the  mysteries 
of  the  '  Tenures^'  the  ol  iroXXol  of  the  pro- 
feamm  are  content  to  eam  an  easy  degree 
by  maateiing  the  more  attractiye  lessons 
eonreyed  in  the  '  Conunentaries.'  So  popu- 
lar haye  they  become  that,  where  the 
atady  waa  confined  in  former  times  to 
those  who  pursued  it  as  an  ayocation,  few 
men  of  raiuc  or  fortune  now  conader  tiieir 
education  complete  without  gaining  an  in- 
■ght  into  the  constitution  of  the  country 
through  Blackstone's  easy  and  perspicuous 
page&  and  abridgments  are  even  intro- 
daoed  into  schools  for  the  instruction  of 
the  jTo^nig.  Whether  this  facility  is  pro- 
dnctiTe  <n  better  lawyers  must  be  left  as  a 
qaection  for  our  critical  descendants. 

William  Blackstone  was  the  fourth  and 
posthumouB  son  of  Charles  Blackstone,  a 
respectable  silkman  in  Cheapside,  London, 
descended  firom  a  family  originally  settled 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  Salisbury.  His 
mother,  who  was  Mary,  daiu;hter  oi  Love- 
Isoe  Biffg,  Esq.,  of  Chilton  FoHot  in  Wilt- 
ahire,  also  died  before  he  was  twelve  years 
dd.  He  was  born  on  July  10, 1723,  and 
fiom  his  birth  his  education  was  under- 
taken by  the  brother  of  his  mother,  Mr. 
Thomas  Bigg,  an  eminent  surgeon  in  New- 
gate Street  In  1730  he  was  put  to  school 
at  ^  Charter-house,  and  m  1735  was 
admitted  on  the  foundation  there,  becom- 
iu  the  head  of  the  school  at  the  age  of 
ween,  and  distinguishing  himself  not  only 
in  the  customary  oration  in  commemora- 
te of  the  founder,  which  he  recited  on 
Beeember  12, 1738,  but  also  by  obtaining 
Kr.  Benson*8  prixe  medal  for  yerses  on 
Miltan.  He  had  in  the  preceding  month 
^  entered  at  Pembroke  College,  Oxford, 
ttd  elected  to  a  Charter-house  exhibition, 
to  viddi  in  February  following  was  added 


BUlGKBTONE 


97 


one  of  Lady  HoUbrd's  exhiUtionai  unani- 
monsly  giyen  by  the  fellows  of  the  college. 

In  the  uniyersity  he  did  not  confine  him- 
self to  the  classics,  but  deyoted  himself  to 
those  sdencea  the  inyestigation  of  whidi 
tended  so  much  to  the  simplicity  and  clear- 
ness of  his  writings.  Among  tnese  he  was 
peculiarly  fond  of  architectiue,  and  before 
ne  was  of  age  he  composed  a  treatise  on 
the  subject,  which,  though  neyer  published, 
was  much  admired.  lus  partiabty  for  the 
Muses^  already  shown  by  his  prize  poem 
on  Milton,  and  afterwards  exnibited  by 
seyeral  elegant  fugitiye  pieces,  he  found 
too  fascinating  and  engrossing  for  the  pro- 
fessicm  to  wnich  he  was  destined;  and, 
resolvinj^  upon  '  total  abstinence,'  he  wrote, 
on  entering  the  Middle  Temple,  a '  Farewell 
to  his  Muse,'  in  strains  whicn  induced  many 
to  regret  he  should  leaye  the  flowery  path 
of  poetnr  for  the  more  rugged  and  sterile 
ways  of  the  law.  Notwitnstanding  this 
formal  adieu,  he  could  not  altogether  re-' 
f^ain;  and  among  other  pieces  he  wrote 
some  yerses  on  tne  death  of  the  Prince  of 
Wales  in  1761,  which  were  published  in 
the  Oxford  collection  as  the  compomtion  of 
his  brother-in-law,  James  Clitherow.  lie 
amused  himself  also  by  annotating  Shak- 
speare,  and  communicated  his  notes  to  Mr. 
Steevens,  who  inserted  them  in  his  last  edi- 
tion of  the  plains. 

He  was  aomitted  a  member  of  the  Middle 
Temple  on  Noyember  20,  1741,  and  was 
called  to  the  bar  on  November  28,  1746. 
But  in  the  internals  of  his  attenduice  on 
the  courts  he  still  continued  his  academical 
studies  at  the  uniyersity,  where  he  was 
elected  in  November  1743  into  the  Society 
of  All  Souls,  of  which  he  was  afterwards 
admitted  a  fellow,  and  delivered  the  anni- 
versary speech  in  commemoration  pi  the 
founder.  There  also  he  took  his  degree  of 
B.C.L.  in  June  1746.  On  being  appointed 
buisar  of  his  college  he  reduced  tne  con- 
fusion in  which  he  found  the  accounts  into 
lucid  order,  and  left  a  dissertation  on  the 
subject  for  the  benefit  of  his  successors. 
He  not  only  arranged  the  muniments  of 
their  estates,  but  greatly  assisted  in  the  re- 
edification  of  the  Codnngton  library  and 
in  the  classification  of  its  contents ;  in  gra- 
titude for  all  which  services  the  colk^e 
appointed  him  in  1749  steward  of  their 
manors.  In  1760  he  commenced  doctor  ot* 
civil  law,  and  in  the  same  year  published 
an  'Essay  on  Collateral  Consanp^uinity,' 
with  the  view  of  removing  the  mconve- 
nience  felt  by  the  college  of  electing  any 
person  who  could  prove  nimself  of  kin  to 
the  founder  in  preference  to  any  other  can- 
didate. His  arguments  had  so  much  weight 
that  soon  after  a  new  regulation  was  intro- 
duced liTTiiting  the  numoer  of  founder*s  kin. 

His  progress  at  the  bar  in  the  meantime 
was  so  dow  and  unproductive  that,  though 


IT 


98 


BIAGESTONE 


he  had  been  in  1749  elected  recorder  of 
Wallingford,  lie  determined  in  1753  to 
retire  to  his  fellowship,  and  only  practise 
as  a  provincial  counsel.  Ahout  this  time 
the  professorship  of  civil  law  in  the  imi- 
versity  became  vacant,  and  the  solicitor^ 
general,  Mr.  Murray  (afterwards  Lord 
Mansfield),  with  a  just  appreciation  of  Dr. 
Blackstone's  abilities,  strongly  recommended 
him  for  the  place.  The  Duke  of  Newcastle 
promised  it,  but  it  is  believed  was  not 
satisfied  with  the  devotion  of  the  candidate 
to  his  grace's  politics,  for  after  a  short  inter- 
view with  hmi  it  was  given  to  another. 
Mr.  Murray  was  naturalfy  disgusted,  and 
advised  the  doctor  to  read  the  lectures  on 
law  he  had  long  been  preparing  to  such 
students  as  were  disposed  to  attend  him. 
He  at  once  adopted  tne  plan  and  met  with 
immediate  success.  These  lectures  form 
tlie  basis  of  that  work  upon  which  is 
founded  his  imperishable  fame ;  and,  as  a 
guide  to  those  who  listened  to  them,  he 
published  in  the  next  year  'An  Analysis 
of  the  Laws  of  England,'  clearly  methodis- 
ing the  intricate  science. 

One  of  the  earliest  fruits  of  the  acknow- 
ledged excellence  of  his  lectures  was  his 
unanimous  election  to  the  first  professorship 
of  law,  on  the  foundation  established  under 
the  recent  will  of  Mr.  Charles  Viner,  the 
laborious  compiler  of  that  '  Abridgment  of 
Law  and  Eqmty,'  the  twenty-four  volumes 
of  which  must  necessarily  occupy  the 
shelves  of  a  lawyer's  library.  The  elec- 
tion took  place  m  1758,  only  two  years 
after  Mr.  Viner's  death ;  and  the  new  pro- 
fessor in  the  same  year  published,  not  only 
his  admired  'Introductory  Lecture,'  but 
also  a  treatise  entitled '  Considerations  on 
Copyholders,'  which  produced  an  act  of  par- 
Hnnient  establishing  tneir  rights  in  the  Sec- 
tion of  members  of  parliament.  The  fame  of 
his  lectures  was  so  great  that  he  was  re- 
quested to  read  them  to  the  Prince  of  Wales, 
an  application  which,  though  his  engage- 
ments obliged  him  to  decline  it,  he  so  fSur 
complied  with  as  to  transmit  copies  for  his 
royal  highness's  perusaL  Justly  conscious 
that  his  legal  character  was  now  esta- 
blished, the  professor  resumed  his  attend- 
ance at  the  oar  in  Michaelmas  1759,  but 
declined  the  honour  of  the  coif  that  was 
oflfered  to  him,  and  afterwards  that  of  chief 
justice  of  the  Common  Fleas  in  Ireland. 

Durine  the  whole  of  this  period  he  had 
exerted  nimself  in  various  ways  for  the 
benefit  of  his  alma  mater  in  the  different 
positions  by  which  his  efficiency  was  re- 
cognised. He  was  appointed  the  arch- 
bi»iop's  assessor  as  visitor  of  All  Souls' 
College ;  he  was  elected  visitor  of  Michel's 
new  foundation  in  Queen's  College,  and  by 
his  tact  and  management  put  an  end  to  the 
disputes  which  had  long  finutrsted  the 
original  intentioBB  of  tho  donor ;  and  as  one 


mjLCKSHOlXE 

of  the  delegates  of  the  *  Clarendon 
he  introduced  new  regnlationa,  the  good 
effect  of  which  is  seen  at  the  preaent  day. 
From  that  press  one  of  the  earlieet  and  heat 
specimens  of  its  reformed  typography  w» 
his  publication  in  1759  of  a  new  edition 
of  the  Great  Charter  and  Charter  of  the 
Forest,  which  led  to  a  controvereial  cor- 
respondence on  the  authenticily  of  a  par- 
ticular copy  between  Dean  (afterwaids 
Bishop)  Lyttleton  and  him,  addressed  to 
the  Society  of  Antiquaries,  of  which  he  was 
a  fellow. 

By  his  marriage  in  1761  with  Sanh, 
daughter  of  James  Clitherow,  Esqu,  of 
Boston  House,  Middlesex,  he  vacated  his 
fellowship  of  All  Souls' ;  but  in  the  same 
year  the  Earl  of  Westmoreland,  then 
chancellor  of  the  university,  appointed  him 
principal  of  New  Inn  HaU^  by  which  he 
was  enabled  to  continue  his  readence  at 
Oxford  for  the  delivery  of  his  lectures.  In 
the  early  part  of  that  year  he  had  been 
elected  member  for  Hinaon  in  the  parlia- 
ment then  called ;  and  also  received  a  patent 
of  precedence  in  the  courts,  to  which  he  wii 
well  entitled,  not  only  by  the  fjEune  he  hsd 
acquired,  but  by  the  increase  of  his  busine«L 
The  specimens  preserved  of  his  advocscf 
prove  the  excellence  of  his  argumentative 
powers.  In  1763  he  was  constituted  solir 
citor-general  to  the  queen,  and  became  a 
bencher  of  his  inn. 

To  repress  the  encroachments  of  pinh 
deal  boojcsellers,  who  were  selling  imper- 
fect copies  of  his  lectures,  he  determmed 
to  issue  them  himself  in  the  form  of '  Com- 
mentaries on  the  Law  of  England.'  He 
accordingly  published  his  first  volume  in 
1765,  and  the  tiiree  succeeding  volumes  in 
the  four  following  years;  and  from  that 
time  to  the  present  tiie  work  has  formed  a 
textbook  for  all  students,  admired  equally 
for  its  expositions  and  the  eloquence  and 
puritY  of  its  language.  "With  the  applause 
whicn  it  deservedly  attained,  it  was  not 
likely  that  it  should  escape  some  amount  of 
critical  detraction.  Some  political  censon 
differed  from  his  views  of  the  principles  of 
the  constitution ;  Dr.  Priestley  animadverted 
on  certain  of  his  ecclesiastical  podtiomL 
which  were  defended  by  the  autnor ;  ana 
to  an  attack  upon  him  by  a  member  of  par- 
liament for  some  observations  he  had  made 
in  the  house,  which  were  alleged  to  be 
contrary  to  the  principles  liud  down  in  his 
work,  he  also  published  a  repl^  justifying 
~  e  had  taken,  wmch  was  se- 


the  position  he 

verely  commented  on  by  Junius.  But  all, 
whetner  opponents  or  supporters  of  his  doc- 
trines, joined  in  a  universal  eulogy  of  the 
clearness  and  beauty  of  his  style,  the  ap^ 
ness  of  his  classical  allusions,  and  tne  allnvo- 
ments  with  which  it  enriched  a  aeienoe 
which  had  previously  lepeUed  liie  itndflnt 
by  its  rugged  eztorior.   It  has  beooBM^  aai 


BLACKSTOmS 

will  for  erer  remain,  the  student's  manual ; 
and  the  continued  demand  for  it  has  found 
em^ojment  for  a  long  succession  of  accom- 
plisliea  editors,  who  by  introducing  the  sub- 
sequent chang^  in  the  law  have  made  it 
as  necessary  and  useful  to  its  latest,  as  it 
was  to  its  oarlieet,  readers. 

In  the  newparliament  of  1768  he  was 
retumed  for  Westbuiy,  but  sat  in  it  only 
two  ^ears ;  for,  though  from  a  disgust  at 
political  controyersj  he  declined  the  place 
of  solicitor-general  in  January  1770,  he 
readily  accepted  a  judgeship  which  was 
offered  to  him  in  the followingmonth  on 
the  death  of  Mr.  Justice  CUye.  He  actually 
kissed  hands  as  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas 
on  February  9 ;  but  at  the  request  of  Mr. 
,  Justice  Yates,  who  wished  to  escape  col- 
lision with  Lord  Mansfield,  he  consented 
to  take  that  judge's  place  in  the  King*8 
Benchy  and  again  kissed  hands  for  that 
court  on  the  16th  of  the  same  month,  when 
he  receiyed  the  honouxw  of  knighthood.  Mr. 
Justice  Yates  died  four  months  after,  when 
Mr.  Justice  Blackstone  remoyed  into  the 
C-ommon  Pleas,  on  June  22. 

Whoeyer  reads  the  reports  of  the  period 
•during  which  he  sat  upon  the  bench  must 
acknowledge  that  he  was  equally  distin- 
guished as  a  judge  as  he  had  been  as  a 
commentator.  Some  of  the  judgments  that 
he  pronounced  are  remarkable  for  the  learn- 
ing they  display,  and  for  the  clearness  with 
which  ne  supports  his  argument;  and  in 
the  few  instances  in  which  he  diifered  from 
hii  colleagues  his  opinion  was  in  general 
found  to  be  right 

He  deyoted  his  latter  years  to  the  im- 
proyement  of  prison  discipline,  and,  in 
conjunction  with  Mr.  Howard,  obtained  in 
1770  an  act  of  parliament  for  the  establish- 
ment of  penitentiary  houses  for  criminals. 
The  beneficial  effects  of  the  system,  though 
not  at  first  sufficiently  perceiyed,  are  now 
uniyersally  acknowledged ;  and  the  amended 
condition  of  our  gaols,  in  the  cleanliness, 
classification,  and  employment  of  the  pri- 
tioners,  is  the  best  proof  of  the  wisdom  and 
beneyolence  of  the  projectors.  In  the  same 
year,  haying  agitated  the  necessity  of  an 
augmentation  of  the  judges'  salaries,  to 
meet  the  increased  taxation  and  expendi- 
lore  of  the  time,  he  obtained  for  them  an 
addition  of  400/.  to  their  stipend. 

Ere  he  had  been  long  on  the  bench  he 
experienced  the  bad  effects  of  the  studious 
habits  in  which  he  had  injudiciously  in- 
dulged in  his  early  life,  and  of  his  neglect 
to  take  the  necessary  amount  of  exercise, 
to  which  he  was  specially  ayerse.  His  cor- 
pulence increased,  and  ms  strength  failed ; 
and,  after  two  or  three  attacks  of  distressing 
illneaB,  he  expired  on  February  14,  1780. 
He  was  buried  in  a  yault  at  St.  Peter's 


SLAGOE 


90 


Ckuch  at  Wallinffford,  where  he  possessed 
A  iMt  called  ^Pnarj  Place.'    A  statue  of 


the 
his 


lie  judge,  by  Bacon,  was  placed  soon  after 

is  death  in  the  hall  of  AU  Souls'  College. 

The  Reports  which  he  had  taken  and 
arranged  for  publication,  commencing  with 
the  term  in  which  he  was  called  to  the  bar, 
and  continuing  with  some  interyals  through 
the  whole  period  of  his  life,  were  giyen  to 
the  world  in  the  year  following  his  death, 
under  the  editorship  of  his  brother-in-law 
and  executor,  James  Clitherow,  Esq.,  with 
an  introduction  detailing  all  the  incidents 
of  his  career,  which  from  its  fairness  and 
impartiality  has  formed  the  groundwork  of 
eyery  future  memoir.  His  inyestigation  of 
the  quarrel  between  Pope  and  Addison, 
which  was  published  with  the  author's  per- 
mission by  Dr.  Eappis  in  the  *  Biographia 
Britannica,'  is  spoken  of  by  Mr.  Disraeli  in 
high  terms  of  praise. 

He  left  behmd  him  seyen  children,  the 
second  of  whom  held  all  the  university  pre- 
ferments of  his  father,  and  eyentually  suc- 
ceeded to  the  estate  at  Wallingford,  whidi 
is  still  possessed  by  his  representatiye. 

Henry  Blackstone,  who  reported  cases 
from  1788  to  1796,  was  the  judge's  nephew, 
and  his  Reports  were  more  popular  than 
those  of  his  uncle,  three  editions  having 
been  called  for. 

BLAOttE,  Robert,  was  made  kind's 
remembrancer  in  the  Exchequer  for  life 
on  December  6,  1502.  He  was  advanced 
to  the  bench  of  that  court  as  third  baron 
on  June  26,  1611, 3  Henry  VIH.,  with  con- 
firmation of  the  patent  of  remembrancer, 
the  duties  of  which  he  still  continued  to 
perform  by  deputy.  In  1515  he  was  one 
of  the  surveyors  of  crown  lands  and  pur- 
veyor of  the  kind's  revenues,  and  received 
a  grant  of  an  annmty  of  eighty  marks  during 
pleasure.  In  that  year  he  obtained  a  patent 
of  the  remembrancership  for  his  son  Bar- 
naby  for  life,  in  reversion  on  his  own 
death  or  other  vacancy,  which  patent  was 
the  subject  of  discussion  in  Dyer's  Reports 
(197),  and  the  result  was  thatit  was  annulled 
and  revoked  in  3  Elizabeth  as  insufficient 
and  not  good,  because  Robert  Blagge  had 
no  legal  estate  at  the  time  of  its  £ite,  nor 
at  any  other  time  after  he  was  constituted 
a  baron.  He  is  stated  in  the  case  to  have 
been  in  possession  of  his  place  on  the  bench 
in  1523-4.  He  died  in  London,  and  was 
buried  in  St.  Bartholomew's. 

He  was  the  son  of  Stephen  Blagge,  of  an 
ancient  family  in  Suffolk,  and  Alice  his 
wife.  He  afterwards  established  himself  at 
Broke  Montagu  in  Somersetshire ;  and  by  his 
marriage  witn  Katherine,  sole  daughter  of 
Thomas  Brune,  or  Brown,  he  became  pos- 
sessed of  Horseman's  Place  in  Dartford, 
and  of  considerable  property  in  the  county 
of  Kent,  which  descended  to  his  sons  Robert 
and  the  above  Bamaby.  His  second  wife, 
Mary,  daughter  of  John,  Lord  Cobham, 
survived  him,  leaving  a  son,  Sir  Qeor^^ 

tt2 


]<Kl 


VLASFOS 


-wko  WW  gntleman  of  the  bedchamber  to 
HeiUT  TIL  (CaL  St.  Paptn  [1609],  263 ; 
ItatUf*  EM,  a.  313, 37S;  Oeg»'i  %(«, 
620.) 

lUROV,  Tkohu  9^  WM  probably 
cf  l«ii!eatenhiTej/wIieie  thers  is  m  hKmlet 
of  tW  BUDS.  The  cnatodj  of  the  honor 
of  PsTerell,  in  that  ud  two  other  coantjee, 
wu  cominittod  to  a  Thomas  de  Bluton  in 
the  nwD  at  Edward  L ;  and  ha  mav  have 
been  tte  Mher  of  the  baron  at  the  Esche- 
aoer.  The  latter  ia  first  mentioned  in  3 
Bdmrd  TIT,  nben,  under  the  title  of '  de- 
ricnaregie,'  ha  was  conatitnted  the  king's 

cbambulain  in  Charter.  He  wu  raised  to  was  replaced  in  the  same  sea^  ami  m  1719 
the  ExdieqDar  bench  Ml  Novamber  3,1333,  '  tie  concurred  with  meet  of  the  other  jodm 
6  Edmrd  lIL  A  new  patrat  was  nant«d  I  in  favour  of  the  kinj^s  prerogatire  over  flie 
10  blm  OD  January  30, 1341,  when  the  king  I  marriage  and  edncation  of  the  ronl  fhmily.  ■ 
had  weeded  tha  court,  on  bis  retnm  bom  i  On  June  22, 1723,  being  then  eightr  jeii*' 
ToniDW,  of  those  whom  ha  considered  to  !  of  age,  he  ohtaiued  permianon  to  niign,. 
hsTa  fuled  in  their  du^.  He  held  the  j  and  a  pension  was  granted  to  him  tar  Oe 
rectorr  of  SoHhnll,  in  Warwickshire.  (Ati.  ramunder  of  his  life,  which  tenninfttad  oa 
SO.  Orig.  L  39,  iL  17;  Hot.  Pari  ii.  106;  May  6, 1726.  He  was  baiied  at  Bradday, 
Oil.  iiqioM,  p.  m.  ii.  86.)  where  there  is  a  monument  to  his  mmoiy. 

XLBICOWS,  Jaws,  was  bom  in  1042  Sir  John  is  represented  as  an  hoofltL 
on  the  manor  of  Marston  St  Lawrence,  on  j  pUin,  blunt  man,  with  no  briUlancy  at 
the  Oifbtd  border  of  Northamptonshire,  ,  ftenius  nor  any  eztraordiiiuy  at**''™"*' 


BLOCELEV 

that  eonrt  for  the  next  flYe-and-twn^ 
rears,  thourii  several  memorialisti  of  tlw 
judge,  as  Baker,  Noble,  and  othen^  Imto 
represented  him  as  having  been  temored  to 
(he  Queen's  Bench,  for  the  whole  of  QomB' 
Anne's  reign,  trom  1703  to  1714.  Lnttnll 
(v,  183)  records  that  in  the  begimung  of 
her  reign  such  removal  was  intended ;  Imt 
it  is  dear  bom  Lord  Raymood'a  B«piat» 
(768, 1317)  that  he  was  then  ra-qpomted 
to  the  Common  Pleas,  end  that  he  wis  still 
in  that  court  at  the  end  of  it,  and  he  i» 
nBTer  mentioQed  as  acting  in  the  Qtieea's 
On  the  Bccesmon  of  Qeo^  L  he 


which    was    granted    in    the    reign 


He   outlived  1 


3  facultiea,  and  conceived 


Henry  VL  to  Thomas   filencowe,  whose  '  that  he  had  discovered  the  longit 

family  otirinally  came  from  s  place  of  that    jtoiy  is  told  of  him  that  once  be  oidetad 


iberland.  He  was  the  eldest  iiig  servant  to  lay  him  out,  inyjfing  thi 
LS  Blencowe,  by  his  wife  Anne,  |  grss  dead.  Indulging  his  whim,  the  ti 
r   of   the   Rev.   Dr.  Francis    fellow  laid   him  on  the  carpet,  and 


that  he 


I  in  Cumberland. 

MO  of  Thomas 

the  datighter  

Savage,  of  Kipple  in  Worcestershire.  He  |  gome  time  came 
was  educated  at  Oriel  College,  Oxford,  i  be  thought  his  honour  was  coming  to  life 
admitted  a  student  at  the  Inner  Temple  in  again,  to  which  the  old  judoe,  tired  of  hi» 
1003,  called  to  the  bar  in  1673,  and  elected  pontioa,  assented.  A  proof  of  Ids  oots- 
a  bencher  in  1067.  RMSed  to  the  degree  of  ^  dente  kindness  of  heart  appeaia  in  another 
tbe  onf  in  1069,  he  was  elected  member  for  '  anecdote.  Lady  Blencowe  bavingaoggested 
Brackley  m  1690.  Though  not  a  pro-  to  him  to  pension  off  ahewerofstoneawho 
rainent  debater,  he  was  afinn  snjiporter  of   was  so  old  that  he  spoiled  the  woric  he  was 

m     v:. :•!.    gmpipygj  gp^  he  replied, '  No,  no,  let  luni 

BjKul  on;  he  enjoys  a  ^eastire  in  thinking 
that  he  earns  his  hresd  at  foursccrs  years- 
and  ten,  but  if  you  tum  him  off  he  will 
die  of  grief.' 

He  left  a  numerous  &mily.  His  third 
son  William  wss  taught  tha  mystoy  of 
doddering  by  bis  maternal  grandfather, 
Br.  Wslljs,  and  was  employed  to  give  evi- 
dence of  the  letters  written  in  dpherwhick 
were  produced  on  the  proceeding  ■ — ~"* 


the  govemmoit.  To  his  msmage  with 
Anne,  the  daughter  of  Dr.  John  Wallia, 
the  celebrated  Savilian  professor  of  geo- 
metry and '  custos  archirorom '  of  Oxurd, 
and  the  great  decipherer  of  his  day,  he 
probably  owed  in  some  measure  his  sd- 
vancement  to  the  bench.  When  the  pro- 
fessor wss  offered  the  deanery  of  Hereford 
in  1093  be  decUned  the  advancement,  hut 
in  his  letter  of  refusal  he  intimated  that  n 
favour  to  his  son-in-law  would  bo 


ccepUble  to  him,    'I  hove,' he  said, 's  ,  Bishop  Atterbury.    He  was  the  fint  parson 
)n-ui-lBW,  Mr.  Serjeant  Blencowe,  of  tbt^    to  whom  a  salary  was  eranted  aa  dedplwrer 
""  imple,  a  member  of  the  House  of   to  the  government,  ma  allowmice  being 
LS,  an  able  lawyer  and  not  inferior    200t  a  year.     The  judge's  second  dangfatn 
of  those  on  the  bench,  of  a  good  j  became  the  wife  of  ^ef  Banm  I^ohyn. 


m  Probyn. 

I  The  estate  of  Marston  St  Lawrence  temuns 
government  and  serviceable  m  it.'    {Baker's  ijn  the  poseeswon  of  Sir  John's  lineal  ds- 
A'brf*<wnptoiMAir«,630-64ft)                          ■  scendant  (iCoM.'*(?rai«r,ii.l80: JWcAotf* 
It  was  not,  however,  till  four  years  after-  |  ' "'     '  " 


to  many 

life  and   great    integril 
Dvemment  and  serviceable  u 


_. ,_      -    ..,.    .La.Aiucdote§,ix.Zl&.) 

wards  thtd,  in  September  1696,  the  seijeant  BLOCZLIT,  Jomr  sx.  Tha  paiiih  dt 
was  constitntad  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer;  I  this  name  in  Worcesteiahiie  was  nmbaUy 
but  in  Uichaehnas  Term  of  the  foltoving  the  native  place  of  John  de  JSkus&j,  wbo 
year  he  was  further  promoted  to  the  Court  i  endowed  the  chsatry  of  the  dneh  of  Bt 
•  "--IS  and  knightad.  He  satin    Mary  then  with  some  of  Ui  kodb  in  80' 


of  Common  fleas  and  knightod.   '. 


BLOET 

JBdwud  nL  and  Bnbfleauent  jean.  Ha 
wu  an  auditor  of  the  Excheqaer  in  44 
Edwaid  nL,  with  a  aalaiyctf  m  ayear: 
ind  he  at  the  aametinie  xeoeiyed  an  annual 
paHion  of  twentymarka  for  certain  good  aer- 
Tioea  he hadpenonned  to  the  kinff  and  the 
lite  queen  Fnilippa:  hendea  whidi  he  had 
I  rant  of  the  cuAod j  of  the  manor  of  £x- 
hohie  in  Warwiekihire  during  the  minority 
of  the  heir.  like  moat  of  the  other  officers, 
■he  waa  in  holj  orderB.  He  was  ndsed  to 
the  hench  aa  a  hanm  of  the  Exchequer  in 
47  Edward  HL,  and  eo  continued  till  the 
Jastjear  of  the  king's  reign.  (Cal.  Inqmi, 
p.m.  iL  194,  268,  &2  ;Isme  SoO,  49, 92 ; 
Ahk  Sat.  Oriff.  u.  310;  CaL  lUd.  JhU. 
18a) 

nOXT,  ROBBBT  (BiBHOP  07  LlVC0LN),i8 

stated  hj  both  Bisdon  (67)  and  Prince  (Si) 
to  hare  belonged  to  a  family  of  that  name 
which  held  the  lordship  of  Ragland,  and 
which  for  many  irenerations  lived  at  Hol- 


BLUNDEVIL 


lOi 


manj  generatu 
combe  Bogus  in  the  county  of  Deyon, 
where  it  atiU  flourishes.  The  mune  is 
oftm  apeUed  Bluett  He  is  described  by 
Frinoe  aa  the  second  son  of  Sir  Bowland 
Bloet,and  ffieat-grandson  of  William  Bloet, 
Ettl  of  Suisbuiy,  of  which  earldom  how- 
erer,  before  the  Conquest,  Dugdale  giyes 
no  account.  But  Gk)dwin's  editor,  Bichard- 
•OD  (283),  calls  him  the  brother  of  Odo, 
Bishop  of  Bayeux,  quoting  Claud.  A.  8,  £ 
118,  SiSS.  mitton,  and  referring  in  cor- 
roboration to  his  grant  of  the  manor  of 
(Hualeton  to  the  priory  of  Bermondsey, 
wherein  he  says,  *  yiod  pro  salute  animsB 
Dom.  mei  Willelmi  Begis,  et  frairis  tnei 
BijocensL  Episoopi,  &c.,  confirmavi  Mo- 
niehis  de  Bermondsey  Cherletonam,'  &c. 
Bat  this  charter  is  of  very  doubtful  au- 
thenticity ;  and  with  all  these  contradictoiy 
accounts,  his  birth,  his  lineage,  and  even 
his  oountiy,  must  remain  in  obscurity. 

It  seems  yezy  probable  that  he  was  the 
Bfeet  who  is  mentioned  as  accompanying 
William  Rufiis  to  England  upon  the  death 
of  the  Conqueror.  (Zinffardf  u.  7Q.)  The 
Asme  of  Kobert  Bloet,  without  any  addi- 
doD,  appears  as  the  witness  to  one  of  Wil- 
liam's charters  to  the  monastery  of  Durham, 
grinted  in  1068  or  1089 ;  and  the  signature 
'Rodberto  IMspensatore *  is  attached  to 
soother  to  Chichester  Cathedral,  which 
wiB  probably  granted  about  the  same  time, 
aod  may  perhaps  be  his. 

He  waa  appointed  chancellor  before  July 
or  August  IwO,  a  charter  to  the  cathedral 
of  Unooln  of  that  date  bearing  his  attes- 
tation; anotb^  to  Salisbury,  dated  in  1191, 
asd  seyeral  without  date  ( Monad,  i.  174, 
ill,  n.  266,  yL  1167, 1177,  mi,1296),  but 
ao  doubt  granted  about  the  same  time,  re- 
eordhia  name  aa  chancellor;  but  no  instance 
^eeoia  of  hia  signature  aa  chancellor  alter 
Jbewaa  raised  to  the  bishopric  of  Lincoln. 
Xhi  hia  ekfTation  to  that  see  he  was  com- 


pelled to  pay  a  large  sum,  yamng^  aeeord- 
mg  to  difierent  authors,  from  oOOLto  6000/.^ 
as  the  price  of  hia  adyancement,  or,  jerfaaps, 
lor  exempting  the  see  from  the  junadiction 
of  the  Archbishop  oi  York. 

He  was  consecrated  by  ArehbiBhop  Lan- 
frano  in  1093,  and  no  doubt  then  resigned 
the  Great  SeaL 

That  he  exerdsed  considerable  influence^ 
not  only  oyer  Kinff  William,  but  oyer  hia 
successor  Kinff  Henry  also,  all  writera 
agree ;  but  it  does  not  appear  that  he  held 
any  official  character  under  William  after 
he  retired  from  the  chanoellonhip. 

Neither  Spelman  nor  Dugdale  mtroduces 
him  in  their  list  of  chief  justiciaries  under 
Henry  L,  but  Henry  of  {luntingdon,  who 
was  one  of  his  archdeacons,  and  had  lived 
long  in  his  family,  expieasly  states  that  he 
was  '  lustitiarius  totius  Anglifls.'  What- 
eyer  doubt  may  be  felt  with  regard  to  this 
author*s  attribution  of  the  title  to  some 
others,  it  is  impossible  entirely  to  discard 
hia  authori^  here,  considering  tiie  intimacy 
of  his  connection,  and  the  consequent 
means  of  knowledge  that  he  had.  The 
period  when  he  held  the  office  is  not  men- 
tioned, but  he  is  further  described  as  having 
been  twice  prosecuted  in  the  last  year  of 
his  life  by  the  king's  suggestion,  and  as 
having  been  fined  so  severefyas  to  producfe 
the  lamentation  that  he  was  now  compelled 
to  dress  those  about  him  in  woollen,  who 
had  formerly  been  dothed  in  rich  nurments. 
Even  to  the  last,  however,  the  king  pre- 
tended kindness  towards  him;  but  wnen 
some  royal  flatteries  were  reported  to  him, 
he  exclaimed  with  a  dgh,  *  He  praises  uo 
one  whom  he  does  not  mean  to  destroy.' 
He  was  in  the  king's  company  at  Wood- 
stock on  the  occasion  of  a  royal  hunt,  when 
he  was  struck  with  a|K>plezy,  and,  falling 
off  bis  horse,  was  carried  to  his  bed,  and 
died  on  January  10,  1123.  His  bowels 
were  buried  at  Eynsbam  in  Oxfordshire,  a 
monastery  which  he  had  restored,  and  nis 
body  was  deiK)sited  at  Lincoln* 

lie  had  an  illegitimate  son  named  Simon, 
bom  to  him  when  he  was  chancellor,  whom 
he  appointed,  while  yet  in  his  nonage,  dean 
of  his  church.  Though  this  does  not  speak 
well  of  hia  morals,  the  character  given  nim 
by  his  contemporaries  in  other  respects  is 
much  in  his  favour.  Henry  of  Huntingdon 
describes  him  as  mild  and  humble,  a  raiser 
of  many,  a  depressor  of  none,  the  orphan's 
father,  and  the  delight  of  his  family;  and 
Matthew  Paris  testifies  to  the  beauty  of 
his  person,  and  the  sweetness  and  aflability 
of  his  manners  and  conversation.  {Atu/l, 
&ic.  iL  604 ;  Wendover,  iL  41,  &c ;  Turner's 
Engl  L  167;  i>amera,  5&) 

BLUHBEVIL,  Bahulph  (Easl  o7  Ches- 
ter), sumamed  Blundevil  (or,  as  Dugdale 
says,  Blaudevil,  from  tiie  town  where  he 
was  bom,  then  called  Album  Monatterium, 


102 


BLYTH 


now  Ofiwestry),  was  the  son  of  Huffh  Cyre- 
lioc,  Earl  of  Chester,  and  Bertra,  daughter 
of  tiie  Earl  of  Evrenx.  He  succeeded  to 
the  title  in  1181.  While  King  Richard 
was  in  the  Holj  Land  he  resisted  Prince 
John's  attempts  to  obtain  the  goremment, 
and  distinguished  himself  in  uie  sieges  of 
the  castloB  of  Marlborough  and  Nottingham, 
held  by  the  ]^iince's  adherents. 
'  In  1198  his  name  appears  as  one  of  the 
iusticiers  before  whom  a  fine  was  levied; 
but  there  is  no  other  trace  of  his  haying 
acted  in  a  judicial  capadtj. 

He  loyaOjassisted  King  John  throughout 
the  troubles  of  his  reign,  and  was  equidlj 
conspicuous  in  securing  the  throne  to  his 
son  Henry  HI.  As  soon  as  the  rebels  were 
defeated,  and  the  kingdom  was  at  rest,  he 
departed  for  the  Holy  Land,  and  was  pre- 
sent at  the  siege  of  Damietta.  After  his 
return  in  1220  the  activity  of  his  disposi- 
tion was  frequently  displayed,  sometimes 
in  opposition  to  the  king,  but  more  fre- 
quently in  his  support.  He  died  in  0<>- 
tober  1231.  having  presided  over  the 
county  of  Cnester  above  fifty  years. 

His  first  wife  was  Constance,  daughter 
and  heir  of  Conan,  Earl  of  Brittany,  and 
widow  of  Geoffrey,  the  son  of  King 
Henry  H.  Being  divorced  from  her,  '  by 
reason  that  King  John  haunted  her  com- 
pany,' he  then  married  Clemencia,  daughter 
of  Kalph  de  Feugers,  and  widow  of  Alan 
Dinant  He  left  no  issue  by  either  of 
them. 

BLYTH,  JoHir  (Bishop  op  Salisbukt), 
was  son  of  William  Blyth,  of  Norton  in  Der- 
byshire, by  a  sister  of  Archbishop  Rotheram. 
He  and  his  brother  Geoffrey  were  sent  to 
the  university  of  Cambridge,  where  each  of 
them  successively  became  master  of  King's 
Hall,  each  also  oeing  eventually  raised  to 
the  episcopal  bench — John  as  Bishop  of 
SaUsbuiy,  on  December  22,  1493;  and 
Geoffirey  as  Bishop  of  Lichfield  and  Co- 
ventry, on  DecemMr  26, 1603. 

At  the  time  of  his  elevation  to  the  pre- 
lacy John  Blyth  was  archdeacon  of  Bich- 
mond,  to  which  he  had  been  admitted  on 
October  8, 1486.  He  was  also  master  of 
the  Bolls,  having  been  appointed  on  May 
6,  1492.  This  office  he  resigned  on  Fe- 
bruary 13, 1494,  a  few  days  before  his  con- 
secration; and  in  the  same  year  he  was 
elected  chancellor  of  the  universihrin  which 
he  was  educated.  He  enjoyed  his  honours 
only  ^\e  ^ears,  dying  about  August  23, 
1499.  His  remains  were  deposited  in  a 
handsome  tomb  behind  the  high  altar  in 
his  cathedral  (J^^tner,  zii.  662;  Le  Neve. 
326;  6WKwt,  323,  362.) 

BOBI,  Hugh  de,  was  sheriff  of  York- 
shire under  Hugh  Baxdolph  ttom  4  to  6 
Hiehaxd  L.  and  was  one  of  we  five  justices 
itinerant  wiio  set  the  tallage  m  Lfaioolndbire 
in  the  eighth  tsmt  of  tbit  zeign,  1196-7. 


BdCLAlO) 

(MadoXf  1, 704,)  For  the  first  four  years 
of  John's  reign  he  acted  as  a  justicier  as 
vTell  at  Westminster  as  on  the  drctdt 

In  2  John  he  was  associated  with  Hugh 
de  Wells  in  the  custody  of  the  bishopric  of 
Lincoln  during  its  vacancy  (Itot,  Chart. 
09);  and  in  the  next  year  he  accounted 
for  the  rents  of  Baldwin  Wace's  lands,  then 
in  the  king's  hands.  (Hot,  Cancdl,  103.) 
The  *Rotulus  de  Obktis'  of  2  John  (101, 
212^  271)  contains  an  entry  of  his  gift  of 
one  hundred  pounds  and  a  palfrey  to  the 
king ;  and  among  the  fines  of  u  John  is  one 
of  two  hundred  marks  paid  by  him  rather 
than  trust  his  son  as  a  hostage  ^  pro  doming 
suo.' 

BOCLAKB,  Hugh  de,  was  a  canon  of 
St.  Baul's,  and  is  mentioned  by  Dugdale 
and  Spelman  as  chief  justiciary  at  the 
commencement  of  the  rei^  of  Henry  I., 
on  the  authority  of  that  king's  charter  of 
liberties,  as  cited  by  Matthew  Paris,  being 
address^  to  him  in  that  character.  Both 
Roger  do  Wendover  and  Matthew  Paris 
give  two  copies  of  that  charter — ^the  first 
when  it  was  promulgated  by  Henry  in  the 
first  year  of  his  reign;  and  the  second  when 
it  was  produced  to  the  barons,  113  years 
afterwards,  by  Archbishop  Langton.  The 
first,  therefore,  would  more  probably  be  the 
correct  copy,  and  that  is  addressed  to  Imn 
as  sheriff  of  Hertfordshire,  while  the  latter 
is  addressed  to  him  as  Justiciarius  Anglite. 
The  continuation  of  the  address  in  both  is 
'et  omnibus  fidelibus  8uis,tam  Anglis  quam 
Francis,  in  Hertfordsyre,'  words  which 
show  that  similar  copies  were  sent  to  each 
county,  addressed  no  doubt  to  its  particular 
sheriff,  as  this  was — according  to  the 
royal  direction  at  the  time  of  its  grant, 
recorded  by  both  these  historians, '  that  ae 
many  copies  of  it  were  to  be  made  as  there 
were  counties  in  England,  to  be  deposited 
in  the  abbeys  of  each  county  as  a  public 
record.'  A  charter  by  which  King  Henry 
made  a  grant  of  lana;  in  Essex  to  Otho 
'  aurifabro,'  addressed  to  Maurice,  Bishop 
of  London,  and  Hugo  de  Bocland,  '  et 
omnibus  baionibus  suis  et  fidelibus,  Francis 
et  Anglis,  de  £ssexi& '  {N,  Fcedera,  i.  0^, 
affords  a  corroboration  that  he  was  at  this 
time  sheriff  of  Hertfordshire,  inasmuch  aa 
the  two  counties  of  Essex  and  Hertford 
were  then,  and  for  several  centuries  after- 
wards, imited  imder  one  sheriff,  and  the  she- 
riffalty was  frequently  held  for  many  years 
together  by  tiie  same  individual  Many 
charters  prove  that  he  was  also  sheriff  or 
portgrave  of  London,  but  his  position  in 
none  of  them  affords  the  slightest  evidenoe 
that  he  ever  was  chief  justidaiy.  That 
he  never  held  that  high  and  respopaUe 
office  is  rendered  more  probable  hj  the 
total  silence  of  the  histonans  with  xegnd 
to  him,  a  silence  which  ia  whdBj  miaecouat- 
able  in  reference  to  an  offioar  i^ooi  iSbef 


BOdAHB 

tecfibe  IB  the  prime  minister  of  the  reelm, 
md  the  next  to  the  hing  m  £gmt j. 

BOOLASII^  HreH  bb,  mey  hare  been 
•  dMeendant  from  the  ahoye-named  Hugh 
di  Boelaad.  The  fixet  mention  of  him  is 
in  4  HeniT  IL,  1168,  when  he  was  excnsed 
ftoB  the  aoBvn  of  Berkshire.  In  1166  he 
evtified  that  he  held  two  knights'  fees  and 
t  half  ia  that  ooontj,  and  was  sheriff  of  it 
from  1170  to  117a  He  acted  as  one  of 
the  JQsticee  itinemnt  in  117d|  to  set  the 
iMxe  on  the  kind's  demesnes  in  Devon- 
aUre^  and  in  the  following  year  in  his  own 
coontT  of  Beika.  (Fhe  MM,  124 ;  Madox, 
1 124,  701.) 

His  son  William  was  sheriff  of  Com- 
vilL 

lOCLAny  Geoffbet  ds,  appears  as 
t  justieier  from  7  Richard  L,  1195^  to  3 
Henry  HL,  1218,  during  which  years  fines 
vers  levied  hefcoe  him  at  Westminsteri 
nd  in  6  Henry  HI.  he  wss  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  into  Hertfordshire.  There 
ars  also  sereral  entries  on  the  rolls  showing 
that  he  was  connected  with  the  £xche<}ner 
IB  the  ^*gw»«'"g  of  King  John's  reign. 
{BaL  CUuu.  I  473;  Jlot.  Chart,  00,  &c) 

About  the  year  1200  he  was  appointed 
to  the  archdeaconiT  of  Norfolk,  which  he 
held  tm  he  was  advanced  by  the  king  to 
the  desneiy  of  St.  Martin  Vle-Gbnnd,  a  oe- 
nefice  which  he  certainly  enjoyed  in  1210, 
having  received  grants  in  the  mterim  of  the 
diiuehee  of  Tenham  and  Pageham.  (Le 
3>rtf,  219 ;  Rot.  Chart.  166 ;  Rot.  Pat.  61.) 

If  he  were  the  '  O.  de  Bocland '  to  whom 
a  mandate  was  directed  in  15  John,  com- 
Bsnding  him  to  let  the  king  have,  at  the 
price  any  others  would  give  for  them,  the 
oom,  piffiL  and  other  chattels  at  Berkhamp- 
ited  inucn  belonged  to  Geoffrey  Fitz-Peter, 
his  brother,  recently  deceased  {Rat.  Clous. 
L 139^,  he  was  mx>Dablv  a  younger  brother 
of  William  de  Bocland,  who  married  the 
alter  of  GFeofl&ey  Fitz-Peter's  first  wife,  the 
dsnghter  of  Geofifrey  de  Say.  As  there  was 
Qo  other  connection  between  Fitz-Peter 
ud  Bocland  than  this  marriage,  it  would 
appear  that  in  those  times  the  title  of 
biother  was  extended  by  courtesy  to  the 
Irotben  of  the  wife*s  sbter's  husband. 

Geoffiey  de  Bocland  seems  to  have  com- 
mitted himself  with  the  barons  in  17  John, 
II  time  and  safe-conduct  were  granted  to 
Hm  to  come  before  the  king,  which  were 
twice  afterwards  renewed  (Rot.  Pat.  172, 
174, 192);  and  in  the  same  vear  his  manor 
of  Tadieworth  in  Hertfordshire  was  given 
W  the  king  to  Nicholas  de  Jelland.  (Rot. 
CW 17257.) 

On  the  aooeieion  of  King  Henry,  how- 
erer^he  aooo  retomed  to  his  duty,  and  was 
mtflied  to  his  judicial  position.  He  died 
Mie  FBbrnaiy4»  1231,  the  date  of  a  charter 
te  Walter  de  "^kham^  then  dean  of  Bt. 
Utrtin's.     {MmtUmdi  London,  767.) 


BOLEBEC 


103 


BOEUV,  Hmf  PHRKT  DB  (EaBL  07  HkRE- 

70BD).    Henry  de  Bohun.  the  father  of 
Humphrey,  wasgreat-granoson  of  the  after- 
named  Milo  of  Gloucester,  the  fint  Earl  of 
Hereford,  whose  eldest  daughter,  Margery, 
married  Humnhrey  de  Bohun,  the  grandson 
of  another  Uumphrev,  who  accompanied 
the  Conoueror  into  England.    After  the 
death  of  Mahell,  Earl  of  Hereford,  her  last 
surviving  brother,  her  grandson  Henry  de 
Bohun,  m  1199,  was  created  Earl  of  Here- 
ford, and  was  constable  of  England.    He 
married  Matilda,  the  daughter  of  Geofirey 
Fitz-Peter,  Earl  of  Essex,  and  died  in  4 
Henry  HI.,  1220. 

Humphrey  de  Bohun,  then  succeeding  to 
the  earldom  of  Hereford,  was,  on  the  death 
of  William  de  Mandeville,  his  mothor*8 
brother,  without  issue,  created  in  1237  Earl 
of  Essex. 

His  life  was  one  career  of  activity,  now 
boldly  demanding  from  the  king  a  redrens 
of  grievances,  and  now  suj^porting  hi.s 
sovereign  in  resisting  his  enemies.  lie  was 
sheriff  of  Kent  in  23  Heniy  HI.  and  the 
two  following  years ;  in  34  Henry  HI.  he 
took  the  cross  and  went  to  the  Holy  Land  : 
in  37  Henry  lU.  he  was  present  in  West- 
minster Hall  when  the  formal  curse  was 
pronounced,  with  bell,  book,  and  candle, 
against  the  violators  of  lllagna  Charta.  In 
41  Heniy  III.  he  had  the  custody  of  the 
marches  ofjuWales,  and  it  was  during  the 
time  that  he  held  this  office  that  his  name 
appears,  in  1200,  as  a  justice  itinerant  for 
the  counties  of  Gloucester,  Worcester,  and 
Hereford.  In  the  troubles  which  shortly 
foUowed  he  joined  Simon  de  Montfort, 
Earl  of  Leicester,  and  was  taken  prisoner 
at  the  battle  of  Evesham,  August  4, 12(5o. 
His  former  services,  however,  availed  him 
to  obtain  a  restoration  of  his  lands  and 
honours,  with  additional  marks  of  favour. 
He  lived  till  September  24, 1276, 3  Edward 
I.,  and  was  buried  in  the  abbey  of  Lan- 
thony.  He  founded  the  church  of  Augus- 
tine Friars  in  Broad  Street,  in  the  city  of 
London. 

He  married  first,  Maud,  daughter  of  the 
Earl  of  Ewe,  by  whom  he  had  a  son 
Humphrey,  who  died  during  his  lifetime, 
leaving  a  son,  also  Humphrey,  who  succeeded 
to  the  earldoms  of  HereK)rd  and  Essex. 
His  second  wife  was  called  Maud  de  Avene- 
bury,  by  whom  he  had  a  son,  John  de 
Bohun,  lord  of  Ilareefield. 

BOLEBEC,  Hugh  de,  was  the  son  of 
Walter  de  Bolebec,  a  j^reat  baron  in  North- 
umberland, by  his  wife  Margaret,  one  of 
the  sisters  and  co-heirs  of  Richard  de 
Montfichet.  He  was  a  frequent  attendant 
on  the  court,  witnessing  several  charters, 
assisting  his  sovereign,  King  John,  in  his 
contentions  with  the  barons,  and  receiving 
his  reward  from  the  lands  of  their  adherents. 
In  4  Henry  IIL  the  county  of  Northmn- 


104 


BOLD^GBBOEE 


berland  was  placed  under  his  charge  {Jlot, 
Clous,  i.  421),  and  he  was  again  soenff  of 
it  in  20  He^  XXL,  when  he  held  it  for 
ten  years.  Though  placed  at  the  head  of 
the  justices  itinerant  for  the  liberties  of 
Durham  in  1228;  he  does  not  seem  to  have 
had  ai^  subsequent  judicial  appdntment 
till  12^2  when  ne  was  named  as  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  for  pleas  of  the  forest. 
He  died  in  Octobw  in  that  year,  leaving 
his  wife  Theophania  surriTing.  By  her  he 
had  a  son  Hugh,  who  died  unmarried 
during  his  fathers  life,  and  four  daughters, 
who  succeeded  to  his  properU^.  CBoi. 
Chart.  179,  220;  Hot.  Clam.  L  246,  814; 
Excerpt  e  BU.  Fm.  ii  885-893 ;  Banmage^ 
i.  452.) 

BOUVOBBOKS;  Eabl  OF.  See  O.  St. 
JoBir. 

BOUVOBBOKS,  Nicholas  db,  judging 
from  his  name,  belonged  to  the  coun^ 
of  Lincoln.  In  4  Edward  H.  he  was  the 
last  of  three  judges  of  assize  sent  into  that 
county  and  nve  others,  and  in  the  tenth 
year  was  named  in  a  sjgecial  conunission  to 
try  some  rioters  in  Lmcoln.  In  12  &  18 
Edward  IL  he  was  commanded  to  cause 
all  proceedings  before  him  as  a  judge  of 
assize  to  be  estreated  into  the  Excnequer. 

He  certified  as  one  of  the  lords  of  the 
township  of  Gargrave  in  Yorkshire.  {Pari 
Writs,  ii.  p.  ii.  661.) 

BOLLAHB,  WiLLiAX,  was  the  eldest  son 
of  a  London  merchant  of  the  same  names, 
and  was  bom  in  1772.  He  was  sent  for  his 
education  to  Dr.  Valpy's  school  atReadine, 
then  noted  for  producing  scholars  of  hign 
literary  attainment  While  there  he  was 
a  great  favourite  with  his  master,  and  wrote 
several  prologues  and  epilogues  for  the 
annual  oramatic  performances  for  which 
the  school  was  renowned.  He  thence  pro- 
ceeded to  Trinity  College,  Cambria^, 
where  he  formed  a  life-long  intimacv  with 
John  Copley,  afterwards  Lord  Lyndhurst, 
and  took  niB  degrees  with  him  in  1794  and 
1796.  In  the  latter  and  two  following 
years  he  gained  the  Seatonian  prize  for  his 
poems  on  '  The  Epiphany,' '  Miracles,'  and 
*  St  Paul  at  Athens ; '  and  subsequentiy 
evinced  considerable  poetic  powers  in  se- 
veral pieces  of  great  elegance.  But  soon  his 
devotion  to  Astrsea  compelled  him  to  desert 
the  Muses.  He  entered  ner  (Inner)  Temple, 
and  placed  himself  under  her  priest  Georjte 
Holroyd,  and,  after  some  initiation  into  the 
mysteries,  was  permitted  to  join  in  the 
ministrations. 

To  descend  from  these  altitudes,  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  on  April  24, 1801,  having 
previously  acted  for  some  time  as  a  specuu 
pleader.  He  joined  the  Home  Circuit, 
practidng  at  the  usual  sesdons  attached  to 
it,  but  prindnally  at  the  Old  Bailey,  and 
in  1804  he  oeciune  one  of  the  four  city 
pleadera.    In  all  of  these  he  commanded  a 


BOLMNa 

large  share  of  business,  and  acquired  ao  good 
a  reputation  that  in  1815  he  was  eelMted 
to  join  Mr.  Holroyd  in  a  commisaion  to 
Jersey  to  enquire  into  the  ezistenoe  of  eop- 
tain  Mdeanoes'  complained  of  by  the  ht^ 
habitants.  In  1817  he  was  made  xeooider 
of  Reading,  the  place  of  his  pupilaoe ;  and 
in  1822,  when,  from  the  respect  he  had  oIh 
tained  as  senior  city  pleader,  he  would  cer- 
tainly in  ordinary  times  have  been  elected 
common  seneant  of  London*  he  was,  from 
the  political  excitement  arising  from  the 
trial  of  Queen  Caroline,  defeated  by  a  small 
majority  in  favour  of  Mr.  (afterwards  LoKd 
Chief  tfustice)  Denman,  who  had  acted  as 
one  of  her  majesty's  advocates. 

After  eight-and-twenty  years'  labour  at 
the  bar,  he  was  called  to  the  bench  of  tiie 
Exchequer  on  November  16,  1829.  The 
nature  of  lus  business  had  not  led  him  to 
that  abstruse  learning^  which  is  so  necessarr 
for  a  judge,  except  m  regard  to  criminal 
law,  with  which  ne  was  intimately  con- 
versant But,  gifted  with  good  sense  and 
discriminative  jud^ent,  he  fulfilled  his 
duties  with  great  discretion.  He  occupied 
the  judicial  seat  for  nearly  ten  years,  when 
disorders  and  infirmities  obliged  him  to 
resign  in  January  1839,  after  which  he  Uved 
little  more  than  a  year,  his  death  taking 
place  on  May  14, 1840. 

He  was  one  of  the  most  popular  men  of 
his  time.  His  eminentiy  handsome  and 
benevolent  countenance  made  the  first  fa- 
vourable impression,  which  his  pleasantly, 
cordiality,  and  kind  disposition  more  thui 
confirmed.  He  had  a  mania  for  old  English 
literature,  and  everything  which  was  ancient 
and  rare.  The  Boxburgh  Club  originated 
at  a  dinner  party  given  by  him,  and  ne  fur- 
nished the  nrst  book  circulated  among  his 
associates,  being  a  reprint  of  Lord  Surrey's 
version  of  the  secona  book  of  the  i£neid^ 
the  first  specimen  of  blank  verse  in  ourlan- 
ffuaffe.  He  figures  as  Hortensius  in  Dr. 
iHbain's  ^  Bibliomania; '  and  his  curious  col- 
lection of  books,  pictures,  and  coins  sold 
after  his  death  for  more  than  3000^ 

He  married  in  1810  his  cousin  Elizabetli, 
one  of  the  daughters  of  John  Bolland,  Esq^ 
of  Clapham,  and  left  several  children. 

BOLLIKO,  WiLLiAJC,  was  appointed 
third  baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  October 
11, 1501,  ITHeniT  VIL,  and  was  continued 
in  his  place  for  tne  first  four  years  in  the 
following  reign.  He  was  in  tne  commis- 
sion of  the  peace  for  Essex  and  Kent  (CUL 
St.  Papers  [1609],  60,  101.)  He  was  one 
of  the  ancients  of  the  Middle  Temple  who 
were  present  when  three  members  of  that 
society  were  called  Serjeants  in  November 
1503,  thus  plainly  showing  that  baxooa  at 
that  time  sat  on  the  bench  who,  not  being 
of  the  degree  of  the  coif,  still  remained  ii 
the  sode^  in  which  they  had  been  bRNH^ 
up.  (DHffdaUs  Orip.  Ilk) 


BONQUEB 

MVaVXB,  WiLUAX,  or  BOVOOmt, 
wu  cmplojed  in  1S66  and  1260  on  mb- 
■ont  to  the  pope  xdatiTe  to  the  election  of 
PoDoe  Kdmmiq  to  the  crown  of  Sidhr,  and 
ipoa  the  peace  with  the  Kinff  of  Prance. 
In  the  letter  of  credence  on  the  latter  occa^ 
mheiacaUed  * milite et  mariacallo  regia.' 
{S^tMr,  I  387, 886.}  In  46  Henry  m., 
U&y  a  Mlazy  oi40L  was  granted  to  four 
JQiCioea  of  toe  bench,  of  whom  he  is  the 
int  named ;  and  in  that  and  the  next  year 
he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  The  fines 
IB  which  his  name  appears  do  not  oocnr 
hejood  Easter  1266. 

BOOTHy  LuTBorcB  (Abchbishop  07 
Tobk),  to  use  the  words  of  Dogdale  (Ba^ 
fOME^.  iL  481),  was  of '  a  yery  antient  and 
kxngfatly  £unily/  possiMwiiig  property  in 
Cheshire  and  Lancashire,  from  tne  reign 
•of  Edward  L  there  were  five  generations 
belbze  John  Booth,  or  South,  of  Barton, 
who  bj  two  wives  had  twelve  children — 
two  ofwhom,  William  and  this  Laurence, 
heesme  Archbishops  of  York;  one.  John, 
SUiop  of  Exeter ;  the  son  of  anotner  was 
nised  to  the  peerage  as  Baron  Beliunere, 
and  afterwards  created  Earl  of  Warrington; 
and  the  daughter  of  another  of  the  twelve 
•children  manied  Ralph  Nevill,  the  third 
£sil  of  Westmorelano. 

Laurence  was  the  youngest  son,  and  the 
<»]y  child  of  the  second  wife,  Maude, 
•dsi^hter  of  Sir  John  Savage,  of  Clifton, 
or  Itock-Savage,  in  Cheshire.  He  pursued 
his  studies  at  Cambridge,  becoming  master 
<if  Pembroke  Hall  in  1450,  and  afterwards 
dianoellor  of  the  university.  Ecclesiastical 
preferments  flowed  quicklv  upon  him. 
r  rom  the  rectoiy  of  Uottenham  in  Cam- 
Iffidffeshiie  he  was  successively  advanced 
to  the  provoetship  of  Beverley  in  1453 ; 
4Monries  in  York  and  Lichfield  r  the  azch- 
descomr  of  Richmond  in  1454;  the  deanery 
«f  St  Iwl's  in  1456 ;  and  the  bishopric  of 
Durham,  by  papal  bull,  on  September  15, 
1457.    (M(nuut.  vi  1807 ;  Le  Neve.) 

Although  Fuller  describee  him  as  'neither 
for  York  or  Lancaster,  but  England,'  there 
11  no  doubt  that  until  the  Lancastrians 
were  deprived  of  all  hope  he  was  zealously 
tttached  to  their  interest  and  employed 
in  their  service.  In  1454  he  was  Queen 
3itigaret*s  chancellor,  and  keeper  of  King 
Benry's  privy  seal  The  battle  of  Towton 
in  the  foDowmg  year  sealed  the  fate  of  his 
poty;  but  that  ne  had  not  made  himself 
obojdousiu  his  adherence  to  his  royal 
oaiter  is  apparent  from  the  hct  that  he  was 
not  ooly  not  included  in  the  act  of  attunder 
then  passed  by  the  conqueror  in  1461,  but 
tbat  by  the  same  statute  his  right  to  for- 
fistues  within  the  palatinate  was  expressly 
«6^ted  in  his  favour.  Within  a  short 
Miod,  however,he  had  incurred  the  king's 
-^Vasnrp  for  some  olfonce  which  is  not 
neoided.    Bas  temponfitiea  were  seised 


BOaANQUET 


105 


into  the  king's  hands  on  December  28, 1462, 
and  were  not  restored  to  him  till  April  17, 
1464,  when  he  had  so  far  reinstated  nimself 
in  the  royal  favour  that  all  grants  to  him 
were  excepted  from  the  act  of  resumption 
Mssed  in  Uie  parliament  of  that  year.  (BoL 
BarL  v.  810.)  From  this  time  till  the 
second  imprisonment  and  death  of  Henry 
VL,  in  May  1471,  he  seems  to  have  been 
convinced  of  the  inutility  of  farther  resist- 
ance, as  in  the  following  July  he  united  in 
the  oath  by  which  Edward,  Prince  of  Wales, 
was  accepted  as  heir  to  the  crown,  and  he 
took  Ids  pla(»  sa  a  trier  of  petitions  in  the 
next  parliament    (IbuL  vL  8,  284^ 

He  was  so  confirmed  in  lung  Edward's 
confidence  as  to  be  selected  for  his  chan- 
cellor on  July  27, 1478,  and  retained  the 
office  till  Februazy  1475.  We  may  pre- 
sume that  hiB  removal  from  it  was  occa- 
sioned by  no  dislike  of  the  king,  inasmuch 
as  within  ten  days  of  the  death  of  Arch- 
bishoD  Neville,  in  Jmie  1476,  the  tem^Norali- 
ties  01  the  see  of  York  were  placed  in  his 
custody,  and  he  was  translated  to  that  nro- 
vince  on  the  1st  of  the  following  September. 
He  presided  as  primate  less  thim  four  years, 
dyin^  at  Southwell  on  May  10, 1480.  His 
remams  were  deposited  in  the  collegiate 
church  by  the  side  of  his  brother,  Arch- 
bishop William  Booth,  who  had  been  in- 
terred there  sixteen  years  before.  {Oodwm, 
607,  752;  Anffl.  Sac,  i.  777 ;  Surtee's  Dur- 
ham, i.  lix.) 

BOEEHAX^  Harvet  de,  was  of  a  family 
which  took  its  name  from  the  village  so 
called  in  Essex.  He  was  an  officer  oi  the 
Exchequer,  and  ako  belonged  to  the  eccle- 
siastical profession,  being^a  canon  of  St. 
Paul's.  In  40  Henry  HL,  1204,  fines 
were  levied  before  him  from  November 
till  the  following  Easter.  Dugdale  {Orig. 
21,  42)  accordingly  introduces  nim  at  that 
time  among  the  justices  of  the  Common 
Fleas,  but  he  does  not  appear  to  have  acted 
afterwards  in  that  character.  He  is,  how- 
ever, recorded  as  a  baron  of  the  Excheouer 
in  1  Edward  I.,  and  probably  continued  so 
till  his  death  in  the  fifth  year  of  that  reign. 
(Madox,  ii.  28,820 ;  CaL  Inqme.  p.  m.  L  62.) 

BOBAHQITBT,  JoHK  Bebvabd.  The 
family  of  Bo8anq[net  left  France  on  the  re- 
vocation of  Uie  Edict  of  Nantes  in  1685, 
and  settled  in  England,  where  several  of 
its  members  flourished  amonff  the  most 
eminent  merchants  of  London.  The  iudge*s 
grandfather,  Samuel  Bosanq^uet,  became 
lord  of  the  manor  of  Low  Hall  m  the  county 
of  Essex,  and  resided  in  Forest  House,  in 
Waltham  Forest ;  and  his  father,  also 
Samuel,  who  added  to  the  properly  the 
estate  of  IHngestow  Court  in  Monmouth- 
shire, was  sheriff  of  the  former  county  in 
1770,  and  governor  of  the  Bank  of  England 
in  1702.  The  judge  was  the  youngest  of 
three  sons,  the  issue  of  his  marriage  vrith 


106 


BOSANQUET 


BOTELEB 


Eleanor^  daughter  of  Henry  Lannoy  Hunter, 
Esq.,  of  Beechill  in  the  county  of  Berks. 
He  WRB  bom  at  Forest  House  on  Mar  2, 
1773 ;  and,  after  passine  some  years  at  £ton 
College,  he  completed  his  education  at 
Ghristchurch,  ChdCord.  Being  called  to  the 
bar  at  Lincoln's  Inn  in  1800,  he  joined  the 
Home  Circuit,  and  attended  the  Essex  ses- 
sions^ of  which  his  father  was  the  chairman ; 
but  three  jrears  before  his  call  he  had  com- 
menced his  legal  career  as  a  reporter  of 
decisions  in  the  Common  Pleas,  Exchequer 
Chamber,  and  House  of  Lords,  in  conjunc- 
tion with  Mr.  (afterwards  Sir  Christopher) 
Puller.  Of  these  reports  there  were  two 
series,  one  from  1797  to  1804,  and  the  other 
from  1804  to  1807.  After  a  steady  progress 
for  seven  years  more,  he  was  select^  as 
counsel  both  for  the  East  India  Company 
and  the  Bank  of  England. 

The  extensive  business  in  which  he  was 
thus  engaged  compelled  him  to  auit  the 
circuit ;  and  taking  the  coif  in  Micnaelmas 
Term  1814,  he  became  firom  that  time  well 
known  to  the  public  in  the  numerous  bank 
prosecutions  which  the  then  fr^uent  for- 
geries of  one-pound  notes  rendered  necessary, 
and  which  he  conducted  with  great  discre- 
tion and  effect  for  a  period  of  tmrteen  years. 
In  1824  he  was  offered  the  chief  justiceship 
of  Bengal,  but  declined  it ;  and  m  1827  he 
became  king's  Serjeant. 

He  was  appointed  a  judge  of  the  Court 
of  Common  Pleas  on  February  1, 1830,  and 
was  thereupon  knighted.  The  ability  and 
impartiality  with  which  he  exercised  his 
important  functions  may  be  estimated  by 
his  being  chosen  one  of  the  lords  commis- 
sioners of  the  Great  Seal,  in  conjunction 
with  Sir  C.  C.  Pepys  and  Sir  Lancelot  Shad- 
well,  which  they  held  from  April  23, 1835, 
to  January  16, 1836,  after  which  date  Sir 
John  sat  in  the  Common  Pleas  for  six  years 
more,  when  the  failure  of  his  health  com- 
pelled him  to  resign  in  Hilary  Term  1842. 

His  appointment  as  head  of  the  Com- 
mission for  the  Improvement  of  the  Prac- 
tice and  Proceedings  of  the  Common  Law 
Courts,  and  his  selection  as  arbitrator  be- 
tween the  Crown  and  the  Duke  of  Athol, 
to  fix  the  amoimt  of  the  imsettled  claims 
of  the  latter  after  he  had  resigned  the 
sovereignlr  of  the  Isle  of  Man,  are  a  suffi- 
cient proof  of  the  high  estimation  in  which 
he  stood. 

In  other  respects  his  reputation  was 
equally  established.  He  published  without 
his  name  a  *  Letter  of  a  Layman '  on  the 
connection  of  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  and 
the  Apocalypse,  embodying  in  a  small 
compass  a  great  amount  of  research.  He 
was  a  veiy  considerable  linguist,  of  accn- 
zate  and  variom  learning,  aiul  paitieularly 
food  of  scientific  enqnines.  In  these  pnr- 
suits  he  occnpied  the  six  yean  which  he 
lifvd  «ffc»  bu  xetiremitoit     Ha  died  ob 


September  25,  1847,  and  waa  buried  at 
LlantiUio-Crossenny,  Monmonthshize,  ia 
the  vault  of  the  fiunilv  of  his  wife,  Mary 
Anne,  daughter  of  Richard  Lewis,  Esq.,  of 
that  place.  A  monument  to  his  memoiT 
is  erected  in  the  church  of  his  own  parisk 
of  Dingestow. 

B08GEHALL,  WiLLiAic  DE.  KDngdak 
had  not  inserted  his  name  among  the 
justices  itinerant,  it  would  not  have  been 
mtroduced  here ;  because  he  never  appears 
to  have  acted  in  that  capacity,  except  for 
pleas  of  the  forest  in  the  northern  countiea 
m  54  Henry  HI.,  1270 ;  the  more  espcMcially 
as  nothing  nas  been  ascertained  relative  to 
him. 

BOBCO,  JoHir  DE,  was  an  advocate  who 
was  employed  in  18  Edward  I.  to  plead  on 
the  part  of  the  king.  (Abb,Bac.2M.)  On 
the  apj^intment  of  the  eight  justices  of 
assize  m  21  Edward  L,  1293,  he  was 
selected  as  one  of  them.  In  the  same  year 
he  claimed,  with  his  brothers-in-law,  the 
manors  of  Toleshunt,  Tregoz,  and  Bluntes- 
hale  in  Essex,  as  son  of  Lu^,  one  of  the 
four  sisters  of  Nicholas  de  Tregoz.  (i2oi. 
Pari,  i.  92.)  He  was  summoned  amonr 
the  judges  to  parliament  in  the  23rd  and 
25th  years  of  that  reign ;  but  his  career 
seems  to  have  terminated  dismcefuUy,  as 
he  was  convicted  in  6  Edwaitl  II.  of  abs- 
tracting a  king's  writ,  and  substituting  a 
false  one  in  its  place.  (Pari,  WriU,  i.  39, 
52  ;  Abb,  Piac,  316.) 

BOTELEB,  Alexander  le,  or.PlHCEHVA. 
The  history  of  the  peerage  shows  several 
baronies  which  were  held  by  individuals 
who  were  called  bv  this  name,  from  the 
office  they  filled  in  the  families  of  royal  and 
noble  persons.  The  butler  of  the  great  Earl 
of  Leicester,  in  the  first  Henry's  reign,  was 
the  founder  of  the  now  extinct  baronies  of 
Oversley  and  Wemme,  and  the  ancestor  of 
the  baron  of  Sudley ;  and  from  the  butler 
of  the  Earl  of  Cnester  in  the  reign  of 
Henry  n.  the  barony  of  Warrington  waa 
derived.  In  the  present  Duke  of  Norfolk 
the  blood  of  William  de  Albini,  the  pincenifr 
or  butler  of  King  Henry  L,  contmues  to 
flow;  and  five  titles  in  the  Engliwh  and 
Irish  peerage,  commencing  with  the  Marquis 
of  Ormond,  owe  their  origin  to  Theobald  le 
Boteler,  the  chief  butler  of  Ireland  under 
Henry  II. 

In  what  family  Alexander  le  Boteler 
held  that  office  does  not  appear,  nor  does 
Madox  give  anv  further  information  con- 
cerning him  than  that  he,  vdth  Ralph 
Fitz-Stephen  the  sheriff,  and  Philip  FSte- 
Emise,  were  the  justices  errant  to  mak» 
the  assize  of  the  kmg's  demesnes  in  Glou- 
cestershire in  20  Henrv  H.,  1174,  to  wliidi  it 
appears  by  the  record  they  were  appomted ' 
by  a  writ  of  Bichard  de  Luciy'tne  ehUf 
juiticiaiy.    (Madan,  L  128.) 

BOTEUB,  NiOHOLAB  LB;  OT 


BOTELER 

leU  land  in  Filbj  in  Noifolky  and  daimed 
the  riglit^  of  pfeeentation  to  the  ehiixch 
ttoe^  which  was  decided  against  him  in 
9  John.  (AU.  lUe.  SL)  In  17  John  he 
Mated  lua  poasenons  for  his  adhoence 
to  tile  bannu^  Imt  they  were  restored  to 
Idm  on  the  acceasion  of  Hemy  IIL  In  the 
■inth  year  of  that  reign  he  was  added  to 
the  list  of  jnatioea  itinerant  for  the  coontiea 
ofXoilblkandSnfiblk.  (.fio«.  Cibicf.  L  884. 
n.77.) 

WUUiEB,  JoHK.  This  jndge  may  he 
pnsomed  to  derive  his  name  from  the  office 
nhich  he  originally  filled  in  Lincoln's  Lm. 
In  the  Black  Book  of  that  society  he  is 
deKiibed  as  heing  admitted  a  member  of  it 
in  8  Edward  IV.,  1468,  because  <hene  et 
fide&ter  se  geasit  in  officio  pincerntt' — a 
nctice  of  which  another  instance  will  be 
Ibimd  in  the  life  of  Jndge  More.  He 
became  reader  in  antomn  lw2y  and  read  a 
mood  time  in  Loit  1488. 

In  9  Henry  YH.,  1404^  he  was  called  to 
the  deme  of  the  coif  with  Humphrey 
Comngsby  and  several  others,  who  held 
tiidr  feast  at  Ely  Honse  on  November  16, 
1484^  which  is  the  first  recorded  instance 
of  this  Bolemnitr  being  honoured  with  the 
presence  of  the  jring  and  queen. 

His  elevation  to  the  bench  of  the  Common 
Fleas  took  place  on  April  26, 1508,  just  a 
jear  before  the  king^s  death ;  and  receiving 
a  new  jpatent  from  Henry  YIIL,  he  con- 
tinued m  the  exercise  of  his  judicial  duties 
for  the  next  nine  years. 

BOTETOUBT,  John  de,  was  appointed 
006  of  the  justices  of  trailbaston  in  33 
Edward  L,  llBOS,  and  in  the  same  year  re- 
eared  his  first  summons  to  parliament,  and 
wu  sent  to  treat  with  tiie  Scots  on  the 
tfEurs  of  that  kingdom.  Dugdale  states 
BoUung  of  his  origin,  but  mentions  his 
npointment  as  governor  of  St.  BriaveFs 
Csitle  in  Gloucestershire,  and  as  warden 
of  the  Forest  of  Dene  in  19  Edwaid  L 
Two  yean  afterwards  he  was  a  justice  of 
gaol  delivery  in  the  counties  of  Warwick 
nd  Leicester ;  and  in  22  Edward  I.,  being 
then  sdndral  of  the  king's  fleet,  he  was 
mnmoned  to  serve  in  Gascony,  and  was  in 
^  expedition  there  in  the  twenty-fourth 
jmtj  during  which  period  various  sums  of 
fluney  were  paid  to  him  on  the  kin^s 
wwrnt  (JRoi.  Pari.  05-478,  ii.  432 ;  N, 
Men,  L  970.)  In  the  following  years  he 
aeeonpenied  the  king  in  his  ScoUish  wars, 
Old  was  present  in  June  1300  at  the  siege 
of  Cariaverock,  the  metrical  chronicler  of 
vidch  describes  him  as  'light  of  heart  and 
doing  TOod  to  alL'  {NicoMs  Siege,  32, 
202.)  He  was  iM^utv  to  the  barons'  letter 
tofte  pcmtiff  in  29  Edvrard  L,  in  which  he 
ii  Hyled  'lord  of  Mendlesham '  in  Suffolk. 
ISro  yean  afterwards  he  was  nominated  the 
Hon  Ueotenant  in  Gnmberiand,  Westmore- 
mi,  kc^  mod  in  S8  Edward  L  he  was  as- 


BOUKOHIER 


107 


si^ed  with  two  others  to  hear  and  deter- 
mme  certain  transgressions  conuuitted  at 
Bristol  {ParL  Write,  I  368:  Eot.  Pari. 
L  168.^ 

Under  Edward  H.  he  was  equally  dis- 
tinguished, being  appointed  one  of  the  pee» 
to  regulate  the  roval  household  and  after- 
wards to  treat  witn  the  Earl  of  Lancas^r. 
He  was  again  admiral  of  Uie  king's  fleet 
and  governor  of  the  castles  of  St  &iavel 
and  Pramlingham ;  he  also  served  asain 
against  the  Scota^  h«sidea  bein^  engaged  in 
several  conmdssions  of  a  dvil  character. 
He  died  in  18  Edwaid  IL  {Cal.  Ifyms.  p. 
m.  i.  319),  leaving,  by  his  wife  Matilda 
(tiie  daughter  of  Beatrice  de  Beauchamp, 
widow  of  William  de  Beauchamp),  several 
children.  The  barony,  after  many  abey- 
ances, is  now  held  by  the  Duke  of  Beau-> 
fort 

BOITBOV,  WiLLiAX  DB,  of  a  Northamp- 
tonshire family,  was  appointed  second 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  February  4, 
1327,  a  few  davs  after  the  commencement 
of  the  reign  of  Edward  lU. ;  but,  as  there 
is  no  subsequent  entry  whatever  concern- 
ing him,  he  probably  died  within  a  few 
months,  Robert  de  Nottingham  succeeding' 
him  as  second  baron  on  October  15  foUow- 
ing.    (PaH.  Write,  ii.  p.  ii.  627.) 

BOITECHISB,  or  BOITSSEB,  John  de, 
whose  name  underwent  several  variations, 
but  at  last  settled  down  to  Bourchier,  is 
first  mentioned  as  one  of  the  attorneys  of 
the  Earl  of  Oxford,  to  appear  in  his  place 
at  the  parliament  held  in  May,  34  Edward 
I.,  1300.  [Pari.  WriU,  i.  im.)  He  was 
one  of  the  justices  of  assize  in  tne  coimties 
of  Kent,  Surrey,  and  Sussex  in  8  Edward 
II.  (Itot.  Pari.  i.  449),  and  was  named  in 
several  other  judicial  commissions  from 
that  time  till  May  31, 1321,  in  the  four- 
teenth year,  when  he  was  constituted  a 
judge  of  the  Common  Pleas.  In  this  court 
he  continued  to  act  for  the  remainder  of 
that  reign ;  but  some  short  delay  seems  to 
have  taken  place  in  his  re-apiK)intment  on 
the  accession  of  Edward  lU.,  ms  patent  not 
being  dated  till  March  24, 1327,  two  months 
afterwards,  while  those  to  his  brethren 
were  immediately  granted. 

He  was  the  son  of  Robert  de  Bousser 
and  Enmia,  his  wife ;  and  by  his  own  mar- 
riage with  Helen,  the  daughter  and  heiress 
of  Walter  de  Colchester,  became  possessed 
of  Stansted  in  Halsted,  and  other  manors 
in  Essex.  The  last  fine  levied  before  him 
was  dated  on  the  morrow  of  the  Ascension, 
3  Edward  in.,  1329.  Dving  soon  after,  he 
left  two  sons,  Robert  and  John,  the  former 
of  whom  is  the  under-mentioned  chanceUor. 

He  was  the  head  of  a  curious  conmussion 
in  19  Edward  IL.  to  hear  and  determine  a; 
charge  made  by  the  Bishop  and  Dean  and 
Chapter  of  London  against  certain  persona 
for  taking  and  carrying  away  a  great  fish,; 


108 


BOUBCHIEB 


^uifdidtur  cete,'  found  on  thdr  manor  of 
W  dton,  the  prosecutors  alleging  that  King 
Henry  III.  hnd,  by  his  charter,  granted 
them  '  totum  crassum  piscem '  which  should 
1be  taken  on  their  land, '  except  the  tongue, 
which  the  said  king  retained  to  himself.' 
(N.  Fcedera,  ii.  619.) 

BOITECHISB,  or  BOITSSSB,  Robert  de, 
Ihe  eldest  son  of  the  aboye-mentioned  John 
de  Bousser,  began  his  career  in  17  Edward  YL 
as  a  man-at-arms,  and  was  returned  in  that 
character  by  the  sheriff  of  Essex,  as  sum- 
moned to  attend  by  general  proclamation 
{Pari  Writs,  ii.  p.  i.  652);  and  in  2  Ed- 
ward ILL,  before  ids  father's  death,  he  was 
one  of  the  knights  returned  to  parliament 
for  that  county,  and  received  ror  his  at- 
tendance at  the  rate  of  four  shilling  a  day. 
iBot.  Pari  ii.  441.) 

In  July  1334,  6  Edward  III.,  he  was 
appointed  chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench 
in  Ireland,  (iv.  Fcedera,  ii  800.)  Whe- 
ther he  accepted  the  place,  or  how  long  he 
^mained  in  it,  does  not  appear ;  but  at  the 
commencement  of  Edward's  claim  to  the 
crown  of  France  he  was  engaged,  in  1337, 
in  the  battle  of  Gadsant,  where  Guy,  the 
l)rother  of  the  Earl  of  Flanders,  was  taken 
prisoner;  and  we  next  meet  with  him 
attending  at  the  Parliament  held  in  Lent 
1340.     {Rot,  Pari  ii.  113.) 

When  the  king  hurriemy  returned  from 
Toumay,  at  the  end  of  November  in  that 
year,  and  dismissed  Robert  de  Stratford, 
the  chancellor,  he  resolved  to  appoint  a  lay 
chancellor ;  and  accordingly  selected  Robert 
-de  Bourchier,  who  was  sworn  in  on  Decem- 
ber 14, 1340,  with  a  grant  of  600/.  a  year 
1)eyona  the  accustomed  fees.  (  Col,  Hot,  Pat, 
138.)  That  this  appointment  was  very  dis- 
tasteful to  all  parties  is  evident  from  the 
petitions  in  the  next  parliament,  praving 
that,  in  consequence  of  the  evils  arising  urom 
))ad  counseUors,  the  king  should  in  future 
make  the  chancellor,  cnief  justices,  and 
other  officers  in  full  parliament,  and  that 
they  should  there  be  openly  sworn  to  ob- 
•serve  the  laws.  To  this  the  kin^  gave 
what  appeared  to  be  a  consent,  and  his  an- 
-flwer  was  confirmed  as  a  statute.  {Hot,  Pat, 
ii.  128,  131.)  Immediately  ^ter  the  par- 
liament had  closed  its  sittmgs  he  revoked 
the  enactment  as  improperly  forced  upon 
iiim;  but  he  soon  found  it  expedient  to 
part  veith  his  military  chancellor,  who  gave 
up  the  Seal  on  Octooer  29,  1341,  and  was 
succeeded  by  Sir  Robert  Paming.  {Hot, 
CloM.  16  Edw.  m.) 

From  this  time  Bourchier  joined  the 
ldng*s  army,  with  so  large  an  array  that  his 
allowance  amounted  to  401/.  10«.  He  dis- 
tinguished himself  at  the  battle  of  Gressi, 
and  was  engaged  as  one  of  the  ambassadors 
to  treat  for  the  subsequent  peace.  He  was 
aummoned  to  parliament  as  a  peer  from  16 
JawardllL 


BOUBCHIEB 

Falling  a  sacrifice  to  the  plague  that 
raged  in  1349,  he  was  buried  in  Halsted 
Churchy  where  his  monument^^atill  zemaina. 

By  his  wife,  Margaret,  daughter  and  heir 
of  Sir  Thomas  de  Preyers,  he  had  thne 
sons — Robert,  John,  and  William.  Two  of 
the  grandsons  of  William  are  the  next  men- 
tioned as  entrusted  with  the  Great  Seal,  in 
the  reigns  of  Henry  VI.  and  Edward  IV. 

BOUBCHIEB,  Thohas  (Abchbibhop  of 
Canterbury),  was  great-grandson  of  the 
last-mentioned  Sir  Robert,  through  hia 
younj^er  son  William,  whose  son,  alao  named 
Wilham,  was  created  Earl  of  Ewe.  in  Nor- 
mandy, by  Henry  V.,  and  married  Anne,  the 
dai^hter  of  Thomas  of  Woodstock,  Duke 
of  Gloucester,  sixth  son  of  Edward  IIL, 
and  widow  of  Edmund,  Earl  of  Staffnd. 
Their  eldest  son  Henry  was  created  Earl  of 
Essex  in  1461;  and  their  second  aon  was 
this  Thomas,  the  future  archbishop. 

Soon  after  his  father's  death  in  1420  he 
became  a  student  in  Nevill's  Iim,  at  Oxford ; 
in  which  university  he  afterwaitLs  Held  the 
office  of  chancellor  from  1434  to  1437. 
His  relationship  to  the  royal  family  had 
already  procured  him  the  valuable  deanery 
of  St  Martin's,  London,  to  which  he  wai 
admitted  in  1433 ;  and  in  November  of  the 
same  year  his  *  neghnesse  of  blood,'  as  well 
as  the  desire  of  the  Commons  in  parliament, 
is  urged  by  the  king  to  the  prior  and  con- 
vent of  Worcester  as  a  recommendation  for 
his  election  to  fill  the  vacancy  in  that  see. 
{Rot,  Pari  V.  436.)  The  pope,  however, 
appointed  Dr.  Thomas  Brouns ;  and  it  was 
eighteen  months  before  the  king  succeeded 
in  placing  Bourchier  there,  on  March  0, 
1435.  Even  at  that  time  his  profession 
was  obliged  to  be  delayed  for  a  month  on 
account*of  his  not  being  of  sufficient  age. 
In  the  same  year  the  monks  of  Ely,  no 
doubt  with  the  view  of  gratifying  the  king, 
chose  him  as  their  bishop,  on  the  death  of 
Philip  Morgan,  and  the  pope  confirmed  the 
election ;  but,  for  some  cause  the  king  re- 
fusing his  assent,  and  the  bishop  having 
the  fear  of  a  praemunire  before  his  eyes,  a 
new  election  became  necessary,  which  feU 
on  Lewis  of  Luxembur^h.  On  the  death 
of  that  prelate,  however,  m  1443,  Bourchier 
was  re-elected  without  royal  or  papal  reeia- 
tance,  and  was  translated  to  Ely  on  De- 
cember 20.  The  monkish  historian  of  that 
diocese  states  that  during  his  ten  yeara'  rule 
he  never  performed  mass  in  the  cnurch  but 
once,  on  the  day  of  his  installation;  and 
that  he  heavUv  oppressed  the  prior  and 
other  of  the  brothers  by  fines,  and  the 
tenants  by  imprisonment.  {Anal  Sac.  L 
671.} 

Eight  days  after  the  death  of  Archbishop 
Kempe,  on  March  22,  1454,  the  coimdl,  at 
the  request  of  the  Commons,  '  for  his  grete 
merits^  virtues,  and  grete  blood  that  he  is 
of,'  jomed  in  recommending  Bishop  Bow- 


BOUBCHIEB 

ehisr  to  the  pope  MsncoMSor  to  the  primacy. 
(BU.PlarLT.4S0,)  This  is  the  second  time 
thit  the  Commons  are  stated  to  have  in- 
terfered in  his  fayonr,  whidi,  if  honestlpr 
reeoidedy  eridenoes  the  popularity  of  his 
ehancteTy  and  tends  to  throw  some  discredit 
on  the  representation  of  the  monk  of  Ely. 
He  was  elected  on  April  22,  1454;  and 
having  thus  attained  the  highest  ecclesias- 
tical dignity  in  the  kingdom,  he  was  within 
ayear  entroated  also  with  the  highestsecular 
anj^oyment.  On  the  kind's  recovery  from 
his  ilmeas,  the  Earl  of  Sahshunr,  whom  the 
Duke  of  York  had  apnointed  chancellor, 
was  remored,  and  Arcnbishop  Bourchier 
was  pat  in  poeaession  of  the  Great  Seal  on 
Mardi  7, 1455.  {Bot.  daus.  88  Hen.  VL) 
He  retained  it  not  <mite  eighteen  months, 
during  which  the  JLancastrians  and  the 
Yorkiats  were  alternately  in  power.  He 
had  not  enjoyed  his  appointment  by  the 
*  former  mncn  above  two  months  before  the 
first  battle  of  St  AlbanS|  on  May  22,  gave 
the  Yorkists  again  the  ascendency.  Btill 
the  chasoellor  was  not  removed,  but  opened 
the  parliament  that  met  in  July.  Even 
when  their  power  was  more  firmly  esta- 
blished by  a  renewal  of  the  kind's  illness, 
and  the  reappointment  of  the  Duke  of  York 
as  protector  in  November  following,  the 
armbiahop  still  continued  in  his  place. 
And  again  when  the  king,  resuming  his 
anthori^r,  dismissed  the  protector  on  Fe- 
bmaij  idf  1456,  the  chancellor  was  found 
to  be  as  ready  to  act  on  that  side  as  he  had 
been  on  the  other.  (Roe.  FlarL  y.  278,  285, 
d21.)  It  is  not  therefore  to  be  wondered 
at  that  Queen  Mamret  should  be  dis- 
satisfied with  so  lukewarm  a  friend,  and 
shoold  seek  a  more  steady  adherent  to  her 
hosband^a  cause.  This  will  accoimt  for 
the  removal,  otherwise  unexplained,  of  the 
arehbiahop,  and  the  appointment  of  Bishop 
Waynflete  as  chancellor  on  October  11  in 
that  year. 

A  temperament  so  easy  could  not  be  ex- 
pected to  make  much  resistance  to  the 
deposition  of  his  royal  patron.  Accordingly 
we  find  him  at  once  reconciling  himself  to 
the  ruling  power,  and  crowning  Edward  IV. 
oo  June  29, 1461,  and  four  years  after- 
wards entertaining  the  km^  and  his  new 
eoeen,  Elizabeth  Woodville,  for  several 
iajB  at  Canterbury,  on  their  visit  there  to 
pi^  their  devotions  at  Becket's  shrine.  By 
that  time  he  had  received  the  last  honour 
he  obtained  in  the  Church,  having  been 
created  cardinal-presbytor  by  the  title  of 
St.  Cyriacus  in  Thermis  on  September  18, 
1464.  He  was  not,  however,  invested  with 
the  red  hat  till  Maj  31, 1472;  and  he  is 
fiirt  called  cardinal  m  the  Rolls  of  Parlia- 
Bient  (vL  3)  of  November  in  that  year.  In 
1475  he  was  one  of  the  ari)itrator8  between 
Edward  and  the  French  king.  (Rymer. 
jdL  15-19.) 


BOUBOHIEK 


10» 


On  the  death  of  Edward  IV.  he  was  in- 
duced by  Richard,  Duke  of  Gloucester,  to 
urge  the  queen  to  give  up  her  younger  son 
into  the  protector^  care,  the  elder  being 
already  in  his  charge;  and  there  is  no 
reason  to  doubt  that  the  archbishop's  en- 
deavours were  conscientiously  made,  without 
a  suspicion  of  the  tragic  fate  to  wmch  both 
were  doomed.  His  coronation  of  the  usurper 
Richard  IIL,  and  of  lus  successful  rival 
Henry  VU.,  offers  a  curious  exhibition  of 
the  &cility  with  which  in  those  perilous 
times  minds  could  accommodate  themselves 
to  political  changes;  but  it  savours  too 
much  of  heartlessness  and  careless  indifier- 
ence,  or  perhaps  too  much  of  consideration 
of  personal  safety,  not  to  create  a  degree  of 
disgust,  which,  however,  is  somewhat  tem- 
pered ny  the  recollection  that  the  arch- 
oishop  had  arrived  at  a  period  of  life  when 
feelings  are  not  acute,  and  the  desire  of 
peace  predominates.  He  did  not  survive- 
the  accession  of  Henry  VH.  above  six 
months,  his  death  occurring  on  March  30, 
1486,  at  the  manor  of  Enole,  near  Seven* 
oaks.  He  was  buried  in  the  choir  of  hi» 
cathedral. 

He  has  the  reputation  of  having  been  a 
learned  man,  and  was  certainly  a  most  cau- 
tious one,  guiding  himself  through  the  diffi-> 
culties  of  a  most  troublesome  penod  with  in- 
finite discretion.    To  judge  irom  a  letter  in 
the  'Fasten  Correspondence '  (L  94),  he  did! 
not  dislike  the  diversion  of  the  chase.    We 
there  find  him  going  '  to  hunt  and  sport  at 
Hunsdon.'    His  two  sees  of  Worcester  and 
Canterbury  benefited  largely  by  his  libe- 
rality, and  to  the  poor  he  was  a  kind  friend. 
But  his  memory  is  principally  respected  for 
having  been  an  active  instrument  in  intro- 
ducing the  art  of  printing  into  England.  It 
is  related  that,  having  heard  of  its  invention, 
he  induced  King  Henry  VI.,  towards  the 
close  of  his  reign,  to  send  an  officer  of  his 
wardrobe,  Robert  Tumour,  to  Haarlem, 
where    John   Guthenberg   had  set  up  a 
press,  he  himself  supplying  a  considerable 
part  of  the  expense.    Tumour  succeeded 
in  bringing  over  Frederic  Corsellis,  one  of 
the  compositors,  with  a  fount  of  types, 
which  the  archbishop  caused  to  be  tSKen 
to  Oxford,  where  the  first  press  was  ac- 
cordingly, through  his  means,  esteblished 
in,  or  soon  after,  the  year  1464.    (Oodxoin, 
129,  268,  466 ;  Angl  Sac.  i.  63, 637 ;  C:^^ 
mer's  Biog.  Diet.) 

BOVSCHISB,  Heitbt  (Earl  of  Essex), 
was  the  elder  brother  of  the  last-mentioned 
Thomas,  the  archbishop.  The  earl  held 
the  Great  Seal  after  the  retirement  of  the 
chancellor,  Bishop  Stillington,  from  June 
23  to  July  17,  1473,  acting  during  the 
whole  of  Triiiity  Term,  and  bills  in 
Chancery  being  addressed  to  him  by  the 
title  of  keeper  of  the  Great  Seal. 
The  father  of  the  earl  was  Williami 


110 


BOUBME 


Earl  of  Ewe,  in  Normandy,  son  of  Sir 
Ilobert  Bourchiei^fl  youngest  son,  William. 
He  married  Anne  of  Woodstock,  grand- 
^ughter  of  Edward  III.,  and  widow  of 
Edmund,  Earl  of  Stafford,  and  had  by  her 
several  sons,  one  of  whom  was  the  arch- 
bishop. 

On  his  father*s  death  in  1420  he  became 
Earl  of  Ewe,  being  then  about  twenty- 
one,  and  having  served  under  the  king  m 
Frtmce  for  three  years  previously.  He 
succeeded  to  the  liarony  of  Bourchier  in 
14dt>,and  for  his  distinguished  services  in 
the  French  wars  was  created  Viscount 
Bourchier  in  1446.  His  marriage  with 
Isabel,  daughter  of  Richard,  Duke  of  York, 
naturally  made  him  a  devoted  adherent  to 
that  party ;  and  after  their  success  at  the 
first  battle  of  St.  Albans,  in  May  1465,  he 
was  constituted  treasurer  of  England,  re- 
taining the  office  about  eighteen  months. 
When  his  nephew,  Edwari  IV.,  had  as- 
sumed the  throne,  he  was  reinstated  in  it 
for  one  year,  and  in  the  following  June 
was  advanced  to  the  earldom  of  Essex. 
He  held  the  treasurership  for  the  third 
time  from  1472  till  his  death,  and  in  1473 
he  was  temporarily  employed,  from  June 
23  to  July  17,  as  keeper  of  the  Great 
Seal  till  Edward  had  fixed  upon  r  his 
chancellor.  He  died  on  Anril  4,  1483, 
five  days  before  the  king,  and  was  buried 
in  the  abbey  of  Bylegh,  near  Maldon,  in 
Essex. 

He  had  many  children,  the  eldest  of 
whom,  William,  died  in  his  lifetime, 
leaving  a  son,  Henry,  who  succeeded  to  the 
earldom,  which  on  his  death  in  1539  be- 
came extinct.  The  barony,  however,  sur- 
vived, and  is  now  supposed  to  be  merged 
in  the  Marquisate  of  Townshend. 

BOirSHE,  or  BTTSKE,  WiLLiAK  DE,  was 
appointed  to  superintend  the  collection  of 
the  fifteenth  granted  in  29  Edward  I.  in 
the  county  of  Wilts.  In  the  new  commis- 
sion asfflgning  justices  of  the  Common  Pleas, 
issued  on  September  29,  1309,  3  Edward 
n.,  he  was  one  of  the  two  who  were  added 
to  that  bench.  He  seems  to  have  been 
frequently  engaged  in  assizes  in  the  coun- 
try, principftfly  in  the  western  counties. 
One  of  these  occasions,  in  10  Edward  U., 
was  for  the  trial  of  persons  accused  of  con- 
spiring to  bring  a  false  app|eal  of  robbery 
against  John  de  Treiaffu,  with  whom  it  is 
somewhat  curious  to  nnd  that  he  was  in 
the  same  year  united  in  a  commission  to 
enquire  into  the  transgressions  alleged 
agunst  the  taxors  in  Devonshire.  In  12 
Edward  H.  he  was  appointed  to  perambu- 
late the  forests  of  Devon,  and  was  com- 
manded to  cause  all  proceedings  before 
him.  as  a  Justice  of  assize  or  otherwise,  to 
be  Drought  into  the  Exchequer  to  be 
estreateC  and  in  ^^  Edward  IL,  when  a 
comxniflddii  into  QuexoBejf  Jenejy  &c.|  for 


BOWEB 

the  trial  of  certain  offences,  which  had  beei 
directed  to  him  and  another,  but  whidi  h§i 
been  superseded,  was,  on  the  petition  o 
the  inhaoitants,  renewed.  (Pan,  Wriii,  i 
110,  iL  p.  ii.  578;  -Bcrf.  JPtiA.  I  878;  A» 
^t.  Orig,  i.  239.) 

BOirSSXB.    See  BoucmxB. 

BOYILL,  WiLLiAV,  the  raesent  lord 
chief  justice  of  the  Common  Tleaa,  is  the 
second  son  of  B.  Bovil,  of  Dumsfoid  Lodge, 
Wimbledon.  He  was  bom  at  AllhaUows, 
Barking,  London,  on  May  26,  1816,  and 
was  called  to  the  bar  at  the  ibddle  Tem- 
ple on  January  15,  1841.  Joining  the 
Home  Circuit,  he  soon  acquired  an  ex- 
tensive practice  both  there  and  at  Wei^ 
minster.  On  attaining  a  silk  gown  in  1866 
he  was  elected  a  bencher  of  his  inn,  and 
ultimately  its  treasurer.  He  entered  pi^ 
liament  in  1857  as  representative  of  Guild- 
ford, for  which  he  continued  member  tiO 
his  elevation  to  the  bench.  He  invariab^ 
advocated  Conservative  principles,  and  wm 
selected  by  Lord  Derby  as  solidtor-gene- 
ral  on  July  6,  1866,  and  was  theienpoa 
knighted.  Within  five  months  after  xtai 
appointment  he  was  called  upon  to  xeogi 
it,  and  to  fill  his  present  high  office,  OB 
November  29,  as  ine  successor  of  Chkl 
Justice  Sir  William  Erie,  bein^  about  thi 
same  time  made  a  member  of  the  pri?} 
coundL 

By  his  wife  Maria,  the  daughter  of  J.  H 
Bolton,  Esq.,  of  Lee  Park,  Blackheath,  he 
has  several  children. 

BOVIHOTOH,  Walter  de,  is  mentioned 
as  a  justicier  before  whom  fines  were 
levied  in  8  John,  1206.  He  held  property 
in  Yorkshire,  and  was  one  of  two  '  inten- 
dentes  *  named  by  the  king  to  Robert  de 
Stuteville,  sheriff  of  that  coimty.  {Pnf, 
to  Fines  of  Rich,  I.  and  John;  ItoL  A 
Oblatis,  106, 107, 109.) 

BOWES,  Robert,  belonged  to  a  dis- 
tinguished family  seated  at  Streatlam 
Castle,  Durham,  for  more  than  two 
centuries.  He  wsa  the  second  son  of  Six 
Ralph  Bowes,  by  Margery,  daughter  ol 
Richard  Conyers,  of  South  Cowton,  bat 
eventually  succeeded  to  the  patenuJ 
estate. 

So  experienced  was  he  in  all  the  pecu- 
liarities of  border  warfare  that  when 
negotiations  were  pending  with  the  Scot^ 
in  December  1541,  his  presence  was 
required  by  the  council  in  London  as  one 
who  could  advise  them  on  the  sulgect 

fActs  Privy  Council^  vii.  285.)  In  the 
bllowing  year  he  led  a  body  of  SOOO 
cavalry  against  the  Scots,  by  whom,  unite 
the  Elarl  of  Huntley,  he  was  defeated  at 
Haddenri^  and,  as  some  say,  made  pxiaoner. 
{Lingardf  vl  333. )  The  war  was  termiiiatad 
by  uie  death  of  King  Jamet^  and  8ii 
Ilobert; became  warden  of  tlie  Eait  wtA 
Middle   Marches.     During  tiis  2B%ii  d 


BOTLAKD 

Edward  be  ecnnpiled  his  'Infonnatioiui' 
CD  the  elate  of  the  marches  and  their  laws 
and  costoms,  addressed  to  Henry,  Marquess 
of  Doxeety  the  warden-general,  and  fiul  of 
curioTia  and  interesting  details.  In  June 
lool  he  was  one  of  the  commissioners  to 
condnde  the  convention  with  Maiy,  Queen 
of  Scots  {Hymer,  zy.  265,  272),  and  in  the 
following  Septemher  was  sworn  a  memher 
of  the  pnTj  counciL 

The  intelligence  he  had  exhihited  as  a 
diplomatist  and  as  an  author  probahlj 
pomted  him  out  as  the  successor  of  John 
BeaomoDt  in  the  office  of  master  of  the 
KoUa,  for  which  he  received  his  patent  on 
June  18, 1552.  In  that  character  he  was 
one  of  the  witnesses  to  King  Edward's  will, 
fixing  the  succession  of  the  crown  on  Ladv 
Jane  Grey,  and  he  acted  on  her  council 
during  the  short  continuance  of  her  nominal 
reign.  On  Jolv  19,  1553,  he  signed  the 
letter  to  Lord  Kich  on  her  behaUT,  but  on 
the  next  day  he  fdgned  another  to  the  Buke 
of  Northamberland,  commanding  him  to 
disarsi.  (  Queeru  Jane  and  Mary,  100, 109.) 
This  probably  saved  him  from  the  punish- 
meat  with  which  several  of  Lady  Jane's 
partisans  were  visited,  and  founded  a  claim 
on  Queen  MaiVs  favour.  He  was  evidently 
continued  in  his  office  for  two  months  of 
the  new  reign ;  and  even  then  he  seems  to 
have  retired  voluntarily,  the  entry  being 
that  his  patent  was  cancelled  '  pure,  sponte, 
et  abeolute/  on  September  6.  Besuming 
thai  his  duties  on  the  border,  he  was  sent 
by  the  council  to  Berwick  in  the  ensuing 
April,  to  assist  Lord  Conyers  in  taMng  the 
mostersyvnth  a  warrant  for  100^  as  a  reward 
from  the  queen. 

By  hia  wife  Alice,  the  daughter  of  John 
Metcalfe,  of  Nappa,  he  had  Kiur  sons ;  but 
these  aU  dying  m  infancy,  his  property  de- 
ToWed  on  his  younger  brother  Kicnfl^,  the 
father  of  Sir  George  Bowes,  the  knight- 
marahaL 

BOTLAVD,  BiCHASD  DE,  probably  the 
eon  of  Roger  de  Boyland  and  Alice  his  wife, 
purchased  in  1268  part  of  the  manor  of 
niisingham  in  Norfolk,  which  was  after- 
wards called  by  his  name.  In  part  payment 
he  gave  eigh^  acres  which  ne  had  pre- 
Tio^y  held  in  Pulham  in  Uie  same  county. 
He  was  then  a  successful  lawyer,  and  in  7 
Edward  I.^  1279,  was  appointed  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  into  Dorsetshire,  Somer- 
setshire, and  Wiltshire,  an  office  which  he 
contiAaed  to  execute  in  various  other 
eoontiefl,  unti],  for  his  corruption  in  the  ad- 
inisiatration  of  justice,  he  was  disgraced  in 
1280,  and  was  fined  4000  marks  for  his  ex- 
tortiana. 

After  his  discharge  he  retired  to  his 
mantoft  d  Boylands,  and  built  a  noble 
^•*fK*ft  there,  famous  for  the  moat  that 
sunomided  ity  and  for  the  magnificent  con- 
duit which  he  constmcted.    He  lived  for 


BRABAZON 


111 


isix  yean  afterwards^  dying  in  24£dwardL 
(Cc2.  Inguis,  p.  m.  i.  l29.) 

The  name  of  his  first  wife  was  Matilda, 
and  his  second  was  Ellen,  the  daughter  of 
Philip  de  Colvile.  The  extent  of  his  pos- 
sessions, comprehendii^  many  manors  and 
lands  in  Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  over  part  of 
which  he  had  a  grant  of  free  wanen  in 
1285,  may  show  either  his  success  as  a 
lawyer  or  his  corruption  as  a  judge :  but  it 
would  be  imjust  to  attribute  his  nches  to 
the  latter,  considering  that  King  Edward 
was  not  likely  to  be  lenient,  or  to  discourage 
complaints  against  him.  (BhrnefiMt  Nor^ 
foUc,  i.  38.) 

BEABAZOH,  Kooer  le.  Jaques  le  Bra- 
bazon,  the  first  of  this  fiEmiily  who  was 
established  in  England,  was  so  called  firom 
the  castle  of  Brabazon  in  Normandy.  He 
came  over  with  the  Conqueror,  and  his 
name  is  inserted  on  the  RoU  of  Battle 
Abbey.  His  great-grandson  Thomss  became 
possessed  oi  Moseley  in  Leicestershire,  by 
nis  marriage  with  Amida,  the  heiress  of 
John  de  Moseley.  Their  son.  Sir  Boger 
also  described  of  Esstwell  in  the  same 
county,  married  Beatrix,  eldest  of  the  three 
sisters  and  co-heirs  of  Mansel  de  Bisset, 
and  bv  her  had  two  sons,  the  elder  of  whom 
was  Koger  le  Brabazon,  the  judge. 

He  is  first  mentioned  in  that  character  in 
15  Edward  L,  1287,  when  he  acted  as  a 
justice  itinerant  for  pleas  of  the  forest  in 
Lancashire ;  and  two  vears  afterwards,  on 
the  removal  of  the  judges  <»nvicted  of  ex- 
tortion and  other  corrupt  practices,  he  was 
constituted  a  justice  or  the  Eji^s  Bench 
in  the  place  of  one  of  them.  That  he  held 
a  high  rank  in  the  estimation  of  the  king 
appears  from  his  being  employed  to  attend 
the  meeting  of  the  Scottish  nobility  and 
clergy  at  Norham  on  May  10, 1291,  when 
Edward  L  took  upon  himself  the  arbitration 
between  the  competitors  for  their  crown. 
There,  in  a  studiea  address  in  the  fVench 
language,  he  re<}uired  from  the  assembly  an 
absolute  recognition  of  King  Edward's  title 
as  Lord  Paramount  of  the  kingdom  of 
Scotland,  which  they  were  not  in  a  condi- 
tion to  refuse.  The  prominent  part  taken 
by  him  in  this  transaction  has  led  writers 
to  speak  of  him  as  if  he  were  then  the  chief 
justiciary.  That  office,  however,  no  longer 
existed,  and  it  was  not  till  four  years  after- 
wards that  he  became  chief  justice  of  the 
King's  Bench,  to  which  he  was  advanced 
about  24  Edward  L,  1295.  He  presided  in 
the  court  till  the  end  of  the  reign,  when  he 
was  immediately  re-appointed  Dy  the  new 
king,  and  continued  to  perform  the  func- 
tions of  this  honourable  post  till  February 
23,  1316,  9  Edward  U.,  when,  pressed  by 
age  and  infirmities,  he  applied  for  and  ob- 
tained his  discharge.  The  patent  of  that 
date  is  expressed  in  the  most  eulogistic 
terms,  and  records  the  king's  commands  that 


112 


BRABOEF 


be  should  be  retained  '  de  secreto  eoiuilio  * 
dining  bis  life,  and  should  be  admitted  to 
all  the  kine's  oourtSi  coondls,  and  parlia- 
ments as  often  as  he  might  choose  to  be 
present.  He  died  in  the  following^  year. 
Leaving  no  issne  by  his  wife,  Beatxiz,  the 
daughter  of  Sir  Jolm  de  Sproxton,  his  pro- 
perty devolved  on  his  brother  MattheWi 
whose  descendant  was  created  Lord  Bra- 
baxon  of  Ardee  in  Ireland  in  1616,  to  which, 
in  1627,  was  added  the  earldom  of  Meath, 
a  title  which  is  still  borne  by  his  lineal 
representative,  whose  father  received  an 
English  peerage  in  1831  with  the  title  of 
Baron  Chaworth.  (Thorot<m'sNoUB,l2Q4; 
Abb.  Rot,  Orig.  i.  238 ;  Hid.  of  the  Fannly 
ofBrabason,  1825.) 

BBABOSf ,  William  de,  whose  ancestor 
came  into  England  with  the  Conqueror, 
and  held  lands  in  Surrey,  JiMnpshire,  ana 
several  other  counties,  acted  as  assessor 
for  Hampshire  for  the  fifteenth  granted  in 
3  Edward  I.,  and  in  the  sixth  year  that 
county  was  committed  to  his  charge  as 
sherifr.  He  held  the  office  for  the  next  two 
years,  in  the  latter  of  which  he  was  the  last 
named  of  the  four  justices  itinerant  in 
Hampshire,  Devonshire,  Cornwall,  and 
Wiltshire;  a  duty  which  he  again  per- 
formed in  Coniwan  in  10  Edward  I.  Two 
years  afterwards  he  died.  (Manmng  and 
Bray's  Surrey,  I  86 ;  Abb.  Piacit.  48,  78, 
164.) 

BRAOKLET,  Lord.    See  T.  Eoebtok. 

BSAOTOH,  or  BBSTTOV,  Hskbt  de.  In 
Ihigdale's  '  Chronica  Series '  the  names  of 
Henry  de  Bracton  and  of  Henry  de  Bretton 
are  separately  introduced  as  justices  itine- 
rant, with  an  interval  of  fourteen  years 
between  them,  and  with  nothing  in  either 
insertion  leading  to  a  supposition  that  the 
one  or  the  other  was  a  justider  at  West- 
minster, or  that  they  were  the  same  person. 
There  is  no  reasonable  doubt,  however, 
that  both  names  belonged  to  one  individual, 
and  that  he  was  for  many  years  a  judge  of 
the  superior  court 

Dugdale  makes  Henry  de  Bracton  a 
justice  itinerant  in  1245  and  1246,  29 
Henry  III.,  and  Henry  de  Bretton  a  justice 
itinerant  in  1260.  In  1250  Henry  de  Brac- 
ton was  evidentiy  on  the  bench  at  West- 
minster, as  he  was  present  as  one  of  the 
'  justiciarii '  at  a  final  concord  made  '  be- 
fore the  king  himself*  respecting  com- 
mon of  pasture  at  Cheshunt.  (Jiarleian 
MS.  371,  p.  71.)  In  every  year  from  1250 
also  the  entries  on  the  fine  roll  prove 
beyond  contradiction  that  there  was  a 
regular  justicier,  whose  name  is  spelled 
inoifierently  Bratton  and  Bretton,  ana  more 
frequentiv  m  the  former  mode.  These  are 
entries  of  payments  made  for  assizes  to  be 
taken   before    him;   and   they   continue. 

Srindpally  irith  the  name  of  Bratton,  till 
uly  1267.     {Excerpt,  e  Bat.  Fm.  IL  92- 


BRACTON 

458.)  It  is  thus  dear  that  Bratton  „ 
Bretton  are  synonymous ;  uid  there  can  be 
littie  question  that  Bracton  is  the  warn 
with  both.  Prince,  in  his  '  Worthies  of 
Devon,'  designates  the  village  in  that 
county  in  whidi  he  supposes  Bracton  to 
have  oeen  bom  as  '  Bracton,  now  Bntfeon* 
Clovelly,'  a  name  it  still  retains.  061- 
linson  {StmerstUh.  ii.  82)  derives  the 
name  from  Bratton,  a  hamlet  of  liGnehead, 
where  the  family  had  property,  and  states 
that  he  lies  buned  in  the  church  there, 
under  an  areh,  with  his  effigy  in  long  xobsi. 
Thus  is  Sir  Edward  Coke  s  assertion,  m 
the  Preface  to  the  8th  Report,  that  Bracton 
was  '  a  justice  of  this  realm,'  corroborated, 
as  he  would  hardly  have  given  him  that 
titie  had  he  been  only  a  justice  itinerant 
He  styles  him,  in  the  Prefiu^e  to  the  9ih 
Report,  '  GuriflB  de  Banco  Judex ; '  but  if 
the  Common  Pleas  is  to  be  understood  by 
this  expression,  its  correctness  may  he 
doubted,  inasmuch  aa  among  the  fines 
there  levied  none  appear  to  have  besa 
acknowledflred  before  mm.  It  seems  more 
probable,  if  the  division  of  the  conrts  had 
then  been  finally  arranged,  that  he  was  a 
justice  of  the  King's  Bench. 

According  to  fSince,  he  studied  at  Ox- 
ford, where  he  took  the  d^ree  of  doctor  of 
both  laws.  He  was  certain^  of  the  derieal 
profession:  he  is  designated  'dUeetos 
clericus  noster'  by  the  king,  in  a  grant 
dated  May  25, 1254,  made  to  him  of^e 
use  of  a  house  in  London  belonging  to 
William,  late  Earl  of  Derby,  dunng  the 
minority  of  the  heir.  (Duydale'$  Orig,  08.) 
On  January  21,  1283.  he  was  collaied  to 
the  arohdeaconry  of  Barnstaple,  but  he  ra- 
signed  it  in  the  following  year.  (Le  Noi, 
98.)  He  died  about  1267,  as  in  that  year 
his  judicial  duties  evidentiy  terminated 
^  Although  Lord  Ellesmere  (SUde  Wabf 
ii.  893),  in  his  argument  on  the  anbject  of 
the  Postnati,  calls  him  chief  justice  in  the 
reign  of  King  Henry  lU.,  and  some  other 
autnorities  so  describe  him  (Bo^'&c.), 
there  does  not  appear  a  sinsle  proof  that 
he  ever  attained  tnat  elevation.  There  ii 
an  interval,  however,  after  the  death  of 
Hugh  le  Despenser,  in  1285,  durmg  irfiidi 
he  might  possibly  have  held  the  ofl£e ;  and 
it  may  be  remarked,  as  giving  some  weiriit 
to  the  suggestion,  that  the  appointment  of 
Robert  de  Brus  as  chief  justice  did  not 
occur  till  Maroh  1288,  a  few  months  after 
the  supposed  conclusion  of  Bracton's  careeCi 

Witnout  enlarging,  as  Prince  has  done^ 
on  his  personal  reputation,  he  undoubtedly 
desen-ed  the  character  he  has  obtained  as  a 
great  lawver  and  a  learned  and  aoeiuale 
writer.  Hb  work  ^De  Legibus  et  Cob* 
suetudinibus  Anglisd'  ^is  a  finJAw^  md 
systematic  performance,  giving  a  oomplele 
view  of  the  law  in  all  its  titles^  aa  it  atooi 
vriien  it  was  written.'  Reeve  (JBkL  of  Bug, 


BRADBUBY 

£fliryiL86)|  fiPOBi  wliom  tiiu  eztnct  is  taken, 
nves  an  anahrtical  abstnct  of  the  seTeral 
MWjMOM  of  Jiu  duupien,  and  assiata  the 
iladaut  bjf  an  am^  ^geatof  their  contenta. 
Ha  eonaMleia  Bracton  aa  fu  aapeiior  to 
Qknyille;  piaiaea  his  style  aa  dear,  ex- 
[imaaiii^  and  nerroua;  and  reaiata  the  at- 
ttmpt  to  throw  diaeredit  on  his  fidelity  as  a 
wBter  oo  the  Kngllah  law,  whidi  haa  heen 
feromidedoBhiameience  to  the  Roman  code, 
■hewing  that  it  ia  xather  alluded  to  for  illua- 
timtion  and  ornament  than  adduced  aa  autho- 
litj.  Wm  omiaBion  of  the  regulations  made 
by  the  atatote  nf  Mailbrid^  affords  internal 
sfidenee  of  his  work  hsTing  been  written 
baiora  tiie  flfty-eeoondyearof  Henrr'a  reign, 
lad  gvaatlj  oonoboratea  the  preceding  sug- 
gaatMo  aa  to  the  period  of  hia  deaUi. 

Mr.  8elden*a  opinion  that  the  work  called 
'  Bdtton '  ia  only  an  abridgment  of  Bracton 
tarrea  weight  from  the  name  of  the  latter 
iMBgTeiy  frequently  called  Bretton.  (Ihid, 
28L) 

ISADBUBT,  Geobgs,  the  eldest  son  of 
Osniy  Brmdbuiy,  of  St.  Martin's-in-the- 
nalda,  Middleaez,  was  called  to  the  bar  of 
|ha  Middle  Temple  on  May  17, 1667.  Act- 
ing aa  junior  counsel  in  the  fiunous  trial  in 
mif  in  which  Lady  Ivy  attempted  to  esta- 
hlkh^  her  claim  to  landa  at  Shadwdl  by 
BStain  deeds  of  yery  doubtful  authentidty, 
ba  alleged  that  their  forgery  waa  manifest, 
bom  the  deacription  of  the  year  in  Philip 
■d  Mai3r's  reign,  in  whieh  they  professed 
to  haTe  been  executed,  beinff  by  a  title 
i^ich  was  not  assumed  by  uie  fang  and 
till  after  the  date  they  bore;  and 
ruatioe  Jeffieya  applauded  him  for  the 
ini^  of  the  macovery.  Not  content 
vfth  thia  unaccustomed  compliment  from 
na  rough  ehie^  he  by  rdterating  his  re- 
■aifc  liSar  in  the  trial  brought  down  upon 
lOMelf  this  silencing  eastigation :  '  Lord  I 
ir/  erdaimed  Jeffreye, '  you  must  be  cach- 
ing too.  We  told  you  yota  objection  was 
raij  ingeniona;  but  that  must  not  make 
ram  titmblaaome ;  you  cannot  lay  an  egg, 
Mtroa  muat  be  cackling  oyer  it' 

nat  he  muat  haye  oeen  oonaiderably 
Qalinguiahed^  aa  a  lawyer  may  be  inferred 
■m  nia  being  summoned  in  December 
tn,  with  the  chids  of  his  profession,  to 
■Molt  with  the  Lords  as  to  what  was  to 
•  done  on  the  emergency  that  had  then 
ttHTPed.  Li  July  of  the  next  year  he  was 
aiMrnBd  bj  the  House  of  Lords  aa  counsel 
or  Sir  Adam  Blair,  Dr.  Elliott,  and  others, 
ha  impeachment  of  whom  for  dispersing 
Qng  Jamea'a  declaration  does  not  appear 
9  mre  heen  afterwards  prosecuted.  On 
bt  9ch  of  the  same  month  he  waa  ap- 
aiBted  emaitor  baron  of  the  Excheouer, 
ai  held  the  office  tUl  his  death,  which 
emxed  an  February  12,  16G6.  (State 
yi^  X.  616,  626;  Luttrea,  I  490,  555, 
57,  iy.  17 ;  Pari,  Bid.  y.  302.) 


BKADHHAW 


lU 


{■aen 


I  BBAD8HAW,  HxKBT.  Fuller  fixea  tha 
I  natiyity  of  Henry  Bradshaw  in  Cheshire^ 
judging  from  hia  surname,  but  eyidently 
Knows  nothing  of  his  family.  He  reodyed 
his  legal  education  at  the  Inner  Temple, 
and  was  twice  reader  to  that  sodety — yis., 
in  autumn  1536,  and  in  Lent  1M2.  In 
1540  he  waa  appointed  solidtor-general, 
and  became  attorney-general  in  1545^a 
period  so  full  of  crimmal  prosecutions  that 
it  is  remarkable  so  little  is  said  of  his  con- 
duct of  them.  Being  created  chief  baron 
of  the  Exchequer  on  May  21,  1552,  he 
witnessed  King  Edward'a  wilL  aettling  the 
crown  on  Lady  Jane  €bey,  and  would  pro- 
bably haye  been  remoyed  from  his  place  by 
Queen  Mary  had  not  death  oyertaken  him 
three  weeks  after  her  accesdon.  He  died 
on  July  27,  1553.  By  his  wife  Johan, 
daughter  of  John  Hurst  of  Kingston-upon- 
Thames,  and  widow  of  Wilfiam  Main- 
wayringe  of  Estham  in  Eaaex,  he  had  four 
sons  and  four  daughters.  (IhigdaUs  Orig. 
164,  170, 172;  Chrom.  of  Queen  Jane,  100; 
Gent,  Mag.  lix.  1011). 

BBADSHAW,  JoHK,  aa  it  is  now  satis- 
ftetorily  establiahed,  waa  a  younger  son  of 
Henry  Bradshaw,  of  Marple  H]ll,in  the 
nariah  of  Stockport  in  Gheahire,  deacended 
m>m  a  family  of  considerable  respectability 
in  Derbyahire,  hia  mother  being  Catherine, 
daughter  of  Rdph  Winnington,  Eaq.,  of 
Offerton. 

Bom  at  Marple  in  1602,  and  baptised  in 
the  parish  church  of  Stockport  on  De- 
cember 10  in  that  year,  he  received  his 
education  first  at  the  free  school  there,  and 
then  at  Bunbury  and  Middleton,  to  all  of 
which  he  bequeathed  large  sums  for  their 
endowment.  Designed  for  the  law,  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  at  Gra/a  Inn  on  April  23, 
1627,  and  to  the  bench  of  that  society  on 
June  23,  1645,  when  appointed  judge  of 
the  Sheriffs'  Court  in  London.  He  pro- 
bably acted  for  aome  years  as  a  proyindal 
counsel,  as  he  liyed  at  Congleton,  and 
served  the  office  of  mayor  there  in  1637, 
and  was  afterwarda  high  steward ;  and  at 
one  time  of  his  life  he  redded  in  Bradshaw 
Hall  in  Bolton,  on  a  atone  oyer  the  door 
of  which  his  frniily  arms  remain.  (Gent, 
Mag.  Ixxxyiii.,  L  328 ;  Baineis  Lancathirej 
i.540.) 

In  the  year  1643  he  became  a  candidate 
for  the  office  of  one  of  the  judges  of  the 
Sheri&'  Court  of  the  dty  of  London,  then 
yacant,  his  antagonists  being  Richard  Proc- 
tor and  William  Steele,  i^rwards  chief 
baron.  The  right  of  election  waa  cldmed 
by  both  the  Courta  of  Aldermen  and  Com- 
mon Coundl,  and  Bradshaw  was  chosen  by 
the  latter  on  September  21.  Immediately 
after\«wds  the  Court  of  Aldermen  elected 
Proctor,  who  thereupon  brought  an  action 
in  the  King'a  (afterwards  the  Upper)  Bench, 
which,  however,  did  not  come  to  a  final 

I 


114 


BBADSHAW 


hearing,  till  Febrnaij  1665,  .when  the  right 
was  determined  to  be  in  the  Common 
Council,  with  whom  it  has  ever  since  con- 
tinued. Bradshaw  in  the  meantime  had 
performed  the  duties  of  the  office,  for  in 
February  1649  he  was  permitted  to  ap- 
point a  deputy  at  Guildhall  '  in  regard  of 
nis  employment  in  the  Iligh  Court.' 
(IVhiteloc^  S77,) 

Clarendon  says  (yi.  217)  he  was  'not 
much  known  in  Westminster  Hall,  though 
of  good  practice  in  his  chamber  and  much 
employed  by  the  factious.'  In  October 
1644  he  was  assigned  as  one  of  the  coun- 
sel against  Lord  Macguire  for  the  rebel- 
lion in  Ireland ;  and  he  probably  assisted 
Prynne  in  his  argument  to  prove  that  Irish 
peers  were  amenable  to  trial  by  an  English 
jury.  He  next  appears  in  the  following 
year  as  leading  Lilbuin's  appeal  to  the 
House  of  Lords  for  reparation  against  the 
iniquitous  sentence  of  the  Star  Chamber  in 
1638;  and  in  the  discussions  which  arose 
in  the  two  houses  in  1646,  as  to  placing  the 
custody  of  the  Great  Seal  in  commission- 
ers who  were  not  members  of  parliament, 
he  was  among  those  voted  by  the  Com- 
mons, but  objected  to  by  the  Lords.  The 
appointment  of  chief  justice  of  Chester, 
however,  was  g^ven  to  nim  in  March  1647. 
In  June  he  was  retained  as  one  of  the 
counsel  to  assist  in  the  prosecution  of  Judge 
Jenkins ;  and  on  October  12, 1648,  he  was 
included  in  the  batch  of  Serjeants  then  made 
by  the  parliament.  ( IFhUelocke,  100,  224 ; 
State  Trials,  iii.  1347.) 

When  the  Lords  rejected  the  ordinance 
for  the  trial  of  the  king,  and  the  Commons 
determined  to  proceed  vrithout  their  con- 
currence, the  names  of  the  peers  and  judges 
who  had  been  appointed  were  struck  out  of 
the  commission,  and  those  of  Bradshaw, 
Nicholas,  and  Steele  were  substituted ;  and 
Bradshaw  was  dignified  with  the  title  of 
lord  president  of  the  so-caUed  High  Court  of 
Justice.  (  Whitdocke,  366, 368.)  The  selec- 
tion of  a  man  of  so  little  weight  in  his 
profession  can  only  be  accounted  for  by  the 
supposition  that  the  concocters  of  the  tra- 
gedy could  not  prevail  on- any  of  the  more 
eminent  lawyers  to  undertake  the  obnoxious 
service.  Whitelocke  and  Widdri^on  had 
refused  the  commission ;  neither  Kolle  nor 
St.  John,  the  two  chief  justices,  nor  even 
Chief  Biffon  Wilde,  could  be  entrusted  to 
obey  their  behest;  and  their  own  law- 
officer,  Prideaux,  either  from  objections  on 
his  part,  or  want  of  confidence  on  theirs, 
was  displaced,  while  creatures  of  their  own 
were  appointed  temporary  attorney  and 
solicitor  ffeneral  to  conduct  the  charge. 
The  trial  began  on  January  20, 1649 ;  and 
BradshaVs  conduct  throughout  its  con- 
tinuance fully  ansv^ered  the  description  of 
Clarendon  (vi.  218),  that  he  admmistered 
the  office  ^  with  all  the  pride,  impudence, 


BRADSHAW 

and  superciliousness  imaginable.'  Whatever 
may  be  the  differences  of  opinion  on  the 
material  point  of  the  trial — and  great  will 
be  the  differences  among  men — ^no  doobt 
can  bo  entertained  that  it  was  ordained* by 
usurped  authority,  that  its  end  wm  de- 
termined before  its  commencement  that  its 
proceedings  were  illegal  and  undignified, 
and  that  the  conduct  of  the  president  was 
insolent  and  overbearing.  During  the  sit- 
tings of  the  court  lodgings  were  provided 
for  him  at  Sir  Abraham  Williams  s  honas' 
in  New  Palace  Yard,  and  all  provisions  and 
necessaries  were  oidered  to  be  supplied. 
He  was  treated  with  all  the  forms  ot  judi- 
cial state,  decorated  with  a  scarlet  robe,  a 
sword  and  mace  were  borne  before  him,  and 
twenty  gentlemen  were  appointed  to  attend 
him  with  partizans.  When,  after  a  loog 
speech,  he  had  pronounced  the  sentence,  ne 
was  the  first  to  sign  the  wairant  for  execa- 
tion.  But,  however  willing  an  instrument^ 
he  was  not  altogether  a  free  agent ;  for  all 
that  he  did,  and  almost  all  that  he  saidt 
seems  to  have  been  directed  and  dictated 
b^  the  majority  of  the  commissioners,  con- 
sisting of  the  king's  most  determined  ene* 
mies.  (State  Trials,  iv.  1008-1154.)  Ib 
the  subsequent  trials  of  the  Duke  of  Htr 
milton,  the  Earl  of  Holland,  and  othexSy  h» 
was  continued  lord  president  of  the  court; 
and  the  dean's  house  at  Westminster  wb» 

given  to  him  for  ever  for  his  residence  and 
abitation,  with  a  donative  of  6000L  He 
became  one  of  the  council  of  state,  and, 
being  elected  its  president,  is  notioed  by 
Whitelocke  for  his  lengthened  argument^ 
and  the  inconvenience  they  occasioned.  A 
vote  to  settle  2000/.  a  year  in  lands  out  of 
the  Earl  of  St.  Albans^  and  Lord  Cottinr- 
ton's  estates  on  him  and  his  heirs  was  pasrtd, 
and  his  appointment  of  chief  justice  of 
Chester  was  renewed,  to  which  the  chili- 
cellorship  of  the  duchy  of  Lancaster  was 
afterwards  added.  He  does  not  seem  i/> 
have  acted  as  lord  president  of  the  High 
Court  of  Justice  beyond  1650,  Serjenk 
Keeble  presiding  in  1651,  and  Seneant 
L'Isle  in  1654.  (niiitelocke,  9d0,  414, 4SI(i,  o 
529 ;  State  Trials,  v.  43,  518.)  ^ 

Bradshaw  was  a  staimch  republican,  and    - 
looked  vrith  a  jealous  eye  on  CromwelTt  , 
attempt  to  gain  the  sole  authority.    When   : 
the  ambitious  general  ejected  the  Long    ■ 
Parliament  on  April  20, 1653,  and  came  i»   *. 
the  council  of  state  to  put  an  end  to' ill   ._ 
sitting,  Bradshaw,  who  still  presided,  torn    ■ 
and  boldly  addressed  him  in  theae  wordi:    ; 
— *  Sir,  we  have  heard  what  you  did  at  tibe   ^ 
house  in  the  morning,  and  before  mUKf    ^ 
hours  all  England  vrill  hear  it ;  but^  nr,  joi    ^ 
are  mistaken  to  think  the  parliament'  li  >^ 
dissolved,  for  no  power  under  heaTcn  r> 
dissolve  them  but  themaelveef  {heni 
take  you  notice  of  that'     (LmM 
He  was  not^  of  course,  one  of  tbe 


BRADSHAW 

selected  by  the  general  to  sit  in  what  was 
called  Barebone'a  Ptirliament ;  but  in  it  an 
act  waa  paased  for  continuing  in  him  the 
juriadiction  of  the  county  of  Lancaster. 
(  WkUdocke^  665.)  Cromwell,  when  he  be- 
came protector,  summoned  him  to  the  coun- 
cily  and  required  him  to  take  out  a  new 
commiseion  for  hia  office  of  chief  justice  of 
Chester;  but  he  refused  to  do  so,  alleging 
that  he  held  that  place  by  a'grant  firom  the 
parliament  of  England,  to  continue  quam- 
dim  §e  bene  ffesterU;  and  whether  he  had 
carried  himself  with  that  intejpity  which 
his  oonomission  exacted  of  him  he  was 
ready  to  submit  to  a  trial  by  twelve  men 
to  he  choeen  by  Cromwell  himself.  Crom- 
well was  silenced,  and,  though  an  order 
was  actually  signed  dismissing  him  from  the 
office,  did  not  think  it  safe  to  prevent  him 
firom  proceeding  on  his  circuit.  In  Crom- 
well's parliament  of  1654  Bradshaw  was 
elected  member  for  Cheshire,  notwithstand- 
ing the  protector's  attempts  to  keep  him 
out,  and  distinguished  himself  against  the 
eomt  party  in  the  debate  whether  the 
government  should  be  in  one  single  person 
and  a  -Mrliament.  (IhrL  Hid,  iii.  1428, 
144-5.)  That  parliament  was  soon  dissolved; 
md  on  summoning  another,  in  September 
1656^  Cromwell  was  more  successful  in  his 
efforts,  and  Bradshaw  was  not  returned. 
The  distaste  between  them  continued  to  in- 
crease, and  Bradshaw  was  onutted  from  the 
list  of  peers  nominated  by  the  protector. 

On  tne  death  of  Cromwell,  Bradshaw 
▼as  returned  for  Cheshire  to  Richard's 
ptrliament  of  January  1659.  With  its 
aiseolation  in  April  the  protectorate  ter- 
Binated  from  mere  imbecility^  and  the 
remnant  of  the  Long  Parliament,  nicknamed 
the  Rump,  resumed  its  sittings.  Bradshaw, 
t  determined  commonwealthVman,  was 
named  on  the  coimcil  of  state,  and  on 
June  '3  was  appointed  one  of  the  commis- 
Booen  of  the  Great  Seal,  in  conjunction 
vith  Tyrrell  and  Fountaine.  He  had  been 
fer  eight  months  suffering  from  the  ague, 
and  was  then  in  the  country.  His  attend- 
ance, therefore,  was  dispensed  with  at  that 
time,  but  on  July  22  he  took  the  oaths  in 
the  house.  Ere  four  months  had  elapsed 
dds  Rump  was  again  dismissed  by  the 
amy,  and  Bradshaw,  still  sick  and  suffer- 
ing,'attended  in  the  coimdl  of  state,  and 
almost  with  his  last  words  expressed  '  his 
ahhoirence  of  that  detestaUe  action,'  as  he 
called  it  (LvdUno,  Godwin,  WhUelocke.) 
He  then  wit^drew^  and  survived  the  scene 
ahoot  a  fortnight,  dying  on  October  31, 
vith  the  declaration  that  if  the  king  were 
to  he  tried  and  condemned  again,  he  would 
he  the  first  man  that  should  do  it  His 
teh  occurred  in  the  Deanery  at  West- 
mxaater,  and  he  waa  buried  with  great 
pomp  in  the  abbey,  his  funeral  sermon 
being  preached  by  John  Rowe.    (Athen. 


BRAIOSA 


115 


i  Oxon.  iii.  1120.)  On  the  restoration  of 
i  Charles  II.  his  body,  and  those  of  Cromwell 
I  and  Ireton,  which  had  been  deposited  in 
i  the  same  place,  were  disinterred,  and,  with 
j  every  mark  of  obloquy,  were  dragged  on 
.  sledges  to  Tyburn,  where  they  were  hanged 
on  the  several  angles  of  a  triple  gibbet,  then 
beheaded,  their  trunks  thrown  into  a  hole 
under  the  gallows,  and  their  heads  exposed 
un  poles  on  the  top  of  Westminster  Hall. 
{Harris  B  Livts,  iii.  520.) 

The  partisans  of  the  royal  and  the  repub- 
lican party  of  course  differ  essentially  in 
their  estimate  of  Bradshaw*6  character.  The 
laudation  of  it  during  his  life  by  Milton 
(whom  he  had  patronised,  and  to  whom  he 
bequeathed  10/.)   is  too  exaggerated,  and 
Clarendon*s  description  of  him  after  his 
death  is  perhaps  i/oo  severe.    Whitelocke's 
(with  whom  he  was  evidently  no  favourite) 
is  pithy,  and  nearer  the  mark :   '  A  stout 
;  man,  and  learned  in  his  profession,  no  friend 
'  to  monarchy.*  The  best  part  of  his  character 
!  is  his  consiBtency,  for  be  nhowed  as  much 
!  resistance  to  the  semblance  of  rovalty  as  to 
the  realitv,  opposing  the  usurpation  first  uf 
Cromwell,  and  then  of  the  army,  as  firmly 
as  he  hod  stood  agfunst  the  king. 

BKAI08A,  William  de,  was  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  to  impose  the  assize  on 
the  king's  demesnes  in  Herefordshire  in 
20  Heniy  II.,  1174,  but  seems  to  have  only 
been  so  appointed  as  sheriff  of  the  county, 
an  office  which  he  held  in  that  and  tliu 
following  year.     {Madox^  i.  124.) 

He  was  the  grandson  of  a  Norman  baron 
i  of  the  same  name,  who,  besides  his  honor  of 
\  Braiose  and  other  large  possessions  in  Nor- 
mandy, is  recorded  in  Domesday  Book  as 
holding  between  fifty  and  sixt}'  lordships 
in  Sussex,  Berks,  Wilts,  Surrey,  and  Dorset. 
His  successor  was  Philip  de  firaiosa,  who, 
by  his  wife  Berta,  the  daughter  of  Milo,  Earl 
of  Gloucester,  was  father  to  this  William. 

In  3  Henry  II.  he  fined  one  thousand 
marks  for  part  of  the  honor  of  Barnstaple 
{Pipe  RoUhj  183) ;  and  in  1104  he  was  one 
of  the  subscribers  to  the  Constitutions  of 
Clarendon.  His  favour  with  King  Henry 
may  be  estimated  by  the  grant,  which  bo 
received  in  the  tweutv-fourth  vear  of  his 
reign,  of  the  whole  kmgdom  of  Limerick. 
How  far  he  deserved  that  fi&vour  depends 
on  the  truth  or  falsehood  of  an  historian  of 
Wales,  who  relates  his  horrible  murder  of 
Sitsvlt  ap  Dynswald  and  a  large  company 
of  Welshmen,  whom  he  had  treacherously 
invited  to  a  feast  in  the  castle  of  Ber- 
gavenny. 

In  7  Kichard  I.,  1 195-0,  he  a^n  acted  as 
a  justice  itinerant  in  Staffordshire  {Madar, 
i.  540)  ;  and  for  the  last  seven  vears  of  that 
reign  he  held  the  sheriffalty  of  the  county 
of  Hereford. 

The  preservation  of  his  influence  in  the 
early  part  of  King  John*s  reign  is  shown, 

i2 


116 


BRAJIHTON 


not  only  by  his  continuance  in  the  office  of 
■herifP  of  lu8  county,  but  also  by  the  special 
charter  he  leceiv^  from  the  king  in  his 
second  year,  exempting  the  lands  of  the 
honor  en  Braioee  from  the  interference  of 
any  of  the  kind's  sherifis  or  other  offio^ 
and  giving  Wuliam  de  Braiosa  sole  juris- 
diction there.  {Ibid.  150.)  About  the  ninth 
or  tenth  year  of  that  reign  he  was  the  sub- 
ject of  royal  persecution.    One  states  the 
cause  to  liave  been  that  he  refused  to  nve 
the  hostages  which  the  king  demanded  to 
secure  the  obedience  of  his  barons ;  another, 
that  the  king  banished  him  for  carrying 
war  into  Wfues,  and  killing  above  three 
thousand  men  in  the  battle  of  Elvel ;  while 
the  long's  own  narrative,  as  recoided  in 
the  Red  Book  of  the  Exchequer,  attributes 
his  outlawry  to  the  nonpayment  of  five 
thousand  marks,  which  he  owed  for  the 
province  of  Munster,  in  Ireland,  and  of  five 
yean'  arrears  of  the  ferm  of  Limerick ;  to 
the  repeated  evasion  of  his  promises  to  pay 
these  moneys ;  to  his  resistance  to  the  nro- 
cesses  of  distress  sent  against  his  castles ; 
and  to  his  rebellious  conduct  throughout 
the  proceedings.    The  result  was  the  cap- 
ture of  his  wife  and   their   eldest  son, 
William,  whom  King  John  in  1210  bar- 
barously commanded  to  be  ftmished  in  their 
prison  in  Windsor  Castle.   The  baron  him- 
self escaped,  in  the  habit  of  a  beggar,  into 
f^rance,  where  he  died  about  1212,  and  was 
buried  in  the  abbey  of  St  Victor  at  Paris. 

His  wife  was  Maud  de  Haya,  or  St 
Walerie,  to  whose  instigation  the  murder 
of  the  guests  at  Bergavenny  is  attributed, 
and  on  whose  violence  is  charged  all  the 
subsequent  misfortunes  of  her  family.  Her 
husband,  tiiough  a  bold  and  active  soldier, 
seems  from  some  accounts  to  have  been 
of  a  pious  and  kindly  disposition,  making 
grants  to  the  monks  with  no  niggardly 
hand,  and  remarkable  for  his  chan^  and 
courtesy  to  the  ]^r. 

His  issue  consisted  of  three  sons  and  four 
daughters.  William,  the  eldest  son,  called 
Gam,  perished  by  starvation  with  his 
mother,  at  Windsor;  Giles  was  brought 
up  to  the  Church,  and  became  Bishop  of 
Hereford ;  and  Reginald  succeeded  in  as- 
suaging the  wrath  of  the  king,  and  regain- 
ing part  of  his  fEither's  posaessions.  (Lord 
LyUeUmCB  Henry  11,  iii.  339;  Wendovery 
ii.  884,  iiL  129,  225,  234,  237.) 

BBAXBTOH,  JoHif,  whose  ancestor, 
William  Bramston,  was  sheriff*  of  London 
in  18  Ridiard  H.,  1394-95,  was  grandson 
of  John,  a  mercer  in  the  same  city,  and 
son  of  Roger  Bramston,  of  Whitechapel, 
who  first  established  himself  in  Essex. 
His  mother  was  Priscilla,  daughter  of 
Francis  Clovile,  of  West  Haningfield  Hall, 
and  widow  of  Thomas  Rushee,  of  Bore- 
ham,  both  in  that  county. 

John  Bramston,  their  eldest  son,  was 


BRAMSTON 

bom  on  May  18,  1577,  at  HaldoB,  and 
after  receiving  his  early  instmcticm  in  flia 
free  school  there,  he  finished  his  edncatkn 
at  Jesus   CollMpe,    Cambridse.     lUnbig 
entered  the  Middle  Temnle,  ne  was  dnly 
called  to  the  bar  in  100^,  and  chosen  m 
1607  by  his  university  as  one  of  thrir 
counseL    In  the  preceding  year  he  had 
married  Bridget^  cbughter  of  Dr.  Thomas 
Moundeford,  an  eminent  physician  of  Idk 
Street,  London.    He  was  selected  as  Lent 
reader  in  1623,  when  his  reading  was  on 
the  statute  32  Henry  VHI.  c  2,  concenn 
ing  limitations ;  and  again  in  the  foUowing 
autumn,  when  he  took  the  statute  13  ESi. 
c.  5,  as  his  subiect,  treating  on  firandnlent 
conveyances.   Li  Michaelmas  Term  he  ww 
one  of  the  fifteen  who  took  the  degree  of 
the  ccnf ;  not  however,  without  oontiibnt- 
ing,  as  all  the  others  did,  500/,  to  IKmg 
James's^  purse.    Obtaining  great  practioe^ 
as  well  in  the  courts  of  law  as  in  Cnaaoeqrf 
the  Court  of  Wards,  and  the  Star  Chamber, 
he  was  selected  in  1626  by  the  Eari  « 
Bristol  to  defend  him ;  in  1627  he  pleaded 
for  Sir  John  Hevenin^ham,  who  wns  imp 
prisoned  for  not  contributing  to  the  km 
{State  Triab,  ii.  1380,  iii.  6);  in  1628  1» 
was  retained  by  the  city  of  London  ■• 
their  counsel,  with  a  fee  pro  eomUw  imp&m 
et  impendendo ;  and  in  1630  he  was  con- 
stituted chief  justice  of  Ely,  on  the  Bomin- 
tion  of  the  then  bishop  of  that  aee,  whidi 
was  confirmed  by  his  successor.    He  vm 
made  the  queen^s  serjeant  on  Maxoh  96, 
1632,  and  King  Charles  advanced  him  on 
July  8,  1634,  to  be  one  of  his  aeijeaiitiy 
and  knighted  him. 

After  the  death  of  his  first  wife,  leaving 
a  numerous  fiimily,  he  married  in  1681,  m 
his  second  wife,  Elizabeth,  the  danghter  of 
Lord  Brabazon,  and  the  relict  already  of 
two  husbands,  the  first  being  Georse  Mjont- 
gomerie,  Bishop  of  Clogher,  and  the  »- 
cond  Sir  John  Brereton,  the  king's  seijeant 
in  Ireland.  He  had  no  childzen.l^  her, 
and  she  died  in  1647,  leaving  him  a  second 
time  a  widower.  Soon  after  his  second 
marriage  he  purchased  the  estate  of 
Skreenes,  in  Roxwell,  Essex,  for  800(ML, 
from  Thomas  Weston,  afterwards  Earl  of 
Portland. 

On  the  death  of  Sir  Thomas  Richardson 
he  was  called  upon  to  fill  the  then  not 
very  enviable  place  of  chief  justice  of  the 
Kind's  Bench,  and  receivea  his  patent  on 
April  14, 1635.  The  people  were  discon- 
tented and  seditiously  mdined;  King 
Charles  was  raising  money  by  varioni 
means  without  the  aid  of  parliament^ 
which  had  not  met  for  six  years ;  the  writs 
for  ship  money  had  just  been  issued  and 
created  general  excitement  Bmmslaay 
who  evidently  was  consdentioiu  in  eon- 
siderin^  that'  it  was  legally  impoaed,  m 
chief  justice  headed  the  opodon  in  iii 


BRAMSrrON 

thai  ifM  girea  Irf  all  tlie  judffes. 

rer  to  Uie  ease  which  the  king  oaa 
laid  bafae  them.  In  the  piosecation  of 
Hampden  he  eap^oited  that  (pinion  apoo 
the  geneial  principle  that  the  defence  of 
the  nafan  mniit  he  at  the  suhjects'  cha^; 
hvt|  notwithstanding^  gare  his  vote  against 
thtb  crown  upon  a  technical  point,  that  hy 
the  leeoid  it  did  not  appear  to  whom  the 
monej  aasrissol  was  due.    (SUUb  Triait, 

One  Of  the  earliest  proceedings  of  the 
Long  Fsriiament,  which  met  in  I^oTember 
1640,  was  to  impeach  Chief  Justice  Bram- 
An  and  fiye  other  of  the  judges  who  had 
given  thia  answer  to  the  kmg;  and  he  was 
ohiiged  to  give  secnrityin  lO^OOOt.  to  ahide 
UitiiaL  fte  prindpiu  charge  against  lum 
waa  for  owning  the  opinion,  and  did  not 
touch  his  jndgment  in  the  case  of  Hamp- 
dflk  Hia  answer,  which  his  scm  thinks, 
thoogh  prepared  and  signed  hj  counsel, 
waa  nerer  called  for,  was  that  he,  like 
Crake  and  Hutton,  suhscrihed  only  for 
eoolSannity,  for  he  was  overruled  hj  the 
net  of  the  judges  in  his  wish  to  insert  that 
the  charge  ccmld  not  be  made  except  in 
case  of  naceesity,  and  only  during  the  time 
and  continuance  of  that  necessity.  When 
the  king  went  to  York  in  JuIt  1042  he 
commanded  the  attendance  ot  the  chief 
jnatiee,  and.  though  Bramston  sent  his  sons 
to  excnse  nim  on  account  of  the  danger 
^uch  those  who  had  become  bound  for  his 
appeaisnre  before  the  parliament  would 
iaear,  the  injunctions  for  his  presence  were 
veitented.  firamston,  howerer,  from  the 
same  motiTes  determined  to  stay  away. 

The  consequence  was,  that  on  October 
16^  1642,  the  king  zeroked  his  appoint- 
SMnt  (iKyifMr,  xz.  636);  but,  as  if  to  show 
that  it  was  not  from  royal  displeasure,  sent 
him  a  patent  as  king's  Serjeant  on  the  10th 
of  the  following  fobruary.  It  is  curious 
that  this  patent  was  panted  a  few  days 
aftor  the  kmg  had  received  the  propodtionB 
of  the  Lords  and  Commons  for  an  accom- 
modation ;  one  of  which  was  a  prayer  that 
ha  would  make  Sir  John  Bramston  chief 
justice  of  the  King's  Bench.  By  this  it  is 
trident  that  the  parliament  were  not  very 
iaretorate  against  Sir  John ;  and  it  seems 
probable  that  the  king  appointed  him  his 
sajeant  aa  an  earnest  of  bis  intention,  if 
the  negotiation  had  succeeded,  to  replace 
Um  in  his  office  in  compliance  vnth  the 
parliament's  request.  As  a  further  proof 
that  that  body  held  him  absolved,  and 
esteemed  him  to  be,  as  Lord  Clarendon 
cslls  him,  'a  man  of  great  learning  and 
integrity,'  they  made  several  attempts  to 
induce  him  to  resume  his  judicial  duties, 
and  when  he  refused,  as  another  had  super- 
seded hinif  they  ordered  him  to  be  |kdvised 
with  on  some  legal  business  before  them. 
In  January  1646-7  the  Commons  named 


BRAMSTON 


117 


him  as  <»e  of  the  lords  eommkricoaBs  of 
the  Great  Seal ;  but  by  his  interest  with 
the  peers  he  induced  them  to  pass  him 
over.  In  the  lollowinff  March  the  same 
attempt  was  piade  wim  the  like  result 
In  the  interim  the  Losds  had  voted  that  he 
should  sit  in  their  house  as  an  assistant ; 
but  without  refusing  the  appointment  he 
managed  to  avoid  t£e  attendance ;  and  in 
April  a  vote  was  passed  that  he  should  be 
one  of  the  judges  c^  the  Common  Fleas 
(WhMock€,  1^246),  which  he  also  de- 
clined. Bis  son  says  that  CromwelL  after 
he  became  protector,  urged  Sir  Jonn  in 
1654  to  take  ihe  office  of  chief  justice 
a^;ain,  butthat  he  excused  himself^  pleading 
his  old  age,  then  veiging  on  seventy-eeven. 
On  September  22  ot  that  ^ear  he  died  at 
Skreenes  after  a  very  short  illness,  and  was 
buried  in  Boxwell  Church. 

FuUer  (i  840)  gives  him  the  character  ot 
bein^  'accomplished  with  all  qualities  re- 
ouisite  for  a  nerson  of  his  place  and  pro- 
lesaion,  •  •  .  aeep  learning,  solid  judgment, 
int^prity  of  life,  and  gravi^  of  behaviour ; ' 
addmff  that  '  he  deserved  to  live  in  better 
times. 

Six  children  survived  him,  three  sons 
and  three  daughters.  The  present  repre- 
sentative of  his  eldest  son  now  reudes  at 
Skreenes,  which  took  ito  name  from  Ser- 
JMnt  William  Skrene,  in  the  reign  of 
Henry  IV.,  and  was  afterwards  powessed 
bv  Richard  Weston,  judse  of  the  Common 
Pleas  in  the  rei^  of  iaizabeth,  from  one 
of  whose  family  it  was  purchased  by  Chief 
Justice  Bramston.  (^Aratruton't  Autobio- 
graphy,) 

BBAM8T0V,  Frakcib,  the  third  surviving 
son  of  the  above-named  Sir  John  Bramston, 
was  removed  from  a  considerable  school 
in  Goldsmith's  Alley,  Cripplegato,  London, 
kept  by  Mr.  Famabie,  to  Queens'  College, 
Cambndffe,  where  he  took  his  degree  of 
M.A.  in  1640.  He  was  so  feeble  and  un- 
healthy at  this  time  that  Dr.  Martin,  the 
master,  wrote  to  his  father  that  4t  was  a 
great  pi  tie  so  great  a  soul  should  have  so 
weak  a  body;  and^  to  prove  that  this  was 
no  flattery,  chose  him  in  1642  fellow  of  his 
college.  He  was  admitted  of  the  society  of 
the  Middle  Temple  in  1634,  and  was  called 
to  the  bar  on  June  14, 1642.  The  troubles 
that  followed  putting  a  stop  to  his  profes- 
sional pursuits,  *'  the  drumming  trumpete,* 
as  his  brother  expresses  it,  'blowing  his 
gown  over  his  ears,'  he  travelled  for  four 
years  into  France  and  Italy,  associating 
with  Mr.  Ilenshaw,  Mr.  Howard,  and  Mr. 
Evelyn.  On  his  return  he  is  not  mentioned 
in  the  reports  till  the  Restoration,  when  his 
steadiness  to  the  royal  cause  secured  him 
cuiployment. 

In  August  1600  he  was  made  steward  of 
some  of  the  king's  courts  in  Essex,  and  ot* 
the  liberty  of  Havering ;  and  in  l(i(i6  hia 


118  BRAMWELL  BRAYBROC 


uniyenilT  chose  him  for  their  counsel,  with 
a  fee  of  iOs.  a  year.  He  was  chosen  reader 
of  his  inn  in  1GC8.  The  extravagance  of 
the  feast  on  this  occasion  is  noticed  hy 


He  also  subscribed  several  in  the  same 
manner  in  May,  J  une,  and  July  1203, 5  John ; 
but  in  7  John  there  is  only  one  charter  so 
authenticated,  which  happens  to  be  the  first 


Evelyn,  who  relates  that  there  were  present  1  after  the  death  of  Archbishop  Hubert,  the 
at  it  *  the  Duke  of  Ormond,  privy  seal,  Bed-  '  chancellor,  and  is  dated  July  24, 1205. 
ford,  Belasvs,  Halifax,  and  a  world  more  of  '      On  all  these  occasions  the  charters  were 
earles  and  lords.'    (^re/yn,  ii.  303.)  authenticated  by  him  in  the  form  specified ; 

In  the  following  year  he  was  one  of  the  but  that  he  could  not  be  a  vice-chancellor 
large  batch  of  Serjeants  who  were  crfiated,  or  keeper  is  shovni  by  the  fact  that  diaing 
and  he  received  the  stewardship  of  the  Court  |  the  same  period  he  attested  several  charten 
of  Fleas  at  Whitchapel,  with  a  salary  of  j  as  a  witness,  when  the  name  of  some  other 
100/.  His  next  advance  was  to  the  bench  i  person  was  attached  to  the  form  of  authen- 
of  the  Exchequer,  being  constituted  a  baron  j  tication.  And  this  occurred  not  only  then, 
on  June  17, 1678.  Within  a  year,  however,  but  both  at  an  earlier  and  a  later  period 
he  was  summarily  discharaed  from  this  seat  also,  commencing  from  March  1200, 1  John, 
with  three  other  judges — ^\Vilde,  Thurland,  j  proceeding  throughout  the  second  year,  and 
and  Bertie — all  of  them  being  dismissed  on  I  continuing  at  intervals  up  to  May  5,  1208, 
April  29, 1679,  for  no  express  cause,  but  ,  9  John. 

upon  the  king*s  forming  a  new  council  of  i  There  seems  ver}'  little  doubt  that  the 
thirty,  and  admitting  Lord  Shaftesbury  into  I  persons  whose  names  appear  upon  these 
the  ministry  as  its  president     Though  a    authentications  of  the  charters,  when  not 

Ecnsion  of  600/.  a  year  was  assigned  to  him,  otherwise  described,  were  merely  clerks  of 
e  *  was  never  paid  but  only  three  terms,'  the  (Chancer}-,  or  officers  in  the  treasury  of 
so  low  was  the  Exchequer  then ;  and  so  j  the  Exchequer.  (See  Judges  of  EngUmd, 
difficult  was  it  to  obtain  any  payment  that ;  ii.  8  <>^  seq.^ 

the  arrears  were  not  received  till  above  ■  lie  received  the  reward  usually  accorded 
three  years  after  his  death ;  and  of  the  •  to  these  officers,  by  beine  advanced  to  the 
various  delays  and  excuses  in  obtaining  it ,'  dignity  of  archdeacon  of  Worcester  some 
his  brother  ^ves  a  ver}'  amusing  account  ;  time  in  1200,  and  also  grants  of  the  church 
in  his  interestmg  autobiography.  The  judge  |  of  Erotheham,  in  the  diocese  of  Lincoln, 
did  not  resume  his  practice  at  the  bar,  but,  ;  in  3  John ;  of  the  perpetual  vicarage  of 


keeping  his  chamber  at  Serjeants'  Inn,  he 
diea  there  four  years  afterwards,  on  March 


Brancestre  in  Norfolk,  probably  his  native 
place,  in  9  John ;  and  of  the  prebend  €i 


27, 1(583,  and  was  buried  inRoxwell  Church.  Lidington  in  Lincoln  Cathedral,  in  10  John. 
Never  having  been  married,  he  left  his  bro-  j  In  these  grants  the  king  calls  him '  his 
ther.  Sir  John,  his  heir,  who  in  his  biogra-  clerk,*  and  in  G  John  two  sheaves  of  com 
phy  gives  a  very  pleasing  character  of_him.    (garbas)  out  of  the  king*s  demesne  of  Wich- 

ton,  in  Norfolk,  are  conferred  upon  him, 


BBAXWELL.  George  William  Wil- 


8HIRB,  is  the  son  of  (George  Br^mwell,  a  |  which  are  dcsciibed  as  having  been  before 

Henry  II.,  *  cuidam  clericonim 
{Itot.CUws.  i.  4.)    Again,  in  5 


banker.    He  was  bom  in  London,  and  was    granted  by  Henry  II., '  cuidam  clericonim 
called  to  the  bar  bv  the  society  of  Lincoln's  .  suurum.'  *  (Rot.'Claus.  i.  4.)    j 


Inn  in  May  1838.  He  travelled  the  Home 
Circuit,  and  gained  so  good  a  reputation  in 
his  profe»*ion  as  to  be  appointed  on  the 


John  the  custody  of  the  abbey  of  Malmes- 
bury,  and  in  7  John  that  of  the  abbey 
of  Kamsey  were  entrusted  to  him,  chanes 


commissionof  enquiry  into  the  process,  prac-  |  in  which  the  officers  in  question  were  ne- 
tice,  and  system  of  pleadings  in  the  superior  ,  quently  engaged.  In  0  John  he  went  into 
courts.  In  1851  he  received  a  silk  gown,  {  rlanders  on  the  king*s  service,  and  had 
and  was  raised  to  the  bench  in  January  !  twenty  marks  allowed  for  his  expenses  (iUi 
18f56  as  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  and  was  ;  L  14)  ;  and  there  are  entries  on  the  Kotulus 
thereupon  knighted.  |  de  I^nestitis  of  12  John  (211,  237)  show- 

He  married,  according  to  Dod's  Peerage,  j  ing  that  payments  from  the  royal  treasuiy 
a  daughter  of  Bruno  Sifva.  |  were  made  through  his  hands.     That  he 

BRAHCEBTRE,  John  de,  is  introduced  by  |  was  of  a  joyous  £sposition,  and  that  the 
Sir  T.  D.  Hardy  (Ca^.  0)  among  the  keepers  j  king  understood  his  character,  may  be  pre- 
of  the  Great  Seal  in  1203  and  1205  on  the  I  siimed  from  the  grant  in  7  John  of  a  dohum 
authority  of  charters  of  6  and  7  John.  Those  of  good  wine  of  price,  and  of  two  more  in 
charters  are  subscribed  with  the  words  '  9  John.  He  died  in  1218.  (XeAVM,302.) 
*  Data  per  manum  J.  de  Brancestre,  Archid.  '  BSATBBOC,  Uobert  de,  so  called  from 
Wigom.'  If  this  be  sufficient  to  ground  the  place  of  his  residence  in  Northampton- 
the  title,  he  should  have  been  so  designated  shire,  was  the  son  of  Ingebard,  by  his  wife 
at  an  earlier  date,  as  there  are  some  char-  Albreda,  one  of  the  daughters  and  ooheii* 
ters  given  under  his  hand  in  September  ,  of  Ivo  Newmarch.  In  0  ]^ch«rd  L  he 
1200,  2  John,  as  well  as  others  so  signed  by  |  accounted  for  the  ferm  of  Htelnroe  in  Rat- 
him  in  conjunction  with  Huffh  de  Wells  ;  land  (MadoXf  i.  235) ;  and  in  the  loUowiqg 
in  August  and  September  of  that  year.  year  he  waa  sheriff  of  the  united  ooaotiM 


BBAYBROO 

of  Bedford  and  Backinghain  under  William 
de  Albiniy  an  office  which  he  continued  to 
hold,  with  an  interval  of  two  or  three,  years^ 
till  15  John.  His  county  of  Northampton, 
ako,  he  held  as  ^eiiff  from  10  to  16  John, 
and  that  of  Rutland  from  12  to  15  John. 
(A&r'tf  WoHkies.)  That  he  filled  some 
office  in  the  court  at  Westminster  appears 
bj  a  notice  on  the  great  roll  of  11  John 
that  certain  accounts  were  rendered  'in 
camera  regis '  before  Bichard  de  Marisco 
and  Robert  de  Braybroc  (Madox,  ii.  262)  ; 
.and  in  the  same  year  the  Rotiilus  Misee 
(148)  records  a  payment  to  him  of  three 
hund^red  marks  to  be  placed  in  the  treasury 
at  Northampton. 

■  His  name  appears  among  the  justiciers 
before  whom  fines  were  acknowledged  in 
1  and  8  John. 

From  some  cause  not  explained,  he  got 
into  disgrace  with  Kinff  Kichard,  in  the 
tenth  year  of  whose  reign  he  fined  180 
marks  to  be  restored  to  ms  favour ;  but  it 
IS  clear,  fix>m  what  has  already  been  stated, 
that  King  John  did  not  remove  his  con- 
fidence. He  granted  him  in  7  John  the 
manor  of  Ooreby  in  Northamptonshire,  and 
Dufldale  (Baronaffe,  i.  728)  states  that  he 
made  him  master  of  his  wardrobe  and  one 
of  his  coundl,  distinguishing  him  with  the 
ipecial  favour  of  allowing  mm  to  hunt  in 
the  royid  forest.  Roger  do  Wendover  (iii. 
^7)  names  him  as  one  of  John's  '  con- 
iiliaiios  iniquissimos '  in  the  time  of  the 
interdict. 

Ilis  death  occurred  during  the  last  year 
of  his  sherifialty,  16  John,  when  he  was 
succeeded  by  his  son  Henry. 

BBATBSOC,  Henbt  de,  was  the  eldest 
son  of  the  last-named  Robert  de  Bravbroc, 
with  whom  he  was  united  in  the  snerifi*- 
alti»  of  Rutland,  Northampton,  and  Buck- 
ingham and  Bedford  for  the  last  two  or 
three  years  of  his  father's  life,  but  in  16 
John  ne  held  them  alone.  Up  to  this 
period  he  had  supported  the  king  through- 
out his  diificulties,  but  in  that  year  (pro- 
bably on  his  father's  death)  he  united  with 
the  barons,  and  took  so  leading  a  part  that 
he  was  excommunicated  by  name,  and  the 
whole  of  his  possessions  seized  into  the 
kittflr's  hands.  At  the  death  of  John  he 
•dli  continued  in  rebellion,  and  success- 
fully resisted  the  roval  forces  at  the  castle 
ofMontsoreL  (WenHaoer, m.2S7,  SOI, S66,) 
On  the  ultimate  retirement  of  Prince  Louis, 
however^  he  returned  to  his  allegiance,  and 
in  September  1217  his  lands  were  restored 
to  him.     (Hot.  ClauB,  L  321.) 

Having  been  appointed,  in  8  Henry  IH., 
•one  of  Uie  justices  itinerant  to  take  the 
MnTtfl  of  novel  disseisin  for  the  counties  of 
Boddmgham  and  Bedford,  at  Dunstable,  he 
and  his  associates  fined  Faukes  de  Breaute 
loot  on  each  of  more  than  thirty  veiiiicts 
Jbimd  against  him  for  violent  seizure  of  the 


BRAYBBOKE 


119 


Eroperty  of  his  ndghbours. ;  Faukes,  having 
itherto  acted  wiui  impunity,  was  .too  sel^ 
willed  to  submit  tamely,  but  on  the  instant 
directed  his  brother  William,  with  all  the 
garrison  of  Bedford  Castle,  to  seize  .the 
judges  and  put  them  into  strict, cqnfine- 
ment.  They  all  escaped,  bowever,  except 
Henry  de  Braybroc,  who  was  taken  and 
carried  to  the  castle,  where,  though  no 
injury  was  done  to  his  j^rson,  he  was 
treated  vdth  the  greatest  mdignity.  His 
wife  Christiana,  daughter  of  Wiscard  Le- 
det,  immediately  appeared  before  the  par- 
liament then  sitting  at  Northampton,  and, 
loudly  calling  for  justice,  the  mdignant 
king  took  the  most  active  measures  to 
aven^  the  afizont.  Proceeding  with  a 
formidable  force  at  once  to  Beoford,  he 
demanded  the  release  of  the  incarcerated 
judge,  which  was  boldly  rofused.  A  re- 
gular siege  then  commenced  on  June  16, 
and  so  stoutly,  was  the  castle  defended  that 
it  was  not  till  August  16  that  the  ^^arrison 
were  forced  to  submit,  when,  so  high  was 
the  king's  indignation  raised,  that  ne  or- 
dered Faukes's  brother  William,  who  had 
been  left  in  command,  with  several  other 
knights,  to  be  hanged  on  the  spot.  (  Wen" 
doveVf  iv.  04. )  Henrv  de  Braybroc  was  thus 
released,  and  was  an»rwards  employed  to 
see  the  castle  totally  destroyed  and  the 
materials  distributed  according  to  the  king's 
order.  In  the  following  year  he  was  again 
appointed  justice  itinerant  for  the  same 
counties,  and  in  10  Henry  IH.  for  the 
counties  of  Lincoln  and  York,  in .  the  for- 
mer of  which  his  wife  had  property.  He  is 
mentioned  as  'Justidarius  de  Banco'  in  a 
record  of  11  Henry  HI.,  and  Dugdale  quotes 
a  fine  levied  beK>re  him  two  years  after- 
wards.    (Madox,  ii.  336.) 

He  died  before  June  1234, 18  Henry  HI., 
as  in  that  year  his  widow  paid  .a  fine  for 
permission  to  marry  whom  she  pleased. 
They  had  two  sons — Wiachard,  who  after- 
wards took  his  mother's  name  of  Ledet ; 
and  John,  who  retained  the  name  of  Bray- 
broc. One  of  the  descendants  of  the 
latter  was  Robert  de  Braybroke,  Bishop 
of  London,  subsequentlv  noticed;  and  an- 
other was  Sir  Reginald  Brajbroc,  who  in 
the  reign  of  Henry  IV.  mamed  the  heiress 
of  the  Lord  Cobham.  (Dugdale' s  Baron,  i. 
728.) 

BEATBBOKE,  RoBEBT  BE  (Bishop  of 
Londok),  a  lineal  descendant  from  the 
above  Henry  de  Braybroc,  was  a  younger 
son  of  Sir  Gerard  Braybroke,  who  died  in 
1369,  by  Isabella  his  wife.  Educated  for 
the  Church,  he  successively  became  a  canon 
of  Lichfield,  archdeacon  of  Cornwall  in 
1376,  dean  of  Salisbury  in  1380,  and  ulti- 
matelv  Bishop  of  London  on  September  0 
1381,'as  successor  to  William  de  Courte- 
neye.  (Le  Neve.) 
He  was  appointed  ChanoeUor  of  EinvrAtvix^ 


120 


BBAYTON 


an  Septeinber  9, 1382,  6  Richaxd  11.,  but 
did  not  Teceiye  tiie  Seal  till  the  dOth.  Of 
his  acts  while  in  that  office  nothins  \b  re- 
corded beyond  his  opening  the  paniament 
in  October,  and  his  tenure  of  it  was  yery- 
short;  for,  in  consequence  of  some  dis- 
affreement  t  between  him  and  John  of 
Gaunt,  Duke  of  Lancaster,  he  was  re- 
moved on  March  10,  1S8S,  the  record 
delicately  suggesting  that  he  '  denred  with 
great  earnestness  to  be  exonerated  from 
the  office.' 

The  remainder  of  his  life,  which  ex- 
tended tiU  August  27,  1404,  was  devoted 
to  his  episcopal  duties.  He  was  buried  in 
his  own  cathedral.  Pepys  records  (iiL  0) 
the  discovery  of  his  body  in  a  complete 
state  of  nreservation  after  the  fire  of  Lon- 
don in  1666 ;  and  in  '  Notes  and  Queries ' 
(2nd  8.  iii.  186)  there  is  a  curious  account 
of  its  subsequent  mutilation. 

BBATTOV,  or  DEATTOV,  Thomas  be, 
had  a  grant  of  the  prebend  of  FVnglas,  in 
the  church  of  Glasgow,  in  13  Edward  11. 
In  3  Edward  IIL  he  accompanied  the  king 
to  Fnnce,  and  was  oigaffed  in  various  mis- 
sions of  trust  for  severu  of  the  following 
years.  His  appointment  as  a  clerk  in  the 
Chancery,  it  would  appear,  occurred  about 
6  Edward  IIL,  as  in  the  parliament  of  that 
year  he  was  a  receiver  of  the  petitions. 

g7LParLiLe8.)  From  14  to 27  Edward 
.  he  was  firequentiv  one  of  those  en- 
trusted with  the  custody  of  the  Great  Seal, 
either  during  the  absence  of  the  chan- 
cellors or  in  the  intervals  of  vacancy  in 
the  office  from  1340  to  1453.  He  con- 
tinued to  act  as  a  derk  of  the  Chancery 
tiU  33  Edward  IIL,  1359  (New  Fcedera,  iii. 
462),  after  which  his  name  is  not  men- 
tioned. 

He  is  frequentiy  called  Thomas  de  Dray- 
ton in  the  Rolls  of  Parliament  (ii.  146-264.) 
If  this  was  his  right  name,  he  was  probably 
connected  with  a  Norfolk  family  having 
possessions  at  Great  Yarmouth.  (Abb.  Hot. 
Oriff.  iL  103,  242.) 

BBXATITS,  Faukes  de,  frequently  acted 
as  a  justice  itinerant,  and  Fuller  says  that 
he  was  a  native  of  Middlesex,  and  that  Ms 
fSunily  were  named  '  de  Brent,'  from  the 
rivulet  so  called  in  that  countv.  Matthew 
Paris,  on  the  only  occasion  m  which  he 
gives  him  a  surname,  also  caUs  him  'de 
Jurent,'  but  he  describes  him  as  a  bastard, 
bom  in  Nonnandy.    This  seems  to  be  sup- 

rrted  by  the  fact  that  for  eight  years  after 
John  (when  he  is  first  mentioned)  ho  is 
never  described  except  by  his  Christian 
name,  Falcasius  or  Fulco.  Neither  does  Ko- 
ger  de  Wendover  add  any  surname.  Dug- 
dale,  both  in  his  '  Baronage'  and  '  Chronica 
Series,'  calls  him  '  de  Breant ; '  but  the  rolls 
after  16  John  invariably  name  him  'de 
Breaute,'  or  '  de  Braute.'  The  probability 
is  that  this  name  was  given  him  from  a 


BBEAUTE 

town  so  caUad  in  the  depaxtment  off  tii» 
Lower  Seine. 

In  7  John  be  was  sent  with  otbeit  t» 
Poictou  with  one  thonaand  maxks  (BtL 
Flni.  60) ;  in  10  John  ha  waa  sheriff  of 
Glamormnshire,  and  was  actively  einployvd. 
in  the  WeLsh  maxchea  until  the  flmera 
year  off  that  vngn.  He  then  waa  sent  jMl 
the  Earl  of  Salisoniyand  othen  on  a  miflMB 
to  Flanders,  taking  with  them  tan  thoosBaJ 
marks.  (HaL  Omu.  I  130,  146.)  Zeal* 
ously  supporting  King  John  in  the  wa» 
with  his  narons  during  the  last  years  of  kda 
reign,  he  was  one  of  the  gencoala  left  to 
checK  them  in  London  when  the  king 
'  marched  to  the  north  in  1216.  In  the  fill- 
lowing  November  he  took  tlie  caaUe  of 
William  Malduit,  of  Hamslape,  and  a  lew- 
days  idTterwards  that  of  Bedford.  .  (Wmn 
dover,  iii.  347,  340.} 

In  reward  for  his  energetic  prooeadinga 
the  king  granted  to  him  the  latter  caslu^ 
and  also  gave  him  in  marriage  a  rich  hut 
unwilli^  bride,  Margare^  danghter  of 
Warin  l^tz-Gerold,  and  widow  of  JBaldwin 
de  Ripariis,  or  de  Betun,  Earl  off  Albemarla^ 
the  son  of  William,  Earl  of  Devon,  togedMr 
with  the  wardship  of  her  aon  Baldwin,  mA 
the  custody  of  his  lands.  Part  of  thase 
were  in  South  Lambeth,  where  he  built  a 
hall  or  mansion-house,  which  waa  called 
by  his  name,  and  is  termed  Eaokeahalli  or 
<  La  Sale  Fawkes,'  in  10  Edward  I.  It  ia 
mentioned  in  the  charter  of  Isabella  de  For* 
tibus.  Countess  of  Albemarle  and  Devon^ 
and  Lady  of  the  Isle  of  Wight,  dated  in 
1293,  by  which  she  sold  her  poaaearicoa  to 
King  Edward  L  (ArchaoL  Jomm,  iv.  276.) 
EdwEurd  the  Black  Prince,  by  licence  firom 
his  father,  gave  it  in  1363  to  the  duster 
of  Canterbuiy  for  perminion  to  found  a 
chantry  in  the  crypt  of  the  cathedral,  wlwie 
two  priests  were  to  pray  for  hia  aooL 
(8tanla/*$  Hid.  Mem.  of  CatUeHmry,  112, 
131.)  It  still  belongs  to  the  chapter ;  and,. 
preserving  its  name  ever  since,  it  waa  kog 
known  as  a  favourite  place  of  auburban  en- 
tertainment, but  has  been  lately  converted 
into  building  land.  Faukea  waa  also  ap- 
pointed seneschal  to  the  king,  and  obtainad 
a  mandate  for  aU  constables  to  treat  him 
hospitably  when  he  came  to  their  castieB.. 
(Rot.  Claus.  i.  100 ;  Hot.  FtiL  135.)  Other 
favours  flowed  in  upon  him ;  the  castles  and 
sheriffalties  of  Oxford,  Northampton,  Bed- 
ford and  Buckingham,  and  Huntingdon  and 
Cambridge,  were  entrusted  to  him ;  and  he 
continued  to  hold  them  for  the  first  eight 
years  of  King  Henry's  reign. 

On  the  accession  of  Henry  IH.  his  brsverr 
was  instrumental  in  seeuring  the  throne  lo- 
him.  But,  although  valiant  and  ooniageous, 
he  was  brutal  and  oppressive.  Not  only 
during  the  war  was  m-  cruel  in  hia  escae* 
tions,  but  even  after  the  peace  wi^  LoidB- 
had  been  completed,,  and  the  SBMIlioas< 


BREAUTE 

huaoB  had  zetanitd  to  tlwir'aUegianoey  tin 
desne  of  plnnder  would  not  allow  him  to 
dawtftomdiemoitmrliitnrjddma.  When 
the  hing  ww  dedued  of  rail  Me,  and  was 
adriied  to  naoiiie  the  cnatodT  of  hia  castlesy 
Fnkea  waa  one  of  thoae  who  joined  with 
tha  Eariof  Albemarie  in  leaiatiiur  the  man- 
date; hat  ha  waa  at  laat  oompeued  to  aah- 
ifliL  Jhawjg  the  whole  of  thia  time,  how- 
afer,hei«oeiTad  many  pfoofo  of  royal  laTour, 
■hflwing  that  hia  aemoea  were  too  Taluable^ 
nd  he  too  powerftd|  to  pendt  hia  delin- 
apendea  to  be  ezaminea  with  atrictoeaa. 
Hia  veliaiice  on  thia  impunity  incTBaaed  hia 
Wdwiw,  nntil  hia  ijreaumption  betrayed 
Urn  into  aacaaaaa  which  were  fatal  to  lum. 
Hia  tymmiT  «id  Tudenoe  became  so  opprea- 
mm  that  nia  neighboun  at  laat  reaiated, 
tad,  ]wn<«^iHnp  againat  him  in  the  King'a 
Goaty  three  jndgea  were  aent  down  to  fiy 
the  eaaea  at  Donatable,  where  no  leas  than 
lUrty  rerdieta  were  found  againat  him^  and 
im  of  lOOL  in  each  of  them  were  imposed. 

Ihe  haoflfaty  baron  reeolTed  to  be  re- 
vaged,  and  aent  hia  brother  William  with 
a  MM  of  hja  followera  to  anae  the  judges. 
Two  of  theni.  Martin  de  Fkteahull  and 
Thonaa  de  MuletoU;  eacaped;  the  third. 
Hemy  de  Bkaybroe,  was  imiuckily  capturea 
ad  taken  to  Hedford  Castle,  where  he  was 
teBBlcd  with  ereiy  indignity.  When  this 
oatni|e  wia  communicated  to  the  council, 
ftaaattnig  at  Ninrthampton,  they  proceeded 
m  the  inatant  to  hia  chastisement.  His 
eaiUe  at  Bedford  was  taken,  though  not  till 
lAer  two  months'  siege,  and  \>^lliam,  the 
kntfaer  of  Fankes,  with  twenty-four  other 
UghtBy  waa  hanged.  Faukes  himself  es- 
oaed  into  Wales,  but,  not  succeeding  in 
Mfttng  any  powers  in  his  cause,  and  hear- 
ag  that  the  king  had  confiscated  all  his 
poBBesdona  (^Excerpi,  a  Sot.  Fm,  i.  117),  he 
irepaned  to  return.  The  kin^  issued  an 
cider  to  the  aherifis  of  Shropahire  and  Staf- 
forislure  to  seixe  him  ana  his  followers. 
He  however  reached  the  court  in  safety, 
ndy  placing  himself  at  the  royal  mercy, 
gave  np  into  the  king's  hands  all  his  pro- 
Btrtf  and  possessions.  (JZlymer,  i.  176.) 
Dehrefed  into  the  custody  of  Eustace  de 
Fanoonberg,  Bishop  of  London,  his  case 
WM  heard  in  the  following  March,  1225, 
thereupon  the  nobles,  nreserving  his  life 
in  consideration  of  his  former  services,  ba- 
aidied  him  the  realm  for  ever.  On  landing 
m  Normandy  he  was  taken  before  the  King 
of  France,  where  he  asrain  narrowly  escaped 
a  di^raceful  death ;  but,  being  signed  with 
tbe  cross,  he  was  permitted  to  proceed  on 
liis  journey  to  Rome.  There  he  induced 
tke  pope  to  interfere  with  King  Henry  on 
Us  behalf;  but  that  monarch  was  inexora- 
Ue;  and  the  life  of  Faukes,  about  1228, 
niB  terminated  by  poison  administered  in  a 
fiih  at  St  Ciriac. 

The  manor  of  Whitchurch,  in   Berks, 


BREREWOOD 


1211 


waa  aasigned  to  hia  wife  for  her  support,, 
and  she  was  allowed  to  answer  to  the  idng 
for  all  the  debta  owed  to  him  at  the  rate 
of  three  hundred  marks  a  year.  The 
Close  Holla  contain  numerona  entries  of  the- 
restoration  of  lands  to  their  possesaors, 
from  whom  Faukes  had  unjustly  seized 
tliem. 

His  dauffhter  Eve  married  Lewellyn-ap- 
Jorwerth,  Prince  of  North  Walea.  (Dug- 
dMs  Barm.  L  743 ;  H^mdover,  iv.  10-137 ; 
Rc^  iii.  10-26.) 

HtllOH  MTilT,  William,  by  his  mar- 
riaoe  with  Joane  de  Benenden,  became 
lord  of  the  manor  of  Benenden.  near  Cran- 
brook,  in  Kent.  There  is  little  account  of 
his  early  career  as  a  lawyer,  except  that 
he  is  mentioned  in  Richard  BelleweV 
Reports,  and  that  he  was  one  of  the  king*e 
seijeants  in  14  Richard  II. 

He  attended  the  parliament  of  21  Richard 
IL,  and  was  caUed  upon  to  say  what  he 
thought  of  the  answers  which  had  been 
given  by  the  judges  to  the  <|^uestions  pro- 
posed to  them  by  Chief  Justice  Tresitian. 
lie  replied  that  thev  seemed  to  him  to  be 
good  and  loyal,  and  that  he  should  have 
ffiven  the  same.  (Mot,  Pari  iii.  358.)  lli» 
fear  of  the  consequences  of  expressing  a 
different  opinion,  and  still  more  nis  imme- 
diate prospect  of  advancement,  probably 
prompted  nim  upon  the  occasion;  for  iik 
Trinity  Term  in  tne  following  year  we  find 
a  fine  acknowledged  before  him  as  a  judgtv 
of  the  Common  Pleas. 

On  the  deposition  of  Richard  IT.,  King 
Henry  made  nim  a  knight  of  the  Bath  on 
the  day  of  his  coronation,  and  continued 
him  in  his  place  in  the  Common  Plean^ 
which  he  retained  till  Easter  140(1 

He  died  on  the  20th  of  May  following 
at  his  house  in  Holbom,  and  whs  buried  in 
Canterbury  Cathedral,  where  his  widow, 
who  lived  till  1453,  built  a  small  chapel  or 
chantry.  They  left  no  children.  (Ilasted^ 
xL  347;  Weever,  235.) 

SSEBXWOOD,  Robert.  The  family  of 
Brerewood  were  flourishing  citizens  of 
Chester.  The  judge^s  ffrandlather  is  called 
a  wet-glover  tnere,  ana  was  thrice  mayor. 
His  uncle,  Edward,  was  a  famous  scholar, 
and  became  the  first  Qresham  professor  of 
astronomy.  His  father,  John,  tne  mayor's 
eldest  son,  was  sheriff  of  Chester ;  and  the 
judge  himself  was  bom  thore  about  1588. 
lie  was  admitted  into  Brazenotfc  College, 
Oxford,  in  1605,  and  two  years  afterwanU 
became  a  member  of  the  Middle  Temple, 
where  he  was  called  to  the  bar  on  Novem- 
ber IS,  1G15.  After  a  lengthened  practice 
of  two-and-twenty  yearn,  duriii^r  which  he 
published  several  of  his  uncle's  works,  ht^ 
was  appointed  a  judge  of  North  Wales  in 
IQiiTf  was  chosen  reader  to  his  inn  in  the 
Lent  following,  and  at  I'kister  1030  was. 
elected  recorder  of  his  native  citv.     The- 


122 


BRETON 


degree  of  the  coif  was  conferred  upon  him 
in  1040,  and  in  Hilary  Term  1641  he  was 
made  king's  Serjeant  Beceiying  the 
honour  of  knighthood  in  December  1643, 
he  was  advanced  to  the  bench  at  Oxford 
on  the  3l8t  of  the  next  month.  The  ex- 
ercise of  Sir  Robert's  judicial  functions  was, 
however,  of  short  continuance,  and  he  never 
performed  them  in  Westminster  Hall. 

Witnessing  the  extinction  of  regal  au- 
thority, and  lamenting  his  royal  master's 
untimely  death,  he  passed  the  remainder  of 
his  days  in  the  retirement  of  his  home,  and 
d^-ing  there  on  September  8, 1654,  he  was 
buried  in  St.  Mary's  Church  at  Chester. 

He  married,  iirst,  Ann<L  daughter  of  Sir 
Handle  Mainwaringe,  of  Over  Fever  in 
Cheshire,  and,  secondly,  Katherine,  daugh- 
ter of  Sir  llichard  Lea,  of  Lea  and  Dem- 
liall,  in  the  same  county,  and  left  several 
children  by  each  of  them.  (Ath,  Oxmu  ii. 
140.)  ^ 

BBETOK,  John  le  (afterwards  Bisnor 
OF  Hereford),  is  stated  to  have  been  the 
son  of  a  knight  of  that  name,  wlio,  with 
his  wife,  was  buried  at  Abbey  Pore  in 
Herefordshire.  (ArchaoL  Jourti,  xix.  35.) 
Brought  up  to  the  double  profession  of  the 
law  and  the  ch(y*ch,he  had  the  county  aud 
■castle  of  Herefoni  committed  to  his  custody 
in  38  Ilenrj'  III.  (Abb,  Hot.  Oriy.  i.  13), 
and  was  raised  to  the  judicial  bench  at  the 
latter  end  of  60  Henry  III.  (Rrcernt  e  Rot. 
Fin.  ii.  430.)  In  the  next  year  the  keeper  of 
the  wardrobe  was  directed  by  the  king  to 
supply  *  Johanni  le  Breton  et  Henrico  do 
Montefoiii,  justiciariis  suis,'  with  the  full 
robes  which  the  other  judges  were  accus- 
tomed to  be  provided  with.  (Selfien's  Ilentj' 
ham  Moffna,  5.)  The  entries  of  assizes 
before  liim  continue  till  the  end  of  De- 
cember 1268,  or  beginning  of  January  126J). 
On  the  13th  of  the  latter  month  the  king 
consented  to  his  election  as  Bishop  of  Here- 
ford, when  he  no  doubt  retired  from  the 
bench.  He  was  consecrated  in  the  follow- 
ing July,  and  presided  over  the  see  about 
Hix  years,  dying  in  May  1275,  3  Edward  1. 
(Godwin.) 

The  work  called  *  Britton,'  which  is  a 
compendium  of  the  English  law,  was  at  one 
time  attributed  to  this  judge  and  bishop. 
But  from  the  contents  it  is  manifest  that  it 
must  have  been  written  after  13  Edward  I., 
inasmuch  as  the  author  cites  a  statute 
passed  in  that  year,  as  well  as  another 
iiuacted  in  0  Edward  I.,  both  of  which 
periods  were  subsequent  to  the  bishop's 
death.  The  work  has  been  considered  by 
others,  and  this  seems  the  better  opinion, 
to  be  little  more  than  an  abridgment  of 
Bracton,  with  the  addition  of  the  sub- 
seauent  alterations^in  the  law ;  and  the  pro- 
bability of  this  acquires  ereater  weight 
when  It  IB  remembei^d  that  JBiacton's  name 
was  sometimes  writtan  Britton  or  Bretton. 


BRETT  . 

(Henghaniy  ut  supra ;  JReevea's  Engl.  LaWf 
ii.  280.) 

BBETOH,  John  le.  The  family  of  Breton 
held  considerable  possessions  in  Norfolk, 
but  to  what  branch  of  it  this  John  le  Bre- 
ton belonged  is  uncertain.  He  was  pro- 
bably the  *  Dominus  de  Sporle '  of  that  name 
who  joined  in  the  barons'  letter  to  Pope 
Boniface  VHI.  in  29  Edward  I.  On  Ja- 
nuary 0, 1305,  33  Edward  I.,  he  was  one 
of  the  justices  of  trailbaston,  then  appointed 
for  the  counties  of  Norfolk  and  Suftolk,  and 
again  in  1307.  In  3  Edward  IL  he  was 
an  assessor  of  the  twenty -fifth  granted  in 
Norfolk,  and  he  died  in  the  next  year. 
(Pari.  Writs,  i.  497,  592 ;  Hot.  Pari.  i.  218.) 

BBETOK,  William  le,  or  BBITO,  as  he 
is  frequently  called  in  the  earlier  part  of.  his 
life,  was  the  brother  of  the  after-mentioned 
Hanulph  Brito,  and  was  engaged  in  various 
ways  m  the  service  of  Henry  HI.  Fifty 
marks  were  paid  out  of  the  treasury  to  him 
and  another  in  6  Henry  III.  to  purchase 
robes  for  the  use  of  the  king;  and  two 
years  subsequently  he  held  a  judicial  ap- 
pointment in  the  court  at  Durham,  he  and 
his  associates  being  commanded  not  to  hold 
plea  on  any  writ  of  the  bishop  which  his 
predecessors  had  not  been  accustomed  to 
issue.  In  10  Henry  HI.  he  seems  to  have 
had  some  regulation  of  the  ports,  as  he  is 
directed  to  allow  a  person  to  send  his  com 
in  a  ship  to  London,  taking  security  that  it 
is  carried  nowhere  else.  (jRot.  CUtus.  L  492, 
631,  u.  118.) 

From  11  to  16  Henry  IIL  he  held  the 
sheriftaltyi  of  Kent  in*  conjunction  witii 
Hubert  de  Burgh.  (Hasted,  i.  180.)  His 
next  advance  was  to  the  office  of  one  of  the 
justices  or  custodes  of  the  Jews  on  July  6, 
1234, 18  Henry  HI.,  which  he  held  three 
years  afterwards*.     (Madox,  i.  234,  ii.  317.) 

He  evidently  became  a  regular  justide^ 
and  it  is  probable  that  he  was  appointed 
in  the  same  year  he  acted  tia  a  justioe 
itinerant  in  the  county  of  Surrey,  32  Heniy 
HI.,  1248.  In  the  next  year  there  are  not 
only  writs  of  assize  to  be  taken  before  him, 
but  he  was  also  united  with  the  same  asso- 
ciates as  in  the  last,  in  three  several  com- 
missions. The  writs  of  assize  have  his 
name  inserted  as  late  as  August  1259. 

He  died  in  46  Henry  III.,  1201,  having 
considerable  property  in  Northamptonshire 
and  other  counties,  for  which  his  son  John 
le  Breton  did  homage,  paying  lOL  for  his 
relief.  (Rvcvrpt.  e  Hot.  Fin.  ii.  67-309, 
.349 ;  Cal.  Inquis.  p.  m.  i.  20.) 

BBETT,  William  Bauol,  one  of  the 
present  justices  of  the  Common  Pleas,  was 
appointed  as  an  additional  judge  under  the 
statute  31  &  32  Vict  c.  126,  a.  11,  paated 
for  amending  the  laws  relating  to  etectiflii 
petitions. 

He  is  the  son  of  the  Rer.  Joeeph  Q«(age 
Brett,  of  Ranelagh,  Gheleea,  by  DoiotliT, 


BKETTON 


BRIDGEMAN 


123 


dauffhter  of  George  Best,  Esq.,  of  Chilston  |  ter.  He  showed  himself  a  strenuous  sup- 
Park,  Kent.  He  was  bom  at  Chelsea  on  •  porter  of  monarchical  government^  voting 
August  Id,  1&15,  and  educated  at  West-  j  against  Lord  Stratiford^s  attainder,  and  op- 
minster  School,  and  Caius  College,  Cam-  |  posing  the  ordinance  by  which  the  militia 
bridge,  where  he  took  his  degree  of  B.A.  in  i  was  taken  out  of  the  hands  of  the  king. 
1840,  and  iUatinguished  himself  both  as  a  '  (l\irl.  Hist,  ii.  611,  75G;  lllutehcke,  6Q,) 
mathematicianandasaboatinirman.  Enter--  When  the  ci^-il  war  commenced  he  left 


ing  linooln's  Iim,  be  was  called  to  the  bar 
in  Janoaiy  1846,  and  joined  the  Northern 
Circuit.  'His  success  is  evidenced  by  his 
soon  becoming  leader  in  the  Passage  Court 
of  Liverpool,  and  by  his  bein^  appointed  a 
reviadng  barrister  in  the  districts  adjacent. 
He  was  employed  also  on  several  govern- 
ment conmuseions  and  by  the  Court  of  Ad- 
miralty. His  practice  in  London  was  very 
extensive,  and  continued  so  after  he  was 
xused  to  the  rank  of  queen's  counsel  in 
Ifarch  18(51.  From  July  1806  till  his  ele- 
vation to  the  bench  he  sat  in  parliament  as 
member  for  Helston,  for  which  he  was  re- 
elected on  being  appointed  solicitor-general 
bv  the  Derby  ministry  in  February  1868. 


the  parliament  and  assisted  his  father  the 
bishop  in  keeping  the  city  of  Chester  firm 
in  its  adherence  to  the  royal  cause.  In 
1645  he  was  one  of  tlie  king's  commis- 
sioners in  the  fruitless  endeavours  to  con- 
clude a  treaty  of  peace  at  Uxbridge,  where 
Charles  was  somewhat  dissatisfied  at  his 
carriage,  expressing  his  surprise  that  the 
son  of  a  bisnop  should  have  been  willing 
to  make  any  cnndt* 8censions  in  matters  of 
the  Church.'  Clarendon  (iii.  448 )  also  joins 
in  this  censure,  and,  though  giving  him 
credit  for  excellent  parta  and  honest  incli- 
nations, says, '  ho  was  so  much  given  to  find 
out  ex])edients  to  satisfy  unreasonable  men 
that  he  would  at  last  ie  drawn  to  yield  to 


l^e  was  then  knighted.     The  act  above  anythiufr  ho  should  be  powerfully  pressed 

«llnded  to  was  pa^ed  on  July  31  of  that  "     '    '    '*   "'       w-    _._  ^  ^l 

Tear,  and  Sir  William  was  one  of  the  three 
new  judges  appointed  under  it  on  August  24. 


to  do/  On  the  ultimate  nuccess  ol  the  par^ 
liamentary  party  Sir  Orlando  discontinued 
hirt  pmctice  at  the  bar,  but,  as  Ludlow  re- 


Ue married  Eugenie,  daughter  of  Louis  I  Intea   (p.  401),  'upon  his  submission  to 
Mayer,  Esq.  |  Cromwell,   was  permitted  to  practise  in 

iSETTOV,  ILexbt  de.  See  Bbactox.  ;  a  private  mauuor.'  1  le  devoted  his  time 
BSIBGSKAV,  ORLAjn>o,  belonged  to  the  .  to  conveyancing,  in  which  department  he 
fiunily  of  Bridgeman  ori^nally  settled  in  ,  became,  it  is  said,  the  great  oracle,  not  only 
Gloacestershire,  a  younger  son  of  which, '  of  liis  fellow-suilcrers,  but  also  of  the  whole 
baring  removed  to  Exeter,  became  the  ,  nation  in  matters  of  law — his  very  enemies 
&ther  of  Dr.  John  Bridgeman,  who,  after  •  not  thinking  their  estates  secure  without 

ii%*  «  «•■  ^%aT*  *         T  1*  1*  1*  A   j*^  1*  1  a1        1*  11         A* 


anon  of  Exeter  and  archdeacon  of  Bam-  {  reputation  that  li\o  editions  were  issued 


^ple,  he  was  the  father  of  several  sons, 
the  second  of  whom  was  the  judge. 

Orlando  Bridgeman  was  bom  at  Kxeter  on 
Janaary30,1608.  He  entered  Queen's  Col- 
lege, Cambridge,  in  1621,  and  he  took  his 
master's  degree  at  Midsummer  1624,  and 
was  elected  fellow  of  Magdalen  College.  In 
November  of  that  year  he  was  admitted  a 
member  of  the  Inner  Temple,  and,  haying 
been  called  to  the  bar  on  Feomary  10, 1632, 
became  a  bencher  a  few  weeks  before  the 


frt>ni  the  press. 

His  learnin<r  insured  him  immediate 
employment  on  the  Kestoration.  Two 
days  ttl'tor  the  kinjr's  return  he  was  in- 
vested with  the  Serjeant's  coif,  followed  on 
the  next  day  by  his  promotion  to  the  office 
of  chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer.  In  the 
same  week  his  loyalty  was  rewarded  with 
a  baronetcy,  in  which  he  is  described  of 
Great  Lever  in  Lancashire,  a  property  not 
far  from  AVigan.     Pepys  speaks  of  another 


rstoration  of  Charles  II.  He  was  made  seat  in  the  county  colled  Ashton  Hall,  near 
king's  counsel  in  the  duchy  of  Lancaster  Lancaster,  in  which  he  caused  four  great 
and  judge  of  the  coimty  palatine  of  Ches-    places  to  be  left  in  the  great  hall  window 


iie  was  knighted.     He  also  had  a  grant  in  :  the  next,  his  own,  with  this,  "  Hodic ;  "  m 
rtverfeion  of  the  ofiice  of  keeper  of  the  writs  j  the  fouith,  nothing  but  this  motto,  **  Cras 
ud  rolls  in  the  Common  Pleas.     {Rymer^ !  nescio  cujus.'^ '     (PepySj  i.  «349.) 
XL447,t>41 ;  Bp,  Bridgeman^ s  MS.  Ledger,)  !      The  principal  duty  that  he  had  to  per- 
In  the  Long  Parliament  of  1640  he  was  ;  form  as  lord  chief  baron  was  to  preside  at 


i^tnraed  for  \Vigan,  his  father's  former 
'KtoiT,  in  which  the  family  seems  to  have 
bad  lome  inteirest,  as  Antnony  Wood  re- 


the  trials  of  the  regicides,  which  lasted 
from  the  9th  to  the  19th  of  October  1660, 
Three  days  after   their    termination   Sir 


lata  that  Sir  Orlando  about  1662  conferred  i  Orlando  was  promoted  to  the  chief  seat  in 
fbp  Bring  npon  John  Hall,  Bishop  of  Ches-    the  Common  Pleas.    He  sat  in  that  court 


124 


BBIDGEMAN 


fbr  nearly  aeren  yean,  in  high  esteem  as  an 
able  exponent  of  the  law  and  an  impartial 
administrator  of  jnstioe. 

That  he  was  sometimes  too  precise  in 
his  legal  interpretations  is  exemplified  by 
a  story  told  by  Roger  North  (p.  07),  that 
when  it  was  proposed  to  moTe  his  court, 
which  was  placed  near  the  door  of  West- 
minster Hall  and  exposed  to  the  wind, 
into  a  back  room  called  the  treasorr,  the 
chief  justice  would  not  agree  to  it,  declar- 
ing it  was  against  Magna  Charta,  which 
enacts  that  tne  Common  Pleas  shall  be 
held  m  eerto  loco  (in  a  certain  place),  with 
which  he  assertea  the  distance  of  an  inch 
from  that  place  is  inconsistent;  and  that  all 
pleas  woald  be  coram  nonjudice. 

On  the  remoyal  of  Loid  Clarendon  the 
Qretit  Seal  was  given  to  Sir  Orlando  on 
August  30,  1667,  as  lord  keeper;  but  no 
successor  was  appointed  to  taKe  his  place 
in  the  Common  Pleas  till  B£ay  1668.  He, 
therefore,  during  the  interval  filled  both 
offices,  which  it  was  said  were  not  incom- 
patible ;  and  though  he  did  not  sit  in  his 
old  court,  fines  appear  to  have  been  levied 
before  him  during  the  whole  of  the  time. 
(Sida:/m,  2,  388;  DugdMs  Ch-ig.  40.) 
While  he  held  the  Seal,  both  Pepys  (iv. 
88)  and  £velyn  (iL  376)  state  that  he 
resided  at  Essex  House  in  the  Strand. 

It  is  to  Lord  Clarendon's  credit  that  he 
writes  not  a  word  in  depreciation  of  his 
successor.      Neither   Burnet    nor   Roger 
North  are  so  abstinent.    The  former  says 
(i.  258,  307)  that  in  his  new  office  he  did 
not  long  maintain  the  esteem  he  had  pre- 
viously acquired,  and  that  his  study  and 
Eractice  haia  lain  so  entirely  in  the  common 
iw  that  he  never  seemed  to  apprehend 
what  equity  was ;  nor  had  he  a  head  made 
for  busmees  and  for  such  a  court    Roger 
North  (Lives,  88;   Examen,  38)  is  more 
particular  in  his  animadversions.    He  de- 
scribed the  lord  keeper  '  as  timorous  to  an 
impotence,  and  that  not  mended  by  his 
great  age.    He  laboured  very  mucn   to 
please  every  body,  a  temper  of  ill  conse- 
quence to  a  judge.    It  was  observed  of 
him  that  if  a  cause  admitted  of  diverse 
doubts,  which  the  lawyers  call  points,  he 
would  nerer  give  all  on  one  side;  but 
either  party  should  have  something  to  go 
away  with.    And  in  his  time  tlie  Court  of 
Chancery  ran  out  of  order  into  delays  and 
endless  motions  in  causes ;  so  that  it  was 
like  a  fair  field  overgrown  with  briars.' 
After  holding  the  Seal  for  about  five  years, 
he  was  made  the  victim  of  the  strong 
parties  which  opposed  him,  and  was  re- 
moved on  November  17,  1672.    He  died 
on  June  25, 1674,atTeddinffton  in  Middle- 
sex, where    he  lies  buried.    All  parties 
unite  in  acknowledging  his  amiable  dis- 
position, his  honest  principles,  his  piety, 
Ids  moaeration,  and  his  learning;  to  the 


BRITO 

last  of  which  the  late  Liord  Ellenboioiigb 
(14  Ead'$  lUporiBj  184)— himself  a  gnat 
authority— bore  honourable  teatunony*  in 
calling  him  'that  most  eminent  judge,' 
and  speaking  of  'the  profundity  of  Jua 
learning  and  the  extent  ctf  hia  induitxy.' 

He  married,  first,  in  1627,  Jodith, 
dauffhter  and  heir  of  John  KynartoO|  "Emu 
of  Morton  in  Shropshire,  who  died  in  1644; 
and  secondly,  Dorothy,  daughter  of  Dr. 
Saunders,  provost  of  Oriel  Colleae,  Ox- 
ford, and  relict  of  George  Ciadoo,  Eaq.^ 
of  Carswell  Castle  in  Stafibrdshire.  Br 
his  first  marria^  he  had  a  daughter  and 
one  son;  by  hia  second  two  sons  and  a. 
daughter.  The  baronetcy,  of  course^  de- 
volved upon  Sir  John,  his  son  by  the  fint 
venter;  but  a  second  baronetcy  was  sranted 
in  1673,  the  year  following  Sir  Onando% 
retirement  from  the  Seal,  to  the  eldest  aon 
by  the  second  venter,  Sir  Orlando  Bridge 
man,  of  Ridley, in  Cheshire.  The  lattar 
became  extinct  on  the  death-  of  the  third 
baronet  in  1740 ;  but  the  former  still  sur- 
vives. The  fifth  baronet  was  ennobled  Inr 
the  title  of  Baron  Bradford  in  1794,  hia 
father  having  married  Anne  Newport,  the* 
sister  and  heir  of  the  last  Earl  of  BradfoKd 


of  that  name.    The  son  of  this  baron 
advanced  to  an  earldom  in  1815. 

BBITO.    SeeW.ut  Bkbton. 

BBITO.  Ralph,  had  the  custody  of  ih» 
honor  of  Bologne  and  of  the  land  of 
Henry  of  Essex  for  many  years,  and  the 
rolls  firom  15  to  81  Bfenry  IL  contain 
entries  of  his  accountinff  tor  them.  In 
1177,  Robert  Mantel  and  he,  as  juiticiariei, 
fixed  the  aid  to  be  paid  in  the  conntiv 
of  Norfolk,  Suffolk,  Essex,  and  Hertford; 
and  in  1170  he  was  selected  for  the  home- 
counties  to  act  as  a  justice  itinerant  in  on» 
of  the  four  divisions  into  which  the  " 


of  Windsor  then  apportioned  the  kingdom. 
(Madox,  i.  130,  263,  &c,  u.  200,  &c)  Bf 
the  roll  of  1  Richard  I.  (he  being  then 
dead)  it  appears  that  Lageford  and  Ghig- 
well  in  Essex  belonged  to  him. 

BBITO,  Richard,  was  an  ofiioer  of  the 
Exchequer,  to  whom  was  committed  th» 
receipt  of  the  rents  of  the  vacant  bishop- 
rics of  Lincoln  and  London  while  in  the 
king's  hands,  the  former  in  conjunction  with 
Master  Gregorius,  and  the  latter  witii 
Ralph,  archdeacon  of  Colchester.  He  is- 
called  archdeacon  of  Coventry  in  the  roll 
of  31  Henry  XL,  1185. 

In  1  Richard  I.  he  was  one  of  the  jus* 
tices  itinerant  in  the  counties  of  Devon, 
Dorset,  Somerset,  Wilts,  Hants,  and  Ox- 
ford ;  and  bb  he  acted  in  so  many  countiei^ 
ell  probably  in  one  circuit,  witnout  hmf 
recorded  as  a  justicier  at  Westminster,  it 
seems  likely  that  oflicers  of  the  court  wei» 
sometimes  sent  on  these  itinera  in  additifln 
to  the  regular  |ustici6r8.  He  no  doabt 
continued  to  act  m  subsequent  jean^M  tte 


BRITO 

Toll  of  7  Bidttid  Ly  1105-0,  cantaixu  an 
•entnr  of  tbe  payment  of  nztv  marks  '  Ri- 

309,  311,  ii.  284.) 

nno,  BAaruLPH,  or  LX  lUTOV,  the 

IvotlMar  of  the  before-mentioned  William 

le  Bratooy  or  Bnto^  ww  chaplain  to  Hu- 

liertdeBaxgh,  the  chief  jnatiaaxy,  in  1221, 

wbai  a  payment  waa  xnade  to  him  nnder 

that  deognation,  bendea  many  others  np 

to  11  Hemy  IIL    He  afterwaxds  became  a 

canoB  of  &  Panl'a.    In  7  Henry  III.  he 

1— :airfl  the  tallage  in  Wilton,  and  appeaza 

to  have  been  abrat  the  king's  person,   as 

in  the  ninth  year  he  bad  an  order  for  the 

repayment  of  ten  marks,  with  irhich  he 

lad  aceommodated  the  king  to  pay  some 

BMsengen.    A  grant  was  made  to'him  in 

11  Hemy  HL  oif  part  of  the  wood  of 

fiigayne,  in  Bbtherwick,  and  in  Dodinton, 

Xortfaamptanahiie,  to  bold  by  the  serrioe 

of  a  pair  of  gilt  apun.    (iSot.  CZsfft.L  457, 

•  114^73,184.) 

Hatinffy  br  the  laflawice  of  his  patron, 
Hnbart  oa  Imigfa,  been  raised  to  the  trea- 
aonnddp  of  the  diamber  of  the  Exchequer, 
hs  waa,  at  the  instigation  of  Peter  de 
Rnpjbna,  Kahop  of  Winchester,  dismissed 
fiomtbe  oiBoe  in  1232  for  frand  and  oonup- 
tioB,  and  fined  in  no  leas  a  sum  than  10001. 
{Wmiofver,  if.  244.)  Henir  in  his  first 
anger  bad  baniahed  Bannlph  Brito  from 
the  kingdooi.  bnt  within  two  months,  on 
]Bjnient  of  the  fine,  restored  him  to  favour, 
tkongb  not  to  bis  place,  with  a  condition, 
howerer,  that  he  ahoold  not  appeal  to  Rome. 
{CtLBU.  BoL  16.) 

Hia  death  oocured  in  1247,  and  the 
woida  '  CBneellazina  spedalis,'  used  by 
Matthew  Paris  in  recording  that  event, 
SBsm  the  cmlj  warrant  for  Dngdale  and 
otfaen  introducing  him  into  tiSa  list  of 
chsBoellQn,  although,  according  to  the  oon- 
oonstmctiQn  of  the  sentence,  the  words  ap- 
pear rather  to  intimate  that  he  was  chan- 
eeUor  to  the  queen.  None  of  the  records 
describe  him  as  the  king's  chancellor,  and 
Sbr  T.  D.  Hardy  baa  accordingly  omitted  the 
name  in  hia  catalogue.  Lord  Campbell, 
br  nustake,  calla  him  Bishop  of  Bath  and 
Weila. 

BUWIDt,  WruiAjr.  This  great  man, 
viio  waa  in  the  confidence  of  four  successive 
mooarchs,  ia  said  by  Camden  to  have  been 
a  foundling,  and  to  nave  received  his  name 
from  having  been  discovered  by  Henry  II. 
CO  a  heath  (Jtrw^re)  while  hunting  in  the 
New  Foreat  The  king,  he  says,  caused 
him  to  be  taken  up  and  placed  under  proper 
cue,  and  when  he  arrived  at  man's  estate 
employed  bim  in  bis  service.  Unfortunately 
lor  this  zomantic  tale,  Dugdale's  account 
«f  him,  if  eorreety  proves  that  it  is  not 
ibanded  on  ixtx&L  He  says  his  father  was 
HsBiy  Briwer,  and  quotes  a  charter  of 
Heny  XL  cunfinning  to  William  Briwer 


BRIWEB 


125 


and  his  heirs  certain  possessions  and  pri- 
vileaes,  with  the  fcsestship  of  the  forest  of 
De  la  Bere,  in  as  ample  a  manner  as  his 
father  held  them  in  the  timea  of  King 
W*illiam  and  Kinjr  Henry  L  Hovrever  this 
may  be,  in  26  Hennr  IL,  .1180,  he  wis 
entrusted  with  the  snerifialfy  of  Devon- 
shire, which  he  continued  to  hold  till  1 
Bichardl. 

His  judicial  career  commenced  in  33 
Henry  U.,  1187,  when  he  was  associated 
with  two  others  in  fixing  the  tallage  in 
Wiltshire.  He  acted  ia  the  same  character 
in  1  Bichard  L  in  Cornwall  and  Berkshire, 
and  in  0  Bichaid  L  in  Nottingham  ana 
Derby.  After  the  introduction  of  fines  his 
name  is  found  among  the  justiciers  before 
whom  they  were  levied  at  Westminster 
and  other  places,  during  the  last  four  years 
of  Bichanrs  reign,  and  most  of  the  years  of 
that  of  John;  and  he  is  mentioned  as  a 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  as  late  aa  6  Henry 
HL,  1221.  (Madoxy  i.  834, 733 ;  1^  BoU, 
116, 186.) 

That  he  attained  an  early  character  for 
wisdom  and  prudence  mav  be  inlisrred  from 
the  fact  that  lung  Bichard,  on  his  em- 
barkation to  the  Holy  Land,  idthough  he 
exacted  from  him  a  fine  for  not  joining  in 
the  crusade,  named  him  as  one  of  the 
council  to  assiBt  the  Bishops  of  Durham 
and  'ELj  in  the  government  ot  the  kingdom. 
Acting  against  the  latter  when  the  king's 
letter  authorised  the  council  to  assume  the 
government,  he  was  included  in  the  aen- 
tence  of  excommunication  which  the  bishop 
induced  the  pone  to  pronounce  against  the 
supporters  or  tne  Eari  John.  All  doubt  of 
his  loyalty,  however,  was  removed  by  the 
hearty  assistance  he  gave  to  release  his 
sovereign  from  captivity;  and  the  king's 
confidence  in  him  is  proved  by  his  being 
selected  aa  one  of  the  ambassadors  Uien 
sent  to  make  a  league  with  the  King  of 
France.  In  this  and  the  subsequent  reigns 
he  was  sheriff  of  several  counties.  The 
rolls  also  teem  with  grants  of  all  kinds— of 
manors,  lands,  mar&ts,  custodies,  ward- 
ships, licences  for  huilding  castles,  and  of 
vanous  other  privileges,  beeidc»  presents 
of  wine,  and  on  one  occasion  of  a  captured 
ship. 

Li  frequent  attendance  on  King  John, 
he  accompanied  him  to  Ireland,  dined  with 
him  at  his  table,  eating  fiesh  on  certain  pro- 
hibited days,  for  which  indulgence  money 
was  g^ven  to  the  poor;  and,  adhering  to 
him  in  all  his  troubles,  he  waa  a  witness  to 
his  renunciation  of  the  crown  to  the  pope. 
In  15  John  he  was  made  seneschal  to  the 
Idng  in  conjunction  with  W.  de  Cantelupe 
(Co/L  Rot,  Fat.  4),  and  when  the  king 
marched  northwards  in  1215  he  was  one 
of  those  entrusted  with  the  command  of 
one  of  the  forcee  left  to  check  the  barons 
remaining  in  London ;  and  on  several  occa- 


126 


BKIWES 


BROMLEY 


sions  till  tbe  end  of  the  reign  justified  the 
royal  confidence  by  the  exertions  which  he 
made  oh  behalf  of  his  sovereign. 

These  exertions  were  continued  on  the 
accession  of  Henry  III.  till  Prince  Louis 
w&s  forced  to  retire  from  the  kingdom. 
Rewards  still  fiowed  upon  him,  and  nt 
yarious  times  he  was  appointed  governor  of 
the  castles  of  Bolsover,  Lidford,  Devizes, 
and  Newcastle-upon-T}Tie. 

He  seems  to  have  been  an  uncompromis- 
ing supporter  of  the  king's  prerogative. 
Wendover  relates  (iv.  83)  that  when  Arch- 
bishop Stephen  and  the  nobles  in  1223 
urged  the  king  to  confirm  the  liberties  and 
rights  for  which  they  had  contended  with 
his  father,  William  Briwer  exclaimed  that 
'  *  those  liberties,  having  been  violently  ex- 
torted, ought  not  to  be  observed.*  '  The 
archbishop,  however,  mildly  reprimanded 
him,  and  the  king  wisely  promiwd  to  keep 
the  oath  he  had  taken  to  grant  them. 

His  career  of  prosperity  was  only  termi- 
nated by  his  deatn,  which  occurred'in  1226, 
11  Henry  III.  He  was  buried  in  the  abbey 
of  Dunkeswell  in  Devonshire,  which  he  had 
founded  for  Cistercian  monks. 

His  riches  and  his  piety  may  be  esti- 
mated by  the  following  works.  Besides 
the  above  abbey  of  Dunkeswell,  he  founded 
that  of  St.  Saviour  at  Torre,  in  the  same 
county,  for  Prsemonstratensian  canons ;  the 
priory  of  Motisfont,  in  Hampshire,  for  canons 
regular  of  St  Augustin ;  and  a  hospital  for 
twelve  poor  people,  besides  religious  and 
strangers,  at  Bridgewater  in  Somersetshire, 
where  he  also  built  a  castle,  constructed  a 
haven,  and  began  a  handsome  bridge. 

He  married  Beatrix  de  Vallibus,by  whom 
he  had  two  sons  and  five  daughters.  On 
the  death  of  the  sons  the  inheritance  was 
divided  among  the  five  daughters  and  their 
heirs.     {DugaM»  Baron,  i.  700.) 

BBIWEB,  John  DE,  is  introduced  as  a 
justicier  in  Mr.  Hunter's  Preface  to  the 
Fines  of  Richard  I.  and  John  inthe  eleventh 
year  of  the  latter  reign,  1209.  That  he  was 
u  some  office  connected  with  the  Exche- 
quer appears  from  several  entries  on  the 
Rot.  de  Finibus.  (417,  442.)  He  died  in 
1229.     {Rot,  de  Ohlatxs,  L  184.) 

BBOCLEBBT,  William:  BE,  of  that  place 
in  Lincolnshire,  was  an  ecclesiastic,  who 
devoted  much  of  his  property  both  in  that 
county  and  in  Yorkshire  to  pious  purposes. 
He  held  the  office  of  remenibrancer  of  the 
Exchequer  in  1338  {Hospitaller  in  EngL 
203)  tin  he  was  promoted  to  be  a  baron  of 
that  court  on  January  20, 1341, 14  Edward 
UI.  He  is  mentioned  as  being  alive  in 
25  Edward  HL  (Ahh.  Rot.  Orig,  ii.  91, 
&c ;  Rot,  Pari  ii.  453.) 

BBOXy  Laxtbence  del,  was  an  advocate 
in  the  reign  of  Henry  IIL,  evidently  stand- 
ing very  mgh  in  his  profession.    As  early 


as  1263  he  ynA  employed  on  the  part  of 


;  the  crown,  and  there  are  no  leas  than  Beven- 

teen  entries  in  that  year  in  which  he  acted 

for  the  king  in  suits  before  the  court    For 

an  interval  of  seven  years  his  name  does 

not  again  occur,  but  m  1260  he  seems,  to 

have  resumed  nis  position,  and  to  have 

!  been  regularly  enga^  on  the  king's  behalf 

until  Christmas  1267.    He  was  raised  to 

the  bench  before  the  following  February, 

and  continued  there  till  the  end  of  tfie- 

reign,  in  the  last  year  of  which  a  judgment 

is  mentioned.     (Rot.  Pari  i.  4.)    He  died 

in  3  Edward  I.,  in  possession  of  considerable 

;  property  in  the  counties  of  Buckingham^ 

i  Kent,  Hertford,  and  Oxford.    {Cal  Inqtds. 

I  p.  m.  i.  54.) 

BBOME,  Adam  de,  was  a  clerk  or  master 
in  Chancery,  and  tilled  the  office  of  a  jus- 
tice itinerant  in  the  county  of  Nottingnam 
in  3  Edward  UI.,  1330.    He  probably  was 
of  the  family  settled  at  the  manor  of  Brome 
Hall  in  Norfolk,  and  is  first  mentioned  in 
6  Edward  H.,  1312,  when  he  was  assigned 
to  talliate  Warwickshire  and  other  counties. 
From  that  time  up  to  3  Edward  lU.,  besides 
being  frequentl;^  mentioned  in  connection 
with  his  duties  in  Chancery,  he  was  several 
times  employed  in  judicicd  commissions. 
(Pari  iyrit8,'il  p.  ii.  602 ;  Abb,  PlacU.  337.) 
Like  his  brethren  in  the  Chancery,  he  re- 
ceived many  ecclesiastical  preferments.    In 
1316  he  was  rector  of  Hamworth  in  ]Mid- 
dlesex ;  in  1316,  chancellor  of  Durham ;  in 
1319,  archdeacon  of  Stow  and  rector  of  St 
Mary,  Oxford.    In  17  Edward  H.  he  had  a 
licence  to  erect  a  school  in  that  university, 
bj  the  name  of  *  Rectoris  Domua  Schola- 
rium  BeatSB  Mariae,  Oxon,'  which,  when 
founded,  he  presented  to  Edward  U.,  who 
further  endowed  it,  and  appointed  him  the 
first  provost.   From  a  large  messuage,  called 
la  Oriole,  bestowed  on  it  by  Edward  IL,it 
received  its  present  name.  Oriel  College. 
(Cal,  Rot,  Pat,  94  j  Chaltneris  Oaford/n', 
Le  Neve,  171.) 

BBOMLEY,  Thohas.  The  ancient  fanuly 
of  Bromley,  established  as  early  as  the  reim 
of  King  John  at  Bromleghe  in  Staffm- 
shire,  has  supplied  the  ranks  of  the  law 
with  the  three  following  judges.  The  fiist 
is  Thomas  Bromley,  who  was  the  son  of 
Roger  Bromley  (a  younger  brother  of  the 
immediate  ancestor  of  Queen  Elizabeth's 
chancellor),  by  Jane,  the  daughter  of 
Thomas  Jennings.  He  was  plac^  at  the 
Inner  Temple,  and  became  reader  there  in 
autumn  1532.  In  June  1540  he  was  called 
to  the  degree  of  the  coif,  and  was  appointed 
one  of  the  king's  Serjeants  on  the  2na  of  the 
next  month. 

Succeeding  Sir  John  Spelman.  he  was 
appointed  a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench  on 
November  4^  1644  That  he  was  hiriily 
esteemed  by  Henry  VUL  ia  apparaiimiai 
his  having  a  legacy  of  300^.  im&tiwking^a 
will^  and  being  appomted  one  of  tlie 


BBOMLEY 

cntoTS  of  it   (  Testam,  Vdust.  43.)    He  thus 
became  one  of  the  council  of  regency  under 
Edward  VL,  but  seems  to  have  avoided  the 
political  difficulties   of  that  reign  till  its 
close,  when  he  was  most  unwillingly  in- 
volYed  in  the  project  of  the  Duke  of  North- 
umberland to  place  Lady  Jane  Grey  on  the 
throne.     His  oeing  sent  for  by  the  duke 
to  prepare  the  king's  will,  and  the  conduct 
pursued  to  overcome  his  resistance,  is  sub- 
sequently detailed  in  the  life  of  Chief  Jus- 
tice Montagu.     Having  submitted,  under 
the  compulsion  to  which  he  was  subjected, 
to  settle  the  instrument,  it  would  seem  that 
he  was  no  further  called  upon  to  interfere ; 
for  his  name  does  not  appear  among  those 
who  witnessed  the  will,  and,  instead  of  being 
committed  to  prison^  astho  two  chief  justices 
were,  he  was  raised  by  Queen  Mary  to  the 
head  of  his  own  court  on  October  4, 1553, 
in  the  place  of  Sir  Roger  Cholmley,  from 
which  it  may  be  naturally  inferred  that  he 
was,  as  Burnet  says,  '  a  papist  in  his  heart.' 
He  presided  at  the  extraordinary  trial  of 
Sir  Nicholas  ThrocJ^morton  on  April  17, 
1554^  when,  though  the  prisoner  had  so 
much  greater  liberty  of  speech  allowed  to 
him  than  in  any  previous  trial  on  record 
that  the  queen's  attorney  openly  complained 
in  court  and  threatened  to  retire  from  the 
bar,  yet  was  he  hardly  pressed  by  the  j  udges, 
who'refosed  him  the  examination  of  a  wit- 
ness he  produced,  and  denied  him  the  in- 
spection of  a  statute  upon  which  he  relied, 
llie  chief  justice's  summing  up  too  was  so 
defective,  'either  for  want  of  memory  or 
ffood  will,'  that  '  the  prisoner  craved  indif- 
fercDcy,   and    did    help   the  judge's    old 
memory  with  his  own  recital.'    (Molinshed, 
iv.  31-^.)     Throckmorton*s  acquittal  and 
the  irdqtiitoas  punishment  of  the  jury  fol- 
lowed ;  and  the  impression  which  the  whole 
proceedings  leave  upon  the  mind  is  anything 
out  Ikvourable  to  the  lasers  who  were 
concerned  in  them.    Sir  Thomas  Bromley 
cannot  escape  from  the  charge  of  undue 
spveritr,  though  probably  he  was  complained 
of  at  t&e  time  for  giving  too  great  licence  to 
the  prisoner.    He  was  succeeded  as  chief 
jofltice  on  June  11,  1555,  by  Sir  William 
Portman ;  but  it  does  not  appear  whether 
the  vacancy  was  occasioned  by  his  death  or 
hj  his  being  superseded.   Wroxeter  Church 
contains  his  remains,  over  which  is  a  hand- 
some altar  tomb. 

He  left  an  only  daughter,  Margaret,  who 
married  Sir  Richard  Newport,  the  ancestor 
d  the  late  Earls  of  Bradford,  a  title  which 
became  extinct  in  that  family  in  1762,  but 
was  revived  in  1815  in  the  descendants  of 
Sir  Orlando  Brid^eman,  one  of  whom  mar- 
ried the  sister  and  heir  of  the  last  earl. 

BBOlQiST,  Thomas,  descended  from  the 
same  ancestor  as  his  last-mentioned  name- 
sake. Established  at  Bromleghe  in  Staf- 
fordehize    under  King  John,  the   family 


BROMLEY 


127 


flourished  in  that  and  the  neighbouring 
counties  throughout  the  succeeding  centu- 
ries. Roger  Bromley,  of  Mitley  in  Shrop- 
shire, a  lineal  descendant,  had,  besides  other 
children,  two  sons,  William  and  Roger.  The 
chief  justice  was  son  of  the  latter,  and  the 
lord  cnancellor  was  grandson  of  the  former, 
his  father  being  George  Bromley,  the  only 
son  of  William,  who  was  of  Hodnet  in 
Shropshire,  and  his  mother,  Elizabeth, 
daugnter  of  Sir  Thomas  Lacon,  of  Willey 
in  the  same  county.  His  father  was  him- 
self distinguished  in  the  law,  being  a  reader 
at  the  Inner  Temple  in  the  reigns  of  Henry 
Vn.  and  Henry  VIII.,  and  his  brother.  Sir 
George  Bromley,  attained  in  the  same  pro- 
fession the  rank  of  justice  of  Chester  imder 
Queen  Elizabeth. 

Sir  Thomas  was  bom  about  the  year 
1530,  and,  being  destined  for  the  law,  was 
sent  to  the  same  inn  at  which  his  father 
had  studied,  where  he  was  reader  in  autumn 
1566,  having  been  just  previously  elected 
recorder  of  the  city  of  London.  He  held 
this  honourable  post  till  he.  became  soli- 
citor-general, to  which  office  he  was  ap- 
pointdl  on  March  14,  1569,  and  filled  it  for 
ten  years,  during  which,  in  1574,  he  was 
elected  treasurer  of  his  inn. 

He  acted  in  1571  on  the  trial  of  the 
Duke  of  Norfolk  for  high  treason,  and 
managed  that  part  of  the  prosecution  which 
had  reference  to  Rodolph  s  message.  (State 
Trials,  i.  957,  1015.)  As  an  advocate  he 
arrived  at  great  eminence,  but  was  scru- 
pulous in  undertaking  a  suit  till  he  was 
satisfied  of  its  justice,  'not  admitting  all 
causes  promiscuously,'  says  David  Lloyd 
TiStete  Worthies,  610),  who  adds  that  •  never 
failing  in  any  cause  for  five  years,  ...  he 
was  the  only  person  that  the  people  would 
employ.'  An  anecdote  is  told  of  him  in 
'  Bacon's  Apophthegms '  which  shows  that 
he  had  a  ready  wit  in  escaping  out  of  a 
dilemma.  Having  offered  m  evidence  a 
deed  which  the  counsel  on  the  other  side 
imneached  as  fraudulent,  arguing  that  it 
had  not  been  produced  in  two  former  suits 
on  the  same  title,  but  some  other  convey- 
ance relied  upon,  Justice  Catlin,  who  in- 
clined to  that  opinion,  said  to  him, '  1  pra^ 
thee,  Mr.  Solicitor,  let  me  ask  you  a  fanu- 
liar  question :  1  have  two  gelddngs  in  my 
stable,  and  I  have  divers  times  business  of 
importance,  and  still  I  send  forth  one  of 
my  geldings  and  not  the  other  ;  would  you 
not  say  I  set  him  aside  as  a  jade  P '  '  No, 
my  lord,'  replied  Bromley,  '  I  would  think 
you  spared  him  for  your  own  saddle.' 

Retained  by  Lord  Hunsdon  and  patron- 
ised by  Lord  Burleigh,  it  is  not  surpris- 
ing, with  the  professional  character  he  had 
acquired,  that  Bromley,  though  not  yet 
fiffy  years  of  age,  should  have  been  selected 
as  the  successor  of  Sir  Nicholas  Bacon.  He 
received  the  Great  Seal  on  April  26,  1579, 


128 


BROMLEY 


Tvith  the  rank  of  lord  chaneellor,  a  title 
which  his  predeceMor  had  never  eiyoyed. 
It  is  not  improhahle,  however,  that  taere 
was  some  doubt  which  of  ^e  two  titles 
.should  he  given  to  him,  for  more  than  two 
months  elapsed  after  Bacon*s  death  daring 
which,   according  to    the  entries  on  the 
•Close  Roll  r24),  the  Great  Seal  remained 
in  the  queen  s  possession ;  and  two  speeches 
>are  preserved  which,  if  both  of  them  are 
rightly  attributed  to  Bromley,  would  seem 
"to  have  been  prepared  by  him  to  deliver  to 
the  queen  in  the  event  of  either  determina- 
tion.    {Epertan  Papers,  81.)    Fuller  says 
(  Worthies,  ii.  259),  <  Although  it  was  dif- 
ticult  to  come  after  Sir  Nicholas  Bacon,  and 
not  to  come  after  hiniy  yet  such  was  Brom- 
ley's learning  and  integrity  that  the  court 
was  not  sensiole  of  any  considerable  altera- 
:tion.'    He  seems  to  have  pursued  a  steady 
course  in  the  performance  of  his  officiid 
-duties,  without  respect  to  persons.     He 
.^presided  as  chancellor  over  the  commission 
lissued  in  October  1586  for  the  trial  of  Mary, 
Queen  of  Scots,  in  which  he  conducted  him- 
'  self  with  great  decency  and  personal  respect 
•towards  the  unfortunate  prisoner,  thougn  in 
the  subsequent  proceedings  in  parliament 
lie  was  the  organ  of  the  house  to  represent 
to  Elizabeth  tneir  unanimous  request  that 
the  judgment  might  be  executed.    Before 
the  next  session,  which  was  opened  on 
February  15,  1587,  he  was  seizect  with  an 
illness  which  necessitated  the  appointment 
•  of  a  temporary  speaker  of  the  House  of 
Lords,  and  by  which  he  no  doubt  escaped 
being  a  performer  in  the  despicable  proceed- 
ings against  Secretary  Davison  on  March 
28.    lliis  illness  terminated  in  his  death 
on  April  12,  at  the  age  of  57.    He  was 
buried  in  Westminster  Abbey,  where  his 
.son.  Sir  Henry,  erected  a  splendid  monu- 
ment to  his  memory. 

B^  his  wife,  Ebzabeth,  daughter  of  Sir 
Adrian  Fortescue,  K.B.,  he  had  four  sons 
and  four  daughters.  One  of  the  latter  mar- 
ried Sir  Oliver  Cromwell,  the  u^ide  of  the 
Protector,  and  another  married  John  Lyttel- 
ton  of  Frankley,  whose  eldest  son  was  ad- 
yanced  to  the  peerage  as  Baron  Lyttelton 
•of  Frankley. 

Sir  Thomas's  eldest  son,  as  well  as  seve- 
ral of  his  descendants,  sat  for  the  county  of 
Worcester  in  parliament,  and  eventually, 
•on  Ma}r  9,  1741,  the  representative  of 
the  family  was  created  Baron  Montford  of 
Horseheath,  Cambridgeshire,  a  title  which 
became  extinct  in  1851  by  the  death  of  the 
third  lord  vdthout  survivmg  issue. 

BBOMLET,  Edwabj),  the  third  member 
of  the  same  family  who  has  been  adorned 
with  the  judicial  ermine,  was  the  son  of 
Sir  George  Bromley,  justice  of  Chester,  the 
elder  brother  of  the  chancellor. 

He  kept  his  terms  at  the  Inner  Temple, 
where  he  was  a  reader  in  Lent  1600.    He 


BROO& 

was  made  a  setjeant  for  the  purpoae  of  hit 
being  raised  to  the  bench,  his  call  takiog 
place  on  February  5,  and  his  patent  as 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  being  oatod  Fe- 
bruary 6, 1610.  During  the  xemaining  ox- 
teen  years  of  James's  reign,  and  for  abow 
two  years  in  that  of  Charles  L,  he  pei^ 
formed  the  functions  of  his  office,  and, 
according  to  Croke  {Car,  85),  he  died  in 
the  summer  vacation  1627. 

BBOMPTOH,  WILLIA3I  BK,  whtee  name 
is  sometimes  spelled  Bumton  and  Burton^ 
was  constituted  a  judge  of  the  Common 
Pleas  in  1278.  6  Edward  I.,  and  fines  weio 
levied  before  him  from  that  year  till  Mi- 
chaelmas, 17  Edward  L,  1289.  {PaH.WriU^ 
i.  882 ;  Dttadale'e  Orig.  44.)  Soon  after 
this  he  was  disgraced  and  imprisoned  in  tiie 
Tower  for  corruption  in  his  office.  (SUm^i 
London,  44.)  One  of  the  charges  against 
him  was  that  he  impeded  theprior  of  Huit- 
ingdon  in  an  assize  of  darrein  presentment 
to  the  church  of  Suho,  whereby  the  bishop 
took  it  by  lame  of  time.  ( J2o<.  iW/.  L  4a) 
Another  implicated  the  judge  in  cruel  treat- 
ment towards  Nicholas  de  Cemy,  impri- 
soned in  Newgate,  by  directing  him  to  be 
put  in  irons  and  injured  as  much  as  po^ 
Bible.  But  his  offences  must  have  been  of 
a  far  more  heinous  nature  than  either  of 
these,  as  the  fine  of  6000  marks,  which  he 
was  compelled  to  pay  for  his  enlazgemoit 
was  one  of  the  highest  that  was  impoeei 
upon  those  who  shared  in  his  disgrace. 

A  William  de  BrompUm  is  named  aaooe 
of  the  king's  councillors  in  the  Statute  de 
Escaetoribus,  29  Edward  L,  IdOl,  and  as 
one  of  the  justices  of  the  Bishop  of  Dor- 
ham  in  the  same  year  (Pari  WriU,  i.  106^ ; 
and  in  the  following  a  justice  itinerant  m 
Cornwall  called  WiUiam  de  Bumton  oocnn, 
but  whether  they  were  the  same  peaon  is 
uncertain. 

BBOOK,  David,  was  a  native  of  Glaston- 
bury in  Somersetshire,  his  father  John,  a 
ser]eant*at-law,  being  principal  seneadial  of 
the  famous  monastery  there.    David  was 
reader  at  the  Inner  Temple  in  1534  and 
1540,  when  he  was  also  treasurer.    In  the 
first  week  of  the  reign  of  Edward  VL,  1547, 
he  was  admitted  to  the  degree  of  the  ccid, 
having  been  summoned  thereto  by  Heniy 
Vni.,  and  in  1551  he  vras  made  one  of 
the  king's  seijeants.     Queen  Mary  soon 
after  her  accession  advanced  him,  on  S^ 
tember  1, 1553,  to  the  office  of  chief  baron 
of  the  Exchequer  (Duffdak^s  Orig.   164^ 
170),  and  on  October  2,  the  morrow  of  the 
coronation,  he  and  a  number  of  other  per- 
sons were    'dobyd  the  knightea  of  the 
carpet'    {Machyn^s  Diary,  335.)    Hli  de- 
cisions are  reported  in  Dyer  till  Hilaiy 
1557,  about  a  year  after  which  he  died. 

David  Lloyd,  in  his  'State  Worthies' 
(386-390),  gives  the  judge  a  highly  encomi- 
astic character,  and  concludes  vTith  an  apo* 


1 


BROOKE 

phfhegm  wliieii  is  worth  remembering.  '  A 
&I  man  in  Rome  riding  always  upon  a  very 
lean  hone  being  asked  tiie  reason  thereof, 
answered  thai  Se  fid  kinue^,  M  he  trusted 
atkers  to  feed  his  horse.  Our  judge  being 
aiked  what  was  the  best  way  to  thrive, 
and,  Xerer  do  ax^thing  hy  another  that  you 
earn  do  by  yourse^* 

Sir  David  left  a  widow,  Maigaiet,  daughter 
of  Richard  Butler,  of  London,  who  had 
pevious  to  her  marriage  with  him  been 
sheady  the  wife  of  two  nusbands,  Andrew 
naDnces  and  Alderman  Robert  Chartsey, 
sod  who,  after  the  death  of  the  chief  baron 
WIS  married,  for  the  fourth  time,  to  Edward, 
Lord  North,  whom  also  she  survived,  and 
dring  in  1575.  was  buried  in  St  Lawrence 
Jewry.  {ColUnis  iVfiY^e. iv.  458 ;  Fuiler^ 
fi.  S8^)  This  lady  was  the  chief  baron's 
leeond  wife,  his  first  being  Katherine, 
dtoghter  of  John,  Lord  Chandos,  who  in  a 
wtoit  of  1553,  granting  to  her  and  her 
fluband  the  manor  of  uanonbur^,  is  de- 
nibed  as  having  been  the  suckling  nurse 
of  Queen  Marv.   (  TondMs  Ysddon!) 

BBOOKB,  Robert,  or  BBOKE,  was  the 
no  of  Thomas  Broke,  of  Claverley  in  Shrop- 
ibire,  by  Margaret,  the  daughter  of  Hugh 
Gfoivenor,  of^Farmot  in  the  same  county ; 
aad  he  was  buried  in  the  church  of  that 
fuiih.  {Athen,  Oxoh.  i.  267.)  He  was 
nader  at  the  Middle  Temple  in  1542 
and  1551.  His  readings  on  these  occa- 
0008  were  '  On  the  Statute  of  Limitations^ 
a2  Heniy  VIII.  c.  2,'  and  <0n  Magna 
Giarta,  c.  It5,'  both  of  which  were  after- 
wnds  pablished.  Between  these  dates — 
riz.,  in  1545— he  was  advanced,  from  the 
dSee  of  common  seijeant  of  the  city  of 
London  to  that  of  recorder  in  the  room  of 
Sir  Roger  Cholmlev.  In  that  character  he 
is  frequently  mentioned  in  Dyers  Reports. 
In  Michaelmas  1552  he  was  made  a  Ser- 
jeant, and  was  several  times  returned  to 
pariiament  as  representative  of  the  metro- 
polis. 

He  was  elected  speaker  in  that  which 

net  on  April  2,  15o4,  durinff  which  the 

fliaxriage  ot  the  queen  with  Philip  of  Spain 

WIS  scuemnized.    A  new  parliament  was 

tken  called,  and  between  the  date  of  the 

lammons  and  the  day  of  meeting  Brooke 

wai  pat  in  the  place  of  Sir  Richard  Morgan 

«  oief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas  on 

October  8.     He  was  knighted  by  Kinff 

FUlip  on  January  27, 1555,  but  he  enjoyed 

Us  judidal  dignity  little  more  than  n>ur 

jeais,  dying  on  September  G,  1558,  about 

two  months  before  the  death  of  the  queen. 

Ob  his  tomb  at  Claverley  he  is  represented 

in  his  official  robes,  with  a  wife  on  each 

sde  of  him  in  splendid  dresses.    One  of  his 

'viTn  was  named  Anne,  and  the  other 

ll^oraihy ;  and  between  them  they  produced 

^  nfenteen  children.     (Machytis  Diary. 

542.) 


BROUGHAM 


129 


His  name  has  a  high  reputation  in  West- 
minster Hall,  not  only  on  account  of  his 
great  learning  and  his  just  administration 
of  the  law,  but  as  the  author  of  an  *  Abridg- 
ment' or  abstract  of  the  Year  Books  till  liis 
own  time,  which  Coke  calls  '  an  excellent 
repertor>'',*  and  of  'Ascun's  Novel  Cases' 
in'  the  tfiree  last  reigns. 

BBOOKE,  Richard,  or  BBOKE,  whose 
familv  was  established  at  I^eighton  in 
Cheshire  as  early  as  in  the  twelfth  century, 
wos  the  fourth  son  of  Thomas  Brooku  of 
that  place,  by  the  daughter  and  heir  of 
John  Parker  of  Copen  Hall.  He  studied 
and  practised  at  the  Middle  Temple  so  suc- 
cessfully that,  dreading  a  summons  to  take 
upon  him  the  degree  of  the  coif,  the  us^unl 
reward  of  eminent  advocates,  he  obtained 
a  roval  permission  in  July  1510,  2  llenrj' 
VIlI.,to  decline  the  honour  in  case  it  should 
be  offered  to  him.  It  would  appear,  how- 
ever, that  he  soon  altered  his  mind,  and  did 
not  avail  himself  of  the  exemption ;  for  he 
was  one  of  the  nine  who  were  made  st^r- 
jeants  in  the  following  November.  In  the 
same  autumn  he  was  reader  at  his  inn  of 
court.  In  that  year  also  he  was  raised 
from  the  oilice  of  under-shorifT  to  that  of 
recorder  of  the  city  of  Ijondon,  and  was 
elected  its  representative  in  parliament,  a 
trust  which  was  repeated  in  lol5. 

In  1520  he  was  raised  to  the  bench  of 
the  Common  l*leas, receiving  the  customary 
knighthood  on  the  occasion;  and  on  re- 
signing the  recordership  the  corporation 
complimented  him  with  a  tun  of  wine  at 
Christmas. 

On  January  24,  152C,  he  was  constituted 
chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  and  performed 
the  duties  of  that  office  in  addition  to  thosi' 
of  the  judgeship  of  the  Common  Pleas  till 
April  1529,  about  which  time  ho  died. 

He  erected  the  mansion  still  called  Hroke 
Hall,  at  Nocton,  near  Ipswich,  in  Suffolk. 
From  Sir  Richard's  son  Robert  descended 
another  Robert,  of  Nacton,  who  was  created 
a  baronet  in  IGOl,  but  dying  in  1093  with- 
out male  issue,  the  baronetcy  expired,  and 
the  estates  descended  to  a  nephew,  Robert, 
who  had  mamed  one  of  his  daughters. 
This  Robert's  great-grandson,  Captain  rhili]) 
Bowes  Vere  Broke,  was  raised  to  the  same 
dignity  in  November  1813,  for  his  vicrtorv 
as  commander  of  the  '  Shannon '  over  the 
American  frigate  the  '  Chesapeake.' 

BBOTTGHAM,  Henrt,  though  bom  in 
Scotland,  was  the  representative  of  one  of 
the  most  ancient  families  in  Westmon>land, 
in  whose  possession  the  manor  of  Burghani, 
now  Brougham,  can  be  traced  uninterrup- 
tedly from  the  time  of  Edward  the  Con- 
fessor. By  the  intermarriage  of  one  of  his 
ancestors  with  the  heiress  of  the  family  of 
Vaux  of  Catterlyn,  he  also  represented  that 
noble  house.  Before  the  death  of  his  grand- 
father, John  Broughiftn,  his  father  resided 

K 


130 


BROUGHAM 


at  Edinburgh,  where  he  married  Eleanor, 
the  only  child  of  the  Rev.  James  Syme,  by 
Mary,  the  sister  of  Dr.  Kobertson  the  his- 
torian. Of  that  marriage  the  eldest  son 
•was  the  future  chancellor,  who  was  bom  in 
St  Andrew's  Square,  Edinburgh,  on  Sep- 
tember 10,  1778. 

In  passing  through  both  the  lligh  School 
and  University  of  Edinburgh  he  distin- 
guished himself  by  his  rapidity  and  intelli- 
gence in  receiving  the  instruction  afforded, 
and  in  the  latter  he  more  particularly  ad- 
dressed himself  to  philosopnical  enquiries. 
The  first  fruit  of  his  studies  was  a  paper 
'  On  the  Inflection,  Reflection,  and  Colours 
of  Light/  written  at  the  early  age  of  seven- 
teen, and  forwarded  by  him  to  the  Royal 
Society,  and  published  in  its  '  Transactions ' 
in  1790.  To  this  ho  added  in  the  next  year 
some  'Further  Experiments;'  following 
these  with  '  General  Theorems,  chiefly  Po- 
risms  of  the  higher  Geometry,'  which  like- 
wise appeared  in  successive  years  in  the 
same  publication.  These  successful  ex- 
ertions in  physical  science  led  him  to  an 
intimacy  with  Sir  Joseph  Ranks,  the  presi- 
dent, and  were  rewarded  in  1803  by  his 
election  as  a  fellow.  In  the  meantime  his 
pursuits  introduced  him  into  the  best  lite- 
Tory  circles  of  Edinburgh,  where  he  joined 
the  *  Speculative  Society,'  and  formed  the 
more  select  association  called '  the  Academy 
of  Physics.'  lie  visited  Norway  and  Sweden 
before  he  settled  himself  as  an  advocate  in 
the  Scottish  law  courts.  In  a  letter  to  his 
friend,  Sir  Joseph  Banks,  dated  December 
10, 1800,  he  expresses  his  aversion  to  that 
profession,  and  nis  resolution  to  attempt  an 
opening  in  the  political  world ;  but  at  the 
same  time  to  cultivate  its  duties  to  secure 
a  retreat,  in  case  his  plan  should  fail.  He 
showed  his  capacity  for  the  province  he 
preferred  bv  publishing  in  1803  '  An  En- 
quiry into  tte  Colonial  Policy  of  the  Euro- 
pean Powers ; '  and  in  1 806  he  exhibited  his 
first  acknowledged  effort  in  behalf  of  the 
persecuted  blacks,  by  issuing  a  pamphlet 
entitled  '  A  Concise  Statement  of  tne  Ques- 
tion regarding  the  Abolition  of  the  Slave 
Trade.'  In  1802  he  had  ioined  with  Lord 
Jeffrey,  Sydney  Smith,  itomer,  and  other 
talented  men  then  residing  at  Edinburgh, 
in  founding  the '  Edinburgh  Review,' which 
up  to  the  present  time,  after  more  than 
sLxty  years'  existence,  preserves  the  popu- 
larity it  obtained  on  its  first  establishment. 
To  this  he  was  a  most  indefatigable  contri- 
butor, advocating  on  all  occasions  the  most 
liberal  principles,  in  support  of  which  it 
alwaj^s  took  so  prominent  a  part. 

With  an  established  reputation  as  a  poli- 
tician, ft  jurist,  and  an  orator,  he  felt  that 
Edinbuign  was  too  confined  a  stage,  and 
therefore,  coming  to  London,  he  became 
for  some  time  a  pu^  of  Mr.  (afterwards 
Chief  Jostioe)  Tindfl|  and,  being  called  to 


BKOUaHAM 

the  English  bar  in  1807  by  the  society  of 
Lincoln's  Inn,  joined  the  Northern  Ciicoit. 
His  practice  was  les8  in  the  courts  than  in 
appeals  to  the  House  of  Lords  and  the  PriTj 
Council,  and  before  parliamentary  com- 
mittees. In  1808  he  signalised  himself  at 
the  bar  of  the  House  of  Commons  bv  his 
euerpetic  advocacy  of  the  application  of  the 
British  merchants  to  obtain  a  repeal  of  the 
famous  orders  in  council  issued  in  opm^ 
sition  to  the  aggressions  of  Napoleon,  uis 
earnest  exertions  and  his  overpowering  elo- 
quence procured  him  a  seat  in  parliament 
in  1810  for  the  borough  of  Camelford.  He 
continued  a  member  of  that  house  till  he 
was  advanced  to  the  other,  twenty  yean 
later,  except  for  four  years  from  I8I2,  Mr. 
Canning  having  then  defeated  him  in  his 
attempt  to  be  returned  for  LiverpooL  In 
1815  ne  was  elected  for  Winchelsea,  for 
which  he  sat  till  he  succeeded  in  an  arduous 
contest  for  the  West  Riding  of  Yorkshire 
in  18*30,  the  year  in  which  he  was  called  to 
the  House  of  Peers. 

It  is  impossible  in  the  present  sketch  to 
particularise  all  the  incidents  of  his  par- 
liamentary career,  so  wide  was  the  range 
of  subject)  which  he  discussed.  No  ques- 
tion found  him  unprepared,  and  whether 
the  debate  was  upon  Anican  slarerj, 
Catholic  emancipation,  or  foreign  politicly 
or  upon  the  more  domestic  questions  of 
charity  abuses,  distress  in  the  agricultunl 
districts,  free  trade  and  the  laws  that  re- 
strained it,  the  extravagance  and  coim^ 
tion  of  our  military  and  civil  establishmeiitL 
and  the  thousand  other  topics  that  affitatod 
that  assembly,  he  threw  into  them  ml  thil 
spirit  and  fervour  for  which  his  speeehv 
were  remarkable.  He  soon  acquired  the 
lead  of  the  pnrt}'  to  which  he  was  attachedf 
and  was  allowed  to  be  a  most  brilliant 
debater,  and  to  be  an  exception  to  the 
almost  universal  experience,  that  the  elo- 
quence of  a  lawyer  did  not  succeed  in  tke 
House  of  Commons.  At  the  same  time  it 
was  admitted  that  in  the  warmth  of  his 
addresses  he  was  apt  to  exceed  the  limits 
of  discretion,  and  sometimes  to  injure  the 
cause  he  was  advocating. 

His  reputation  as  a  lawyer  had  so  fir 
advanced,  aided,  no  doubt,  W  his  political 
status,  that  he  was  occasionally  consulted 
by  the  Princess  Charlotte,  and  on  her 
elopement  from  Warwick  House  in  1814 
he  was  summoned  by  her  to  her  mothet^ 
house  at  Connaught  Terrace,  to  which  she 
had  fled,  and  it  was  by  his  advice  that  she 
returned  home.  But  the  great  event  on 
which  his  legal  fame  was  to  be  establiahed 
in  the  popular  mind  was  now  KprnoMsiaag^ 
On  the  accession  of  George  FVt  in  18SQ^ 
his  queen,  from  whom  he  had  been  Iomt 
separated,  determined  to  return  to  EUmI 
to  assert  her  rights,  and  ernnmoniw  Mr 
Brougham,  whom  die  appointad  her  i^ 


BROUGHAM 

tomey-genenilt    as   her    adnser.    A  bill ' 
of  pains   and  penalties  was  immediately  - 
brought  into  the  House  of  Lords,  charnng  . 
her  with  adultery  committed  abroad,    llr.  | 
Brougham  was  ike  leading  counsel  for  her  I 
defence  against  the  bill,  and  by  his  extra-  - 
ordinary  exertions  and  powerful  advocacy  j 
produced  such  an  effect,  not  only  on  the 
pabMc  mind,  but  on  the  noble  jury  who 
were  to  decide  on  her  fate,  that  ministers 
were  obliged  to  withdraw  the  bill.    So  . 
fev&e  had  been  his  invectives  against  the 
king,  not  only  in  this  defence,  but  in  par- 
liament also,  on  that  and  on  other  occasions, 
that,  though  his  position  at  the  bar  had 
long  entitled  him  to  the  usual  precedence, 
Vu  majesty  refused    to    allow  him    the 
honour  of  a  silk  ^wn,  the  death  of  the 
queen  depriving  him  in  the  next  year  of 
tnat  whicn  he  wore  as  her  attorney-general. 
Agnnst  Lord  Eldon,  to  whom  he  attri- 
Luted  his  exclusion,  he  took  every  oppor- 
tanity  of  aiming  the  most  pointed  shafts  of 
wit  and  sarcasuL    His  lordship  refers  to, 
one  of  his  direst  attacks  "in  183o,  in  a  letter 
to  his  daughter,  Lady  F.  J.  Banks,  with 
eool  indifference. 

Of  course  the  cause  of  Brougham's  se- 
Terity,  and  the  assertion  of  Eldon's  indifier- 
ferenoe,  must  be  both  taken  with  some 
sllowance ;  but  while  his  lordship  remained 
dumoellor,  Brougham  was  obliged  to  content 
hinuelf  with  a  stuff*  gown.  Under  Lord 
Lvndhurst,  who  succeeded  Lord  Eldon,  he 
received  in  1827  a  patent  of  precedence.  At 
diat  time  so  conscious  was  he  of  his  parlia- 
mentary powers  that  he  refused  the  place 
of  lord  chief  baron  offered  him  by  Mr.  Can- 
ning, the  new  minister,  objecting  that  it 
would  exclude  him  from  tne  house;  and 
en  Mr.  Canning's  suggestion  that  he  would 
be  only  one  stage  from  the  woolsack,  he 
replied,  *  But  the  horses  ivould  be  aff.^ 

Soon  after  the  accession  of  William  IV. 

the  nunistry  of  the  Duke  of  Wellington 

WM  obliged  to  succumb,  and  that  headed 

by  Earl  Grey  took  its  place.    So  strong 

were  Mr.  Brougham's  claims  on  the  Whigs 

that   no    lower  place   than  that  of  lord 

chancellor  could  bo  offered  to  him,  and  he 

accordingly  received  the  Great    Seal  on 

Xovembe/  22,  1830,  and  on  the  next  day 

ms  created  Lord  Brougham  and  Vaux. 

Daring    his    chancellors&p    his    utmost 

enerfries  wero  applied   in    the  House  of 

Lovds  to  the  carrying  of  the  Ileform  Bill, 

and  to  the  support  of  all  the  measures  sug- 

SCfted  by  the  ministry ;  and  in  the  Court  of 

Cbaneery  to  the  introducing  many  exten- 

ate  leforma,  some  of  doubtful  value,  but 

^itherB  of  easential  and  permanent  benefit 

•Vaaiig  others,  he  swept  away  a  host  of 

flDKire  places  entailing  great  expense  to 

tlie  ■dtorsy  and,  as  a  compensation  for  so 

jneit  an  annihilation  of  the  patronage  of 

the  office,  he  procured  for  his  successors  an 


BllOUGILiM 


131 


addition  of  10002.  a  year  to  their  retiring 
allowance.  He  went  out  with  his  party, 
after  exactly  four  years'  enjoyment  of  the 
office,  on  November  22,  18£i4 ;  but  when  in 
the  next  year  its  successors  were  obliged 
in  their  turn  to  give  way  to  the  whigs,  for 
some  cause  or  other,  hitkerto  unexplained, 
Lord  Brougham  was  not  restored.  Per- 
haps it  was  for  the  same  reason  which 
was  adduced  by  Sir  Robert  Walpole  just 
one  hundred  years  before,  that  he  would 
not '  make  a  man  lord  chancellor  who  was 
constantly  complaining  of  the  grievances 
of  the  law,  and  threatening  to  rectify  the 
abuses  of  Westminster  Ilall.'  (Lord 
Hervcifs  Memoirs,  i.  434.) 

Lord  Brougham  whs  now  in  his  fifty- 
seventh  year,  a  period  of  life  at  which 
many  a  man  having  filled  the  highest  office 
in  tlie  state  would  have  thought  himself 
justified  in  resting  upon  his  laurels.  But 
ne  was  of  no  such  disposition ;  he  did  not 
approve  of  slothful  inaction,  but  preferred 
exercising  his  talents,  whether  in  or  out  of 
office,  with  a  view  to  the  benefit  of  the 
state,  and  to  the  improvement  of  his  fellow- 
creatures.  He  continued  regularly  to  at- 
tend the  hearing  of  appeals  in  the  House 
of  Lords  for  many  years ;  and  for  his  inde- 
fatigable labours  in  that  judicial  capacity 
he  was  rewarded  by  Queen  victoria  in  1 800 
with  a  new  patent,  entailing  his  tith'  in 
default  of  male  issue  upon  his  brother, 
William  Brougham,  Esq.,  lately  a  master 
in  Chancery.  Time  moderated  his  political 
feelings  and  tempered  his  party  virulonce, 
and  he  was  charged  by  disappointed  bigots 
with  having  joined  the  tor^'  ranks.  But 
the  imputation  arose  from  his  not  choosing 
to  desert  old  friends  of  that  party,  with 
whom,  amidst  the  most  violont  political 
contests,  he  had  still  kept  up  his  intimacy. 
But  no  one  could  accuse  him  of  any  decay 
or  discontinuance  of  hb  exertions  for  the 
extension  of  knowledge  and  instruction 
among  the  poor,  or  in  the  pursuit  of  the 
patriotic  and  benevolent  objects  it  had  been 
nis  life's  endeavour  to  promote.  Both 
before  and  after  his  exaltation  tliese  objects 
wero  numerous.  Among  the  principal 
were  the  formation  of  the  '  Society  for  the 
Diff'usion  of  Useful  Knowledge,'  by  which 
many  valuable  publications  were  issued; 
and  the  foundation  of  University  Colh'ge, 
Jjondon,  extending  the  benefits  of  a  superior 
education  to  a  class  of  men  who  were  in- 
capable of  incurring  the  customary  expenses 
of  Oxford  or  Cambridge,  or  who  were  un- 
willing to  subject  themselves  to  the  tests  or 
discipline  required  at  those  universities.  To 
these  may  be  added  as  a  consequence  the 
University  College  Hospital.  lie  was  also 
greatly  instrumental  in  the  establishment  of 
the  Social  Science  Association ;  and  as  its 
president,  even  so  lately  as  18(>i,  in  his 
eightv-fifth  year,  he  delivered  a  lengthened 

x2 


132 


BROWNE 


address  at  Edinbiiigh.  the  scene  of  bis 
earliest  triamphsy  wmcn  surprised  all  who 
heard  it  by  its  vigour  and  variety.  His 
various  contributions  to  the  press  have  been 
collected  in  ten  octavo  volumes ;  and  it  is 
to  be  hoped  that  to  these  may  be  shortly 
add^y  as  promised,  '  His  Life  and  Times.' 
He  was  elected  lord  rector  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  Glasgow  in  1825,  and,  retaining 
his  popularity  to  the  last,  he  was  chosen 
chancellor  of  the  University  of  Edinburgh 
in  18G0.  He  purchased  an  estate  at 
Cannes,  in  Provence,  on  which  he  built  a 
mansion,  to  which  he  retired  for  several 
weeks  of  the  last  years  of  his  life^  and 
where  he  died  on  May  7, 18G8. 

By  his  wife,  Mary  Anne,  daughter  of 
Thomas  Eden,  Esq.,  and  niece  of  Liords 
Auckland  and  Henley,  the  widow  of  John 
Spalding,  Esq.  (whom  he  married  in  1819), 
he  had  two  daughters,  both  since  deceased, 
and  no  son ;  and  his  title  has  descended  by 
tibe  special  limitation  before  mentioned  to 
his  brother,  William  Brougham,  now  Lord 
Brougham  and  Vaux. 

B&OwAJs,  Aetthoitt,  was  the  son  of 
Wistan  Browne,  of  Abbesroding  and  Lan- 
genhoo  in  Essex,  and  Elizabeth,  the  sister 
of  Sir  John  Mordaunt,  of  Turvey  in  Bed- 
fordshire, serjeant-at-law,  who  became 
chancellor  of  the  duchy  of  Lancaster,  and 
whose  son  was  created  Lord  Mordaunt. 
(Testam.  Vetud,  462.)  Anthony  was  bom 
about  1510,  and  stuued  at  Oxford,  where 
he  did  not  take  a  degree,  entered  the  Mid- 
dle Temple,  and  became  reader  there  in 
autumn  1553  and  in  Lent  1554. 

Being  a  strict  Roman  Catholic,  he  made 
himself  active  in  carrying  into  effect  the 
new  orders  of  religion  promulgated  under 
Queen  Mary ;  and,  being  then  a  justice  of 
the  peace  in  his  native  county,  a  letter  was 
sent  by  the  council  in  August  1554  direct- 
mg  him  and  others  to  put  those  in  ward 
who  kept  themselves  from  church  and  were 
not  in  other  respects  conformable.  Among 
the  persons  brought  before  him  was  William 
Hunter,  *  an  apprentice  of  nineteen  years,' 
who,  according  to  the  printed  relation  of 
his  brother  Kobert,  was  '  pursued  to  death 
by  Justice  Brown  for  the  gospel's  sake.' 
Robert  enlarges  on  the  justice's  *  fury '  and 
'  rage,'  and  seems  to  lay  more  blame  on  him 
for  sending  the  unfortunate  youth  to  Bishop 
Bonner  than  on  that  brutal  prelate  for  con- 
demning him  to  be  burnt.  In  the  next  year 
Justice  Browne  and  his  fellows  sent  up  an- 
other prisoner,  whom  they  called  '  an  arro- 
gant heretic ; '  and  in  August  1557  a  spe- 
ciid  letter  was  written  to  him  by  the 
council,  'geving  hym  thanks  for  his  dili- 

fent  proceeding  against  Trudgeover  [whom 
e  had  taken  and  executed  in  Essex  J;  will- 
ing him  to  distribute  his  head  and  quarters 
according  to  his  and  his  coUeagaes'^former 


BROWNE 

determinations.'     (Dr,  MaUUmd  on  the  Ee^ 
fwmatwn,  427,  468,  514,  559.) 

These  energetic  exertions  were  not  un- 
requited. He  was  called  to  the  degree  of 
the  coi^  and  on  the  very  day  that  he  as- 
sumed it,  October  16,  1555,  he  was  ap- 
pointed one  of  the  queen's  seiieants,^  and 
on  October  5, 1558,  was  made  chief  justice* 
of  the  Common  Pleas.  Within  six  weeka 
Queen  Mary  died,  and  on  the  day  succeed- 
ing that  event  he  received  a  new  patent  from 
Euzabeth ;  but  before  Hilary  Term  it  was 
deemed  expedient  to  remove  both  the  Ca- 
tholic chief  justices  from  their  more  promi- 
nent positions,  still,  however,  retaining  their 
legal  services.  Chief  Justice  Browne  was- 
accordingly  removed  into  the  seat  of  Mr. 
Justice  liyer,  who  was  placed  at  the  head, 
of  the  court.  This  change  having  been 
completed  on  January  22,  1559,  he  con- 
tinued to  perform  the  duties  of  a  puisne 
judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  till  the  day  c^ 
his  death.  Anthony  Wood  states  that  he 
was  offered  the  Great  Seal  when  the  Lord 
Keeper  Bacon  was  in  temporary  disgrace  on 
the  suspicion  of  having  assisted  Jolm  Hales 
in  a  pamphlet  ar^ng  that,  in  the  event  of 
Queen  Elizabeth  s  death  without  issue,  the 
crown  would  devolve  on  the  house  of  Suf* 
folk ;  but  that  Browne  refused  it,  ^  for  that 
he  was  of  a  different  religion  from  the 
state.'  It  was  perhaps  in  connection  with 
this  offer  that  ne  received  the  honour  of 
knighthood  in  1566. 

He  died  on  May  16, 1567,  at  his  estate  of 
Weald  Hall,  or  South  Weald,  in  Essex, 
which  he  had  purchased  from  Lord  Chan- 
cellor Rich.  He  was  buried  in  the  church 
of  that  parish,  and  to  his  remains  wan- 
added,  within  the  same  year,  those  of  his 
wife  Joan,  daughter  of  William  Faxingtoo,  ' 
of  Farington  in  Lancashire,  and  widow  of  ^ 
Charles  Booth,  Esq.    He  left  no  issue.  f 

His  devotion  to  Queen  Mary  did  not  pre- 
vent him  from  resisting  her  encroachmenti     ; 
on  the  rights  of  his  chief  justiceship.    Li     * 
the  interval  between  Sir  Kobert  Broofke's     ^ 
death  and  his  own  appointment  the  qnecn     " 
had  filled  up  the  vacant  place  of  exigent  of    '- 
London,  &c.,  the  presentation  to  whidi  be- 
longed to  his  omce.    As  soon  as  he  was     " 
installed  ho  at  once  admitted  his  nephew 
Skrogges,  whose  right  was  decided  by  tha 
judges  to  be  good  against  Coleshill,  the 
queen's  nominee.     {Dyer's  Jteports^  175.) 

Plowden,  his  contemporary  (J2q90fifyS56^ 
376),  calls  liim  a  judge  of  profound  learn- 
ing and  great  eloquence,  and  nves  Bome^ 
emogistic  verses  composed  on  liia  death. 
He  is  said  to  have  supplied  Bishop  LesliB- 
with  the  legal  arguments  for  his  paim^ilet 
in  favour  of  the  succession  of  Maiy,  (taam 
of  Scotland,  published  under  ^e  mma  oT 
Morgan  Plufipps,  and  answered  hw  Sr 
Nicholas  Bacon.  (AihmL  Oxm.  I  SBflL 
405,  483;  Maranes  E$iex,  L  lia) 


BBOWNE 

BSOWVX,  HiTMPHBET,  of  Ridley  Hall,  in 
Terling,  EsseZy  was  the  uncle  of  the  fore- 
going Anthonj  Browne,  being  the  younger 
brother  of  Wistan  Browne.    Their  fitther 
was  Kobert  Browne,  of  Langenhoo  in  that 
<»anty,  and  their  mother  Mary,  daughter 
and  heir  of  Sir  Thomas  Charlton.    Hum- 
phrey was  of  the  Middle  Temple,  where  he 
was  chosen  reader  in  1516,  and  again  in 
152L    He  was  not  called  to  the  degree  of 
the  coif  till  ten  years  afterwards,  nor  made 
a  king's  seijeant  till  Easter  1536.    On  No- 
Tember  20,  1542,  he  was  elevated  to  the 
bench  as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas,  jt 
6est  which    he    retained    in  four  reigns. 
Although  his  name  appears  as  a  witness 
to  King  Edward's  deed  altering  the  suc- 
eesaion,  Queen   Mary  yeiy  properly  con- 
sidered the  act  as  one  more  of  compulsion 
than  of  choice,  and  Queen  Elizabeth,  on 
her  accession,  made  no  inmiediate  change 
in  the  judges,  whatever  were  their  religious 
opinions.      The  quiet  and  unostentatious 
performance  of  his  duties  was  undistin- 
firaished     by    any    remarkable     incident. 
Plowden  relates  that  in  a  case  in  Hilary 
Tenn  1559  he  'did  not  argue  at  all,  be- 
cause he  was  so  old  that  his  senses  were 
decayed  and  his  voice  could  not  be  heard ; ' 
ret  he  acted  for  nearly  four  years  after  he 
had  thus  lost  his  iucudal  powers,  the  last 
fine  levied  before  him  being  dated  at  the 
«Dd  of  November  1562,  and  his  death  oc- 
coning  on  the   5th  of  the  next  month. 
(Dugdaie's  Orig.  47,  215 ;  1  PUncdenj  190.)  ; 

His  remains  were  removed  from  a  house  ' 
which  he  had  built  in  Cow  Lone,  St.  Se- 
pulchre's, with  great  funeral  pomp  to  the 
church  of  St  Mary  Orgars  in  Cannon 
Street  where  one  of  his  wives  had  been 
buzied,  and  to  which  parish  he  bequeathed 
several  houses.   ( MachyrCs  Diary y  297, 393.) 

His  first  wife  was  Anne,  daughter  of  Sir 
Henry  Vere,  of  Great  Adlington ;  and  his 
second  mfe  was  Anne,  dau^ter  of  John, 
Lord  Hussey.     {Movant,  i.  118.) 

BSOWH,  Robert,  does  not  appear  to 
have  been  related  to  either  of  the  pre- 
ceding judges,  nor  has  any  certain  trace 
been  found  of  the  family  to  which  he  be- 
longed. All  that  is  known  of  him  is  that 
lie  was  promoted  to  the  bench  of  the  Ex- 
diequer  as  second  baron  on  May  6,  1550,  4 
Edward  VL,  and  that  he  retained  his  seat 
during  Mary's  reign  and  for  the  first  two 
months  of  that  of  Elizabeth,  when  he  was 
replaced  by  George  Freville. 

BBOWVS,  Samuel,  was  the  son  of  Ni- 
cholas Browne,  Esq.,  of  Polebrook  in 
XorthamptoDshJre,  by  Frances,  daughter 
of  Thomas  St.  John,  Esq.,  of  Cayshoe, 
Bedfordshire,  Uie  j;nmd£ather  of  Oliver 
St  John,  the  chief  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas  during  the  Fkotectorate.  Samuel 
ym  admitted  pensioner  of  Queen's  Col- 
iege,  Gambiidgey  in  1614|  and  was  entered 


BROWNE 


13S 


at  Lincoln's  Inn  in  1616,  where  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  in  1623,  and  elected  reader 
in  autunm  1642.  He  was  returned  mem- 
ber for  the  boroughs  of  Clifton,  Dartmouth, 
and  Hardness,  in  the  Long  Parliament  of 
Norember  1640;  and  in  February  1643, 
no  doubt  by  the  influence  of  his  cousin  St. 
John,  who  was  then  solicitor-general,  he 
was  recommended  by  the  parliament  to  be 
a  baron  of  the  Exchej^uer,  in  the  proposi- 
tions made  to  the  king  for  peace,  T^iich 
came  to  nothing.  In  the  following  No- 
vember he  and  St.  John  were  two  of  the 
four  members  of  the  House  of  Commons  to 
whom,  with  two  lords,  the  new  Great  Seal 
was  entrusted.     {Pari.  Hist,  ii.  606,  iiL  70, 

1820 

Tne  commoners  so  appointed  still  con- 
tinued to  perform  their  parliamentary  func- 
tions.   Lord    Commissioner    Browne  was 
most  active    in   the    proceedings  against 
Archbishop  Laud,  summing  up  the  case  in 
the  House  of  Lords  and  carrying  up  the 
ordinance  for  his  attainder  passed  by  the 
Commons  in  November  1644.  {State  Trials, 
iv.  576,  506.)    His  position  did  not  exempt 
him  from  the  inconveniences  of  the  civil 
war.    He  had  to  complain  to  the  parlia- 
ment in  December  1644  that  his  house  at 
Arlesley    in  Bedfordshire    was    used  for 
quartenng  troops,  and  he  procured  an  order 
for  their  removal  out  of  the  county.  {Jour- 
nalSf  iii.  734.)    After  remaining  in  office 
for  nearly  three  years,  the  lords  commis- 
sioners were  removed  in  October  1646,  and 
the  Great  Seal  transferred  to  the  speakers 
of  the  two  houses.    Resuming  then   his 
practice  at  the  bar,  where  by  a  vote  of  the 
house  precedence  was  given  him,  he  was 
included  in  the  batch  of  twenty-two  who 
were  made  Serjeants  by  the  parliament  on 
October  12,  1648,  when  botn  ho  and  his 
cousin  were  also  elevated  to  the  bench,  he 
as 'judge  of  the  King^s  Bench,  and  St.  John 
as  chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas.   Just 
previous  to  this  he  had  been  sent  as  one  of 
the  commissioners  to  treat  with  the  kin^ 
in  the  Isle  of  Wight,  and  what  he  witnessed 
there  of  his  majesty's  bearing,  and  the  un- 
seemly return  with  which  it  was  met  by 
the  parliaments  subsequent  proceedings, 
tended  no  doubt  to  open  his  eyes  to  the 
violent  objects  of  the  party  to  which  his 
cousin  St.  John  was  attached.  He  resolved, 
therefore,  no  longer  to  follow  in  his  foot- 
steps; but  when  the  king,  three  months 
later,  fell  a  victim  to  its  machinations,  he 
boldly  refused  to  act  as  a  judge  under  the 
usurped  "govemment,  and,  with  five  of  his 
colleagues,  resigned  his  seat  on  the  bench. 
(  Whitelocke,  154, 158, 226,  334, 342, 378.) 

This  conduct  so  effectuaily  atoned  in  the 
eyes  of  the  royalists  for  everything  that 
might  be  deemed  objectionable  in  his  former 
acts,  that  on  the  Kestoration  he  was  not 
only  immediately  reinstated  as  a  serjeant. 


134 


BBUGE 


Irat  within  aix  months  was  replaced  on  the 
bench,  being  constituted  on  Noyember  3^ 
1660,  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas,  where 
he  retained  his  seat  till  his  death  in  £a8ter 
Term  1668.  (1  SUderfim,  3,  4,  365.)  He 
was  buried  nnaer  a  monument  still  eiisring 
in  the  church  of  Arlealej. 

He  married  Elizabeth,  daufl^ter  of  John 
Meade,  Esq.,  of  Nortofts,  finchingfield, 
Essex. 

SBTTCI,  Edwabd  CLokd  Kinloss).  The 
third  son  of  Robert  ae  Brus,  the  first  chief 
justice  of  the  Court  of  King's  Bench  as 
newly  constituted  under  Henry  ILL,  and 
one  of  the  competitors  for  the  crown  of 
Scothmd  in  tiie  following  reign,  was  John 
de  Brus,  to  whose  grandson  his  cousin 
King  David  H.  cranted  in  1359  the  castie 
and  manor  of  Clackmannan,  with  various 
other  manors  in  the  county  of  that  name. 
In  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century  Sir 
Edward  Bruce,  the  second  son  of  one  of  the 
lineal  holders  of  this  property,  acquired  the 
estate  of  Blair  Hall,  ana  by  his  marriage 
with  Alison,  daughter  of  William  Reid,  of 
Aikenhead  in  the  same  coun^,  and  sister 
of  Robert  Reid,  Bishop  of  Orkney,  had 
three  sons,  the  second  of  whom,  Edward, 
became  master  of  the  Rolls. 

He  was  bom  about  1548,  and  was,  accord- 
ing to  the  most  probable  accounts,  brought 
np  to  the  law,  and  practised  at  the  Scottish 
bar.  In  1607  he  was  preferred  to  be  one 
of  the  senators  of  the  College  of  Justice, 
and  in  1600  was  selected  by  King  James  as 
his  ambassador  to  the  English  court,  for 
the  professed  purpose  of  congratulating 
the  queen  on  her  escape  from  the  Earl  of 
Essex's  insurrection,  but  with  the  secret 
mission  to  forward  James's  views  on  the 
succession,  and  to  sound  the  disposition  of 
the  people  in  regard  to  it.  He  effected  this 
object  with  so  much  jud^ent  and  address 
that  he  obtained  the  private  assurance  of 
most  of  the  leading  men  of  the  country 
that  they  would  support  James's  preten- 
ttons ;  and  he  openea  a  secret  correspond- 
ence with  Sir  Robert  Cecil  (afterwards 
published  by  Lord  Hailes),  which  insured 
the  earliest  communication  of  every  detail 
that  would  aid  the  conjuncture.  (Robertson^ 
iii.  136;  Burnet,  i.  8.)  Even  before  his 
royal  master  had  reaped  the  fruits  of  his 
diplomacy  ho  received,  in  reward  for  his 
services^  a  grant  of  the  dissolved  abbey  of 
Kinloss  in  the  shire  of  Elgin,  and  was 
created  Lord  Bruce  of  Kinloss  by  patent 
dated  Febru^  22,  1603. 

On  Queen  Elizabeth's  death,  Ldrd  Bruce 
of  course  accompanied  his  sovereign  to  wit- 
ness that  peaceful  accession  to  the  English 
throne  which  he  had  been  so  instrumental 
in  securing.  He  waa  not  long  in  being 
placed  in  a  poat  which  had  some  slight 
relation  to  hia  earlr  atadia^  receiving  in 
leas  than  three  wem  after  King  Jamea's 


BBUGE 

arrival  in  England   the   appoiiitinent  of 
master  of  the  Rolls  on  May  18, 1603. 

Lord  Bruce  was  at  the  same  time  ad- 
mitted into  the  king's  new  council,  and  in 
the  first  parliament  obtained  an  act  of  nata* 
ralisation  for  himself  and  hia  £aniily.  King 
James  showed  his  continued  favour  to  hiin^ 
by  makinff  him  large  jpranta  of  money  and 
Lmds,  ana  by  promotmg  the  marriage  of 
his  daughter  Christian  with  William,  after- 
wards second  Earl  of  Devonahire,  givmg 
her  away  with  his  own  hand,  and  making 
up  her  fortune  to  10,0002.  in  July  1604 
the  king  also  created  him  an  Englishpeer 
by  his  former  title.  He  sat  at  the  BoCa 
for  nearlv  seven  yean,  and  hia  remaina  are 
deposited  close  to  his  court  in  the  chapel 
there,  where  his  effigy  in  his  official  draas 
is  represented  on  a  monument,  the  inscrip- 
tion on  whidi  states  that  he  died  on  Ja- 
nuary 14,  1610-11,  and  condudea  with 
these  two  lines : — 

Conjoge,  prole^  nuro,  genero,  spe,  reqae  beatns  ; 
^  ivcre  nos  docuit,  nunc  docet,  ecce,  moiL 

By  his    wife,    Magdalen^  daughter  of 
Alexander  Clerk,  of   Balbimie    m   Fift^ 
Esq.,  he  had,  besides  the  daughter  already 
mentioned,  two   sons,    who    sucoeasively 
possessed  the   titie.    Edward,  the  elder, 
was  killed  in  a  duel  with  Sir  Edwud 
Sackville,    afterwards    Duke   of  Dorsst 
Thomas,  the  younger,  waa  created  Earl  of 
Elgin   in    Scotland    in   1688^  and    Lord 
Bruce  of  Whorlton  in  England  in  1641. 
To  the  last  title  his  son  received  the  addi- 
tion of  the  earldom  of  Avlesburr  in  1664. 
This  tide,  though  it  failed  in  1747,  was 
re-granted  to  the  last  earl's  nephew  in  1776^ 
to  which  a  marquisate  was  added  in  182L 
The  title  of  Earl  of  Elgin  devolved,  accord- 
ing to  the  Scotch  patent,  on  the  heir  male, 
who  was  the  Earl  of  Kincardine,  a  de- 
scendant from  Sir  George  Bruce  of  Car- 
nock,  younger   brother    of   Edward,  the 
master  of  the  Rolls,  and  the  two  tides  of 
Elgin  and  Kincardine  are  now  enjoyed  hj 
the  present  peer,  who  has  also  an  Knglish 
barony  of  the  former  name,  granted  in 
1849. 

BBTTCE,  James  Lewis  Kniohi,  de- 
scended from  an  old  Shropshire  £unily 
long  settled  near  Ludlow.  His  father, 
John  Knight,  Esq.,  of  Llanblethian  in 
Glamorgamthire,  and  Fairlinch  in  Devon- 
shire, by  his  wife  Margaret,  the  only 
married  child  of  William  Bruce,  Esq.,  of 
the  fonner  place,  a  descendant  from  a 
junior  branch  of  the  ancient  house  of  Bruce 
of  Kennet,  and  granddaughter  (by  her 
mother^  of  Gabriel  Lewis,  Esq.,  of  Laa- 
ishen  m  Glamoivanshire,  haa  a  lam 
family,  of  whom  uie  lord  justice  waa  the 
jroungest  son.  He  waa  bom  at  Hainihuila 
m  1791,  and  bore  hia  fiithei^a  OMBt  te  m 
first  fbrtr-aix  yean  of  hia  lift  ;i  baft  la  1887 


He  finialiAil   Ills   education   at  Exeter 
CeUegey  Oxford,  and,  entering  at  Ldncoln^s 


BBUGE  BRUS  135 

he  added  hy  licence  that  of  his  mother,  <  BBXTDSVELL,  Robert,  lineal  descendant 
upon  the  occasion  of  his  eldest  brother,  of  an  ancient  family  established  at  Doiling- 
John  Bmoe  Bnioe,  Esq.,  assuming  the  ton  in  Oxfordshire  as  early  as  the  reif;n 
snmame  of  P^oe  on  succeeding   to  an  ^  of  Henry  III.,  and  of   which    Edmund 

BrudeneU,  attomey-^reneral  to  Kichard  II., 
was  a  member,  was  Dum  in  the  year  1401. 
He  was  the  second  son  of  Edmund  Bru- 
Inn  in  1812,  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  :  denell,  Esq.,  of  Agmondesham,  Bucking- 
1817.  In  the  first  instance  ho  attended  |  hamshire,  where  he  had  large  pofi8e8sions, 
the  Welsh  Circuit,  where  he  is  said  to  ,  by  his  second  wife  l^hilippa,  oaughter  of 
hare  had  great  success  in  handling  the  Philip  Engletield,  Esq.,  ot  rlnchingfield  in 
natiYe  juriea.  But  in  the  Court  of  Chan-  i  Essex.  After  8pending  some  time  at  the 
*^    -.v:-v    1.^    ,.!*: — i...i«  ^i.i.-.^i — ]    University  of  Cambridge,  he  studied  the 

law  at  an  inn  of  court  which  is  not  re- 
corded ;  but  his  namt*  occurs  as  an  advocate 
in  the  Year  Books  in  Hilary  Term  140(), 


eaij,  to    wliich    he   ultimately  attached 

Idmielf,  his  talents  and  industry  were  soon 

rewarded  hy  ao  lar^  a  business  that  in 

t      18S9  he  received  a  silk  gown.    From  that 

';  time  till  he  was  raised  to  the  bench  he  and  he  was  called  to  the  degree  of  the  coif 
'  enjoyed  the  most  extensive  practice,  through  ,  in  Michaelmas  Term  1*'K)4,  receiving  the 
'  the  labours  of  which  he  fought  with  un-  appointment  of  kiug*s  Berjeant  in  1505.  In 
flmcfaing  energy  and  imperturbable  good  j  eighteen  mouths  he  was  raised  to  a  judicial 

^ seat  in  the   King's  Bench,  on  April   :i8, 

lo07,  two  years  before  the  death  of  King 
Henry  VII. 
On  the  accession  of  Henry  VIII.  he  was 


kmnour. 

In  ld«3l  he  was  elected  member  for 
Bishop's  Castle,  shortly  before  its  disfran- 
chisement by  the  Keform  Act  In  parliament 
hewas  a  supporter  of  conservative  principles.  |  removed  into  the  Court  of  Common  Ple&s 
In  18^4  the  Univerai^  of  Oxfora  honoured  <  but  afterwards  returned  to  the  King's 
him  with  the  degree  of  D.C.L.  |  Bench,  where  he  sat  as  one  of  the  pui.Mne 

ViThen  the  le^slature  decided  that  two  I  judges.    At  the  end  of  twelve  years  ho 
additional  judges  were  necessary  for  the  I  was  appointed  chief  justice  of  the  IJommon 


MBstance  of  the  lord  chancellor,  Mr. 
Kniffhtp-Bmce,  with  the  approbation  of  the 
whole  bar,  woa  selected  for  the  first  place. 


Pleas  on  April  !•'$,  1521,  and  presided  there 
till  his  death  on  January  30,  1531.  He 
was  buried  in  the   church    of  Dean    in 


He  became  vice-chanceUor  on  October  28,  •  Xorthamptonnhire,  under  a  beautiful  ala- 
1841,  and  wss  thereupon  knighted,  and  !  boster  nionumeut,  on  which  his  etiigy  was 
soon  afterwards  was  (»dled  to  the  privy  ■  placed  between  thoae  of  his  two  wives. 
counciL  Indefatigable  in  the  performance  The  first  of  these  was  Margaret,  the  widow 
(if  the  duties  that  devolved  upon  him,  no  of  William  Wivil,  lOsq.,  of  Stanton  in 
amount  of  labour  seemed  to  distress  or  dis-  Leicestershire,  and  duughter  and  co-heir  of 
concert  him.  Before  the  long  vacation  of ,  Thomas  Entwisseli,  Em^.,  of  Stanton-Wivil. 
1850,  bv  the  illness  of  the  two  other  vice-  -  The  second  was  IMiilippa  Power,  of  IWck- 
cbancellors,  the  whole  bushiess  of  the  ampton.  By  tlie  latter  lie  had  no  issue ; 
three  courts  at  the  most  pressing  period  of  :  but  by  the  former  he  had  two  sons — Thomas 
the  year  having  been  thrown  on  lus  hands,  {  and  Anthony.  The  descendants  of  the 
he  oespatched  it  with  so  much  discriniino-  elder  of  these  were  elevated  in  the  ])ecrage 
tion,  anility,  and  good  temper  that  a  public  to  the  highest  from  the  lowest  rank, 
expression  of  respectful  admiration  was  Among  those  which  have  become  extinct 
ehdted  from  the  whole  bar,  in  an  address  are  the  Dukeof  Muntngii,  Marquis  of  Mont- 
from  the  attorney- general.  hcrmer,  I'^arl  of  Caixiigan,  Baron  Montagu 

It  seemed  naturally  to  follow,  when  the  of  Ikjughton,  and  Buron  Alontagu  of  I)eaii : 
Court  of  Appeal  in  ("hancery  was  organ-  and  the  only  one  which  still  remains  in  the 
iaed  in  October  1801,  that  Sir  James  House  of  I'eers  is  the  Miurquis  of  Ayles- 
fihould  at  once  be  selected  for  the  senior    bur  v. 


lord  justice:  a  position  which  he  held  for 
above  fifteen  years,  when,  suffering  under 
SMvere  illness,  he  sent  in  his  resignation 


BBTJKSISH,  ItOHKiiT,  probably  derived 
his  uaiue  froiu  a  parish  in  Suli'olk,  which  is 
also  frequently  called  Bumedish.     A  .John 


in  October  1866,  which  within  h  fort-  ,  de  Burndish  acquired  the  manor  of  jNIorton, 
night  was  followed  by  his  death  on  No-  '  nearOngarin  l^issex,  in  the  reign  of  Kd ward 
vember  7.  The  loss  of  few  men  on  the  I.  His  son  Nicholas  was  probably  Itobert's 
judicial  seat  has  been  more  regretted  than    father  or  brother.    Of  Kobert  there  is  no 


quiet  humour  and  chastened  wit.  I  1 41,  ii.  98,  121) ;   CaL  lufjuiK.  p.  m.  ii.  70, 

He  married  Elixa,  the  cmly  daughter  of !  159, 184.) 
Thomaa  Newte,  Esq.,  of  Duvale  in  Devon-  ;      BBTJ8,  Peter  de,  or  BBUI8,  was  de- 
sire, by  whom  he  bad  several  children.       |  scended  from  Itoberl  de  Brus,  a  valiant 


136 


BRUS 


Norman  knigbt,  who  accompanied  William 
the  Conqueror  on  his  invasion  of  England, 
and  whose  prowess  was  rewarded  with  no 
less  than  ninety-four  lordships  in  Yorkshire, 
of  which  Skelton  was  his  principal  seat 
The  lordship  of  Annandale  was  afterwards 
added  to  the  family  by  the  marriage  of 
Kobert's  son  Kobert  to  the  heiress  of  that 
larpre  property,  which  on  his  death  devolved 
on  William,  the  eldest  son  of  that  marriage, 
from  whom  descended  Kobert  de  Brus,  or 
Briwes,  afterwards  noticed ;  while  the  Eng- 
lish estates  became  the  inheritance  of  Adam, 
the  second  Robert's  eldest  son  by  a  first 
marriage.  After  two  Adams,  there  were 
four  Peters  in  succession,  of  whom  the  sub- 
ject  of  the  present  notice  is  the  third.  His 
father  was  a  strong  adherent  to  Prince  Louis 
of  France  when  he  was  introduced  by  the 
barons  in  rebellion  a^nst  King  John,  and 
gave  him  powerful  aid  in  Yorkshire.  His 
mother  was  Helewi&e,  one  of  the  sisters  and 
coheirs  of  William  de  Lancaster,  of  Kendal, 
a  justice  itinerant.  He  did  homage  for 
his  father's  estates  in  February  1222,  6 
HeniT  111.,  and  married  Hillaria,  the  eldest 
daughter  of  Peter  de  Mauley. 

lie  was  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  ap- 
pointed for  the  county  of  Northumberland  on 
June  30, 122(5, 10  Henry  IIL,  after  which  no 
further  mention  is  made  of  him  till  No- 
vember 15, 1240,  25  Henry  HI.,  when  his 
son,  the  under-mentioned  Peter,  fined  two 
hundred  marks  on  having  livery  of  the 
lands  of  which  his  father  was  seised  on  the 
day  when  he  commenced  his  journey  to  the 
Holy  Land,  where,  probably,  he  died.  (Hot. 
CiausAlir)!  ;  Excerpt,  e Rot,  Fin.  i. 80, 332.) 

BBTTS,  Peter  de,  the  son  of  the  preceding 
Peter,  by  Hillaria  his  wife,  was  Joined  in 
the  commission  issued  to  the  justices  itine- 
rant for  Yorkshire  in  62  Henry  HL,  1268. 
In  the  next  year  he  was  appointed  constable 
of  the  castle  of  Scarborough,  and  died  on 
September  18,  1272.  He  left  no  issue,  so 
that  his  four  sisters  divided  his  property. 

BBTTS,  lloBERT  de,  was  the  fifth  lord  of 
Annandale,  to  which  he  succeeded  in  29 
Henry  IH.,  1245,  on  the  death  of  his  father, 
Kobert  the  Noble,  who,  by  his  marriage 
with  Isabel,  the  second  daughter  of  Prince 
David,  Earl  of  Huntingdon  and  Chester, 
grandson  of  David  L,  King  of  Scotland, 
became  one  of  the  greatest  subjects  in 
Europe.  From  June  till  October  1250 
there  are  entries  of  payments  made  for 
assizes  to  be  taken  before  him,  and  his  name 
also  appears  upon  fines,  showing  that  he 
acted  as  a  justicier  at  that  time.  There  is 
then  an  interval  of  seven  years;  but  from 
1257  to  1263  he  acted  in  the  same  manner, 
and  on  the  circuits  of  the  two  last  years  he 
was  placed  at  the  head  of  the  commissions. 

In  1263y  during  the  contest  between  the 
king  and  the  bazona,  he  atood  firm  to  hia 
royal  master,  with  whom  he  was  taken  pri- 


BRYAN 

soner  at  the  battle  of  Lewes,  on  May  14, 
1264.    (JJopm,  iii.  154.) 

In  October  1266  the  payments  for  aaoies 
before  him  are  resume^  and  on  March  8, 
1268,  he  was  appointed  'capitalis  jiuti- 
ciarius  ad  placita  coram  rege  tenenda,' 
being  the  first  who  was  distinctly  consti- 
tuted chief  justice  of  the  King's  BendL 
He  had  a  salary  of  one  hundred  marks  as- 
signed to  him. 

King  Henry  died  in  the  foUowing  No* 
vember,  but  Kobert  de  Bms  does  not  appeer 
to  have  been  replaced  on  the  judicial  bendt 
on  the  accession  of  Edward  1.     Nothing  is 
related  of  his  career  during  the  eighteen 
years  which  intervened  before  he  be^une  a 
competitor  for  the  crown  of  Scotland  on  the 
deatn  of  Queen  Margaret  in  1290.     The 
several  claimants  who  then  came  forwaid 
were    eventually  reduced    to    two— John 
Balliol,  the  representative  of  the  eldest 
daughter  of  David,  Earl  of  Huntingdon; 
and  Kobert  de  Brus,  the  descendant  of  the 
second,  but  one  degree  nearer  the  common 
stock.    The  decision  was  referred  to  King 
Edward,  who,  in  1292,  determined  in  favoor 
of  Balliol,  who  was  accordingly  declared 
king.     Kobert  de   Brus,  however,  would 
never  acknowledge  his  title ;  but  retiring 
in  disgust,  he  died  at  his  castle  of  Loch- 
mabeu  in  129t5,  and  was  buried  at  the  mo- 
nastery of  Gisbume  in  Cleveland,  which 
had  been  founded  by  his  ancestor,  the  first 
Kobert. 

By  his  wife  Isabel,  the  daughter  of 
Gilbert  de  Clare,  Earl  of  Gloucester,  he 
had  three  sons — Kobert,  Bernard,  and  John. 
Kobert's  son,  Kobert,  eventually  succeeded 
in  securing  the  Scottish  crown,  by  the 
signal  victory  obtained  at  Bannockbum 
over  the  forces  of  Edward  II..  on  June  24, 
1314. 

The  third  son,  John,  was  the  progenitor 
of  a  long  line  of  eminent  knights,  from 
whom  descended  the  Earls  of  Elgin  and 
Cardigan  and  the  Marquis  of  Aylesbuiy. 

BBYAN,  TnoHAS,  studied  the  law  in 
Gray's  Inn,  and  is  mentioned  in  the  Year 
Books  as  an  advocate  so  early  as  Hilaiy, 
34  Henry  VI.,  1466.  His  call  to  the  de- 
gree of  the  coif  was  in  Michaelmas  1463; 
and  his  practice  seems  to  have  been  con- 
siderable, both  during  the  next  seven  years 
of  Edward's  reign  and  the  short  restoration 
of  Henry  VI.  that  followed.  He  was 
raised  to  the  head  of  the  Common  Fleas 
on  May  29,  1471,  a  few  weeks  after  Ed- 
ward's return.  In  1476  he  received  the 
honour  of  knighthood  on  the  same  day  ts 
the  Prince  of  Wales  (Holmshed,  ilL  Ui), 
and  he  continued  to  perform  the  duties  of 
his  office  for  the  remamder  of  the  reign. 

There  is  evidence  of  his  not  bemrvfr- 
moved  under  Edward  V.  and  BklmdllL; 
and  from  the  latter  he  rseeifqi  a  j(m^  m 
tail  male,  of  themanon  of  WylkiBld^Mi 


BUBBEWITH 

Uphaven  in  Wiltshire,  of  Over  in  Glouces- 
tershire, and  of  Calverton  in  BuckiDgham- 
dure  (9  Beportj  Pub,  Jtec,,  App,  ii.  12, 122), 
pra])ertie8  forfeited  to  the  Hng  by  persons 
attainted.  These  grants  are  stated  to  be  for 
unnamed  services  against  the  rebels;  but 
that  they  were  judicial,  and  not  political, 
may  be  presumed  from  his  immediately 
Teceivin^  a  new  patent  as  chief  justice  on 
Heniy  \  XL's  accession,  and  from  his  being 
•ppointed  one  of  the  commissioners  to 
execute  the  office  of  steward  at  that  king's 
coronation.     (Bymer,  xii.  277. J 

He  presided  in  his  court  till  his  death, 
about  October  1«500.  His  will  was  proved 
on  December  11  in  that  year;  and,  inad- 
much  as  both  he  and  his  son  Thomas  desired 
to  be  buried  in  the  reli^nous  house  of  Ash- 
nge,  and  the  son  of  the  latter  was  buried 
there,  it  may  be  presumed  that  he  was 
seated  in  Buckinghamshire.  The  name  of 
bid  wife  does  not  appear;  but  ho  left  a  son 
named  Thomas,  whose  son  Francis  was  the 
intimate  friend  of  Sir  Thomas  Wyatt,  and 
wi8  himself  a  scholar  and  a  poet  His 
poetical  powers  are  thus  celeorated  by 
vnyton  m  the  '  Heroical  Epistles ' : — 

.Vnd  sweet-tongu'd  Bn-an,  whom  the  muses 
kept, 
'  And  in  his  cradle  rock'd  him  while  he  slept 

BUBBEWITH,  Nicholas  (Bishop  of 
Bira  AyD  Wells),  was  bom  at  Menethorpe 
in  Yorkshire,  and  was  brought  up  in  the 
neighbouring  township  of  Bubbewitb,  from 
whence  he  acquired  his  name.  The  earliest 
notice  of  him  is  as  a  clerk  or  master  in 
Chancery  receiving  petitions  in  parliament 
m  ia97,'21  Kichard  11.  (lioi.  Pari  iiL  348.) 
He  had  been  admitted  prebendary  of 
HaTes  in  the  church  of  Exeter  in  139G,  and 
was  collated  to  the  archdeaconry  of  Dorset 
in  1400,  to  which  was  added  in  the  follow- 
ing year  that  of  Richmond,  which  ho  held, 
however,  for  only  two  days.  (Le  Neve, 
281, 325.) 

He  succeeded  Thomas  de  Stanley  as 
master  of  the  Rolls  on  September  24, 1402, 
but  continued  in  that  omce  less  than  two 
Tears  and  a  half,  resigning  it  on  March  2, 
1405. 

It  was  not  long  before  he  was  raised  to 
tbe  episcopal  bench  ;  and  he  afifords  a 
curious  instance  of  one  individual  presiding 
over  three  sees  in  less  than  two  years.  He 
iras  elected  Bishop  of  London  on  May 
1'^  140(5;  was  translated  to  Salisbury  on 
August  14,  1407,  and  to  Bath  and  Wells 
on  April  1,  1408.  He  was  raised,  during 
these  changes,  to  the  office  of  treasurer, 
▼hich  he  held  for  about  two  years. 

He  presided  over  the  diocese  of  Bath  and 
Wells  more  than  sixteen  years;  and  his 
chancter  for  wisdom  was  so  well  esta- 
bliihel  that  he  was  one  of  the  prelates 
«m  to  Rome  in  1414  to  assist  the  cardinals 
in  dedding  between  the  three  candidates 


BULLEE 


137 


then  contending  for  the  papal  chair,  when 
the  choice  fell  upon  Martin  \,  While  on 
that  mission  he  joined  in  inducing  Giovanni 
di  Serravalli,  Bishop  of  Fermo,  to  under- 
take the  translation  of  Dante's  *  Conmiedia.' 
(Tiraboschi,  Poes.  Ital.  ii.  40.) 

He  is  described  as  a  man  discreet,  pro- 
vident, and  circumspect,  both  in  temporal 
and  spiritual  affairs;  and  his  charity 
and  munificence  were  evidenced  both  in 
his  life  and  the  disposition  of  his  will.  He 
died  on  October  27,  1424,  and  was  buried 
in  his  chapel  at  Wells.  (<rW»nVt,  370; 
Pymer,  viu.  4.51,  400,  512;  Notes  and  Que- 
ries, 3rd  S.  iii.  400). 

BTJKTKOHAM ,  John  de,  or  BOKTKOHAM 
(Bishop  of  Lincoln),  was  educated  at  Ox- 
ford, where  he  took  the  degree  of  Doctor 
in  Divinity.  He  was  collated  archdeacon  of 
Northampton  in  1:550.  In  l.*551,24  Edward 
III.,  he  was  appointed  keeper  of  the  king's 
great  wardrobe.  {Alb,  Pot.  Oruj,  ii.  211.) 
In  1357  he  was  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer, 
but  it  may  be  presumed  that  he  resigned 
his  seat  on  that  biMich  on  his  becoming 
keeper  of  the  privv  seal  two  years  after- 
wards',  an  office  which  he  retained  till  the 
middle  of  the  thirty-sovonth  year.  In 
1300  Itobert  de  Ilerle  and  he  were  con- 
stituted the  king*s  li(>utenauts  and  captains 
of  the  duchy  of  JJrittany. 

In  the  meantime  he  had  been  advanced 
successively  to  the  dvanciv  of  Lichfield, 


IX.,  in  revenge  for  certain  contests  between 
them,  thought  proper  to  remove  him  from 
it  in  1397,  offering  him  the  see  of  Lichfield 
instead.  Tlie  ofi'ended  prelate,  however, 
refused  to  accept  what  he  considered  as  a 
degradation,  but  chose  rather  to  retire  to 
the  cloisters  of  Canterbury,  whore  in  less 
than  six  months  he  died  on  March  10, 
1398.  {Ije  Neve;  Godwin f  2dij.)  His  works 
are  mentioned  by  Bale  and  IMts,  and  prove 
him  to  have  been  an  able  disputant  and 
profound  scholar. 

BTJLLEB,  Fkaxcls,  is  equally  celebrated 
among  both  females  and  males,  but  not 
with  equal  admiration.  While  he  is  con- 
sidered by  the  latter  as  one  of  the  most 
learned  of  lawyers,  he  is  stigmatised  by  the 
former  as  one  of  the  most. cruel  of  judges, 
since  to  him  is  attributed  the  obnoxious  and 
ungent^manly  dictum  that  a  husband  may 
beat  his  wife,  so  that  the  stick  with  which 
he  administers  the  castigation  is  not  thicker 
than  his  thumb.  It  may  perhaps  restore 
him  to  the  ladies'  good  graces  to  be  told 
that,  though  the  story  was  generally  be- 
lieved, and  even  made  the  subject  of  carica- 
ture, yet,  after  a  searching  investigation  by 
the  most  able  critics  ana  antiquaries,  no 
substantial  evidence  has  been  found  that  he 
ever  expressed  so  ungallant  an  opinion. 


138 


BULLEB 


Francis  Buller  was  Tof  an  ancient  and ' 
renowned  Comisli  family,  the  members  of 
which  were  famous  in  the  senate,  in  the 
Churchy  and  in  many  distinguished  posts  in 
the  service  of  the  state.  One  of  his  uncles 
was  father  of  Admiral  Sir  Edward  Buller, 
of  Trenant  Park,  who  was  honoured  with  a 
haronetcy,  which  expired  in  1824.  Another 
imcle  became  Bishop  of  Exeter;  and  the 
judge  himself  had  legal  blood  in  his  veins, 
some  of  his  ancestors  being  recorders  of 
boroughs,  and  another  the  daughter  of 
Chief  Justice  Pollexfen.  His  motner  also 
was  Lady  Jane  Bathurst,  the  sister  of  Lord 
Chancellor  Bathurst,  the  second  wife  of  his 
fiEither,  James  Buller,  Esq.,  of  Shillingham, 
M.P.  for  Cornwall  from  1747  till  his  death 
in  1765.  Francis  was  bom  on  March  17, 1746, 
and  was  entered  at  the  Inner  Temple  on  Fe- 
bruary 3, 1763.  He  became  a  pupil  of  Mr. 
(afterwards  Judge)  Ashhurst,  andin  1765  felt 
competent  to  set  up  for  himself.  For  seven 
years  he  was  in  full  practice  as  a  special 
pleader,  and  his  reputation  in  that  character 
was  greatly  enhanced  by  the  publication  in 
1767  of  a  work  (said  to  be  founded  on 
coUections  made  by  his  uncle,  Mr.  Justice 
Bathurst)  entitled  *  An  Introduction  to  the 
Law  relative  to  Trials  at  Nisi  Prius,'  which 
was  so  much  esteemed  that  it  went  through 
six  editions  before  his  death. 

He  was  called  to  the  bar  in  Easter  Term 
1772,  and  immediately  took  a  high  rank 
among  his  colleagues.  His  assistance  and 
advice  were  in  perpetual  requisition,  and 
there  was  scarcely  any  case  of  importance 
in  which  he  was  not  engaged.  The  Re- 
ports of  Heniy  Cowper  and  the  State  Trials 
amply  show,  not  only  the  extent  of  his  prac- 
tice, but  the  excellence  of  his  advocacy. 
Lord  Mansfield  soon  recognised  his  genius 
and  promoted  his  advancement,  which  was 
furthered  by  his  uncle.  Lord  Chancellor 
Bathurst.  In  1777  he  was  made  a  king's 
counsel  and  second  judge  on  the  Chester 
Circuit;  and  on  May  6,  1778,  he  was  ap- 
pointed a  jud^e  of  the  King's  Bench,  being 
then  only  thirty- two  years  of  age.  Lord 
Mansfield's  expectations  were  fully  realised 
by  the  eifectual  assistance  he  received 
during  the  ten  years  he  remained  chief  jus- 
tice, m  the  last  two  of  which,  when  his 
health  began  to  decline,  ho  found  a  most 
efiicient  and  active  substitute  in  Mr.  Justice 
Buller,  who  not  only  conducted  for  him  the 
sittings  at  Nisi  Prius,  but  in  the  absence  of  the 
chief  took  the  lead  in  Banco,  though  Judge 
Ashhurst  was  his  senior.  In  those  two  years, 
in  fact,  he  was  little  less  than  chief  justice, 
and  in  the  hope  of  inducing  the  minister  to 
make  him  really  so,  it  is  undeRitood  that 
Lord  Mansfield  delayed  his  own  resignation. 
Mr.  Pitt,  however,  from  political  and  other 
motives  would  not  consent^  but  appointed 
Lord  Kenyon  as  Lord  Mansfield's  successor, 
gmag  Mr.  Justice  Buller  the  very  inade* 


BUBaH 

quate  compensation  of  a  baxonetoy  in 
January  1790.  Under  Lord  Kenyon  he  re* 
mained  for  six  vears,  and  in  Easter  1794  he 
removed  into  the  Common  Pleas,  where  he 
sat  for  six  years  more.  Beine  then  pros- 
trated by  physical  infirmity,  ne  anwi^ed 
with  the  lord  chancellor  for  me  lesigDatioo 
of  his  seat ;  but  on  June  6, 1800,  the  veij 
day  after  that  arrangement,  and  before  it 
could  be  efiected,  he  died  at  his  house  in 
Bedford  Square,  at  the  age  of  fifly-fouri  ani 
was  buried  in  St.  Andrew*8,  Holbom. 

Thus  terminated,  at  an  age  which  had 
been  the  commencement  of  many  a  judicial 
life,  the  career  of  a  jud^  who  had  sat  on 
the  bench  with  distinguished  merit  no  less 
than  twenty-two  years.  No  one  ever  denied 
his  extraoidinary  legal  capacity,  though  the 
correctness  of  some  of  his  decisions  might 
be  disputed.  Not  only  was  he  the  reco^ 
nised  substitute  of  his  celebrated  chief  m 
his  own  court,  but  he  won  the  admiration 
of  that  great  grudger  of  praise.  Lord  Thui- 
low,  who  had  so  great  a  dependence  on  him 
that  he  frequently,  when  obliged  or  inclined 
to  be  absent,  appointed  him  to  preside  in  his 

Slace  in  the  Cfourt  of  Chancery,  where  hii 
ecrees  excited  the  rough  eulogy  of  his 
principaL  Yet  with  all  his  ^  industryi  sa- 
gacity, quickness,  and  intelligence,  nd 
notwithstanding  his  urbanity  to  the  bar,  he 
was  not  a  popular  j  udge.  He  was  con^dered 
arrogant  m  liis  assumption  of  superioiitT, 
hasty  in  his  decisions  and  decrees,  anSi^ 
which  pressed  harder  upon  him  in  public 
estimation,  prejudiced,  severe,  and  even 
cruel  in  crimmaL  trials.  But  his  character 
has  outlived  all  detraction,  and  at  the 
present  day,  due  allowance  being  made  for 
occasional  mistakes  and  shortcomings,  there 
ai'e  very  few  deceased  judges  whose  de- 
cisions, whose  opinions,  or  whose  doubts 
are  received  with  more  respect.  Even  in 
his  own  day  his  penetration  and  impartiality 
were  so  far  recognised  that  it  was  said  of 
him  that,  though  no  person  if  guilty  would 
choose  to  be  tried  by  him,  all  persons  if 
innocent  would  prefer  him  for  their  judge. 
Among  the  young  and  diffident  members  of 
the  bar  whom  he  encouraged  and  befriended 
were  the  eminent  names  of  Fcame  and 
Ilargrave,  and  the  future  chief  justices, 
Gibbs,  Law,  and  Abbott,  the  latter  of  whonl, 
when  tutor  to  his  son,  he  recommended  to 
adopt  the  law.  He  married,  at  the  early  age 
of  seventeen,  Susannah,  the  onlv  daughter 
of  Francis  Yarde,  Esq.,  and  by  )ier  had  an 
only  son,  who,  in  compliance  with  the  will 
of  his  mother^s  brother,  assimied  the  ad* 
ditional  surname  of  Y'arde,  and  whose  mm^ 
the  third  baronet,  was  raised  to  the  peexa^ 
in  1858,  by  the  title  of  Baron  Chunton  » 
the  county  of  Devon. 

BUBOH,  Hubert  de  (Raxl  ov  Km). 
This  distinguished  man  tnoed  hk  anovtix 
as  high  as  the  Emperor  Chadinuigiii^  ftooi 


BUBOH 

wboB&  fifth  MOy  Chariefl,  Duke  of  Ingeheim. 
deseended  Harliim  de  Biugh,  who  marriea 
Heriera  or  Arhytta,  the  mother  of  William 
the  Gooquerar,  and  had  h^  her  two  sons, 
both  to  be  hereafter  noticed — ^riz.,  Odo, 
Bishop  of  Baveox;  and  Bobert,  £arl  of 
Monton.  Booert*8  son,  William,  who  re- 
beUed  against  Heniy  L,and^  being  defeated, 
«M  not  only  depziTed  of  his  eyes,  but  im- 
prisoned ibr  life,  ia  stated  to  have  left  two 
SBDS,  one  of  whom  was  John  de  Boigh, 
the  &ther  (or  nunapiobahlj  the  grand- 
frthsr)of  Hnhert.  (Butsf.  UmversOe.) 

From  an  early  period  of  his  life  Hubert 
«M  in  the  aerrice  of  Richard  L,  and  in 
tihs  lust  Tear  of  King  John's  reign  he  was 
■fidenUy  prominent  at  court  to  be  one  of 
tke  ^edgea  aa  his  sovereign's  nart  that  the 
oonrention  with  Beginald,  Earl  of  Bologne, 
ihould  be  faithfally  kept,  and  to  be  a  wit- 
Ma  to  a  royal  charter.  In  the  same  year 
iw  was  raised  to  the  office  of  king's  cluun- 
Msin,  and  is  so  designated,  for  the  first 
fime,  in  a  charter  dated  April  2d,  1200, 
sonfinning  a  convention  nuuie  between 
Mm  and  William  de  Vemon,  Earl  of 
BiBfroii,  OB  his  marriage  with  Johanna,  the 
Mri's  younger  dau^ter,  by  which  the  Isle 
of  Wight  and  Ohnstchurch  were  assigned 
li  her  portiocL    (J2o(.  CAori.  30,  36,  52.) 

Erom  this  period  he  advanced  rapidly  in 
Iks  royal  favour.  The  castles  of  Dover  and 
Wisdm  were  conmiitted  to  his  charge,  he 
was  Ty^»"^^»^  sheriff  of  Dorset  and  Somer- 
set, ana  he  was  entrusted  with  the  cus- 
toij  of  the  county  and  castle  of  Hereford 
mi  the  office  of  Warden  of  the  Marches, 
iat  the  defence  of  which  the  king  gave  him 
a  hundred  knights.  In  3  John  the  sheriff- 
sities  of  Cornwall  and  Berkshire  were  added 
to  his  employments ;  and  he  obtained  a 
licence  to  tortify  his  castle  of  Dunestore  in 
Someisetshire.  {Hoi,  Chart.  100;  Hapin, 
n.  423 ;  JRoi,  LSberat.  10 ;  ILdt,  Pat  6,  11.) 

On  the  defeat  of  Arthur,  Earl  of  Brit- 
tmy,  in  August  1202,  that  prince  was  sent 
to  Falaiae  under  the  charge,  according  to  | 
aims  relations  (HoUruhedj  ii.  28o),  of  Hu- 
Wrt  de  Bursrh,  whose  refusal  to  obey  the 
king's  cruel  behest  against  his  royal  prL';o- 
aer  Is  the  subject  of  one  of  the  most  beauti- 
faX  of  Shakspeare's  scenes.  This  disobe- 
dience and  the  concealment  with  which  it 
^18  covered  seem  to  have  been  forgiven 
vhen  the  murmurs  of  the  barons  on  Ar- 
tiur's  supposed  death  were  removed  by 
bbert's  announcement  that  the  prince 
was  still  alive.  On  King  John's  being 
aunmoned,  after  the  completion  of  the 
ittl  tragedy,  to  answer  the  charge  be- 
kn  Fmlip  of  fVance  and  his  peers,  Hu- 
bert was  sent  with  Eustace,  Bishop  of  Ely, 
to  that  coort,  to  demand  a  safe-conduct  for 
kis  going  and  returning,  the  former  of  which 
vas  leadilj  pnmiaed,  but  the  latter,  they 
wen  anewiered,  would  depend  on  the  judg- 


BUBaH 


139* 


ment  to  be  pnmoimced.    John,  not  ventur- 
ing to  expose  himself  to  such  a  risk,  i^^as- 
condemned  for  his  non-appeaianoe  to  the 
forfeiture  of  his  French  dominiona.    ^^' 
pm,  ii.  429.) 

In  1214  he  is  mentioned  as  seneschal, 
j  and  also  as  mayor  of  Niort,  and  shcully 
afterwards  as  seneschal  of  Foictou,  in 
which  character,  after  the  battle  at  Bo- 
vines,  he  arranged  a  truce  between  the 
Kings  of  England  and  France  for  five 
years.     (  Wendover,  iiL  183,  302.) 

Having,  on  the  death  of  his  first  wife,  mar^ 
ried  Beatrice,  the  daughter  of  William  de 
Warenne,  and  widow  of  Dodo  Bardol^  in 
1200,  her  death  occurred  before  December 
18,  1214 :  for  on  that  day  the  sheriff  of 
Lincoln  was  commanded  to  give  Huberts 
steward  seisin  of  the  land  of  Finighani, 
which  was  Beatrice's  dower.  (Rot,  Claun,, 
L  181.) 

As  seneschal  of  Foictou,  he  was  in  At- 
tendance at  Runnymede  on  July  15, 1210, 
17  John,  when  Magna  Charts  was  granted ; 
but  a  few  days  afterwards  he  was  raised  to* 
the  high  office  of  chief  justiciary  of  Eng- 
land. To  this  office  were  added  many 
grants,  and  the  custody,  among  others,  of 
Dover  Castle. 

He  was  in  charge  of  this  important  for- 
tress in  May  1216,  when,  at  the  instigation 
of  the  barons,  England  was  invaded  by 
Frince  Louis  of  France,  who  in  the  next 
month  began  to  besiege  it.  Hubert  bv  his 
skill  and  courage  successfully  resisted  the 
enemy's  attacks  until  the  death  of  King 
John,  when  Louis,  finding  his  warlike 
efforts  unavailing,  endeavoured  to  tempt 
him  to  deliver  up  the  castle  by  promises 
of  large  rewards.  The  loyal  governor's 
honour,  however,  being  as  impenetrable 
as  his  walls,  the  foiled  prince  raised  the 
siege  and  hastened  from  the  scene.  (  JVen- 
dover,  iii.  368,  380,  iv.  4.) 

He  next  defeated  the  French  armament 
sent  under  the  command  of  Eustace  le 
Moyne  to  aid  Frince  Louis,  the  conse- 
quence of  which  victory  was  the  retire- 
ment of  the  French  prince  and  the  com- 
Sarative  restoration  of  peace  to  the  kiug- 
om,  under  the  prudent  management  of 
William  Mareschall,  Earl  of  Fembroko, 
the  young  king's  governor.     (Lint/ard,  iii. 

That  Hubert  remained  in  the  office  of 
chief  justiciary  on  the  accession  of  the  new 
king  IS  proved  by  various  mandates  ad- 
dressed to  him  under  that  character  in  1216 
and  for  many  years  after  that  date.  A  salary 
of  300/.  per  annum  was  assigned  for  his 
support  m  the  office,  and  1000/.  for  the 
custody  of  Dover  Castle.  {Devon's  Issue 
lioU,2.) 

On  the  death  of  the  earl  marshal  in 
1219  the  regency  was  conferred  on  Hu- 
bert, while  the  king's  person  was  placed 


140 


BURGH 


under  the  care  of  his  riyal|  Peter  de  Hupi- 
bus,  Bishop  of  Winchester.  His  govern- 
ment was  marked  by  wisdom  and  firmness^ 
not  unaccompanied,  however,  with  some 
degree  of  severity.  He  repressed  a  dan- 
gerous insurrection  in  Liondon  in  1222,  and 
caused  Constantine,  the  ringleader,  to  be 
executed ;  he  compelled  the  barons  to  sur- 
render their  castles  into  the  king^s  hands, 
and  in  1224  he  punished  Faukes  de 
Breaute,  a  ferocious  magnate  raised  by 
the  late  king,  for  imprisoning  Henry  de 
Braybroc,  one  of  the  judges,  Dy  destroy- 
ing his  castle  of  Bedford,  hanging  those 
who  had  defended  it,  and  banishing  the 
principal  ofifender. 

In  1222  Hubert's  interest  at  court  had 
been  still  further  strengthened  by  his  mar- 
riage with  Margaret,  the  eldest  sister  of 
Alexander,  King  of  Scotland,  thus  be- 
coming allied  to  his  sovereign,  whose  sis- 
ter, the  princess  Johanna,  had  been  re- 
cently united  to  the  Scottish  king. 

When  the  king  attained  his  majority  he 
continued  Hubert  as  his  minister,  and  raised 
him,  in  1227,  to  the  earldom  of  Kent,  a 
title  which  his  ancestor,  William,  Earl  of 
Moreton,  had  forfeited  his  freedom  and  his 
life  in  his  endeavours  to  recover.  In  the 
following  year  his  office  of  chief  justiciar}' 
was  confirmed  to  him  for  life;  and  the 
numerous  grants  with  which  he  was  en- 
riched, and  responsible  offices  entrusted  to 
him  about  the  same  time,  are  proofs  at 
once  of  the  influence  he  possessed  over  the 
king's  mind,  and  the  manner  in  which  he 
•exercised  it  to  his  own  aggrandisement. 

His  uncontrolled  authority  could  not  fail 
to  excite  some  jealousy  among  the  barons, 
nor  could  his  enemies  be  slow  to  find  in- 
8tances  of  rapacity  in  the  rewards  which 
he  accumulated.    But  the  success  of  his 
ministiy  and  the  favour  of  his  sovereign 
silenced  all  loud  complaints.     The  feeling 
of  the  time  may,  however,  be  judged  from 
the  derisive  title  of  *  Hubert's  Folly,*  which 
was  given  to  a  castle,  commenced  but  not 
<:ompleted  by  him,  at   Cridia,  to  overawe 
the    Welsh.     (Wendova-,    iv.    173.)    His 
career  was  nearly  arrested  in  September 
1229  by  the  irritable  temper  of  tne  king, 
who,  having  collected  avast  army  at  Ports- 
mouth vdth  the  ol^ect  of  makmg  an  at- 
tempt to  recover  nis  French  dominions, 
found  such   scanty  naval   preparations   to 
transport  his  armament  that  in  his  passion- 
ate disappointment  he  called  Huoert  an 
old    traitor,  charged  him  with  receiving 
■&  bribe  from    France,  and    would    have 
instantly  despatched  him  with    his  own 
hand  had  he  not  been  restrained  by  the 
Earl  of  Chester.    The  royal  indignation 
did  not  long  continue,  and  Hubert  was  re- 
stored for  a  time  to  his  former  power. 
Even  in  1231  he  obtained  the  privilege  of 
appointing  a   substitute  as  Justidaiy  of 


BUKGH 

England  in  case  of  illness  or  absence,  and 
the  grant  of  the  office  of  chief  justiciaiy  of 
Ireland  for  life. 

But  the  seed  of  suspicion  had  been  sown, 
and  there  were  many  to  encourage  its 
growth.  He  was  charged  with  conniving 
at  certain  depredations  which  had  been 
made  against  the  Italian  clergy,  under 
Robert  de  Tuinge ;  and  the  fr^uent  dis- 
turbances on  the  Welsh  frontier  were 
attributed  to  his  incapacity.  The  restora- 
tion of  his  ancient  rival,  Peter  de  Rupibui, 
Bishop  of  Winchester,  to  favour  seemed  to 
foretell  the  coming  storm,  and  that  prelate 
was  not  backward  in  insinuations  which  he 
knew  would  hasten  it.  He  represented 
that  the  poverty  of  the  treasury  was 
occasioned  oy  the  rapacity  of  some,  and  the 
maladministration  of  others,  of  its  officers, 
and  used  his  interest  to  procure  the  dis- 
missal of  several  functionaries  who  owed 
their  places  to  the  justiciary's  protection. 

Huoert's  fall  was  not  long  delayed.  He 
was  removed  from  his  office  on  July  29, 
1232,  16  Henry  lU.,  and  Stephen  de 
Segrave  was  nominated  in  his  stead.  He 
was  called  upon  to  account,  not  only  for  the 
disposition  of  all  the  treasure  he  had  re- 
ceived, but  for  the  exercise  of  all  the  privi- 
leges entrusted  to  him,  both  in  the  reign  of 
John  and  of  the  present  king ;  and  various 
criminal  charges  were  brought  against  him 
by  those  who  rejoiced  in  his  disgrace. 

So  inveterate  was  the  king  against  his 
former  favourite  that  Hubert  dicT  not  dare 
to  appear  at  the  time  appointed,  but  took 
sanctuary  on  two  occasions,  the  sanctity  of 
the  latter  of  which  was  harshly  vioUied, 
and  he  was  dragged  to  the  Tower. 

His  imprisonment  there  did  not  last  lonff, 
for  the  king,  under  the  Bishop  of  London  s 
threat  of  excommunication  for  violating 
the  sanctity  of  the  church,  was  compelled 
to  replace  nis  captive  in  the  asylum  he  had 
chosen.    The  church   was  then   encircled 
and  besieged,  so  that,  being  deprived  of  food 
and  the  means  of  escape,  Hubert  was  at 
last  obliged  to  surrender  himself  and  re- 
turn to  his  prison   in  the  Tower.     The 
exertions  of  nis  friend  Henry,  Archbishop 
of  Dublin,  could  only  obtain  authority  to 
ofier  him  the  choice  of  abjuring  the  realm, 
or  perpetual  imprisonment,   or  confessing 
himself  a  traitor  and  putting  himself  at  the 
king's  mercy.    He  at  once  rejected  all  these 
conditions,  out  replied  that,  though  he  had 
done  nothing  deserving  his  present  treat- 
ment, he  would,  for  the  satisfaction  of  the 
king,  retire  from  the  kingdom,  although  he 
would  not  abjure  it. 

The  king  bcin^  somewhat  pacified  by  his 
submission,  and  by  the  remembrance  of  his 
former  services  to  his  father  and  himself, 
consented  that  he  should  retain  his  patri- 
monial inheritance  and  the  lands  he  held  of 
mesne  lords,  forfeiting  those  that  he  held  in 


BUB6H 

chief  from  the  long,  and  that  he  should  be 

at  in  safe  custody  in  the  castle  of  Devizes 
er  the  charge  of  four  earls.    Thither  he 
was  aecordingl  J  transferred ;  hut  in  the  fol- 
lowing year,  hearing  that  his  old  enemj 
was  abont  to  obtain  the  custody  of  his 
pezBOD,  he  dropped  from  the  wall  into  the 
moaty  and  took  refuge  in  the  church  of  St. 
Jdm  at  Devizes.    Here  he  was  again  yio- 
lastly  dragged  from  the    altar,   but,  the 
Ushops  interfering,  was  obliged  to  be  re- 
doroa  to  his  sanctuary.    On  this,  however, 
a  precept,  dated  October  15, 1233,  was  issued 
'  to  the  good  men  of  Wilts,'  commanding 
them,  if  Hubert  de  Burgh  would  not  give 
lus  iJ>juration  of  the  realm  to  Ralph  de 
Bnv  aod  Ralph  de  Norwich,  justices  whom 
tike  king  had  sent  there,  or  submit  himself 
to  be  judged  by  them,  to  surround  the 
dkoich  and  the  cemeteiy  thereof  as  thev 
should  be  instructed.  (New  FcederOj  i.  21 1. ) 

He  was,  a  few  days  afterwards,  rescued 
from  his  intended  starvation  by  a  body  of 
limed  men,  who,  overpowering  his  guiurds, 
led  him  from  the  church,  and  conveyed 
1dm  to  the  Earl  of  PembroKe,  then  in  arms 
i^ainst  the  king  in  Wales.  His  outlawry 
immediately  followed. 

The  disgrace  of  Peter  de  Rupibus  oc- 
eured  in  April  1234,  and  was  soon  after 
followed  by  the  restoration  of  peace  be- 
tween the  king  and  the  barons,  with  the 
restitution  of  their  forfeited  lands.  In  this 
reconciliation  Hubert  participated,  butat  the 
same  time  surrendered  his  title  to  the  office 
of  chief  justiciary.  (Wendover,  iv.  204- 
310.) 

Even  after  all  these  trials,  his  loyalty  to 
the  king  was  conspicuous.  In  the  con- 
federacy of  the  barons  headed  by  Richard, 
the  king's  brother,  in  1238,  he  alone  re- 
mained udthf ul  to  his  allegiance.  But  with 
a  monarch  so  weak  and  fickle,  so  avori- 
dous  and  extravagant,  it  was  impossible 
to  remain  long  in  peace.  In  22  Henry  III. 
the  king  took  offence  at  the  marriage  of 
Hubert's  daughter  Margaret  with  Richard, 
Earl  of  Gloucester;  and,  though  it  was 
proved  that  Hubert  had  no  knowledge  of 
the  affidr,  the  royal  indignation  could  only 
be  appeased  by  a  considerable  fine.  In  the 
following  year,  upon  some  frivolous  pre- 
temse,  a  new  quarrel  was  fixed  upon  him, 
and,  many  of  the  old  charges  against  him 
liaving  been  revived^  a  day  was  appointed 
for  the  triaL  His  answers  to  all  the  eight 
articles  aUeged  against  him  were  full  and 
ttdsfactory,  but  he  felt  compelled,  in  order 
to  avoid  an  unjust  sentence,  to  make  a 
peace-offering  to  the  lung  of  four  of  his 
easUes.     (State  Trials,  i.  13.) 

The  few  years  that  he  lived  afterwards 
kftwas  suffered  to  pass  in  ouiet,  and  his 
erentfol  life  was  closed  on  May  12^  1243, 
27  Henry  III.,  at  Banstead  in  Surrey.  He 
~    boned  within  the  church  of  the  Friars 


BUfiGH 


141 


Preachers,  or  Black  Friars,  in  Holbom,  to 
which  he  had  been  a  large  bene&ctor.  His 
pious  donations  were  too  numerous  to  be 
recorded  here,  but  among  them  may  be 
mentioned  his  grant  to  that  fratemi^  of 
his  palace  at  Westminster,  which  was  ailer- 
waras  purchased  by  the  Archbishop  of  York, 
and  is  now  known  bv  the  name  of  White- 
hall ;  and  his  foundation  of  the  Hospital  of 
Our  I^Yy  and  the  church  of  the  Maison 
Dieu,  at  Dover. 

Whatever  failings  marked  the  character 
of  Hubert,  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  he 
was  a  faithful  servant  and  a  wise  coun- 
sellor to  the  monarchs  whom  he  served. 
The  distractions  of  the  kingdom  after  he 
had  ceased  to  be  Henry's  minister  speak 
loudly  of  his  power  of  gliding  and  con- 
trolling the  passions  of  a  foolish  and  capri- 
cious prince. 

He  left  two  sons  and  two  daughters,  but 
of  which  of  his  wives  they  were  the  issue 
is  a  debateable  question. 

The  eldest  son,  John,  did  homage  for  his 
father's  lands,  but  never  bore  the  title  of 
Earl  of  Kent.  His  branch  of  the  family 
failed  in  1279,  by  the  death  of  John's  son 
John,  without  male  issue. 

Hubert's  second  son  was  named  Hubert, 
from  whom  descended  Sir  Thomas  de  Burgh,, 
who  in  1487  was  created  a  peer,  aa  Baron 
Borough  of  Gainsborough,  a  title  which  in 
1508  fell  into  abeyance  among  the  four 
sisters  ofRobert,  the  sixth  boron.  (Nicolas' s 
Synopsis,) 

One  of  his  daughters,  Margaret,  was  cer- 
tainly b^  the  Princess  Margaret,  as  she  i» 
so  described  in  a  charter  dated  April  14, 
1227.  Her  clandestine  marriage  with  Ri- 
chard de  Clare,  Earl  of  Gloucester,  in  1237, 
already  alluded  to,  was  quickly  followed  by 
her  death,  as  the  earl  took  another  wife  in 
the  following  year.  (Arch€Bol,  Inst,  at  York, 
1816 ;  Holy  TrinUy,  129.) 

BTTBOH,  HuoH  de.  When  John  de  San- 
dale,  the  chancellor,  went  from  York  to 
London  on  August  26, 1316, 10  Edward  H., 
he,  by  the  king's  directions,  left  the  Great 
Seal  in  the  custody  of  William  de  Ayre- 
mynne,  the  keeper  of  the  Rolls,  under  the 
seals  of  Robert  de  Bardelby  and  Hugh  de 
Burgh,  clerks  of  the  Chancery.  Hugh  de 
Burgh,  clericus,  was  paymaster  of  the  forces 
rais^  in  Cumberland  and  Westmoreland 
in  27  and  31  Edward  I. ;  and  was  one  of 
the  procurators  of  the  Bishop  of  Carlisle  in 
the  parliament  of  16  Edward  II.,  and  for 
the  abbot  of  St.  Mary's,  York,  in  that  of 
the  follovnng  year.  (Pari,  WritSf  i.  506, 
ii.  p.  ii.  616.)  He  held  the  living  of  Pa- 
trick Brompton  in  Yorkshire,  and  died  in 
2  Edward  III.    (Col,  Inquis,  p.  m.  ii.  21.) 

BUBGH,  William,  was  apparently  of  ar 
Norfolk  family,  although  he  nad  property 
in  the  counties  of  Leicester,  Rutland^  and 
Lincoln.    His  first  appearance  as  an  advo- 


142 


BUBGHERSH 


cate  in  the  Year  Books  was  in  43  Edward 
III.,  1809 ;  and  he  is  mentioned  as  one  of 
the  king's  Serjeants  in  8  Hichard  II.,  1379 
(Hot.  Pari.  iii.  79) ,  receiving  in  the  same 
year  the  appointment  of  seneschal  of  the 
domain  of  Okeham  'ad  placitnm  regis.' 
(Cal  Hot  Pari,  20S,  20S,  f>hh)  In  Trinity 
1888,  7  Richard  IL,  we  find  him  acting  as 
a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas,  to  which  he 
had  prohahly  been  only  joat  appointed,  as 
in  the  following  Christmas  he  was  knighted 
at  Eltham,  having  previously  received  the 
materials  for  his  robes  as  a  banneret.  (Dug^ 
ilale's  Orig,  40,  ia3.) 

He  was  one  of  the  judges  who,  in  August 
1887,  were  induced,  or,  as  he  pleaded,  com- 
pelled, to  sign  the  opinions  stigmatising  as 
treason  the  ordinance  of  the  previous  par- 
liament, appointing  commissioners  for  the 
government  of  the  kingdom;  and,  being 
impeached  in  consequence,  was  condemned 
with  his  colleagues  to  die.  His  sentence, 
like  theirs,  was  commuted  to  banishment 
for  life ;  and  the  city  of  Dublin,  with  two 
miles  round  it,  was  named  as  the  place  of 
his  exile,  with  an  allowance  of  40  marks 
per  annum  to  live  on.  His  expatriation 
lasted  till  1397,  when  he  had  liberty  to 
return.  The  reversal  of  the  original  pro- 
ceedings against  him  and  the  others,  which 
passed  in  the  next  year,  was  in  its  turn  an- 
nulled by  the  first  parliament  of  Henry  IV., 
two  years  afterwaras.  That  king,  however, 
in  the  fourth  year  of  his  reign,  restored  him 
wholly  to  the  property  which  he  had  for- 
feited. {Pot.  Pat,  lii.  253-491 ;  CW.  Inquis, 
p.  m.  iii.  107.) 

BITS0HEB8H,  Heihit  de  (Bishop  of 
Lincoln).  The  family  of  Burghersh  derived 
its  name  from  a  manor  so  called  in  the 
county  of  Sussex.  Its  possessor  in  the  reign 
of  Edward  I.  was  Robert  de  Burghersh, 
who  was  constable  of  Dover  Castle,  and 
warden  of  the  Cinque  Ports.  He  died  in 
1800,  and  Ilenrj',  bom  about  1390,  is  de- 
scribed in  the  statutes  of  Oriel  College, 
Oxford,  as  the  son  of  Robert  de  Burghasse, 
knight,  and  Matilda,  his  wife. 

He  owed  to  his  connection  with  Bartho- 
lomew de  Badlesmere,  of  Ledes  Castle, 
Kent,  his  uncle,  that  favour  which  produced 
the  king's  intercession  with  the  pope  to 
raise  him  to  the  vacant  see  of  Lincoln.  In 
one  of  the  royal  letters  he  is  called  canon 
of  York.  {Pari.  Writs,  ii.  p.  i.  405-418.) 
The  necessary  bull  having  been  procured, 
he  was  consecrated  bishop  on  July  20, 1820, 
14  Edward  II.  In  the  next  year  his  brother 
and  his  uncle  were  both  in  arms  on  the  side 
of  the  Earl  of  Lancaster;  and  it  is  evident 
that  he  was  suspected  of  adhering  to  the 
same  party,  as  there  is  a  memorandum  on 
the  Roll  {ibid,  550)  that  he  is  not  to  be 
requested  to  raise  men-at-anns  to  march 
n  gainst  the  rebels  and  adherents  of  the  eail. 
The  Btnmg  terms  of  vituperation  which  the 


BUBLAKD 

king  uses  in  his  letter  to  the  pope  on  tluD 
occasion,  praying  for  the  bishop^s  expidiioo 
form  a  curious  contrast  with  the  laudatoi^ 
expressions  in  his  five  letters  of  recomiiw» 
dation  two  years  before.  {New  Fatdera^  I 
404.)  The  temporalities  of  his  biahopric 
were,  however,  seized  into  the  Idnx^a  hands: 
but  were  restored  by  the  first  paruamentd 
Edward  in.    {Ibid,  mi.) 

Soon  after  the  accession  of  Edward  III 
he  was  placed  in  the  ofiice  of  treasurer] 
which  he  filled  till,  in  the  next  year,  oi 
May  12, 1828,  he  was  appointed  chanoelloK 
In  1829  he  accomranied  the  king  to  France, 
to  do  homage  to  King  Philip  for  the  landi 
held  of  that  crown,  and  is  said  to  have  re- 
ceived some  hint  of  an  intention  to  surprise 
and  seize  the  person  of  Edward^  who  there- 
upon lost  no  time  in  escaping.  He  retained 
the  Great  Seal  till  the  downfall  of  Mortimv 
and  Queen  Isabella,  when  the  king,  on  N(^ 
vember  28,  1330,  placed  it  in  the  hands  of 
John  de  Stratford,  Bishop  of  Windhestor, 
but  gave  Burghersh  a  general  pardon.  (CMl 
Pot  Pat.  109/) 

We  find  him,  however,  in  the  royal  con- 
fidence, as  treasurer,  from  the  eighth  yev 
of  the  reign  till  the  end  of  his  life,  and  en- 
gaged in  various  negotiations  as  to  Edwazd's 
claim  to  the  crown  of  France,  accompanying 
the  king  in  his  expeditions,  and  becoming 
bound  for  him  for  a  loan  of  10,0O0iL  {Nmi 
Fa^dera,  i.  898-1134.) 

The  bishop  died  at  Ghent  in  December 
1340,  and  his  body  was  removed  to  Englmd 
for  burial  in  his  own  cathedral. 

He  is  reputed  to  have  possessed  great 
natural  abilities  and  extensive  leanung. 
His  political  character  must  have  been  high, 
since  for  ten  vears  after  the  king  had  re- 
leased himself  from  his  mother's  domination 
he  was  employed,  although  one  of  her  party, 
in  embassies  requiring  skill  and  prudence  « 
well  as  confidence  and  trust  He  and  loM 
brother  founded  a  grammar-school  in  lis- 
coln,  to  which  he  left  maintenance  for  five 
poor  priests  and  as  many  poor  scholan  fiir 
ever. 

Bartholomew,  his  brother,  was  the  an- 
cestor of  the  present  Earl  of  Westmoreland 
and  the  Baroness  le  Despenoer  and  Bun- 
hersh.  (  Godvoinj  294 ;  Barneses  Edward  III, 
36-210.) 

BUBLAm),  John,  belonged  to  a  fanuly 
which  was  for  a  long  series  of  yean  aettlea 
at  the  manor  of  Steyning,  in  the  parish  of 
Stoke  Courcy  in  the  county  of  Somenet 
His  father  was  also  named  John  Burland, 
and  his  mother  was  Elizabeth,  the  daughter 
of  Ckver  Morris,  of  Wells,  M.I).  Their  son 
was  educated  at  Balliol  College,  Qzfind, 
from  1740  to  1743,  when  he  entered  the 
Middle  Temple,  and  was  called  to  tba  bior 
in  January  1746.  The  next  T6«r  lie  mar- 
ried Letita^  daughter  of  WilfintBoUfly 
Portman,  E0q[*i  ef  Oichaid  PoftaHBy  vf 


BUBNEL 

Knoe,  the  daugbter  of  the  speaker,  Sir 
E^wmrd  Seymour. 

In  1762  he  was  hcmonred  with  the  degree  - 
of  theooify  and  in  1764  was  appointed  kmg*8  | 
Mij^nt.  After  he  had  held  the  recordership  j 
of  Wells  for  some  time  with  great  reputation,  I 
the  corporation  thought  fit  to  remove  him,  < 
hut  on  application  to  the  Court  of  King's  | 
Bench  in  1767  a  peremptory    mandamus 
was  ordered  to  be  made  out  for  his  restora- 
tion.   He  was  constituted  a  baron  of  the 
Exdiequer  on  April  8,  1774;  but  within 
two  Years  he  died  by  the  bursting  of  a 
blood-vessel  in  his  brain,  on  March  28, 1776, 
snd  was  buried  in  Westminster  Abbey.   He 
left  a  son,  who  became  member  of  parlia- 
ment for  Totnes.     (CoHifutm^s  Somerset,  i. 
217 ;  GenL  Mag,  xxxvii.  01.) 

BUBVEL,  RoBEKT  (Bishop  of  Bath  and 
Welub),  appears  to  have  been  (after  con- 
sideration of  the  various  descriptions .  of 
his  parentage)  the  son  of  another  Robert 
Bomel,  and  to  have  been  bom  at  Acton- 
Bamell.  In  1265,  50  Heniy  III.,  he  is 
desmbed  as  derk  or  secretary  to  Edward, 
the  king's  eldest  son  (Arch<eoi,  Journal^  ii. 
•126),  and  as  being  signed  with  the  cross 
with  the  prince  in  1269,  whom  he  accom- 
panied to  the  Holv  Land.  Having  returned 
Wore  him,  he  £eld  in  the  first  year  of 
Edward's  reign  a  high  place  in  the  council 
dnring  the  king's  absence  (Madox,  iL  207), 
tnd  there  are  also  several  letters  addressed 
by  kim  to  Walter  de  Merton,the  chancellor. 
&)  BepoH  Pub.  JRec,,  App.  ii.  92,  93,  113.^ 
He  was  at  this  time  canon  of  Wells  and 
ucbdeacon  of  York,  and  probably  held 
fiome  office  in  the  Exchequer. 

King  Edward  returned  to  England  on 
Aoffust  2,  1274,  and  was  crowned  on  the 
19£.  Within  a  month  afterwards  Bumel 
was  raised  to  the  chancellorship,  the  Great 
Seal  being  delivered  to  him  on  September 
21, 1274.  He  filled  this  office  all  the  re- 
mainder of  his  life,  and  never  during  the 
eighteen  years  that  it  lasted  lost  the  con- 
fi&nce  of  his  royal  master;  a  distinction 
which  he  well  merited  from  the  wisdom  of 
kis  counsels,  and  the  zeal  and  assiduity 
with  which  he  aided  his  sovereign's  efforts 
in  the  improvement  of  the  law. 

In  January  1275  he  was  elected  Bishop 
of  Bath  and 'Wells,  and  was  consecrated  at 
Merton  in  the  following  April.  On  the 
abdication  of  the  archbishopric  of  Canter- 
bury by  Robert  Ascwardby  in  1278,  the 
monks  elected  Bishop  Bumel  as  his  suc- 
cessor, but  the  ]^pe,  not  deeming  him  a 
mm  fitted  for  his  purposes,  annulled  the 
anpointment,  and  placect  John  Peckham  in 
the  Tacant  seat 

On  his  various  expeditions  into  foreign 

ptrtt  he  left  the  Great  Seal  in  the  custody 

^  (tifferent  officers  of  the  Chancery,  to 

tittnct  the  neceaaaiy  business. 

Acton-Bonell,  the  place  of  his  birth  and 


BURNET 


143 


residence,  has  acquired  an  interest  in  his- 
torical recollections  by  having  given  its 
name  to  the  Statutum  de  ^rcatoribiis, 
which  was  enacted  there  on  October  12, 
12a3,  11  Edward  I.  The  king  was  then 
paying  a  visit  to  his  chancellor,  while  a 
parliament,  which  he  had  summoned  to 
meet  at  Shrewsbury,  were  determining  the 
fate  of  the  Welsh*  Prince  David.  When 
that  trial  was  over,  the  parliament  joined 
the  king  at  Acton-Bumell,  and  passed  this 
statute,  after  which  the  Inng  extended  his 
royal  visit  till  November  12.  Some  re- 
mains of  the  room  in  which  the  parliament 
sat  still  exist.  They  belong  to  the  old 
mansion  of  the  bishop^s  ancestors,  which  he 
replaced  by  a  new  bmlding,  still  remaining, 
but  with  great  alterations. 

One  of  his  last  acts  is  his  attendance  at 
Norhnm  as  chancellor  at  the  meeting  of 
the  Scottish  peers  on  June  3,  121)1,  when 
King  Edward  acted  as  arbitrator  between 
the  competitors  for  that  crown.  (Lingard, 
iii.  200.) 

6a  October  26, 121)2,  he  died  atBerwick- 
on-Tweed,  when  his  body  was  removed  to 
WeUs  and  buried  there. 

Bishop  Bumel  was  an  active  and  a  wise 
minister,  serving  the  crown  with  zeal, 
energy,  and  prudence.  No  chancellor  be- 
I  fore  nim  had  ever  held  the  Seal  so  long  or 
retained  so  iminterruptedly  his  sovereign's 
confidence.  The  monk  of  Worcester  gives 
his  character  in  these  words:  'Regi  tam 
utilis,  plebi  tam  afiabilis,  omnibus  amabilis: 
vix  nostris  temporibus  illi  similis  inve- 
nietur.'     (Am/l.  iSac.  i.  514.) 

BITEUTET,  tnoMAS,  was  not  the  first  of 
his  familv  who  obtained  a  seat  on  the 
judicial  bench,  his  grandfather  having 
acquired  high  legal  eminence  in  the  Scot- 
tish tribunal  as  Lord  Cramond.  His  father 
was  the  celebrated  whig  prelate,  Gilbert 
Burnet,  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  whose  exer- 
tions at  the  Revolution,  the'piety  of  whose 
life,  and  the  value  of  whose  works  have 
thrown  around  him  a  lustre  which  is 
rather  brightened  than  diminished  by  the 
controversies  which  the  latter  occasioned. 
His  mother  was  the  bishop's  second  wife, 
Mrs.  Mary  Scott,  a  wealtny  and  accom- 
plished Dutch  lady  of  Scottish  and  noble 
extraction.  Thomas  Burnet  was  their 
third  and  youngest    son,  and   was    bom 


about  1694.  He  was  first  sent  to  Merton 
College,  Oxford,  and  afterwards  in  1700  to 
the  Lniversity  of  Leyden,  where  he  studied 
for  two  years,  and  then  visited  Germany, 
Switzerland,  and  Italy.  On  his  return  he 
entered  himself  at  the  Middle  Temple  in 
1709. 

His  student  life  was  divided  between 
law  and  politics,  and  he  acquired  e<jual 
notoriety  for  the  wildness  of  his  dissipar 
tions  an^  for  his  genius  and  wit.  Swift,  in 
one  of  his  letters  to  Stella  of  1712,  speak- 


144 


BURNET 


ing  of  the  Mohocks  when  they  terrified 
the  town  by  their  hiwless  and  mischievous 
exploits,  reports  that '  the  Bishop  of  Salis- 
bury's son  IS  said  to  be  of  the  gang.'  This, 
however,  may  have  been  only  a  current 
calumny  of  the  day,  which  the  tory  dean 
found  pleasure  in  promulgating.  The 
groundlessness  of  the  report  seems  the 
more  probable,  inasmuch  as  at  this  period 
Burnet  was  issuing  from  the  press  no  less 
than  seven  pamphlets  against  the  adminis- 
tration, and  in  defence  of  the  whigs ;  and 
was  engaged  in  the  composition  of  several 
poetical  pieces,  which  were  not  given  to 
the  world  till  long  after  his  death  :  occu- 
pations which  would  leave  him  little 
leisure  for  the  imputed  connection.  One  of 
the  pamphlets,  entitled  *A  certain  Infor- 
mation or  a  certain  Discourse,  that  happened 
at  a  certain  gentleman's  house,  in  a  certain 
coimty,  written  by  a  certain  person  then 
present,  to  a  certain  friend  now  in  London ; 
from  whence  you  may  collect  the  great 
certainty  of  the  account,'  so  stung  the 
ministers  that  they  imprisoned  the  author. 
There  is  no  doubt  that  his  course  of  life  at 
this  time  was  dissolute  and  licentious.  A 
story  is  told  that  his  father  one  day,  seeing 
him  uncommonly  grave,  asked  him  the 


Tom  ?  *  '  My  own  reformation,  my  lord.' 
The  bishop  expressed  his  pleasure,  but  at 
the  same  time  nis  despair  of  it. 

On  the  accession  of  George  I.  he  wrote 
some  other  political  squibs,  now  forgotten, 
and  at  his  father's  death  he  published  the 
'character'  of  the  bishop,  with  his  last 
will.  In  1715  he  and  Mr.  Ducket  wrote  a 
travestie  of  the  first  book  of  the  Iliad, 
under  the  title  of  *  Homerides,'  which  na- 
turally procured  them  a  place  in  Pope's 
'Dunciad.'  On  the  whig  party  regainmg 
power  he  was  sent  as  consul  to  Lisbon, 
where  he  got  involved  in  some  dispute 
with  Lord  Tyrawley,  the  ambassador,  and 
adopted  a  cuiious  mode  of  ridiculing  his 
noble  antagonist.  Having  learned  what 
dress  his  lordship  intended  to  wear  on  a 
birthday,  he  provided  liveries  for  his  ser- 
vants of  exactly  the  same  pattern,  and 
appeared  himseli  in  a  plain  suit.  He  con- 
tmued  at  Lisbon  several  years,  and  on  his 
recall  to  England  he  published  his  father's 
'  History  of  his  own  Time,'  to  the  last 
volume  of  which  he  added  a  life  of  the 
bishop. 

Resuming  his  orig;inal  profession,  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  m  1720,  twenty  years 
after  his  admission  to  the  Middle  Temple. 
He  showed  so  much  ability  and  met  with 
such  success  that  in  1736  he  received  the 
degree  of  the  coif,  and  in  1740  was  ap- 
pomted  kinff's  serjeant.  In  October  of  the 
next  year  ne  succeeded  Mr.  Justice  For- 


BURROUGH 

tescue  on  the  bench  of  the  Common  Fleas. 
where  he  administered  justice  with,  a  great 
reputation  for  learning  and  uprightness  for 
nearly  twelve  years.  He  was  Imighted  in 
November  1745,  on  the  occasion  of  all  the 
judges,  seijeants,  and  barristers  presentiiifr 
an  address  to  the  king  expressive  of  their 
'utter  detestation  of  the  present  wicked 
and  most  ungrateful  rebellion.'  He  died 
unmarried  on  January  5,  1763,  of  the  gout 
in  his  stomach,  and  was  buried  near  his^ 
father  in  St.  James's  Church,  Clerkenwell. 

Whatever  were  the  frailties  of  his  youth, 
he  redeemed  them  by  his  after-life,  com- 
manding in  the  latter  period  the  respect  of 
the  wise,  as  he  had  gained  in  the  former 
the  admiration  of  the  wits  who  dis- 
tinguished the  reign  of  Queen  Anne.  He 
rejoiced  in  the  esteem  of  many  friends,  and 
hd  merits  and  his  worth  wei«  resided 
after  his  death  in  several  publications. 

BuiumAK,  Thomas  de,  was  the  last 
justice  of  four  to  whom  the  first  com- 
mission of  trailbaston  into  the  countiei^ 
of  Lincoln,  Nottingham,  and  Derby,  dated 
November  23,  1304,  33  Edward  L,  wtt 
addressed.  {Rot  Pari  i.  407.)  On  the 
renewal  of  tne  commissions  in  the  follow- 
ing April,  he  was  not  reappointed ;  but  he 
had  in  the  meantime  been  returned  as 
knight  of  the  shire  for  Lincolnshire,  whidi 
he  had  already  represented  in  three  parlia- 
ments, and  was  again  elected  to  that  of  2 
Edward  11. 

BTTBNTON,  WiLLiAM  DE,  the  last  named 
of  five  justices  itinerant  appointed  in  SO 
Edward  L,  1302,  for  the  county  of  Corn- 
wall, may  have  been  the  same  as  William 
de  Brompton,  the  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas  in  this  reign,  whose  name  was  some- 
times written  fiumton;  as  thirteen  yean 
had  elapsed  since  his  disgrace. 

BXrBBOUGH,  James,  was  the  third  son  of 
the  Rev.  John  Burrough,  of  Abbotts-Ami 
in  Hampshire,  in  which  county  and  in 
Wiltshire  he  possessed  considerable  pro- 
perty. He  was  bom  in  1750,  and,  showing 
great  ability  as  a  youth,  his  father  deter- 
mined on  bringing  him  up  to  the  legal 
profession.  He  was  called  to  the  bar  of 
the  Inner  Temple  in  1773,  having  pre- 
viously practised  for  a  short  time  as  a  spe- 
cial pleader.  Joining  the  Western  Circuit, 
he  graduallv  acquired  a  good  share  of 
business,  and  was  particularly  noticed  for 
his  profound  knowledge  as  a  sessional  law- 
yer. In  1792  he  was  appointed  a  commis- 
sioner of  bankrupts,  and  to  Lord  Eldon's 
estimation  of  his  mtelligence  and  worth  he 
owed  his  ultimate  elevation. 

lie  was  selected  in  1794  by  the  Eazl  of 
Radnor  as  his  deputy  in  the  recordeiflhip  of 
Salisbury,  and  auerwards  became  recuder 
of  Portsmouth,  both  which  appointments 
he  held  till  he  was  advanced  to  the  InocIu 
That  event  did  not  occor  till  May  181^ 


BUKSTALL 

wliai  he  was  lixtf-nx  yean  of  age.  He 
was  then  eoostittited  a  judge  of  the  Com- 
moii  Fleaa,  and  knighted. 

Ab  a  jadge  he  held  a  distinffiiished  rank. 
To  his  legal  knowledge  he  ac^ed  patience 
tad  fltiict  impartiality ;  and  he  was  par- 
ticiilari^  esteemed  for  the  kindness  and 
nnmlicity  of  his  demeanour.  He  was  apt 
to  oeal  in  apophthegms,  one  of  which  was, 
*  PaUic  policj  is  an  unruly  horse,  which  if 
a  judge  nnwaiily  mounts,  ten  to  one  he  is 
Tim  away  with.'  His  mode  of  illustration 
too  was  especially  quaint  He  once  ad- 
dieflBed  a  jury  thus :  *  Gentlemen,  you  have 
heei  told  that  the  first  is  a  contequenUal 
mm.  Now,  perhaps  you  do  not  know 
'wlist  a  consequential  issue  means;  hut  I 
*dtre  say  you  understand  nine-pins.  Well, 
Aen,  if  you  deliver  your  bowl  so  as  to 
strike  the  front  pin  in  a  particular  direc- 
tkm,  down  go  the  rest:  just  so  it  is  with 
these  counts ;  knock  down  the  first,  and  all 
tbe  zest  will  go  to  the  ^und ;  that's  what 
we  call  a  amMequadkd  tsnteJ' 

When  he  had  attained  the  age  of  se- 
Tenty-nine  he  was  oblij;ed  by  his  infirmi- 
lies  to  apply  for  his  discharge,  which  he 
chimed  at  the  end  of  1829.  His  life  was 
-prolonged  till  March  25, 1839,  and  his  re- 
gains were  deposited  in  theTemj^le  Church. 
His  daughter  Anne,  his  onlj  surviving  child, 
erected  a  monument  to  his  memory  in  the 
diarch  of  Laverstock,  near  Salisbury.  (Lord 
Cmnpbefft  CkanceUort,  iv.  QOQ ;  Law  Mag. 
ill  290.) 

BVSBTALL,  WiLLiAX  DE,  is  first  men- 
tkned  as  a  clerk,  or  master,  in  Chancerv  in 
s  document  recording  that  the  Great  Seal 
was  placed  in  the  custody  of  four  indivi- 
duals, of  whom  he  is  the  second  named,  on 
llaich  16, 1371,  to  hold  during  the  absence 
of  Sir  Eobert  Thorpe,  the  chancellor.    The 
next  time  his  name  appears  is  in  an  entry 
dated  the  28th  of  the  same  month,  stating 
the  delivery  by  the  Bishop  of  Winchester, 
the  late  chancellor,  of  certain  seals  which 
had  been  left  in  his  possession.    He  is  then 
called  master  of  tne  Rolls,  and  Dugdale 
fixes  that  as  the  date  of  his  appointment. 
In  49  Edward  IH.  there  was  a  contest  in 
the  court  of  Rome  between  him  and  a  car- 
^iioal  relative  to  the  presentation  to  the 
parish  church  of  Hoghton  in  the  diocese  of 
IKiiham,  which  the  pope  decided  in  his 
&Tour.    (Xew  FcederUy  lii.  1037.)    Under 
lUchard  II.  he  continued  master  of  the 
^lls  during  the  first  four  years  of  his 
iri^,  and  died  in  1381. 

During  his  time  the  Domus  Conversorum 
is  Chancerv  I.iane  was  permanently  annexed 
Vt  Edward  III.  to  the  office  of  master  of 
tieRoDs. 

IVBTOH',  JoH2r  DE,  was  appointed  mas- 
ter of  the  Rolls  on  October  24, 1380,  but 
whether  he  was  the  John  de  Burton  who 
idd  benefices  about  this  time  in  Cam- 


BURY 


145 


,  bridgeshire  and  Yorkshire,  and  was  very 

liberal  to  the  institutions  of  those  counties, 

!  is  uncertain.  He  held  the  office  till  July  22, 

I  1304 ;  and  from  March  20  to  April  10, 1.303, 

'  he  was  entrusted  with  the  Great  Seal  dur- 

!  jng  the  absence  of  the  chancellor.    There 

i  is  proof  that  he  died  in  possession  of  the 

place  bv  the  mandate  to  give  up  the  Rolls 

i  of  the  Ohanceiy  being  dir^;ted,  not  to  him, 

but  his  executors.    (Rttt.  IkU,  18  Rich.  II. 

I  p.  i.  m.  28.) 

BUBT,  RicniRD  db,  or  DE  AVVGSB- 
VILLE  (Bishop  of  Durham).  The  real 
name  of  this  learned  and  eminent  prelate 
was  Richard  de  Aungerville,  a  town  in 
Normandy;  but  he  assumed  that  of  de  Bury 
from  the  place  where  he  was  bom,  Burv  St. 
Edmunds,  in  Sufiblk.  He  was  son  of  Sir 
Richard  de  Aungerville,  and  was  bom  in 
1281.  Being  of  very  tender  vears  when  he 
was  left  an  orphan,  the  care  of  his  education 
devolved  on  his  uncle,  John  de  WiUoughby, 
a  priest,  by  whom  his  youthful  studies  were 
well  directed.  In  due  time  he  was  re- 
moved to  Oxford,  where  he  pursued  them 
with  so  much  diligence  that  he  became  dis- 
tinguished for  his  leaming,  and  at  the  same 
time  acquired  the  higher  character  of  a 
man  pure  in  his  life  and  maimers. 

On  leaving  Oxford  he  entered  the  convent 
of  Durham  as  a  monk.  From  this  seclusion 
he  was  withdrawn  by  being  selected  as  the 
tutor  of  the  king's  eldest  son ;  but,  as  the 
prince  was  not  bom  till  1312,  this  event 
could  scarcely  have  occurred  before  the 
vear  1310  or  1320,  when  our  monk  would 
have  been  nearly  forty  years  old.  Ilis  con- 
duct in  his  new  position  was  so  exemplary 
that  he  was  rewarded  with  the  treasurer- 
ship  of  Guienne,  where  he  was  established 
when  Queen  Isabella,  and  his  pupil  the 

Erince,  went  to  France  in  1325.  The  asylum 
e  gave  them  there,  and  the  pecuniary  aid 
he  afforded  out  of  the  royal  treasures  in  his 
keeping,  had  nearly  proved  fatal  to  him. 
Although  the  latter  nghtly  belonged  to  the 
prince,  as  his  father  had  transferred  the 
duchy  to  him,  he  was  pursued  by  the 
emissaries  of  the  Despencers,  and,  escaping 
to  Paris,  was  compelled  to  conceal  himself 
for  seven  days  in  tne  belfry  of  the  church 
of  the  Friars  Minors  in  that  city. 

On  the  accession  of  his  princely  pupil  to 
the  throne  liis  services  were  not  forgotten, 
lie  was  retained  near  the  person  of  the 
king,  then  little  more  than  fourteon  ycnrn 
of  age,  and  was  rewarded  successively  with 
the  oiiices  of  cofferer,  treasurer  of  the  ward- 
robe, and  keeper  of  the  privy  seal.  Nor 
was  his  clerical  preferment  overlooked. 
He  held  at  first  a  small  prebend  in  the 
church  of  Chichester :  and  the  kinp:,  in  a 
letter  to  the  pope  on  de  Bur}''s  behalf,  calls 
him  '  his  secretary,'  and,  speaking  of  his 
services,  'a  pueritia  nostra,'  uses  these 
strong  expressions :  '  Quod  novimus  ipsum 

L 


146 


BURY 


yirum  in  consiliis  providum,  conyersationis 
et  Yitsd  munditi&  decorum,  Hterarum  scien- 
tuL  prseditum,  et  in  af^ndis  quibuslibet  cir- 
cumspectum.'  The  object  of  this  letter  was 
to  induce  the  pope  to  reserve  for  de  Buir 
the  prebends  in  the  churches  of  Hereford, 
London,  and  Chichester,  with  the  other  be- 
nefices which  Gilbert  de  Middleton,  arch- 
deacon of  Northampton,  lately  deceased, 
had  possessed.  Before  an  answer  could 
have  been  received  to  this  application,  de 
Bury  was  collated  to  the  vacant  archdea- 
conry on  January  6, 1330-1 ;  but  the  pope, 
according  to  the  too  common  practice  of 
the  day,  usurped  the  appointment,  and,  on 
the  1st  of  the  following  March,  granted  the 
dignity  to  Peter,  one  of  his  cardinals ;  but 
prebends  in  the  cathedrals  of  Lincoln,  Sa- 
rum,  and  Lichfield  were  among  the  grants 
soon  after  made  to  de  Bury. 

Li  October  1331  he  went  with  Anthony 
de  Pesaigne  on  a  mission  to  the  pope  at 
Avignon,  where  he  formed  an  intimacy  with 
Petrarch,  among  his  conversations  with 
whom  is  one  relative  to  the  Island  of  Thule, 
on  which,  however,  Petrarch  complains  that 
the  learned  ambassador  was  either  unable  or 
imwilling  to  offer  any  elucidation.  On  his 
return  from  this  emlmssjr  he  was  sent,  with 
two  others,  to  Cambndge,  with  a  com- 
mission to  enquire  into  the  conduct  and 
claims  of  such  scholars  as  were  supported  in 
that  university  by  the  kin^^s  bounty.  It 
was  probably  during  this  visit  that  he  be- 
came one  of  the  guild  of  St  Mary's  there,  to 
the  union  of  which  with  that  of  Corpus 
Christi  the  college  of  the  latter  name  owed 
its  foundation.    (Maatert,  9.) 

In  1332  he  was  admitted  dean  of  Wells, 
and  in  the  next  year  was  sent  again  as  am- 
bassador to  the  pope,  bv  whom  he  was  ap- 
pointed one  of  his  chaplains.  While  he  was 
absent  on  this  mission,  Lewis  Beaumont, 
Bishop  of  Durham,  died ;  and  the  pope  used 
ihe  opportunity  at  once  of  exercismg  his 
own  power,  ana  of  gratifying  King  Edward, 
by  setting  aside  an  election  made  by  the 
monks  of  Durham,  and  placing  Richard  de 
Bury  in  the  vacant  seat.  He  was  conse- 
crated at  Cherteey  on  December  19,  1333. 

King  Edward  estimated  his  ability  and  his 
prudence  so  highly  that  he  fixed  on  him  to 
fill  the  most  important  ofiices  in  the  state. 
He  was  accordingly  constituted  treasurer  on 
Februaiy  3, 1334,  and  raised  to  the  chan- 
cellorship on  September  28  in  the  same 
year.  Whether  ne  found  that  he  was  un- 
qualified for  its  cares  and  responsibilities,  or 
tnat  they  withdrew  him  more  than  he 
wished  from  those  of  his  diocese,  he  resigned 
the  latter  office,  after  holding  it  less  than 
nine  months,  on  June  6,  1^5.  He  was 
employed  in  the  following  and  several  sub- 
sequent years  in  frequent  embassies  to 
France  on  the  subject  of  the  king^s  claims — 
an  occupation  to  which  his  learning  and 


BUKY 

talents  were  probably  more  peculiarly  fitted^ 
His  allowance  on  these  missions  was  at  the 
rate  of  five  marks  a  day.  (Sew  Fcsdera^  iL 
9o0.) 

Though  frequently  absent,  he  neglected 
none  of  the  requirements  of  his  diocese.  He 
had  the  habit  of  turning  all  his  time  to  ac- 
count, and  neither  his  meals  nor  his  travela 
were  spent  idly.    D  uring  the  former  he  wta 
read  to  by  his  chaplains,  among  whom  were 
numbered  some  of^the  most  celebrated  men 
of  the  day,  and  afterwards  he  discussed  with 
them  the  various  subjects  suggested  by  the 
reading.    During  the  latter  he  occupied 
himself  in  forming  what  became  the  largest 
library  in  Europe,  the  possession  of  which 
was  one  of  his  greatest  glories,  and  its  ac- 
cumulation formed  his  chief  delight.    Ha 
spared  no  expense  in  securing  the  most 
curious  and  valuable  manuscripts,  and  speaks 
with  evident  glee  of  the  motives  which  in- 
fluenced the  donors  of  some,  and  of  the 
difficulties  he  had  to  overcome  in  obtaining 
others.    The  stores  he  had  thus  collected  he 
bequeathed  to  the    students  of   Durham 
(since  called  Trinity)  College,  in  Oxford, 
being  the  first  puSlic    library  that   wai 
founded  in  that  university ;  and  in  bds  woik 
called  '  Philobiblon '  he  not  only  gives  in- 
structions for  its  management,  but  endea- 
vours to  excite  a  love  of  literature  and  a 
taste  for  the  liberal  arts. 

His  own  devotion  to  books  may  be  esti* 
mated  by  the  language  he  uses  regarding 
them : — '  Hi  sunt  magistri  qui  nos  izistraunt 
sine  virgis  et  ferula,  sine  verbis  et  ooler&, 
sine  pane  et  pecuni^.  Si  accedis  non  dor- 
miunt,  si  inquiris  non  se  abscondunt,  non 
remurmurant  si  oberres,  cachinos  neednnt 
si  ignores.' 

His  ardour  in  their  pursuit  did  not  end 
with  their  attainment.  He  read  and  used 
them ;  and  he  relates  that  the  first  Greek 
and  Ilcbrew  grammars  that  eyer  appeared 
in  England  were  derived  from  his  hfboun. 
He  encouraged  the  acquaintance  and  assisted 
the  enquiries  of  all  learned  and  inteUigent 
men,  and  never  enjoyed  himself  so  fiilly  as 
in  the  pleasures  of  their  conversaticm  ^  and 
his  unaerstandin^  was  so  cultivated,  his  wit 
so  piercing,  and  his  spirit  of  enquiry  so  eager, 
that  few  subjects  were  beyond  his  genius  and 
penetration. 

His  virtues  and  his  charities  were  equal 
to  his  talents  and  learning.  He  was  beloved 
by  his  neighbours,  with  whom  he  lived  on. 
terms  of  reciprocal  affection ;  to  his  clergy 
he  was  an  indulgent  superior ;  to  his  tenants 
and  domestics  a  considerate  master.  He 
was  most  bountiful  to  the  poor,  distributing 
eight  quarters  of  wheat  every  week  for  tlw 
relief  of  those  around  him,  and  never  omit- 
ting in  his  journeys  to  appropriate  lam 
sums  for  the  mdigent  in  those  places  tiuou^ 
which  he  passed. 

He  closed  his  useful  life,  in  the  64t]i  jmt 


BURY  BYRUN  147 

of  his  age,  at  his  palace  of  Auckland,  on  '  pointed  in  June  1858  to  fill  the  vacant  seat 
April  24,  1345,  and  was  interred  in  hiA    on  the  bench  of  the  Common  Pleas, 
cathedral.  He  has  been  twice  married.     His  first 

BUBT,  Thomas,  the  youngest  son  of  Sir  wife,  a  daughter  of  J.  Foster,  Elsq.,  of  Bijr- 
Wiliiam  Bury,  knight,  of  Lin  wood  in  Lin-  .  gleswade,  he  lost  very  early;  his  second  is 
cobshire,  was  bom  in  1655,  and,  entering  i  a  daughter  of  J.  Weld,  £s(][.,  of  Koyston. 
Gny's  Lin  in  1C68,  was  called  to  the  bar  in  .  Besides  the  above-mentioDed  pamphlet, 
167d.  After  twenty-four  years'  practice,  he  he  published  a  work  *  On  the  Usut}-  Laws,* 
obtained  the  degree  of  serjeant  in  1700,  and  i  and  some  others. 

on  January  26  of  the  next  year  he  was  made  ;  BTKTEWOBTH,  RicnARD  de  (Bishop 
t  baron  of  the  Exchequer.  Speaker  Onslow  i  of  Loxdon),  had  a  grant  of  the  manor 
in  his  notes  to  Burnet  states  that  it  was  \  of  Bynteworth,  now  called  Bentworth,  in 
Mid  that  it  appeared  by  Bury's  'Book  of  I  lIampehire,'vi'iththeadvowsonofitschurch, 
Accounts'  that  Lord  Keeper  Wright  had  i  from  the  Archbishop  of  Kouen,  in  0  Edward 
ICXXV.  for  raising  him  to  the  bench.  This  •  III.,  and  probably  was  a  native  of  the  place, 
discreditable  story,  howeyer,  depends  on  :  lie  was  employed  in  the  previuus  year  as 
veiT  slight  testimony.  The  new  baron  was  ,  one  of  the  ambassadors  to  negotiate  the 
of  course  knighted,  and  sat  in  that  court  marriage  of  the  king*s  brother,  John,  Earl 
daring  the  remainder  of  his  life ;  for  fifteen  ,  of  Cornwall,  with  Maria,  dau^rhter  of  Fcr- 
Teais  as  a  puisne  baron,  and  for  six  as  :  dinond  of  Spain,  and  in  severul  8ul)st>quent 
chief  boron,  to  which  he  was  adyanced  on  ;  years  on  other  missions,  in  all  of  which 
Jane  10,  1716.  In  the  famous  Aylesbury  '  he  Is  called  'juris  civilis  professor.'  In  11 
casein  the  House  of  Lords  he  supported  the  i  Edwaril  III.  ho  was  keeper  of  the  king*s 
opinion  of  Chief  Justice  Holt,  when  the  |  priyy  seal ;  and  he  appears  to  have  been  a 
judgment  which  he  had  opposed  was  re-  |  canon  of  St.  Paul's  at  the  time  of  the  de- 
yened.  I  cease  of  Stephen  de  Gravesend,  Bishop  of 

He  died  on  May  4, 1723,  and  was  buried  !  London.  By  his  conduct  in  these  employ- 
tt  G^rantham,  where  there  is  a  handsome  !  ments  his  character  had  been  so  firmly  es- 
monument  to  his  memory.  I  tablished  that  he  was  immediately  called 

BTLE8,  John  Babxabd,  one  of  the  pre-  |  upon  to  fill  the  yacant  see,  his  election  to 
sent  judges  of  the  Common  Pleas,  was  bom  \  which  took  place  on  May  4,  1:338.  On 
at  Stowmarket  in  Suffolk  in  1801,  and  is  ;  July  6  the  kmg  appointe<f  him  his  chan- 
the  eldest  son  of  John  Byles,  Esq.,  of  that  celh)r.  But  his  sudden  death  put  an  end  to 
place,  by  the  only  daughter  of  William  ■  his  tenure  of  both  these  oftices  on  December 
fiumard^  lEIsq.,  of  Holts  in  Essex.  j  8,  1339,  before  he  had  illustrated  either  by 

Called  to  the  bar  by  the  Inner  Temple  any  memorable  act.  (CrWfriw,  18o.) 
in  Noyember  1831,  he' joined  the  Norfolk  BYSLA7,  William  de  (Birlaco),  can 
Circuit  and  attended  the  sessions  attached  hardly  be  considered  entitled  to  the  desig- 
to  it.  In  1840  he  was  appointed  recorder  nation  given  to  him  by  Sir  T.  IX  Ilanly  as 
of  Buckingham,  and  in  184*3  received  the  ;  keeper  of  the  Great  Seal.  He  seems  to  have 
degree  of  the  coif,  to  which  was  added  a    been  merely  a  clerk  in  the  Chancery,  to 


patent  of  precedence  in  all  the  courts  in 
1846,  the  year  in  which  the  act  was  passed 
opening  tlie  Court  of  Conunon  Pleas  to  all 
barristers.  In  1857  he  was  promoted  to  the 
dignity  of  queen's  seijeant.  During  the 
imole  period  of  his  career  as  an  advocate 
Ids  sagacity  and  sound  judgment  secured 
for  him  a  considerable,  and  ultimately  a 
leading,  business. 

His  professional  reputation  must  have 
been  universally  acknowledged  to  have  in- 
duced a  lord  chancellor  so  much  opposed 


whom,  with  two  of  his  brethren,  the  (jreat 
Seal  was  on  some  occasions  entrusted  dur- 
ing the  temporary  absences  of  the  chancellor, 
the  first  occurring  in  March  1298,  20  Ed- 
ward I.,  and  the  last  in  1308. 

BYiiUM,  John  de,  was  named  in  a  sepa- 
rate commission  of  trailbaston,  issued  on 
March  13,  l.*i05,  33  Edward  I.,  for  the 
county  of  Lancaster,  which  in  the  follow- 
ing month  was  consolidated  with  the  other 
northern  counties  in  a  new  commission,  in 
which  his  name  was  not  included.    {FarL 


to  him  in  politics  as  was  Lord  Cranworth  IVritSj  i.  407,  408.) 
to  select  him  for  a  judge's  place.  Mr.  Ser-  He  was  a  lineal  descendant  from  Ralph 
jeant  Byles  was  not  only  a  tory,  or  rather  I  de  Burun,  who  at  the  time  of  the  (Jon- 
s  oooseiratiye,  in  his  opinions,  but  had  ad-  ,  queror's  survey  had  eight  lordships  in  Not- 
Tocated  the  principles  of  that  section  of  his  I  tmghamshire  and  five  in  Derbyshire,  and 
pxrty  which  supported  protection  in  an  able  '  whose  family  subsequently  obtained  con- 
punphlet,  callea  *  Sophisms  of  Free  Trade.'    siderable  property  in  Lancashire.  His  father 


Aotwith.«tanding  this  apparent  impediment 
to  his  advance,  Lord  Cranworth,  deeming 


was  also  named  John,  and  his  mother  was 
Joan,  daughter  of  Sir  Baldwin  Thies,  and 


that  a  good  judge  was  better  than  a  political  widow  of  Sir  Robert  Holland, 
pamaan,  made  choice  of  one  who  in  the  :  Seated  at  Clayton,  in  Lancashire,  his 
estimation  of  the  legal  world  held  the  high-  ■  father  was  one  oF  tlie  conservators  of  the 
est  pkce.      Mr.  Byles  was  therefore  ap-  \  peace  for  that  county  in  15  Edward  I.,  and 

i/2 


148 


CAEN 


sheriff  of  Yorkshire  for  seven  years  from  21 
Edward  1.,  and  actively  engaged  in  raising 
the  forces  for  the  Scottish  wars.  In  28 
Edward  I.  he  held  a  high  place  in  the  com- 
mission to  perambulate  the  forests  of  that 
and  the  neighbouring  counties.  (Pari, 
Writs,  i.  299,  389,  398,  ii.  8-17.) 

John  the  son  for  the  first  nine  years  of 
the  reign  of  Edward  II.  held  an  equally 
prominent  position  in  Lancashire.  Some 
little  confusion,  arising  from  the  identity  of 
name,  renders  it  difficult  to  distinguish  pre- 
cisely the  acts  of  the  two.  The  date  of 
neither  of  their  deaths  is  given.  The  son 
married  Alice,  cousin  and  heir  of  Kobert 
Banastre,  of  Hyndeley,  Lancashire,  and  was 


C.£SAB 

succeeded  by  his  son  Richard  de  Byron. 
In  regular  descent  from  him  came  Sir  John 
Byron,  who  for  his  faithful  adherence  fo  the 
fortunes  of  King  Charles  I.,  and  his  valiant 
support  of  his  cause,  was  created  Baron 
Byron  of  Rochdale  on  October  24,  1643. 
The  present  baron,  the  eighth  lord,  is  his 
lineal  descendant.  The  surpassing  genius 
of  George  Gordon  Byron,  the  sixth  lord,  has 
g^ven  to  the  title  an  immortality  whidi  it 
could  have  never  derived  either  from  the 
antiquity  of  the  family  or  the  devoted  loy- 
alty for  which  the  peerage  was  granted : 
his  works  will  remam  a  lasting  monument 
of  his  ^lory,  but  a  sad  record  of  nis  unhappy 
disposition  and  of  his  unfortunate  fate. 


C 


CAEN,  John  de  (Cadomo);  was  one  of 
the  clerks  in  the  Chancery.  He  is  men- 
tioned on  many  different  occasions  from 
1292  to  1302  in  connection  with  the  Great 
Seal,  as  holding  it  with  other  clerks  of  the 
Chancery  during  the  occasional  absences  of 
^e  chancellor,  and  in  October  1298  he 
was  acting  in  the  Exch^uer  as  locum  tenens 
for  the  chancellor.  (JfcfocKor,  i.  421.)  He 
also  acted  as  a  receiver  of  petitions  to  the 
parliaments  1306  and  1307,  33-35  Edward 
1.,  and  as  late  as  1310,  3  Edward  IL 

C£SAB,  Thohas.  In  the  city  of  Treviso, 
near  Venice,  the  noble  family  of  Adelmare 
had  long  resided,  when  a  member  of  it, 
named  Peter  Maria  Adelmare,  who  was 
eminent  as  a  civilian,  married  a  daughter 
of  the  house  of  CsBsarini,  and  had  three  sons, 
the  second  of  whom  was  christened,  after 
his  mother,  Csesar.  This  Csssar  Adelmare 
pursued  his  studies  at  Padua,  and,  having 
taken  the  degree  of  doctor  in  medicine, 
came  to  Enghmd  to  practise  in  1550.  Here 
he  obtained  such  repute  that  he  was  em- 
ployed by  Queen  Maiy,  and  on  one  occasion 
received  the  enormous  fee  of  100/.  for  his 
attendance.  (Burgon^s  Gresham,  ii.  464.) 
Queen  Elizabeth  also  placed  him  at  the 
head  of  her  medical  department,  and  granted 
to  him  some  beneficial  leases  under  the 
crown.  He  fixed  his  residence  in  the  close 
of  the  priory  of  Great  St.  Helen's,  Bishops- 
gate,  where  he  died  in  1569.  By  his  wife, 
Margaret,  daughter  of  Martin  Perin,  or 
Perient,  treasurer  in  Ireland,  he  left  eight 
children,  two  of  whom  obtained  judicial 
appointments — Julius  Cocsar,  the  eldest  son, 
after  mentioned:  and  Thomas,  the  third  son, 
the  subject  of  this  sketch. 

Thomas  CsBsar  was  bom  in  1561,  and 
was  educated  at  Merchant  Taylors'  School 
in  London.  In  October  1580  he  was 
entered  of  the  Lmer  Temple,  where  he  was 


not  called  to  the  bench  until  he  was  ap- 
pointed a  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  and 
never  held  the  post  of  reader  to  the  sociely. 
He  seems  to  have  used  his  father's  name 
during  the  early  part  of  his  life,  and  to 
have  afterwards  partially  adopted  that  of 
Cffisar,  at  first  with  an  aUaSf  and  subee- 

auently  alone.  His  first  wife,  whose  mo- 
lier's  name  was  Chapman,  describes  hersdf 
in  her  will,  '  Susan,  wife  of  Thomas  Dal- 
mare,  alias  Caesar.'  In  this  he  no  douM 
followed  the  example  of  his  brother,  & 
Julius,  who  was  then  holding  a  prominent 
judicial  situation,  and  was  aiming  at  higha 
posts,  for  which  he  perhaps  imagined  his 
Italian  surname  might  be  deemed  a  dis- 
qualification. 

Thomases  name  does  not  appear  in  any  of 
the  Keports,  and  no  account  is  given  of  his 

Erofessional  career,  nor  of  any  office  whi^ 
e  held  (except  that  of  steward  of  St 
Catherine's  Hospital,  of  which  his  Brothel  ^ 
was  master),  before  his  appointment  as  a 
baron  on  May  26, 1610.  On  his  receiving 
it,  the  Inner  Temple  ordered  that  'he 
should  not  be  attended  to  Westminster  by 
any  but  the  ofiicers  of  the  Exchequer,  for- 
asmuch as  none  but  such  as  were  of  the 
coif  ought  to  be  attended  by  the  fellows  of 
the  house.'  He  is  there  described  as  '  the 
puisne  baron  of  the  Exchequer  (commonly 
called  the  baron  cursitor).'  Another  order 
was  made  on  June  10,  that,  though  he  had 
not  read,  but  fined  for  not  reading,  he 
should  have  his  place  at  the  bench  table 
notwithstanding  a  previous  act,  '  That 
none  who  should  thenceforth  be  called  to 
the  bench  that  had  not  read  should  take 
place  of  any  reader,  or  have  a  voice  in  pii^ 
liament.'  {DugdM$  OHg.  149.)  It  tk 
thus  manifest  that  the  office  of  btzon  wbidk 
he  held  was  not  of  the  same  dflmo  o( 
dignity  as  the  other  barons;  aad  uat  W 


GiESAB 

htd  no  judicial  fimction  is  apparent  from 
the  absence  of  his  name  from  all  the  Keports 
of  the  period. 

But  whateTerwaa  hia  position,  be  did 
not  letain  it  quite  two  months,  during 
which  intenral  be  waa  knighted.  He  died 
on  July  18,  1610,  and  waa  buried  in  the 
diurcb  of  Grieat  St  Helen's,  Bishopsgate. 

Bia  first  wife  died  in  1590,  leaving  three 
cfaildjen,  wbo  did  not  live  to  grow  up.  He 
mazried,  secondly,  Anne,  the  daugnter  of 
Oeoige  Lynn,  of  ooutbinlk,  Nortluimpton, 
Esq.,  and  widow  of  Nicbolas  Beaston,  Esq. 
Bat  she  dvinf  early,  without  children,  he 
took  for  bis  third  wife  Susan,  daughter  and 
co-heir  of  Sir  William  Ryther,  uiight,  an 
opulent  alderman  of  London,  and  nad  by 
her  three  sons  and  five  daughters.  (Lodff&s 
Ontarg,  39-41.) 

CS8AB,  JnJXTS.  was  the  eldest  son  of 
Cfisar  Adelmare,  pn^dan  to  Queens  Mary 
and  Eliiabetb,  hj  bis  wife  Margaret  Perin, 
or  Perient.  He  waa  bom  at  Tottenham  in 
Middlesex  in  1667,  and  enjoyed  royal  pa- 
tr(mage  from  his  inJhncy.  He  received  the 
names  of  Julius  Caesar,  the  latter  of  which 
he  seems  very  early  to  have  substituted  for 
that  of  bis  ancestors,  though  even  so  late 
as  1606  be  was  designated  by  both  names 
with  an  alioM  in  formal  documents. 

Having  lost  his  father  when  be  was 
twelve  years  old,  and  bis  mother  having 
manied  again,  be  was  sent  to  Magdalen 
Hall,  Oxford,  where  he  took  the  degree  of 
EA.  in  1575,  and  that  of  M.A.  in  1578. 
In  1580  be  was  admitted  a  member  of  the 
Inner  Temple,  and  proceeding  to  Paris,  he 
took  the  degree  there  of  doctor  in  both  laws 
in  1581,  after  which  be  returned  to  Oxford, 
and  proceeded  to  the  same  degree  in  that 
imiversitv  in  1583.  (Wood's  Fasti,  i.  224.) 
In  1582  be  married  Dorcas,  daughter  of  Sir 
Richard  Martin,  an  alderman  of  London, 
afterwards  master  of  the  Mint,  and  widow 
of  Ricbard  Lusher.  During  the  previous 
year  he  received  two  public  appointments, 
and  in  1583  he  became  commissary  of 
Essex,  Herts,  and  Middlesex,  from  which 
he  was  promoted  in  1584  to  be  judge  of 
the  Admiralty  Court  Although  possessed 
of  so  important  a  post  at  the  early  age  of 
27,  he  was  not  contented,  but  made  fre- 
qnent  applications  for  grants  and  promo- 
tioo,  in  vdiich  be  was  only  so  far  at  that 
time  successful  tbat  in  October  1588  he 
wag  admitted  one  of  the  masters  in  Chan- 
Cfiy,  an  office  which  was  then  frequently 
iSUed  by  doctors  of  the  civil  law.  He 
still  continued  his  importunities,  alleging 
that  he  bad  spent  4000i.  above  his  gains  in 
the  execution  of  bis  office  of  judge  of  the 
Admiralty,  and  in  relieving  the  poor  suitors 
of  his  court.  This  statement  it  would  be 
scarcely  possible  to  credit,  if  his  unlimited 
eharity  were  not  evidenced  by  what  Isaac 
Walton  says  of  bim^  tbat  when  grown  old 


a^BSAB 


149 


'  be  waa  kept  alive  beyond  nature^s  course 
by  the  nrayers  of  those  many  poor  he  daily 
relievea.' 

At  last  bis  perseverance  procured  for  him 
the  appointment  of  a  master  extraordinary 
of  the  Court  of  Requests  in  1501,  but 
it  was  not  till  August  1505  tbat  be  was 
admitted  one  of  the  ordinary  masters  of 
that  court,  which  gave  him  immediate  a<y 
cess  to  the  queen.  During  this  time  it  is 
amusing  to  see  bow  be  paid  bis  court  to 
the  influential  ministers  and  favourites,  and 
how  ingeniously  he  contrived  to  remind 
them  of  his  claims  in  his  letters  conveying 
new  years'  gifts,  some  curious  specimens 
of  which  are  preserved  among  the  Lans- 
downe  MSS.  In  1593  he  was  elected 
treasurer  of  the  Inner  Temple,  and  on  De- 
cember 8  in  the  same  year  be  was  appointed 
governor  of  the  mine  and  battexy  works 
throuffbout  England  and  Wales.  Having 
alreadnr  nrocuied  (by  a  bribe  of  500/.  to 
Arcbibala  Douglas,  the  Scottish  ambas- 
sador, to  use  bis  influence  with  the  queen) 
the  reversion  of  the  mastership  of  St. 
Catherine's,  he  succeeded  to  it  on  June 
17, 1500. 

His  wife  d^ing  in  June  1505,  he  entered 
in  the  following  year  into  a  second  matri- 
monial connection  with  Alice,  daughter  of 
Christopher  Green,  and  widow  of  John 
Dent,  a  rich  merchant  of  London.  In  Sep- 
tember 1508  her  majesty  inflicted  on  bim 
the  honour  of  a  visit  to  his  house  at  Mitcbam, 
the  expense  of  which,  with  the  customary 
oflerin^,  amounted  to  700/.  sterling.  No 
other  incident  occurred  to  him  in  Eliza- 
beth's reign,  except  that  be  obtained  a  ver- 
dict of  200/.  against  a  man  for  asserting 
that  he  had  pronounced  a  corrupt  sentence 
against  him  in  the  Admiralty.  {Croke,  Eliz, 
305.) 

King  James  knighted  him  on  Ma^  20, 
1003,  and  in  the  same  year  reappomted 
bim  master  of  the  Court  of  Requests  and 
master  of  St.  Catherine's.  He  wos  further 
favom'od  with  grants  of  the  manor  of  Lin- 
wood  in  Lincolnshire,  and  of  the  Forest  of 
High  Peak  in  Derbyshire,  for  life.  On 
April  11,  lOOG,  the  important  office  of 
chancellor  and  under  treasurer  of  the  Ex- 
chequer was  conferred  upon  him,  and  in  tlio 
next  year  he  was  sworn  of  the  privy  coun- 
cil. During  the  eight  years  in  which  be 
performed  the  onerous  duties  of  his  place 
nis  main  difficulty  seems  to  have  been  the 
supplying  means  to  meet  the  idle  profuse- 
ness  of  his  master.  He  obtained  from  the 
king,  in  January  16,  1011,  a  reversionary 
grant  of  the  mastership  of  the  Rolls ;  but 
he  did  not  come  into  possession  for  nearly 
four  years,  when  he  was  sworn  in  on  Sep- 
tember 13,  1G14.  In  James's  reign  be  sat 
in  parliament  for  Westminster  in  1004,  for 
Middlesex  in  1014,  and  for  Maiden  in  1621. 

Having  lost  his  second  wife,  be  married 


150 


GJESAR 


Anne,  the  daughter  of  Henry  Wodehouse,  of 
Waxham  in  Isorfolk,  by  Anne,  dau^rhter  of 
Sir  Nicholas  Bacon,  lord  keeper,  and  widow 
of  William  Hungate,  of  East  Brudenham  in 
the  same  county. 

Sir  Julius  continued  master  of  the  Rolls 
till  his  death,  a  period  of  more  than  twenty- 
one  years ;  and  during  the  interval  between 
the  ^sgrace  of  Lord  Chancellor  Bacon  and 
the  delivery  of  the  Seal  to  Lord  Keeper 
"Williams — viz.,  between  May  21  and  July 
10,  1621 — ^ho  had  a  commission  to  hear 
causes  in  Chancery.  To  Bacon,  with  whom 
he  was  connected  by  marriage,  he  continued 
a  kind  friend,  assisting  him  by  his  bounty, 
afibrding  Mm  an  asyluL  in  his  misfortunM; 
and  receiving  his  last  breath  in  -his  arms. 
He  had  not  any  great  reputation  as  a  judge, 
and  it  is  said  that  counsel  would  occasion- 
ally pass  '  a  slye  jeste '  upon  him. 

tie  died  on  April  18, 10*36,  at  the  age  of 
seventy-nine,  and  was  buried  at  Great  St. 
Helen  s,  Bisliopsgate,  where  his  father  lay. 
Over  his  remams  was  placed  a  monument 
with  an  inscription  written  by  himself,  in 
the  form  of  a  deed  with  a  pendent  seal,  the 
connecting  silk  of  which  is  broken. 

He  had  no  issue  by  his  last  wife,  but  hSs 
other  two  brought  him  eight  children.  Of 
the  five  by  his  first  wife  only  one  survived 
him — ^viz.,  the  under-mentioned  Charles. 
His  second  wife  produced  to  him  three  sons 
— John,  who  was  knighted  at  the  age  of  ten ; 
Thomas,  who  became  a  doctor  in  divinity ; 
and  Robert,  who  obtained  the  place  of  one 
of  the  six  clerks  in  Chancery.  (Lodges 
Camrs.) 

C£SAB,  CnARLKS,  the  eldest  surviving 
son  of  the  above  Sir  Julius,  was  bom  on 
Januarjr  27,  1589.     Destined  to  pursue  the 

Erofession  by  which  his  father  nad  risen, 
e  was  sent  to  All  Souls*  College,  Oxford, 
and  was  admitted  to  the  degree  of  doctor 
of  laws  on  December  7,  1012.  (WoofTs 
Ftvfti,  i.  348.)  Commencing  practice  in  the  ; 
ecclesiastical  courts,  he  received  the  order 
of  knighthood  on  October  6  in  the  following 
year,  and  was  gradually  promoted,  first  to 
the  office  of  the  master  of  the  faculties,  and 
then  to  that  of  judge  of  the  audience.  ( State 
Trials,  ii.  1452.)  On  May  10,  1015,  he 
was  made  a  master  in  Chancery,  no  doubt 
by  the  interest  of  his  father,  who  had  been 
sworn  in  as  a  judge  of  that  court  in  the 

Preceding  year ;  and  on  the  death  of  Sir 
)udley  Digges,  in  10.S0,  ho  was  appointed 
master  of  the  Rolls,  on  March  30 ;  paying 
however,  according  to  a  memorandum  made 
by  his  son,  for  that  'high  and  profitable  I 
place  *  no  less  than  16,000/.,  *  broad  pieces  | 
of  gold,*  with  a  loan  of  2000/.  more  when 
the  king  went  to  meet  his  rebellious  Scot- 
tish army.  It  is  difficult  to  regret  that  ho 
did  not  live  long  enough  to  profit  by  this 
-iniquitous  traffic  of  the  judicial  seat,  as 
di^graceM  to  one  party  as  the  other.    In 


CAISSS 

November  1642  the  smallpox  seized  the 
&mily,  and  proved  fatal  to  one  of  Yob 
daughters  on  the  2nd  of  that  month,  to 
himself  on  the  0th  of  December,  and  to  his 
eldest  son  five  days  after.  They  weie 
buried  at  Benningtcm  in  Herts,  where  hu 
estate  was  situate ;  and  his  monument  them 
bears  an  inscription  commemorative  of  Us 
personal  worth  and  his  judicial  integri^. 
It  records  besides  that  he  had  two  wives — 
the  first,  Anne,  daughter  of  Sir  Peter  Van- 
lore,  knight,  an  eminent  London  merchant; 
and  the  second,  Jane,  daughter  of  Sir  Ed- 
ward Barkham,  knight,  lord  mayor  of 
London — and  that  he  had  six  chil<{ren  by 
the  first  wife,  and  nine  by  the  second,  birt 
of  these  fifteen  no  male  descendant  now 
preser\'es  the  name  of  the  family.  {Lodges 
CiPsars.) 

CAIBirs,  Hugh  M'Calmont  (Lobd  • 
Cairns),  within  three  years  passed  throngli 
three  legal  ofiices — attorney-general,  loird 
justice  of  appeal,  and  lord  chancellor — aris- 
ing from  a  practising  barrister  to  the  highest 
seat  in  the  law,  from  a  simple  member  of 
the  House  of  Commons  to  the  speakership 
of  the  House  of  Lords,  and,  after  less  than 
ten  months*  enjoyment  of  that  honouiahle 
ofiice,  has  been  entrusted  with  the  still  moie 
responsible  position  of  the  leadership  of  the 
conservative  party  in  the  house  of  wnich  he 
had  been  so  short  a  time  a  member.  Such  a 
rapid  advance  as  this  has  never  been  befbrs 
witnessed,  such  proof  of  confidence  is  a^ 
most  unparallelea. 

He  was  bom  in  1819^  and  is  the  son  of 
William  Cairns,  Esq.,  of  Culha  in  the 
cxiunty  of  Down.  At  Trinity  College, 
Dublin,  where  he  was  educated,  besides  ' 
other  honours,  he  took  the  first  place  in 
classics.  Called  to  the  bar  at  Lincoln's 
Inn  on  January  20, 1844,  he  soon  acquired 
so  prominent  a  station  in  the  Coiirt  of 
Chancery  that  he  was  made  a  queen's 
counsel  in  1850,  when  he  still  maintained 
it  with  more  than  the  usual  success.  rBefore 
this  date  he  had  commenced  his  parlia- 
mentary career,  having  been  elected  mem- 
ber for  Belfast  in  18o2,  and  in  every  other 
farliament  till  he  was  ndsed  to  the  bench, 
[is  eloquence  and  ability  in  that  arena  are 
the  best  proofs  of  the  statesmanship  which 
is  generally  attributed  to  him. 

His  ofiicial  life  began  with  the  appoint- 
ment, on  February  20,  1858.  of  solicitoi^ 
general,  which  he  held  till  the  change  of 
ministry  on  June  18,  1850,  a  little  less 
than  sixteen  months.  Seven  years  after- 
wards, on  the  conservative  party  resuming 
Jower,  he  was  made  attorney-general  on 
uly  0, 1806,  and  in  less  than  foiir  months 
was  removed  into  the  important  office  of 
lord  justice  of  appeal  in  Chancery  on  Od- 
tober  20.  On  the  following  FebnuDj  99 
he  was  called  up  to  the  Honee  of  FMi  | 
by  the  title  of  I^rd  Cainis  of  Qtttinojk  fct 

.     J 


GALETO  CAMPBELL  151 

the  county  of  Antzim ;  and  on  the  20th  of  par,  in  Fifeehire,  was  the  younger  son  of  Dr. 

the  same  month  in  1808  he  received  the  George  Campbell,  minister  of  Cupar,  and  of 

Great  Seal  as  lord  chancellor.    This  he  Mogdelene,  daughter  of  John  Ilaliourton, 


retained  only  till  December  9  in  the  same 
yetr,  when  the  liberal  party  gained  the 
aicaidency,  but  was  then  immediately 
selected  as  the  leader  of  the  opposition  in 


Esq.,  of  Fodderance.  Ue  spent  eight  of  his 
early  years,  from  ten  to  eighteen,  at  the 
University  of  St  Andrews,  studying  for 
the  ministry,  and  took  the  degree  of  A.M. 


the  House  of  Lords,  with  which  office  he  i  there.  Kelinquishing,  however,  his  cleri- 
hss  been  again  entrusted  in  the  present '  cal  prospects,  and  aiming  at  legal  disdnc- 
session.  l  tion,  he  came  to  London,  and  in  November 

In  1867  his  alma  mater,  the  University  1800  entered  the  sodety  of  Lincoln^s  Inn, 
of  Dublin,  elected  him  their  chancellor.         and  placed  himself  under  the  guidance  of 

He  married  Mary  Harriet,  daughter  of  Mr.  Tidd.  With  that  eminent  special 
John  McXeile,  Esq.,  of  Parkmount  in  the  pleader  he  stayed  three  years,  and  to  the 
comity  of  Antrim.  .  tuition  he  received  during  that  time  he 

GALZTO,  Jomr  DE,  or  DE  GAUX.  A  |  chiefly  ascribed  his  success  at  the  l»r.  He 
fine  was  acknowledged  before  John,  abbot  gratefully  records  the  generosity  of  his  in- 
of  Peterborough,  in  1254,  dO  Henry  III.,  '■  structor,  who,  he  relates,  on  finding  that  it 
andinthatand  the  following  year  his  name  would  not  be  convenient  to  him  to  pay  a 
appears  at  the  head  of  the  justices  itine-  second  fee  of  one  hundred  guineas,  not  only 
itnt  into  several  counties.  From  April  till  refused  to  take  it,  but  insisted  un  returning 
August  1258  also  payments  were  made  for  him  the  first.  (Lord  CVs  Cham',  v.  4^4. ) 
assizes  to  be  held  be  tore  him.  In  October,  Before  this,  finding  that  the  small  allow- 
44  Henry  lU.,  he  was  constituted  trea-  ance  which  his  father  could  make  him  was 
sorer,  and  continued  so  till  his  death  on  inadequate  for  his  support  in  the  metropulis, 
Msrch  1, 1202.  This  abbot  was  John  de  he  engaged  himself  for  many  years  ns  a 
Caleto,  or  de  Caux,  who  was  elected  to  reporter  to  the  'Morning  Chronicle,'  then 
that  dignity  in  1249,  being  then  prior  of  under  the  conduct  of  Mr.  Perry,  a  country- 
St  Swithin  s  at  Winchester.  He  was  a  man  of  his.  To  this  he  added  occasionally 
relative  of  Queen  Eleanor.  (Bruce  s  Introd.  a  dramatic  criticism,  in  which  after  8onie 
to  Chron,  I^robwy,  z.)  Browne  Willis  time  he  became  an  adept,  though,  from  the 
describes  him  as  a  pious  and  wise  man.  strictness  of  his  Presbyterian  education,  nud 

GALOWS,  William,  probably  descended  consequent  inexperience,  this  must  at  first 
from  a  family  seated  at  Ilolbeach  in  Lin-  havt;  oten  a  ditiicult  task,  and  probably 
colnshire  in  the  reign  of  Kicliard  II.,  was  produced  some  strictures  which  in  alter- 
«o  short  a  time  a  judge  that  little  is  known  years  he  would  hesitate  to  indorse.  The 
about  him.  In  the  Tear  Books  he  is  ,  *  Morning  Chronicle '  was  the  organ  of  the 
mentioned  under  the  name  of  Collow  in  ;  wlii;jrd,  to  which  party  he  attached  himself 
1475,  and  as  having  been  called  serjeout  at  the  outset  of  his  career,  and  it  is  greatly 
from  the  Middle  Temple  in  Trinity  Term  to  his  credit  that  during  the  whole  of  his 
18  Edward  IV.  In  2  Kichard  HI.,  1484,  lite,  w^hether  it  was  in  opposition  or  in 
he  was  joined  in  the  commission  of  assize  power,  lie  never  deserted  it.  His  occupa- 
Cor  the  county  of  Dorset,  and  on  January  31,  pation  and  his  politics  introduced  him  into 
14£l7,  2  Henry  VII.,  he  was  raised  to  the  various  society,  and  among  his  relaxations 
judicial  seat  In  the  Common  Pleas.  The  were  the  enjoyments  of  the  Cider  Cellar  in 
only  fine  levied  before  him  is  in  the  follow-  Maiden  Lane,  Covent  Garden.  There  he 
'  ing  Trinity  Term,  and  from  the  absence  of  had  the  advantage  of  associating  with 
all  notice  of  him  from  that  time,  it  would  many  men  of  celebrity,  among  whom  wiis 
seem  that  he  then  resigned  or  died.  .  the  learned  and  eccentric  Professor  Person, 

CAMBHOIT,  Walter  de,  is  mentioned  in  .  who  surprised  him  by  reciting  the  whole  of 
14  Edward  L  as  a  keeper  of  the  tallies  of  Anstey's  *  Pleader's  Guide '  from  menior}*. 
the  Exchequer.  He  was  appointed  a  jus-  Durin^r  the  period  of  his  novitiate,  when 
tice  itinerant  in  Tindsle  in  21  Edward  I.  Bonaparte  threatened  to  invade  the  king- 
{Ii'4.  Pari.  i.  122),  being  at  that  time  doni,  he  joined  the  *  Bloomsbury  and  Inns 
cuitos  of  the  castle  of  Baumburgh ;  but  he  of  Com-t  jVssociation  *  (Lord  CJs  Ch,  Jttst, 
<i>fl  not  appear  to  have  acted  afterwards,  ii.  004),  a  corps  chietly  composed  of  mem- 
Id  that  year  he  and  Isabella  his  T\'ife  bers  of  the  legal  profession,  and  he  looked 
lerit?d  a  tine  of  considerable  propertv  in  bock  in  after-years  "with  so  much  pride  to 
ColwcU  in  Northumberland,  for  wliich  his  position  in  the  ranks  that  he  l(;ft  the 
coonty  he  was  elected  a  member  of  par-  :  musket  he  bore  as  an  heirloom  to  his 
liament  in  34  Edward  L,  and  died  in  the    descendants. 


Mme  year.  {Pari.  WriU,  i.  89 ;  Abb,  Hot, 
Orig.  1.  04.) 

CAMDEV,  Earl.    See  C.  Pratt. 

CAMPBELL,  JoH27  (Lord  Campbell), 
bom  Sept.  6>  1781,  at  Springfield,  near  Cu- 


Of  Lord  Kenyon,  who  was  then  chief 
justice,  he  relates  that  at  the  Nisi  Prius 
sittings  at  Guildhall  the  chief  used  to  hand 
the  record  to  the  students,  who  sat  in  a  box 
close  to  him,  and  point  out  to  them  the 


152 


CAMPBELL 


important  issues  to  be  tried.  During  the 
latter  part  of  Mr.  Campbell's  pupilage  the 
chief  justice  was  Lord  Ellenborough.  with 
whose  '  very  dignified,  impressiye,  and  awe- 
inspiring  deportment/  especially  at  the  trial 
of  Colonel  Despard  in  1803  for  nigh  treason, 
he  was  much  struck,  and  whose  '  rough 
treatment'  of  him  in  his  future  career  he 
regrettingly  remembers.  (Ch,  Just,  ii.  329, 
iii.  94,  177.) 

He  was  called  to  the  bar  in  Michaelmas 
Term  1806,  and  published  in  1808  two 
volumes  of  '  Reports  of  Cases  Argued  and 
Tried  at  Nisi  Pnus,  in  the  Courts  of  King's 
Bench  and  Common  Pleas,  in  the  Home 
Circuit,  from  Michaelmas  Term  1807  to  the 
sittings  before  Easter  1808,'  which  he  after- 
wards continued  in  two  additional  volumes 
extending  to  the  year  1816.  This  publica- 
tion greatly  aided  his  progress  at  the  bar. 
Dr.  Watt  mentions  also  another  publication 
under  Mr.  Campbell's  name  in  1808,  'A 
Letter  to  a  Member  of  Parliament  on  the 
Articles  of  a  Charge  against  Marquis  Wel- 
lesley,  which  have  been  laid  before  the 
House  of  Commons;'  probably  an  ephe- 
meral pamphlet  which  died  with  the  day. 
It  would  seem  from  the  title  of  his  reports 
that  he  at  first  attended  the  Home  Circuit, 
though  afterwards,  about  1810,  he  joined 
the  Oxford  Circuit,  on  which,  as  well  as  in 
Westminster  Hall,  his  success  was  so  great 
that  for  three  years  before  he  obtained  a 
silk  gown  he  was  the  leader  of  it.  (Chanc, 
iii  275.) 

In  1821  he  married  Mary  Elizabeth,  the 
eldest  daughter  of  Mr.  Scarlett,  then  one 
of  the  most  eminent  advocates  at  the  bar, 
who  afterwards  became  lord  chief  baron 
of  the  Exchequer,  and  was  created  Lord 
Abinger.  To  the  influence  of  his  father- 
in-law,  who  was  appointed  attorney-general 
in  1827,  he  probably  owed  his  promotion  to 
the  post  of  king's  counsel  in  the  same  year. 
Lord  L^-ndhurst  being  chancellor. 

In  the  next  year  he  was  named  the  chair- 
man of  a  commission  on  the  Registration 
of  Deeds,  and  in  1830  he  was  placed  at  the 
head  of  the  Real  Property  Commission. 
(Ch.  Just,  iii.  324.)  In  that  year  he  began 
his  senatorial  career  as  member  for  Stafford, 
and  soon  showed  himself  active  and  useful 
in  introducing  and  defending  several  im- 
portant measures,  among  which  were  the 
Bill  for  the  Registration  of  Deeds,  and  the 
Anatomy  Bill.  A  friend  to  parliamentary 
reform,  he  gloried  in  having  materially 
furthered  the  measure,  attributing,  not  un- 
naturally, the  one  vote  by  which  the  second 
reading  of  Lord  John  Russell  *s  first  bill 
was  carried  to  his  leaving  his  circuit,  '  at 
a  considerable  professional  sacrifice,'  and 
coming  up  to  London  to  be  present  at  the 
division.  His  speech  on  the  second  bill  he 
afterwards  published.    (Speeches^  49.) 

On  November  26,  ISS^,  he  was  rewarded 


CAMPBELL 

with  the  solicitor-generalship,  and  conse* 
quent  knighthood.  In  the  new  parUament 
tnen  called  he  was  elected  member  for 
Dudley,  but  only  retained  his  seat  till  1834, 
when,  on  his  being  made  attomey-genenl, 
the  fickle  town  would  not  re-elcMCt  him. 
For  nearly  a  whole  session  he  remained 
without  a  seat ;  but  in  the  following  Juii» 
he  succeeded  with  a  more  distinguished 
constituency,  being  elected  member  for 
Edinburgh  in  the  place  of  Francis  Jeffiey, 
made  a  lord  of  session.  This  city  he  coii« 
tinned  to  represent  while  he  remained  a 
commoner.  His  tenure  of  office  was  inter- 
rupted after  little  more  than  nine  montha 
by  his  party  being  turned  out  of  the  mi- 
nistry in  December  1834,  but  only  to  be 
restored  with  more  confirmed  power  in 
April  1835,  when  Sir  John  was  reinstated 
in  his  place. 

Before  his  first  period  of  office  as  attor* 
ney-general  expired,  Sir  John  Leach,  the 
master  of  the  KoUs,  died.  Though  accord- 
ing to  the  usual  practice  he  might  have 
claimed  the  vacant  place,  he  allowed 
himself  to  be  passed  over  in  favour  of 
the  solicitor-general.  Sir  Charles  Christo- 
pher  Pepys,  who  was  appointed.  On  hi» 
resuming  the  office  of  attorney-general  the 
Great  Seal  was  put  into  commission,  of 
which  the  new  master  of  the  Rolls  was  the 
head,  and  after  so  remaining  about  nine 
months,  Sir  Charles  was  constitnted  lord 
chancellor.  Thus  for  a  second  time  the 
office  of  master  of  the  Rolls  was  vacant^ 
and  for  a  second  time  Sir  John  Campbell 
was  passed  over.  Lord  Langdale  receiving 
the  appointment.  The  avowed  reason  for 
thus  overlooking  his  claims  was  that  he 
was  wholly  inexperienced  as  an  equity 
lawyer ;  but  the  real  ground  was  supposed 
to  be  that  he  was  so  active  and  serviceable 
to  the  ministiy  in  the  House  of  Commooa 
that  he  could  not  be  spared  without  dan- 
ger to  its  existence.  Indignant  at  first 
with  this  usage,  he  resigned,  but  a  peer- 
age being  given  to  his  wife,  with  the  title 
of  Baroness  Stratheden,  he  was  appeased 
and  resumed  his  post 

The  whig  party  retained  their  ascen- 
dency for  the  next  four  years,  and  no  va- 
cancy occurred  on  the  bench  which  Sir 
John  Campbell  was  desirous  to  filL  Dur- 
ing the  whole  period  of  his  parliamentary 
career  he  devoted  himself,  both  at  this  time 
and  after  his  accession  to  the  peerage,  to 
the  improvement  of  the  laws,  and  several 
statutes  owe  their  existence  to  his  intro- 
duction. On  the  ministry  beginning  ta 
totter  in  1841,  they  were  so  determined 
before  their  exclusion  to  reward  their  at- 
torney-general for  his  political  and  pro- 
fessional exertions,  that  they  rentiiKa  on 
the  bold  and  questionable  step  of  removing 
their  ancient  collea^e,  Loid  mimkatti 
from  the  chancellonhip  of  Irekndi  for  th*' 


CAMPBELL 

fonoM  of  laiiiiig  Sr  John  to  that  digpilr 
ana  deckinff  him  with  a  peera^  With 
nlnctance  Lord  Flunkett  suhmitted;  and 
Sir  John,  on  June  22, 1841,  became  Lord 
Campbell  of  St.  Andiews  and  lord  chan- 
cellor of  Ireland.  After  ntting  only  one  or 
two  dajB  in  the  Liah  court  he  made  a 
speech  to  the  bar,  in  which  he  plainly  in- 
tunatee  hia  expectaticm  uf  soon  being  '  re- 
duced to  a  private  station.'  (Speeches,  618.) 
The  ministry  succumbed  in  August,  and 
Lord  Campliell,  retiring  with  them,  finished 
his  short  tenure  of  office:  but  though  enti- 
tled to  a  pensioii  of  4000/.,  the  job  was  so 
gross  and  notorious  that  the  ministry  did 
not  yenture  to  offer  nor  he  to  claim  it. 

During  the  nine  years  that  followed  his 
retirement  he  anplied  himself  to  his  sena- 
torial duties,  tajong  a  leading  part  in  the 
Lords*  debates,  and  assisting  greatly  in  the 
appellate  jurisdiction  of  the  house.  But 
his  actiTe  habits  required  further  occupa- 
tion, and  in  1842  he  found  it  by  publish- 
ing his  *  Speeches  at  the  Bar  and  in  the 
House  of  Commons.'  But  his  ambition 
was  not  satisfied  with  this  slight  oflering ; 
aiming  at  literary  fame,  he  next  chose  a 
snbject  from  the  execution  of  which  he 
hoped  to  obtain  it.  This  was  '  The  Lives 
of  the  Lord  Chancellors,'  the  first  three 
volumes  of  which  he  published  at  the  close 
of  1845,  continuing  them  in  1846  and  1847, 
till  he  had  filled  seven  volumes,  concluding 
with  the  Life  of  Lord  Eldon.  This  work 
acquired  an  immediate  popularity,  and, 
though  condemned  by  some  critics  for  its 
looseness  and  occasional  incorrectness,  it 
should  be  remembered  that  the  mere 
writing  of  seven  volumes,  each  consisting 
of  between  six  and  seven  hundred  closely 
printed  pages,  in  the  course  of  little  more 
than  two  years,  was  of  itself  an  extraordi- 
nary effort  of  labour,  and  that  it  would  be 
unreasonable  to  expect  any  strict  investi- 
gation of  records  or  authorities,  or  more 
than  a  compilation  from  previous  writers. 
In  1840  he  published  two  volumes  of  'The 
Lives  of  the  Chief  Justices,'  to  which,  in 
1857,  he  added  a  third  gossiping  volume, 
including  those  of  Lords  Kenvon,  Ellen- 
bomugh,  and  Tenterden,  in  which  a  ten- 
dency to  disparage  his  noble  predecessors 
IS  too  apparent.  The  only  other  literary 
production  which  he  printed  was  'Shalc- 
speares  Legal  Acquirements,*  being  an 
attempt  to  prove  that  the  great  dramatist 
npent  his  youth  in  an  attomey^s  oflice. 
'Uiis  was  a  mere  enlargement  o^  the  idea 
that  had  been  previously  suggested  by 
Malone,  Chalmers,  W.  S.  Landor,  J.  r. 
Collier,  and,  so  lately  as  in  1838,  by 
Charles  Armitage  Brown. 

When  hia  party  came  again  into  power 
in  1846,  Lord  John  Russell,  the  prime 
miniiter,  admitted  him  into  the  caoinet, 
and  gave  him  the  appointment  of  chan- 


CAMFBELL 


153 


cellor  of  the  duchy  of  Lancaster.  This 
office  he  filled  till  March  6,  1860,  when. 
Lord  Denman  having  retired  £rom  ill 
health  and  advanced  age,  Lord  Campbell 
was  raised  to  the  chief  justiceship  ot  the 
Queen's  Bench,  although  only  two  years 
younger  than  Ms  predecessor.  On  assum- 
ing it  he  of  course  relinquished  his  seat 
in  the  cabinet  council,  as  he  had  expressed 
his  strong  disapproval  of  the  union  of  the 
two  positions  by  Lord  Mansfield  in  1767, 
and  Lord  Ellenborough  in  1806.  (Ch.  Just. 
iL  461,  iiL  186.) 

Lord  Campbell  was  specially  fitted  for 
the  office  to  which  he  was  thus  appointed. 
During  the  nine  years  that  he  filled  it  he 
is  acknowledged  to  have  performed  its  im- 
portant duties  in  a  most  exemplary  manner, 
preserving  the  dignity  of  the  place,  and 
administering  the  law  with  apparent  ease 
and  strict  impartiality.  When  Lord  Pal- 
merston  assumed  the  premiership  for  a 
second  time  in  1869,  he  offered  Lora  Camp- 
bell the  chancellorship;  and  it  surprised 
the  world  that  he  should  be  tempted  to 
leave  a  court  where  he  was  so  much  at 
home,  for  one  in  the  practice  of  which  he 
could  not  be  expected  to  be  so  conversant, 
especially  when  its  tenure  was  so  uncertain. 
But  ambition  decided,  and  he  received  the 
Great  Seal  on  June  18. 

He  presided  over  the  Court  of  Chancery 
for  two  years,  and  the  practisers  in  it  were 
astonished  at  the  readiness  with  which  he 
mastered  the  forms  of  the  court,  and  the 
discrimination  he  showed  in  the  judgments 
he  pronounced.  In  the  midst  of  his  duties, 
in  tne  fall  tide  of  his  triumph,  he  was  sud- 
denly cut  off.  On  Saturday,  June  23, 1861 , 
he  had  attended  a  cabinet  council,  and, 
after  having  entertained  a  party  of  mends 
at  his  house  at  Knightsbridge,  had  retired 
to  his  chamber  in  his  accustomed  health 
and  spirits,  and  applied  himself  to  preparing 
a  juogment  which  he  had  promised  on 
Monday.  On  Sunday  morning  he  was 
found  dead  in  his  chair  with  the  blood 
oozing  from  his  mouth,  caused  by  the  burst- 
ing of  one  of  the  great  arteries  near  hi» 
heart 

Thus  awfully  terminated  the  life  of  one 
who,  during  its  whole  continuance,  never 
relfULed  fit)m  his  labours,  who  never  was 
satisfied  unless  he  was  doing  something, 
and  was  indefatigable  in  all  his  pursuits. 
Commencing  as  a  poor  and  dependent  man, 
he  worked  his  way  by  industry  and  per- 
severance, not  onlv  to  wealth,  out  to  the 
highest  honours  of  his  profession.  In  the 
temporary  cessation  of  his  legal  life,  his 
love  of  employment  led  him  to  aspire  to  the 
acquisition  of  a  literary  name,  it  is  not, 
however,  probable  that  his  fame  as  a  lawyer, 
a  legislator,  or  a  judge,  will  be  superseded 
by  his  repute  as  an  author.  The  transient 
popularity  of  his  works  has  already  in  a 


154 


CAMVULE 


great  measure  subsided,  for,  though  they 
must  ever  be  regarded  as  an  extraordinary 
effort  of  laborious  industry,  and  as  composed 
in  a  pleasant  and  easy,  though  somewhat 
egotistic,  style,  they  are  not  looked  upon 
as  authority  by  those  who  are  best  versed 
in  the  history  of  the  various  times  of  which 
they  treat  It  has  been  considered  a  material 
deti'action  from  the  merits  of  his  works 
that  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  them 
he  takes  every  opportunity  of  referring  to 
the  incidents  of  his  own  life,  and  the  ad- 
vice and  opinions  he  gave  in  his  professional 
capacity.  It  will  be  seen  that  this  volun- 
teer information  has  been  serviceable  in  the 
preparation  of  the  present  sketch. 

In  the  year  before  his  own  death  he  lost 
his  wife,  "Lady  Stratheden,  to  whose  title 
their  eldest  son,  William  Frederick,  suc- 
ceeded, thus  takinff  a  place  in  the  peerage 
which,  but  for  his  lather's  position  as 
chancellor,  would  have  given  him  prece- 
dence in  the  House  of  Lords.  Lord  Camp- 
bell left  two  other  sons  and  four  dnughtei-s. 

CAHVILLE;  Gerard  de  (de  Cana 
Villa),  the  ancestor  of  whose  family  came 
into  England  with  William  the  Conqueror, 
was  the  eldest  son  of  Richard  de  Camville, 
the  founder  of  Combe  Abbey  in  Warwick- 
shire ;  and  by  his  marriage  with  Nichola, 
the  eldest  of  the  three  daughters  of  Richard 
de  Haya,  and  the  widow  of  William  Fitz- 
Erneifl,  had  in  her  right  the  office  of  con- 
stable of  the  castle  of  Lincoln.  A  charter 
exists  among  the  archives  of  the  duchy  of 
Lancaster  (Archcoologiaj  zxvii.  112)  which 
is  curious  as  having  been  granted  by  Rich- 
ard I.  between  the  demise  of  his  father  and 
his  own  coronation,  and  as  showing  tliat  he 
did  not  then  assume  the  style  and  title  of 
^  King,'  but  only  called  himself  '  Dominus 
Anglioe.'  It  confirms  to  Gerard  de  Cam- 
ville and  his  wife  Nichola  all  the  right  and 
heritage  of  Nichola  in  England  and  Nor- 
mandy, together  with  the  custody  and 
constableship  of  Lincoln  Castle.  He  was 
also  made  sheriff  of  the  county  of  Lincoln. 

On  King  Richard*s  departure  to  the  Holy 
Land,  Gerard  de  Camville  ha\'ing  joined 
the  party  of  Prince  John,  William  de 
Longchamp,  the  chief  justiciary,  laid  siejrc 
to  Lincoln  Castle,  which  Nichola  resolutely 
defended  {Madox,  i.  i?2),  and  compelled 
Longchamp  to  withdraw  his  forces.  On 
the  king's  return  Gerard  was  not  only  de- 
prived of  the  sheriffalty  and  constableship, 
but  also  of  his  own  estate,  and  was  reduced 
to  the  necessity  of  purchasing  restitution  of 
the  latter,  with  the  king's  favour,  by  a  fine 
of  two  thousand  marks.  On  the  accession 
of  King  John  he  recovered  the  sheriffalty, 
which  he  retained  till  the  end  of  the 
seventh  year  of  that  reign,  and  received 
other  proofs  of  the  king's  regard.  When 
the  kmgdom  was  placed  under  interdict 
in  0  John,  the  king  committed  to  him  and 


CAin^EBBIG 

to  William  de  Comhill  all  the  lands  and 
goods  of  the  clergy  in  the  dioceae  of  Lincoln 
who  refused  to  perform  divine  service. 
(CuL  Hot,  Pat  S,)  He  received  the  ac- 
knowledgment of  fines  at  Cambridge  in  10 
and  11  .^hn,  1208-9,  and  he  and  bis  asso- 
ciates are  there  specially  called    'justicii 

He  died*  in  16  John.  (Ibid,  S,  10.)  His 
wife,  Nichola,  survived  him  for  some  years, 
during  which  she  held  the  sheriffalty  of 
Lincolnshire,  and  was  constituted  governess 
of  the  castles  of  Frampton  and  Lincoln,  the 
latter  of  which  she  gallantly  defended 
against  the  confederated  barons.  She  died 
about  15  Henry  IH.,  1230-1. 

CAMVILLE,  TnoHAS  DE,  was  a  nephew 
of  the  above  Gerard  de  Camville,  being  the 
third  son  of  his  brother  William  by  Albreda, 
the  daughter  and  heir  of  Geoffrey  Marmion. 
He  held  Westerham,  in  Kent,  of  the  honor 
of  Bologne,  in  2  and  3  John,  and  paid  fif- 
teen marks  for  three  knights'  fees  in  that 
county,  and  two  marks  for  one  knight's  fee 
in  Essex.  {JRot,  CanceU.  101,  220.)  His 
adherence  to  the  rebellious  barons  at  the 
close  of  that  king's  reign  was  punished  with 
the  loss  of  all  his  lands,  which,  however, 
were  restored  on  his  obedience  to  the  go- 
vernment of  Henry  III.  In  1 1  Henry  UI. 
he  had  the  grant  of  a  market  for  his  manor 
of  Fobbing,  in  Essex.  (RoL  Clam,  i.  243, 
325,  ii.  194.)  He  is  only  once  named  as  a 
iusticier,  on  the  authority  of  a  fine  being 
levied  before  him  in  May  1229,  13  Heniy 
III.  (Dw/dale's  Orig.  42.)  His  death  oc- 
curred in  1235,  leaving  Agnes,  his  widow, 
imd  a  sou  Robert,  who  married  a  daughter 
of  Hamo  de  Crevequer.     {H(uied,  iii.  162.) 

CAKTEBEIG,  Thomas  be  (Cambridge), 
desciibed  as  of  the  clerical  profession,  was 
an  ofiicer  in  the  Kxchequer  in  29  Edward  L, 
and  his  appointment  as  a  baron  of  that 
court  took  place  on  September  16,  1307, 
two  months  after  the  accession  of  Edward 
II.  In  the  following  year,  on  October  24,  he 
had  a  patent  authorising  him  to  take  the 
place  of  William  de  Carleton,  the  senior 
baron,  when  he  was  absent,  and  to  sit  next 
to  him  when  he  was  present — a  clear  proof 
of  the  royal  favour,  as  there  were  then  two 
barons  in  the  court  senior  to  him  in  standing. 
He  remained  in  this  place  till  July  17, 1310, 
when  his  removal  doubtless  arose  from  his 
services  being  more  valuable  in  another 
character,  as  during  the  time  he  held  the 
oflSce,  and  for  several  years  afterwards,  ex- 
tending to  1317,  he  was  employed  in  foreign 
negotiations.  (Neto  Fasdera^  i.  934,  ii.  15, 
175,  273,  333;  Madox,  ii.  58;  Pari  WriUy 
ii.  p.  ii.  4,  630, 1408. ) 

CANTEBBIO,  John  de,  could  scarcely  be 
the  son  of  the  above  Thomas  de  Cantebrig, 
as  Masters,  in  his '  Corpus  Christ!  College' 
(p.  8^,  suggests,  the  latter  being  a  dergy- 
man,  though  he  was  probably  nearly  related 


GA^VTILUPE 

to  him.  From  4  Edward  IL  he  was  con- 
tiniudly  emplojed  in  the  judicial  commift- 
aioiia  in  the  county  of  Camhridge,  and  was 
retnmed  member  for  it  to  tevend  of  the 
parliaments  from  the  14th  to  the  19th  year. 
He  is  mentioned  as  a  counsel  in  the  Vear 
Books  of  Edward  U.  and  Edward  IIL  In 
the  third  year  of  the  latter  he  was  one  of 
the  king's  seijeants,  and  as  such  was  joined 
in  the  conmiiseion  into  Northamptonshire, 
ScjCf  and  on  October  22  in  that  year  was 
made  a  knight,  tanquam  banerettus. 

In  1331  he  was  seneschal  of  the  abbot 
of  St.  Albans  {Newcomef  223),  and  on  Ja- 
nuary 18  he  was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the 
Common  Fleas,  and,  for  some  reason  that 
does  not  appear,  had  a  new  patent  on  Ja- 
nuary 30, 1334.  His  death  occurred  in  the 
next'year. 

His  property  was  very  extensive  in  the 
town  and  neighbourhood  of  Cambridge, 
and  both  during  his  life  and  by  his  will  he 
deroted  a  great  part  of  it  to  the  guild  of 
St.  Mary,  in  that  town  (afterwards  Corpus 
Christi  College),  of  which  he  was  a  member, 
ind  twice  alderman.  (DufffJales  Orig.  45 ; 
Ahk  Rot.  Orig,  95;  l^arL  Writs,  ii.  p.  ii. 
630.) 

CAVTILUPS,  SmoN  de.    See  S.  Nor- 

CAVTILUPE,  William  de.  The  noble 
£nnily  of  Cantilupe,  so  called  from  the  ori- 
sinal  Champ  de  Loup,  'or  Campus  Lupi, 
loUowed  the  Norman  Conqueror  in  his  en- 
terprise on  the  English  monarchy.  William, 
▼hose  father  was  Walter  de  Cantilupe,  in 
2  John  held  the  office  of  fdeward  of  the 
household.  (JRot.  Liberat,  1.)  In  the  fol- 
lowing Tear  he  was  sheriff  of  Worcester- 
shire, Wlarwick  and  Leicester,  and  Hereford ; 
and  over  one  or  the  other  of  these  counties 
he  presided  for  many  years.  From  5  to  10 
John  his  name  appears  as  one  of  the  justi- 
ders  hefure  whom  fines  were  acknowledged. 
{Hmder'9  Preface.)  During  the  remainder 
of  that  reign  he  was  in  frequent  personal 
attendance  on  his  sovereign,  accompanyiiiLr 
bim  to  Ireland,  and  firmly  supporting  him 
both  under  the  interdict  and  m  his  wars 
imh  the  barons.  It  would  be  endless  to 
ndte  the  grants  which  were  made  to  him 
br  Kiug  John,  eyen  up  to  the  lai>t  month 
of  his  reign  (Rot.  Clans.  L  2fK)) ;  and  on  the 
soceadon  of  Henry  IIL  his  loyalty  was  still 
conspicuous,  both  he  and  liis  son  assisting 
ia  the  siege  of  Montsorel  in  Leicestershire, 
sod  in  raising  that  of  Lincoln.  In  2 
Henry  IIL  he  was  again  made  sheriff  of 
Warwickshire  and  Leicestershire,  with  the 
custody  of  the  castle  of  Kenilworth,  where 
he  fixed  his  cliief  residence ;  and  in  the 
oezt  year  he  was  appointed  one  of  the  jus- 
tins 'itinerant  into  Bedfordshire  and  the 
neighbouring  counties.  He  still  enjoyed  the 
office  oi  senMchal,  which  his  son  also  held 
after  kia  death ;  uid  during  the  remainder 


CANTILUPE 


155 


of  his  life  received  repeated  marks  of  the 
royal  favour,  the  only  interruption  to  which 
arose  from  his  joining  the  barons  who  were 
dissatisfied  with  the  ministry  of  Hubert  de 
Burgh.  He  built  a  hospital  at  Studley,  at 
the  gates  of  a  priory  there,  the  adyowson  of 
which  belonged  to  nim. 

His  death  occurred  in  April  1238,  leaving 
four  sons — William,  the  nezt-mendoned 
Walter,  John,  and  Nicholas. 

CAVTHUPE,  Walter  de  (Bishop  of 
Worcester),  the  second  son  of  the  above 
W^illiam  de  Cantilupe,  was  educated  for 
the  Church,  and  in  10  John  was  presented 
to  the  living  of  Eyton.  This  was  foUowed 
in  the  course  of  t^e  next  eight  years  by  no 
less  than  seven  benefices,  besides  a  prebend 
in  the  church  of  Lichfield, —  Wurefield, 
Burton,  Long  Huchendon,  Kammcham, 
Preston,  Herdewic,  and  half  of  Stokes. 
{Rot.  Pat.  87,  KM),  &c. ;  Rot.  Chart.  192.) 

In  10  Henry  III.,  1231,  he  was  one  of 
the  seven  justices  itinerant  named  for  several 
counties,  being  the  only  occasion  on  whicli 
he  appears  to  nave  acted  in  that  capacity. 
In  August  l'2iMi  he  was  elected  to  the  bi- 
shopric of  Worcester,  and  in  his  episcopal 
character  he  boldly  resisted  the  papal  ex- 
actions, influenced  probably  by  the  remem- 
brance of  his  own  pluralities ;  at  the  same 
time,  however,  exhibiting  so  much  zeal 
'  that,  to  advance  the  heroic  designs  of 
Christian  princes  in  the  Holy  Land,  he  went 
himself  thither,  accompanied  by  William 
Longspee,  I^arl  of  Salisbury.' 

Towards  the  close  of  his  lifo  he  sided 
with  Simon  de  Montfort,  Earl  of  Leicester, 
for  which  he  was  oxcnmmunicate<l  by  the 
pope's  legate ;  but  h«  liv<;d  long  onou^rh  to 
repent  of  his  di.^loyalty,  and  to  obtain  abso- 
lution. He  died  at  his  manor  of  Blockley 
on  Febnmry  12,  litW.  His  character,  ac- 
cording to  the  historian  of  his  nephew,  St. 
Thomas  de  Cantilupe,  was  that  of  *  a  person 
of  mind  and  courage  equal  to  his  nirth.' 
He  founded  the  nunnery  of  White  Ladies, 
and  was  otherwise  munificent  to  his  see. 
(Life  and  Gvsh  of  S.  Thomas  de  Cantilupe^ 
by  R.  S.  S.  I.  Gaiit,  1(J74.) 

CANTILUPE,  Thomas  de  (Bishop  op 
Hereford),  was  the  grand.-^on  of  the  above 
William  de  (.^antilupe,  whose  heir  of  tho 
same  name  was  his  father;  his  mother 
being  Milicent,  the  daughter  of  Hugh  de 
(.Toumay,  and  the  widow  of  Almorio,  Enrl 
of  E\Teux  in  Xormandy,  and  of  Oloiicestor 
in  England.  Ho  wiis  born  about  the  beirin- 
ning  of  the  i*cign  of  King  Henry  III.,  at  his 
father's  manor  of  Ilanieldonc  in  Lincoln- 
shire. Undor  the  advice  of  his  uncle, 
Walter,  Bishop  of  Worcester,  he  was 
brought  up  with  a  view  to  the  clerical  pro- 
fession, and  studied  at  Oxford  under  Kobert 
Kilwarby,  who  became  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury and  a  cardinal.  He  afterwards  re- 
moved  to  Paris,  and  applied  himself  to  the 


156 


CANTILUPE 


study  of  philosophy,  in  the  College  of  Sor- 
bonne;  wnence  he  proceeded  to  Orleans  to 
read  the  civil  law  with  an  eminent  pro- 
fessor there.  Returning  to  Oxford,  he  ap- 
5 lied  himself  to  the  canon  law,  and  proceeded 
octor.  The  nobili^  of  his  blood,  as  weU 
as  the  eminence  of  his  learning,  pointed  him 
out,  in  12C2,  as  worthy  to  fiU  the  office  of 
chancellor  of  the  university,  in  performing 
the  duties  of  which  in  the  suppression  of  a 
riot  between  the  southern  and  northern 
scholars,  he  is  said  to  have  greatly  exerted 
himself,  to  the  injury  both  of  his  person 
and  habiliments. 

The  barons  having  assumed  the  ascen- 
dency, and  the  king  being  completely  under 
their  dictation,  he  was  selectea  by  them  to 
fill  the  office  of  chancellor  on  Feoruary  21, 
1205.  Their  power,  however,  being  termi- 
nated by  the  oattle  of  Evesham,  and  the 
death  of  De  Montfort  in  the  following 
August,  his  removal  was  the  natural  con- 
sequence. 

Having  retired  to  Oxford,  he  completed 
a  course  of  divinity  by  taking  the  degree  of 
doctor,  his  ancient  fiiend  and  master, 
Robert  Kilwarby,  then  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  honouring  his  act  with  his 
presence. 

His  connection  with  the  insurgent  barons 
did  not  blind  King  Henry  to  his  merits,  and 
accordingly,  in  1266,  he  was  appoint^  arch- 
deacon of  Stafford,  to  whicn  were  added 
'  many  and  fatt  benefices,'  as  he  held  at  the 
same  time  canonries  in  York,  Lichfield, 
London,  and  Hereford.  Neither  was  he  in 
less  favour  with  Edward  I.,  being  elected 
Bishop  of  Hereford  on  June  20, 1275. 

The  remainder  of  his  life  was  devoted  to 
the  sacred  duties  of  his  office,  on  the  per- 
formance of  which  his  biographer  is  very 
eloquent,  not  forgetting  'his  courage  in 
defence  of  ecclesiasticail  libertyes,'  which 
engaged  him  in  many  controversies,  and 
eventually  led  to  his  death.  Archbishop 
Peckham  having  laid  some  injunctions  on 
the  sees  within  nis  jurisdiction  which  were 
prejudicial  to  their  liberties,  and  considered 
to  be  beyond  the  ver^  of  his  power,  our 
bishop  volunteered  a  journey  to  Rome  to 
obtain  redress.  There  he  was  received  with 
great  distinction,  and  having  prosecuted  his 
suit  to  a  successful  issue,  he  commenced  his 
journey  homeward ;  but  being  seized  with 
sickness,  he  could  not  proceed  further  than 
Monte  Fiascone,  where  he  died  on  August 
25,  1282,  in  the  sixty-third  year  of  his  age. 
His  flesh  was  buried  at  the  place  of  his 
death,  and  his  bones  were  removed  to  Eng- 
land and  interred  in  his  cathedral.  The 
miracles  which  were  performed  on  both 
these  events,  and  on  other  occasions  during 
his  life,  and  at  his  shrine,  are  stated  to  ex- 
tend to  the  number  of  425.  The  fame  of 
them  was  so  great  that  he  was  canonised 
about  thirty-two  years  afterwards  by  Pope 


CABLETON 

John  XXII.,  on  April  17, 1920,  being  tim 
last  Englishman  so  nonoured. 

The  Bishops  of  Hereford  in  his  honour 
assumed  hb  family  coat  aa  ^e  arms  of  thdr 
see — ^viz..  Gules,  three  leopards'  heads  in- 
verted, each  with  a  flower  de  luce  in  hit 
mouth.  Or.  {Life  and  Oests  of  S>  Thomm 
CantUupe.) 

CABILSFO,  WiLLiAX  DE  (Bishop  or 
Dtjbham),  a  native  of  Bayeux,  was  to 
named  from  havinff  been  a  monk  of  St 
Carilefo,  from  which  he  was  advanced  to 
be  abbot  of  St  Yincentius ;  both  bein^ 
monasteries  in  the  province  of  Maine;  tbi 
former  being  a  cell  at  Covenham  in  Lincofai- 
shire,  and  the  latter  one  at  Abergavenny  iB 
Montgomeryshire. 

He  was  elected  Bishop  of  Durham  on  No- 
vember 10, 1080,  in  the  place  of  Walchemi^ 
who  was  slain  about  six  months  befine. 
The  church  of  Durham  having  been  greatly 
neglected,  the  present  edifice  was  com- 
menced by  him,  and  afibrds  sufficient  nroof 
of  the  munificent  expenditure,  not  only  of 
this  bishop,  but  of  his  succeasor,  Bannlpk 
Flambard,  in  its  structure. 

William  of  Malmesbury  (Geda  Bepmi^ 
480,  &c.),  who  describes  mm  as  a  man  oft 
ready  tongue,  and  very  powerful  in  his  timi^ 
says  that  he  was  appointed  by  Williaa 
Kufus  to  administer  the  public  affairs  in 
1088,  and  Roger  de  Wendover  (ii.  82,  S4) 
distinctly  mentions  that  he  was  made '  jna* 
ticiarius.'    His  tenure  of  that  office,  hoir* 
ever,  must  have  been  very  short,  for  Odo^ 
Bishop  of  Bayeux,  is  described  as  holdhup 
it  at  the  previous  Christmas,  and  Carile& 
in  the  spring  had  joined  that  prelate  in 
the  confederacy  to  depose  King  William^ 
and  raise  his  brother  Kobert  to  the  throoa 
The  insurrection  being  quelled  by  the 
defeat    of   Odo,  the   king  proceeded    to 
Durham  to  chastise  the  bishop,  whom  he 
obliged  to  surrender  and  to  quit  the  kin|^ 
dom.    After  a  banishment  or  two  or  thrM 
years  he  was  permitted  to  return,  when  he 
endeavoured  to  ingratiate  himself  with  the 
king  by  taking  part  against  Archlushop 
Anselm.    He   was,   however,    soon  after 
summoned  to  the  court  to  meet  certain 
charges  made  against  himself.    Compelled 
to  obev,  he  reacned  the  court  of  Windsor 
with  (fifiiculty,  and,  surviving  only  a  few 
days,  died  there  on  January  2, 109i5.    Hii 
remains  were  removed  to  Durham,  where 
they  were  deposited  in  his  cathedral. 

He  is  described  as  endowed  with  tho 
highest  mental  gifts,  with  wit,  eruditioDy 
eloquence,  and  subtlety,  and  as  second  to 
none  in  the  conduct  of  business ;  but  with 
unbridled  ambition,  and  wanting  faith  and 
integrity.  (Duffdale'8  Momut.  i.  224,  && ; 
Oodtoin,  781 ;  AngL  Sac,  L  704.) 

CABLETOV,  WiLLiAX  BB^  aaaodatediii 
14  Edward  L  with  Henir  de  Bimyin  1b§ 
custody  of  the  vacant  ab  Mj  of  BaniMiyp  il 


CABR 

serted  hy  Dugdale  in  bis  list  of  barons  of 
e  Exchequer  in  the  same  year,  but  he 
IS  gdIj  at  that  time  one  of  the  justices  of 
B  Jews.  He  is  introduced  in  that  cha- 
eter  by  Madox  (L  236^  in  the  next  and 
ree  following  years,  till  which  time  the 
!WB  were  in  the  kingdom.  The  justices 
the  Jews  seem  always  to  have  sat  with 
e  baions  of  the  Exchequer;  but  their 
tties  of  coozse  terminated  after  the  expul- 
m  of  that  people.  William  de  Carleton 
d  Peter  de  JLeicester,  who  then  held  the 
Sce^  were  thereupon  appointed  regular 
iQDSy  and  the  former  continued  to  act 
am  that  time  till  the  end  of  the  rei^. 
1 25  Edward  L  he  was  employed  by  the 
ng  with  two  others  to  collect  a  sum  of 
n  thoosand  pounds  firom  the  merchants  at 
ntwerp.  (^0^.  Flarl  L 169,  ld4.) 
Dngdale  says  that  he  was  constituted 
nef  baron  onlJnly  26, 1903, 31  Edward  I. ; 
It  the  liberate,  on  the  authority  of  which 
OS  statement  is  made,  contains  no  such 
GOgnation.  (Madox,  iL  62.)  The  title 
f  chief  baron  indeed  was  not  adcpted  tiU 
Hne  years  afterwards;  but  Wiluam  de 
sdetbii  was  at  that  time  the  senior  baron, 
id  was  at  the  head  of  those  reappointed 
D  the  accession  of  Edward  IL,  1307.  On 
ctober  24,  1308,  he  had  special  licence 
om  ihe  king,  on  account  of  his  long  ser- 
ies, to  retire  to  his  own  house  as  often 
id  as  long  bb  his  health  or  priyate  aflSiirs 
lould  require,  and  to  attend  at  the  Exche- 
ler  in  his  place  when  he  should  think  fit 
fftidL  iL  57),  and  he  does  not  appear  among 
IS  justices  who  were  summoned  to  parlia- 
ent  beyond  the  following  March. 
GASB,  WnxiAX,  in  his  admission  to 
ray*s  Inn  in  December  1655,  is  described 
^^ewington,  Middlesex.  He  was  called 
)  the  bar  in  May  1663,  and  succeeded  Sir 
lichaid  May  as  cursitor  baron  between 
885  and  1&8,  retaining  his  office  at  the 
lerolution.  He  died  in  1689.  {LuttreUy  \ 
557.)  ! 

CABTEB,  Lawbehce,  was  bom  at  Lei- 
ster about  1672,  of  a  family  which  origi- 
iDy  came  from  Stchin  in  Hertfordshire. 
[is  &ther,  who  bore  the  same  names, 
iring  projected  the  scheme  of  supplying 
doester  with  water,  was  chosen  the  repre- 
ntitiye  of  the  borough  in  several  parlia- 
eots  of  TVilliam  UL,  of  whom  he.  was  a 
m  supporter.  His  mother  was  Mary,  the 
raghter  of  Thomas  Wadland,  Esq.,  of  the 
eworke  at  Leicester,  an  eminent  solicitor, 

whose  office  her  husband  had  been 
ticled.    Their    son,  after   being    called 

the  bar  by  Lincoln's  Inn,  was  elected 
corder  uf  his  native  town  on  September  1, 
i97,  and  entering  the  House  of  Commons 
i  its  xepresentatiye  in  the  next  year,  sat 
loe  tm  the  death  of  William  UI.  In 
710,  and  in  the  two  following  parliaments 
f  1714  and  1715,  he  was  returned  for 


CARY 


157 


Beeralston,  and  at  the  dissolution  of  the 
latter  in  1722  he  was  again  elected  for 
Leicester;  but  history  has  preserved  no 
record  of  his  senatorial  eloquence.  His 
professional  career  was  distinguished  by  his 
Doing  appointed  in  1717  solidtor-ffeneral 
to  the  l^nce  of  Wales,  afterwards  George 
n.,  by  receiving  in  1724  the  degree  of  the 
coif,  and  by  being  made  soon  after  one  of 
the  king's  Serjeants,  when  he  was  knighted. 

On  September  7, 1726,  he  succeeded  Mr. 
Baron  Pirice  as  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer, 
retaining  his  recordership  for  the  next  three 
years.  He  continued  on  the  bench  till  his 
death  on  March  14,  1745,  with  the  reputa- 
tion of  an  upright  judge.  He  was  buned  in 
the  church  of  St  Mary  de  Castro,  Leicester, 
where  hb  monument  is  still  to  be  seen. 
{NichoTt  Leicetter,  L  318.) 

0ABU8,  Thoxas,  was  of  a  Lancashire 
fandly,  and  his  descendants  in  1684  were 
seated  at  Horton  in  that  county.  His  legal 
school  was  the  Middle  Temple,  where  ne 
became  reader  in  Lent  1556.  At  the  end 
of  Mary's  reign  he  was  summoned  to  take 
the  coif,  which  he  received  soon  after  the 
accession  of  Elizabeth,  on  April  19, 1550. 
From  that  time  till  Trinity  1565  his  name 
occurs  in  Dyer's  and  Plowden's  Reports. 
The  date  of  his  elevation  as  a  judge  of 
the  Queen's  Bench  is  not  given,  but  from 
the  latter  author  (Flowden^  S76)  it  may  be 
collected  that  he  succeeded  Mr.  Justice 
Corbet,  who  sat  in  the  court  as  late  as 
Trinity  Term  1566.  Cams  remained  there 
till  his  death,  the  date  of  which  has  not 
been  discovered ;  but  no  successor  seems  to 
have  been  appointed  for  him  till  May,  14 
Elizabeth,  1572,  although  his  name  does 
not  appear  in  the  Keports  after  Easter  in 
the  twelfth  year. 

He  married  Catherine,  daughter  of  Sir 
Thomas  Preston  of  Fumess  Abbey,  a  lineal 
descendant  of  John  de  Preston,  a  judge  of 
the  Common  Pleas  in  the  reigns  of  Henrv 
V.  and  \'I. 

CAB7,  Joiix,  of  an  ancient  and  opulent 
family,  seated  in  Devonshire,  was  the  son 
of  Sir  John  Cary,  knight,  bailiff  of  the 
forest  of  Selwood,  and  Jane,  daughter  of 
Sir  Guy  de  Brien.  He  was  appointed  a 
captain  of  the  Devonshire  coast,  and  a  com- 
missioner of  array  in  the  same  county,  soon 
after  his  father's  death  in  1371.  (yeic  Fcv- 
dera,  iii.  976,  1046.) 

His  name  does  not  occur  in  the  Year 
Books,  and  there  is  no  proof  of  his  ever 
having  acted  as  an  advocate.  According  to 
the  practice  of  that  period,  neither  the  chief 
nor  the  puisne  barons  of  the  Excliequer 
were  necessarily  selected  from  the  seijeants 
or  pleaders,  nor  indeed  otlierwise  connected 
with  the  law  than  as  officers  of  that  par- 
ticular department.  It  is  true  that  he  was 
cdled  by  the  king's  writ  to  take  upon  him- 
self the  degree  of  a  serjeant-at-law  in  6 


158 


GASSY 


mdiard  II. ;  but  it  is  equally  true  that  he 
disobeyed  the  summons  {Manning^  201), 
and  it  may  not  be  unreasonably  supposed 
that  he  refused  the  honour  because  he  was 
not  a  regular  pleader  in  the  courts. 

Whatever  was  his  previous  position,  he 
was  raised  to  the  office  of  chief  baron  of 
the  Exchequer  on  November  5,  1380,  10 
Kichard  II. ;  but  it  turned  out  an  unfortu- 
nate advancement  for  him.  Within  a  fort- 
night after  his  appointment  the  parliament 
passed  an  ordinance  placing  the  government 
of  the  kingdom  under  eleven  conunissioners, 
and  in  effect  depriving,  not  only  the  king's 
favourites,  but  the  king  himself,  of  all 
power  in  the  state.  In  the  effoits  made 
to  regain  the  ascendency,  the  plan  of  ob- 
taining the  declaration  of  the  judges  that 
the  ordinance  was  illegal  was  adopted. 
The  chief  baron  was  one  of  those  who 
concurred  in  that  declaration,  being  pre- 
sent vnth  the  others  on  the  discussion  at 
Shrewsbury.  He,  therefore,  was  included 
in  the  impeachment,  and  was  condenmed  to 
death  with  his  colleagues,  but,  like  them, 
had  his  sentence  commuted  to  banishment. 
The  place  of  his  exile  was  the  city  of 
Waterford  and  a  circle  of  two  miles  round 
it;  and  for  his  support  he  had  an  allow- 
ance of  20/.  per  annum.  As  his  name  was 
not  among  those  of  his  banished  brethren 
who  received  permission  to  return  to  Eng- 
land in  20  Kicnard  II.,  he  probably  died  m 
Ireland,  apparently  in  the  previous  year 
(Cal,  Jbiquis.  p.  m.  iii.  106) :  but  his  pro- 
perty, including  Torrington  and  Cockinffton 
m  Devonshire,  was  restored  in  3  Henry  iV., 
1402.     (Hot.  ParlAn.  4S4.) 

He  married  Margaret,  daughter  and  heir 
of  Robert  Holloway,  by  whom  he  had  two 
sons,  Robert  and  John. 

The  latter  was  Bishop  of  Exeter  for  a 
short  space,  and  died  in  1419.  The  former 
was  a  renowned  knight,  many  of  whose 
descendants  were  honoured  with  various 
titles  in  the  peerage,  all  of  which  have 
become  extinct,  except  that  of  Viscount 
Fidkland  and  Baron  Hunsdon. 

CASS7,  JonN,  was  probably  born  at  the 
manor  of  Wighttield,  in  the  parish  of  Deei> 
hurst  in  Gloucestershire,  which  had  been 
held  by  the  family  from  the  time  of 
Edward  IH.,  and  continued  in  tiieir  pos- 
session certainly  till  the  end  of  Elizabeth's 
reign.  Ilis  name  occurs  among  the  counsel 
in  Richard  Bellewe's  Reports  of  the  time  of 
Richard  II. ;  and  he  was  raised  to  the  office 
of  chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  May  12, 
1380,  in  the  twelfth  year  ot  that  reign. 

He  received  a  new  patent  on  the  acces- 
sion of  Henry  IV.,  but  died  verv  shortly 
afterwards.  His  tomb  affords  an  example 
of  the  practice  of  placing  the  royal  arms  on 
the  monuments  of  persons  holding  oihce 
under  the  crown,  the  three  lions  of  Eng- 
land occurring  on  the  brass  over  his  re- 


CATUN 

mains.    {Aikyn^»  Olfmceilerth,  202 ;  Gad, 
Mag,  Feb.  1840,  p.  141.) 

CATESBT,  John,  of  a  family  settled  in 
Northamptonshire,  was  apparently  the 
uncle  of  \Villiam  Catesby,  esquire  of  th» 
household  of  Edward  IV.  and  Richard  HL, 
who  was  attainted  for  his  adherence  to  the 
latter  in  the  field  of  Bosworth.  (jRat.  Pari, 
vi.  L>76,  278.) 

He  was  a  member  of  the  Inner  Temple^ 
or  the  ^  Inner  Inne,'  as  it  was  then  calM, 
and  first  appears  among  the  advocates  in 
the  Year  Books  in  Michaelmas  1458.  He 
was  honoured  with  the  coif  in  1403,  and 
made  king's  seijeant  on  April  18,  140Bl 
He  was  promoted  to  the  bench  of  the 
Common  Pleas  on  November  20, 1481, 31 
Edward  IV.,  and  was  knighted  in  the  fol* 
lowing  year.  The  three  subsequent  changes 
in  the  sovereiffnty  of  the  kingdom  made  no 
alteration  in  nis  judicial  position,  thonih 
Henry  VII.  delayed  his  reappointment  tor 
nearly  a  month  after  his  brethren,  probably 
on  account,  of  doubts  arising  from  nis  rela- 
tionship to  William  Catesby,  so  closely 
connected  with  the  late  king. 

The  excellence  of  his  character  mayb» 
inferred  from  his  being  the  first-naiiMd 
executor  in  the  will  of  Bishop  Waynflet9 
{Chandler,  382),  whom  he  survived  bat  % 
short  time,  dying  in  1486. 

He  marriecL  Elizabeth,  the  daughter  of 
William  Green,  of  Heese  in  Middleaez, 
Esq.,  and  had  by  her  seven  sons  and  two 
daughters.  He  was  buried  in  the  abbey  of 
St.  James,  in  Northampton,  and  apparently 
was  seated  at  his  manor  of  Whiston  in  that 
county.     {Test,  Veiust,  277,  380.) 

The  conspirator  in  the  gunpowder  plot 
was  one  of  his  descendants. 

CATLIN,  RoBEBT.  There  were  two  con- 
temporary  lawyers  of  the  name  of  Catliiif 
Ricnard  and  Robert,  of  difierent  branehet 
of  the  same  family.  {Fuller ,  i.  568 ;  Bhm§' 
fields  Norfdkj  i.  682.)  Richard  Catlin,  of 
Lincoln's  Inn,  was  made  a  serieant  in  1563, 
and  queen's  serieant  in  1556.  He  was 
connected  with  tne  county  of  Norfolk,  and 
was  steward  of  Norwich,  which  he  also 
represented  in  parliament 

The  branch  firom  which  Robert  Catlin 
was  descended  was  anciently  seated  at 
Raimds  in  Northamptonshire.  He  ww 
bom  at  Thrapstone  in  that  county  {Pkw* 
den^  342),  and  was  elected  reader  of  the 
Middle  Temple  in  1547.  In  1655  he  was 
admitted  to  the  degree  of  the  coif;  and  on 
November  4,  in  the  following  year,  Philip 
and  Mary  appointed  him  one  of  their  ser- 
geants. He  was  raised  to  the  bench  as  a 
judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  October  10^ 
1558,  five  weeks  before  the  death  of  Quean 
Mary,  and  received  a  new  patent  the  dftj 
after  the  accession  of  Queen  EUiabetlL 
Previous  to  the  following  tezm,  on  the  re- 
moval of  the  two  Catholic  chief  JBilioei|ke 


CATJX 

tris  on  JaniiAry  S2  promoted  to  the  head  of 
the  Court  of  Queeira  Bench,  and  knighted. 
He  continued  to  preside  m  chief  justice  for 
the  next  sixteen  jeaxs,  with  a  high  reputa- 
tion for  wisdom  and  graTitj.  That  he  was 
hold  and  independent  also  is  apparent  from 
a  letter  to  Lord  Burleigh,  who  had  con- 
Tcred  a  message  from  the  queen,  complain- 
ing of  his  judgment  in  a  suit  in  whicn  tlie 
Earl  of  Leicester  was  a  partr,  wherein  he 
MTs  he  '  dares  not  alter  the  ancient  fonai 
of'courL'  (Co/.  State  Ptipen  [1471],  410.) 
However  high  the  character  of  a  judge 
may  be,  it  is  not  to  be  expected  that  tho^e  ! 
tgainst  whom  he  decides  will  always  join 
m  his  praises.  Li  1566  one  Thomas^VeUh 
of  London  was  indicted  in  the  Queens  ■ 
Bench  for  saying,  '  My  Lord  Chief  Justice 
Catlin  is  incens^  against  me ;  I  cannot  have 
JTUtice,  nor  can  be  heard ;  for  that  court 
BOW  is  made  a  court  of  conscience,'  and  was 
fined  accordingly. 

The  chief  justice  died  at  his  seat  at  Xew- 
oham  in  Beafbrdshire  in  1574.  He  married 
Ann,  the  daughter  of  John  Boles,  of  Wal- 
lington  in  Hertfordshire,  and  relict  of  John  . 
Bugoyne.  (Ckamuy,  48.)  By  her  he  left  ' 
in  only  daughter,  Siaiy,  who  married  first 
Sr  John  Spencer,  and  their  son  Robert  was 
ae^ed  Baron  Spencer  of  Wormleighton  in 
1003,  whose  g^ruidson  was  adranced  to  the 
Mridom  of  Sunderland  in  1643.  The  fifth 
wl  succeeded  under  the  act  of  parliament 
»  Duke  of  Marlborough,  his  mother  being 
lecond  daughter  of  the  great  dnke. 

The  earMom  of  Spencer  of  Althorp  in 
drnved  from  the  same  stock,  the  first  earl 
baring  been  a  younger  son  of  the  third  Earl 
•if  Sunderland.  The  barony  of  Churchill  of 
Whichcote  also  was  ffranted  in  Idlo  to  a 
Tounger  son  of  the  uiid  Duke  of  Marl- 
borough, and  all  these  titles  still  grace  the 
EufflLih  peerage. 
ikim  See  J.  D£  Calsto. 
CiTE,  Jobs  dr,  acted  as  a  justider  from 
1264  to  1^1,  4o  Henry  IH.  {DugdMs 
Oriq.  43 ;  Ejrerpi.  e  JRat.  lU.  ii.  331^%.) 
If  H.  Phillipps  (GroHdenr  of  the  Law 
[1084],  53)  is  right  in  stating  that  the  baro- 
nets of  that  name  of  Stanford  in  Northamp- 
Muhire,  a  title  still  existing,  are  descended 
irom  him.  his  ancestor  was  Jordan  de  Cave,  | 
the  brother  of  Wyamams  de  Cave,  who  re- 
erired  lands  in  North  and  South  Cave,  in 
Yorkshire,  from  William  the  Conqueror, 
ind  transferred  them  to  Jordan. 

CAVE.  HreH  de,  in  5  Edward  I.  was 
cleric  to  Ralph  de  Hen^ham,  chief  justice 
of  the  King's  Bench.  (JDvgdalei  Orig.  94.) 
Id  21  Edward  L,  1203,  he  was  the  last 
oamed  of  four  justices  itinerant  assigned  for 
ih«  county  of  Surrey;  and  he  was  among 
the  justices  summoned  to  the  parliament  of 
August  2:i  Edward  I.  {Pari  Writs,  i.  20.) 
lie  snd  his  brother,  probably  the  under- 
nsnud  John,  in  15  Edward  I.,  had  a  grant 


CAVENDISH 


159 


of  land  at  Cokefrueddinge  in  Staffordshire, 
from  Alwvn  de  Norton  and  his  wife.  (Al^. 
Placit.  213.) 

CAVE,  John  de,  is  inserted  by  Dugdale 
as  having  been  appointed  a  justice  of  the 
Kingd  Bench  in  1283,  11  Edward  I.  Al- 
though there  is  no  absolute  imposgibility 
that  he  may  haye  been  the  same  person  ns 
the  above  /ohn  de  Cave,  the  lapse  of  time 
from  1201  to  1283  renders  it  very  impro- 
bable. There  is,  however,  no  sui)sequent 
record  of  his  name  in  connection  with  the 
courts. 

lie  appears  to  have  been  the  brother  of 
the  last-mentioned  Hugh  de  Cave,  and  to 
have  had  grants  of  land  made  to  him  till 
2  Edward  ll.  (Abb.  IHaciL  213,  215,  275. 
305.) 

CAVSHSISH,  JoHX  DE.     Notwithstand- 
ing the  high  legal  rank  which  John  de 
Cavendish  attained,  and  the  tragical  termi- 
nation of  his  life,  and  although  his  family 
was  afterwards  illustrated  by  two  duke- 
doms, no  account  remains  of  his  early  career 
except  that  which  may  be  collected  from 
the  Year  Books.    Nor  can  the  want  of  any 
other  memorials  of  him  be  wondt>red  at, 
when  we  advert  to  the  fact  that  nearly  250 
years  elapsed  after  the  death  of  the' chief 
justice  before  the  family  was    ennobled. 
John  de  Cayendish  wa;)  the  son  of  Roger 
de  Gemum,  the  grandson  of   Italph  df> 
Gemum,  an  after-mentioned  justice  itine- 
rant in  the  reign  of  Henry  111.     The  name 
of  Cayendish  was  first  assumed  by  either 
his  father  or  himself,  each  Ijcing  said  to 
have    acquired  it  by  ninrrioge  with   the 
heiress  of  the  lord  of  the  manor  so  called 
in  the  county  of  Suffolk.    John  de  Caven- 
dish appearsin  the  Year  Books  as  an  advo- 
cate OS  early  as  21  Edward  III.,  and  as  late 
as  45  I'Mward  III.,  and  was  made  a  seneant 
in  40  Edward  III.     Yet  Dugdale  intro- 
duces him  in  his  '  Chronica  Series '  as  chief 
justice  of  the  King's  Bench  in  30  Edward 
III.,  13C5.     This  is  evidently  founded  on 
niistake,  for  Dugdale,  six  years  afterwards, 
^ves  a  patent  appointing  him  a  puisne 
judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  November 
27,  1371,  besides  showing  that  Sir  Henry 
Green  was  chief  justice  till  October  20, 
1305,  on  which  day  he  was  succeeded  by 
Sir  John  Knyvet,  who  kept  the  place  till 
ho  was  made  chancellor,  when  Cavendish 
is  again  inserted  in  the  list  as  raiseil  to  tho 
chief  justiceship  of  the  King's  Bench  on 
July  15, 1372.    From  40  to  44  Edward  III. 
he  was  joined  in  the  commissions  as  a  judgo 
of  assize,  his  salary  for  which  was  20/.  a  year 
(Devon's  Issue  Roily  3(X));  and  lines  were 
levietl  before  him  as  a  judgo  of  the  Common 
.  Pleas  at  the  commencement  of  40  Edward 
I  III.,  in  the  term  next  after  his  appointment 
to  that  court.  {Dugdale* s  Orig.  45. )   He  was 
a  trier  of  petitions  in  every  parliament  from 
1372,  and  not  before,  which  lie  undoubtedly 


160 


CAVENDISH 


would  Uave  been  had  he  been  then  chief 
justice.  He  continued  to  fulfil  his  hifirli 
duties  with  great  credit  till  the  end  of  the 
reign,  when  he  was  immediately  reappointed, 
vnui  the  grant  of  100  marks  per  annum, 
which  had  been  for  some  years  made  to  his 
predecessors. 

lie  seems  to  have  been  a  bit  of  a 
humourbt.  A  case  being  heard  before 
him  in  which  a  question  arose  upon  a 
lady's  age,  her  counsel  pressed  the  court  to 
have  her  before  them,  and  judge  by  in- 
spection whether  she  was  withm  age  or 
not  But  'Candish,  Justice,'  showing 
great  knowledge  of  female  character,  says, 
^  II  n'  ad  nul  home  en  Engleterre  que  puy 
adjudge  a  droit  deins  age  ou  de  plem  age ; 
car  ascun  femes  que  sont  de  age  de  xxx 
ans  voilent  apperer  d'age  de  XTin  ans.' 
(Year  Book,  60  Edw.  III.  fo.  6,  pi.  12.) 

The  chief  justice  met  with  an  untimely 
end.  The  insurrection  of  Wat  Tyler  in 
1381  extended  itself  from  Kent  over  va- 
rious parts  of  England.  In  the  county  of 
Suffolk  the  rebels  assembled  to  the  number 
of  50,000.  destroying  the  property  and  ill- 
treating  the  persons  of  all  who  would  not 
join  them.  The  principal  objects  of  their 
Vengeance  seemea  to  be  all  those  who  had 
any  sort  of  learning.  They  attacked  Sir 
John  Cavendish's  house,  and  plundered 
and  burned  it;  and  having  imfortunately 
got  hold  of  the  venerable  man,  they  dragged 
him  into  the  market-place  of  Bury  St.  Ed- 
munds, and  there,  after  a  mock  trial,  ruth- 
lessly beheaded  him  and  insulted  his 
remains. 

Thus  perished  this  amiable  judge,  after 
gracing  the  judicial  bench  for  ten  years, 
without  an  imputation  of  having  perverted 
the  course  of  justice,  or  of  deviating  from 
the  path  of  rectitude  and  integrity,  to 
justiiy  or  to  palliate  the  brutal  fate  which 
overtook  him.  Shortly  before  his  murder 
he  was  honoured  by  being  elected  chan- 
cellor of  the  University  of  Cambridge. 

By  his  wife  Alice,  who  died  before  him, 
he  left  two  sons,  the  descendant  of  one  of 
whom,  William,  became  the  biographer  of 
Cardinal  Woh«ey,  to  whom  he  was  gentle- 
man usher.  He  was  afterwards  admitted 
into  the  service  of  the  king,  by  whom  his 
fortunes  were  greatly  enriched'  by  various 

I>rofitable  offices  and  valuable  grants  of 
onds  belonging  to  the  dissolved  abbeys 
and  priories.  One  of  his  sons,  William, 
was  ennobled  by  James  I.  with  the  title  of 
Jkron  Cavendish  of  JIardwicke  in  1604, 
to  which  that  of  Earl  of  Devonshire  was 
added  in  1018.  The  fourth  carl  was  created 
Duke  of  Devonshire  in  1094.  A  younger 
son  of  the  fourth  duke  was  created  Earl  of 
Burlington  in  1831,  a  title  which  is  now 
held  by  liis  grandson,  the  present  Duke  of 
Devonshire. 
Another  son  of  Wolscy*s   biographer^ 


CECIL 

named  Charles,  was  fkther  of  Sir  WilUaa 
Cavendish^  who  waa  raised  to  the  peeram 
by  being  created  Viscount  Manafidd  m 
1620,  to  which  were  succesaiTely  added  the 
earldom,  maiquisate,  and  dukedom  of  New- 
castle, all  of  which  titles  became  extinet 
in  1691. 

CAXTOH,  Jeremiah  de,  although  omit- 
ted in  Dugdale's  list,  was  undoubtedly  a 
justicier,  being  expressly  called  so  in' 90 
Ilenxy  III.,  as  being  present  at  the  exeeih 
tion  of  a  final  concord  'before  the  Uiiff 
himself '  at  Westminster  {Harleian  M8i 
371,  fo.  711a),  and  also  pa3rnient8  bein^ 
made  for  assizes  to  be  taken  before  him  la 
28  and  31  Henrv  UL  (Exeerjii.  e  MeL 
Fin,  i.  424,  ii.  9.)  In  the  following  year 
he  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the  coatoles  of 
the  archbishopric  of  Canterbury  during  iti 
vacancy  (Afaaox,  i.  596),  after  whidi  hii 
name  occurs  in  37  Ilenrv  UL,  1253,  at 
holding  pleas  before  the  king  with  Hemj 
de  Bretton. 

CECIL,  William  (Eabl  of  Sali8bubt)| 
was  one  of  the  parliamentary  commissiciMn 
of  the  Great  Seal  for  less  than  four  moothi 
His  fpmdfather  was  the  renowned  Lnd 
Burleigh,  and  his  father  was  Robert  Gecil« 
the  wise  minister  of  Queen  Elisabeth  and 
James  I.,  who,  after  serving  both  sore- 
reigns,  and  after  passing  through  the  two 
lower  grades  of  the  peerage,  was  created 
Earl  of  Salisbury  in  1605.  On  his  deadi,  in 
1612,  this  William  succeeded,  but  did  not 
do  much  credit  to  his  lineage.  At  first  the 
obsequious  servant  of  his  sovereign,  he  con- 
curred in  every  act  proposed  by  the  ooait| 
and  attended  King  Charles  when  he  re- 
tired in  his  troubles  to  York,  joining  the 
peers  in  signing  the  declaration  that  the 
king  had  no  intention  to  take  warlike 
measures.  Soon  after,  without  any  appa- 
rent reason,  he  fled  from  court,  desertug 
the  king's  p!arty  for  that  of  the  parliament 
and  forming  one  of  the  small  knot  of  lords 
who  legislated  at  Westminster.  He  had 
the  efiiontery  to  appear  before  the  king  at 
Oxford  as  a  commissioner  to  treat  for  peace, 
and  was  named  in  the  same  capacitv  in  the 
proposed  treaty  at  Uxbridg^.  ^Thouffh 
totally  without  credit  with  either  party,De 
was  appointed  a  commissioner  of  the  Great 
Seal  on  July  3,  1646.  The  narliament, 
however,  wiuidrew  their  confidence  from 
him  and  the  other  commissioners  on  Oc- 
tober 80,  and  placed  the  Seal  in  the  custody 
of  the  speakers  of  the  two  houses. 

On  the  decapitation  of  the  king  he  al- 
lowed himself  to  be  nominated  one  of  the 
Council  of  State,  and,  as  if  this  was  not  a 
sufHcient  degradation,  he  got  himself,  on  the 
abolition  of  the  House  of  Lords,  returned 
as  a  member  of  the  House  of  Commons  Ibr 
Lynn  in  Norfolk,  in  September  16^  After 
being  expelled  with  the  rest  by  OnmrvrsA 
in  1653,  ne  joined  the  Rampat'iis  mettmg 


CESXRETON 


CHAMBERLAYNE 


161 


ia  1650,  to  be  a^aiiy  expdledy«nd  ftgun  ra-' ;  meption  is  made  of  hU  name,  except  that' 
stored.  His  insignificance  probably  saved,  he  is  one  of  the  executors  named  in  King 
lyy^i  (m  the  reetoradoa  of  Charles  IL,  who    Henry's  will.   (Hi/mer,  406.)    He  is  some* 


1^  doubt  thoufl^ht  tha^  the  contempt  which 
all  men  felt  lor  the  degraded  earl  was  a 
sufficient  punishment. 

He  died  on  December  8, 1668.  His  de- 
scendants have  wiped  out  his  disgrace,  and, 
at  the  end  of  two  centuries,  flourish  with 


times  called  Chaceport. 

CHAXBSBLATVE,  TuoKAB,  claims  a  de- 
scent from  William^  Count  TankerviUe^ho 
was  one  of  the  Norman  followers  of  Wil- 
liam the  Conaueror,  and  whose  son  John 
became  lord  chamberlain  to  Henry  I. ;  the 


the  additional  title  of  marquis,  granted  in  i  same  office  being  held  by  several  of  his  de- 


17^.  (Clarendon;  Whitelocke;  P^rUHisL) 
j(S0TBETOH,  Adam  DEr  King  Henry  III. 
before  the  seventeenth  year  of  his  reign 
founded  a  house  for  the  maintenance  of 
converted  Jews,  in  the  street  then  called 


scendants,  its  name  thus  became  attached 
to  them.  One  of  the  branches  of  the  fa- 
mily, William  Chamberlayne/  brother  of 
Sir  Thomas  Chamberlayne^  who  was  em- 
ployed in  diplomacy  by  Iienry  VUI.  and 


*  New  Street,'  but  now  known  as  Chancery  :  nis  three  successors,*  settled  in  Ireland,  and 
Lane,  endowing  it  with|  many  houses  and    was  the  father  of  the  subject  of  the  present 
Imds,  and  bestowing  on  it  the  church  pf  St    article. 
Dunstan,  in  fleet  Street   Over  this '  Domus 


Thomas  Chamberlavne  was  called  to  the 
Convereorum' a  custos  was  appointed,  some-    bar  by  Gray's   Inn   m  1585,  and  became 

reader  in  1607.  He  was  raised  to  the 
dejpree  of  the  coif  in  1614,  was  made  ar 
Welsh  judge  in  1615,  and  in  1616  was 
advanced  to  the  office  of  chief  justice  of 
Chester,  and  knighted.  (Co/.  State  Papers 
[1611],280,363.)  From  this  position  he  was 
selected  to  be  one  of  the  judges  of  the  King's 
Bench  on  October  8,  1620.  In  that  court 
he  remained  only  four  years ;  for,  whether 
from  feeling  the  duties  too  onerous,  or  from 
some  other  cause,  he  retired  from  it  on 


times  during  the  king's  pleasure  and  some- 
times for  life,  who  was  ^nerajly  an  eccle- 
uasdc,  and  connected  with  the  legal  pro- 
feasion.  In  the  reign  of  Edward  I.  this 
office  was  first  united  with  that  of  master 
of  the  HoUs ;  and  when,  by  the  banishment 
of  the  Jews  from  England,  the  object  of  its 
foundation  gradually  ceased,  the  house  was 
eventually  annexed  to  the  office  of  piaster 
of  the  Itolls,  and  thenceforward  received 
the  name  bv  which  it  is  now  distinguished. 


\dam  da  Cestreton,  both  an  ecclesiastic  |  October  18,  1624,  and  resumed  his  judicial 
and  an  officer  of  the  court,  received  in  50  j  seat  at  Chester,  with  a  grant  of  the  same 


Iienry  UL,  1205,  a  grant  of  the  custody  of 
this  house  for  his  life ;  and  during  the  whole 
of  52  Henrv  III.  he  was  performing  the 
functions  o^  a  justicier.    (Excerpt  e  Hot, 


precedency  in  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas, 
to  be  held  without  fee  or  charge,  which 
was  made  to  him  within  a  week  after  the 
accession  of  Charles  1.     (Croke,  Jac.  600; 


Ftn.  ii.  465-478.)    The  short  time  that  he    Cal.  State  Papers  [1625-6],  5.)    In  a  com- 


mission dated  Ma^  12, 1625,  he  is  described 
not  only  as  chief  justice  of  Chester,  but  also 
as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas.  (Bymer, 
xviii.  67ii.)  He  is  likewise  mentioned  by 
Sir  William  Jones  (JReparts,  70),  under 


remained  on  the  bench  may  account  for  his 
Don-appearance  in  Dugdale's  '  Chronica  Se- 
ries." inasmuch  as  his  death  occurred  at  the 
beginning  of  the  following  year. 

CHACEPOBC,  Peter.  A  pant  of  30 
marks  per  annum  was  made  in  31  Hennr  Easter  Term,  1  Car.,  as  one  of  the  judges 
in.  to  Hugh  de  Chaceporc  and  his  wii^  before  whom  the  case  of  Lord  Sheffield  v. 
Guidonea,  who  in  the  patent  is  called  Katcliffe  was  argued  in  the  Exchequer 
'cognate  regis.'  (CaL  Hot.  Pat.  22.)  |  Chamber,  in  which  it  appears  that  after 
Whatever  was  their  relationship  to  Peter  '<  various  hearings,  extending  over  two 
Chaceporc,  it  will  account  for  his  being  [  years,  the  judges  were  equally  divided. 
constitut«Ml  king's  treasurer  in  26  Henry  III.,  Lord  Bacon,  in  his  address  to  Sir  James 
and  f(ir  hi*  being  keeper  of  the  king's  ward-  j  Whitelock  on  succeeding  to  the  chief  jus- 
robe  from  20  to  37  Henr}'  HI.  (i6tV7.  10 :  ticeship  of  Chester,  recommends  him  to 
JiadojT,  i.  tXX),  &c.)  The  wardrobe  appears  i  follow  the  example  of  his  predecessor 
to  have  been  used  as  one  of  the  royal  trea-  '  Chamberlayne,  who,  he  says, '  for  religion, 
furiea,  and  a  certain  class  of  fines  was  >  for  Icming,  for  stoutnesse  in  course  of 
c^vmmonly  paid  into  it.  On  Iday  15, 1253,  justice,  for  watchfulnesse  over  the  peace 
William  de  Kilkenny  being  ill,  the  Great  |  of  the  people,  and  for  relation  of  matters 
Seal  was  delivered  to  Peter  Chaceporc  and  of  state  to  the  counsell  heer,  I  have  not 
Jubn  de  Lexinton,  and  there  is  little  doubt  knowen  (no  disprayse  to  any)  a  better 
that  the  former  merely  received  it  in  one  or  ■  servant  to  the  king  in  his  place.'     (Liber 


other  of  the  above  characters,  probably  in  the 
firmer,  to  be  deposited  in  the  wardrobe  for 
safe  custody.  In  that  same  year  Peter  Chace- 


FamelicuSf  80.) 

He  died  on  September  17  or  27,  1625, 
having  married,  first,  Elizabeth,  daughter 


162 


CHAMBB& 


wick  in  the  same  county;  and,  Becondly, 
Lady  ElizabeUi  Berkeley,  only  daughter  of 
Lord  Chamberlain  Hunadon,  and  widow  of  ! 
Sir  Thomas  Berkeley.    (CaL  St.  Fapers  ' 
[1619],  846.)     Hw  eldest  son,  Thomas,  of  | 
Wickham  in  Oxfordshire,  was  a  loyal  ad- 
herent to  Kinpr  Charles  in  his  misfortunes, 
and  was  by  lum  created  a  baronet  in  1642, 
a  title  which  lasted  134  years,  and  expired 
in  1776.    (  JFoi4(m,  iL  8/4.) 

CHAXBBi,  Alak.    The  family  of  De  la 
Chambr^,  De  Camera,  or  Chaumberay  was  '. 
of  Norman  origin,  and  the  name  of  one  of  j 
its  members  occurs  on  the  Holl  of  Battle 
Abbey.    They   settled  in  Westmoreland,  ■, 
where  their  descendants  haye  flourished  in 
an  uninteiTupted  lineal  succession  till  the  ; 
present  time.    Alan  Chambr^  was  the  son  ; 
of  Walter  Chambrd,  of  Halhead  Hall  in  the  ' 

r'sh  of  Kendal,  and  recorder  of  Kendal,  ; 
his  marriage  with  Manr,  daughter  of 
Jacob  Morland,  of  Capplethwaite  Hall  in 
the  same  county. 

He  was  bom  in  1730,  and,  being  des- 
tined to  the  law,  he,  reyiyinff  an  ancient 
custom  which  had  been  long  discontinued, 
first  resorted  to  an  inn  of  Chancery,  and 
paid  the  customary  dozen  of  claret  on  ad- 
mission into  the  society  of  Staple  Inn,  and 
his  arms  are  emblazoned  on  a  window  in 
the  hall.  From  this  inn  he  removed  to 
the  Middle  Temple  in  February  1758,  but 
transferred  himself  to  Oray^s  Inn  in  No- 
vember 1764,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  in 
May  1767.  The  diligence  with  which  he 
had  devoted  himseff  to  his  studies  was 
proved  by  the  success  which  he  achieved, 
and  his  independent  and  upright  conduct 
and  amiable  disposition  may  be  estimated 
by  his  popularity  among  his  colleagues, 
ite  selected  the  Northern  Circuit,  and  soon 
became  one  of  its  leaders.  In  1783  he 
was  chosen  treasurer  of  his  inn,  and  in 
1796  he  was  elected  recorder  of  Lan- 
caster. On  the  resignation  of  Mr.  Baron 
Perryn  in  1709  he  was  named  as  his  suc- 
cessor, the  announcement  of  which  was 
received  by  the  circuit  bar  with  '  acclama- 
tions auite  unprecedented.'  A  short  act 
of  parliament  was  passed  on  July  1, 1700, 
autnorising,  for  the  first  time,  a  Serjeant  to 
receive  his  degree  in  the  vacation,  so  that 
the  vacant  office  might  be  immediately 
granted  to  him.  In  June  of  the  following 
Tear  he  was  removed  from  the  Court  of 
]Bxchequer  to  the  Common  Pleas,  in  which 
he  remained  till  his  resignation  in  Mi- 
chaelmas vacation  1815. 

In  the  exercise  of  his  functions  he  merited 
and  received  universal  praise  both  for  his 
learning  and  urbanity.  So  extremely  care- 
ful was  he  of  doin^  anything  that  could  by 
possibility  be  mismteipreted  that  on  one 
occasion  he  declined  the  invitation  to  a 
hoiu&  at  wliich  the  Judges  had  been  accua- 
tmnea  to  be  entertained  during  the  dxcuit, 


CHABLETOK 

because  the  proprietor  was  defendant  In  % 
cause  at  that  assize. 

Sir  Alan  lived  seven  years  after  his  re- 
tirement, and,  dying  at  llarrogate  on  Sep* 
tember  20,  1823,  was  buried  in  the  family 
vault  at  Kendal. 

OHAVVELL,  WiLLiAV  Frt,  is  one  oC 
the  present  barons  of  the  Excheqner.  He  if 
the  son  of  Pike  Channell,  Esq.,  of  Peckham 
in  Surrey.  He  was  called  to  the  bar  by 
the  Inner  Temple  in  May  1827,  and  wai 
one  of  the  five  centlemen  who,  in  18I0L 
on  the  warrant  for  opening  the  Court  of 
Common  Pleas  to  all  oarristers  hang  de> 
clared  null  and  void,  were  the  first  whe 
were  called  to  the  degree  of  seijeant-at- 
law  with  all  its  former  privileges.  On 
February  12,  1857,  he  was  appointed  to  Ids 
present  ofiice,  and  knighted. 

He  married  in  1 834  a  daughter  of  lUehaid 
Moseley,  Esq.,  of  Champion  Hill,  Cambtf- 
well. 

CHAVYILL,  WiLLiAX  DE  (Archdeaooit 
OF  Richxond),  was  one  of  the  jostideis 
at  Westminster  before  whom  fines  weie 
levied.  (Hunter's  Preface,)  That  dignity 
he  had  enjoyed  since  1180.  He  probaUy 
died  in  1196,  as  his  successor  was  then 
appointed.     {Le  Neve,  323.^ 

CHAPPIE,    WiLLiAX,    nelonging  to  a 

i  Dorsetshire  family,  and  residing  at  Waybty 

'  House  in  the  parish  of  Upway,  was  born  m 

1677.    In  1722  he  entered  parliament  as 

member  for  Dorchester,  which  he  contannsd 

to  represent  till  he  was  raised  to  the  ben^ 

History  is   silent  as  to  his  talents  as  a 

senator,  but  as  a  lawyer  his  reputation  WM 

high.     Called  seijeant  in  1724,  he  was 

made  a  judge  on  the  North  Wales  Cixcoit 

I  in  1728,  and  on  his  appointment  as  kimj^ 

.  seijeant  in  1729  he  was  knighted.    Oft 

I  June  16, 1737,  he  was  constituted  a  jodga 

'  of  the  King*s  Bench,  and  occupied  tiie  seat 

for  nearly  eight   ^ears   with  credit  and 

distinction.    He  died  on  March  15,  174& 

leaving,  by  his  wife  Trehane  Clifton,  of 

Green  Phu^,Wonersh,  Surrey,  four  sons  snd 

two  daughters,  one  of  whom  married  8ir 

Fletcher  Norton,  afterwards  Lord  Grantley. 

(Hutchins's  JDoreei,  i.  373,  596:  Sbraiffe, 

1075.) 

CHABLSTOH,  HoBERT  DE  (to  whidi 
branch  of  the  family  of  Charleton  of  Shrop- 
shire he  belongs  there  is  no  account),  was 
raised  to  the  office  of  chief  justice  of  the 
Court  of  Common  Pleas  on  January  90» 
1388, 11  Richard  IL,  and  the  fines  levisd 
before  him  extend  to  Midsummer  139L 
As  his  attendance  in  parliament  is  not 
noticed  at  a  later  period,  he  probably  died 
soon  after  that  date.  He  reoeiTed  tiie  oidar' 
of  knighthood  as  a  iMumeret  in  1388* 
(DftffdMMOriq.  46, 103.)  Someofliiida- 
cisions  are  in  iftichiod  Bdlewe's  RepoKi. 

OSABLETOV,  JoB,  descandU  mm  As 
ancient  Shropshire  family  of  CluaMo% 


* 


CHABLETON  CHAUOOUB  163 

I  directly  fiom  Sir  Alan  Charleton,  of   relates  tlieee  pwticolarB  (p.  313),  calls  him 
plej  Caatle  near  WeUin^n,  the  brother    *Bn  old  cavaher,  loyal,  learned;  ^ravc,  nnd 
ioBDf  the  first  Lord  Powis.  He  was  the  ,  wise/  and  oondodes  his  narration  thud : 
est  son  of  Robert  Charleton,  of  Whitton,    |  May  Westminster  Hall  never  Imow  a  worae 
Ills  fint  wife,  Emma,  daughter  of  Thomas  j  udse  than  he  waa.' 
rby,  of  Adston,  Northamptonshire ;  from       He  sat  as  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas 
Me  brother,  Sir  Job  Harby  (both  emi-   from  April  ^  168a  till  April  21,  1080, 
t  jewellers  who  had  sufierea  much  in    when  he  was  one  of  the  four  judges  who 
royal  canse),  he  received  his  baptLsmal    were  remoyed  hj  James  IL  for  ffiving  Iiis 
le.*  Bom  in  Ixmdon  in  1614,  and  edu-    opinion  in  opposition  to  the  king's  dispens- 
id  at  Magdalen  Hall^  Cbdbrd,  he  was   ing  power.    He  was  however  restored  to 
ed  to  the  bar  by  Lincoln's  Inn,  but    his  chiefjusticeship  of  Chester  (Bram^;i'« 
B  not  appear  to  have  practised  in  the    Autob.  223;  2  Slower,  400),  and  was  made 
rts  during  the  interregnum,  but  was    a  baronet  on  the  12th  of  May  following, 
t^  to  Protector  Richiurd's  only  parlia-   He  died  on  May  27, 1697. 
it  in  1650,  and  also  to  the  nrst  two       His  seat  was  at  Ludford  in  Herefordshire, 
iaments  of  Charles  IL  in  1660  and  1601,    By  his  first  wife,  Dorothy,  daughter  and 
nember  for  Ludlow.  heir  of  William  Blundell,  of  Bishops  Castle, 

Gs  reputation  for  loyalty  may  be  inferred  Esq.,  he  had  four  sons  and  three  daughtens ; 
n  hisD^g  indudecL  on  the  Restoration  and  by  his  second  wife,  Lettioe,  daughter 
he  first  batdi  of  new  Serjeants,  and  being  of  Walter  Waring,  of  Oldbury,  Esq.,  he  had 
ie  one  of  his  majesty's  council  at  Ludlow  one  son  and  one  daughter.  The  bajronetcy 
the  Marches  of  Wales.  In  1662  he  became  extinct  in  1784.  ( WoUan,  v.  13 ; 
a  grant  of  3700/.  for  the  services  ren-  Wood^s  Fadi,  i  464.) 
id  by  his  father  to  Charles  L  (Col.  St.  CHA8TILL0V,  Hbitbt  de,  or  CA8TIL- 
ier$  [1062],  876),  and  also  succeeded  LIOH,  was  raised  to  the  aichdeaconry  of 
Geoffirey  Palmer  as  chief  justice  of  Canterbury  in  1195,  7  Richard  I.,  and  was 
ister,  bemg  thereupon  knighted.  He  then  acting  as  a  justicier  in  the  Curia 
une  king*s  Serjeant  in  16w,  but  his  '  Regis,  sevcural  fines  being  levied  before  him 
w  is  very  seldom  mentioned  by  the  law  in  that  year.  He  probably  had  previously 
vtezB  of  the  day.  '  filled  some  office  m  the  Exchequer,  and 

Q  the  parliament  of  1661  he  was  chair-  may  have  been  the  Henry  de  uasteillun 
1  of  the  committee  for  elections ;  and  on  who  accounted  for  the  ministry  of  the 
ruazy  4,  1673,  he  was  unanimously  chamberlainship  (' chamberlengariie  *)  of 
ted  speaker.  His  claim  for  the  cus-  London  in  6  and  7  Richard  L  (Madox,  i. 
aij  privileffes  was  uttered  in  so  neat  i  775.) 

brief  an  address  that  Lord  Chancellor  During  the  controversy  which  arose  in 
ftesbury  complimented  him  on  having  .  1202  between  King  John  and  the  monks  of 
th  so  much  advantage  introduced  a  ,  St  Augustine's,  Canterbuiy,  concerning  the 
rter  way  of  speaking '  on  the  occasion.  :  right  of  patronage  to  the  church  of  Faver- 
leagnation  of  the  chair,  in  a  fortnight  |  sham,  the  archdeacon  contrived  to  secure 
r,  was  not  unlikely  to  have  been  the  some  advantage  to  himself  by  claiming  the 
ih  of  an  intrigue  of  the  Earl  of  Shaftes-  custody  of  the  church  during  the  vacancy. 
r,  who  was  then  in  the  ascendant.    By    (Hasted^  xii.  564V 

Stephen  Fox*s  confession  to  the  parlia-  CHATTCOXB,  Hugh  de,  in  the  last  tliree 
It  of  1679,  Sir  Job  had  a  pension  of  years  of  the  reign  of  Richard  I.  was  sheriff* 
V,  while  he  was  speaker.  of  Staffordshire,  and  from  the  6th  to  the 

ir  Job  retired  to  his  chief  justiceship  of  9th  John  held  the  same  office  in  Warwick- 
ster,  in  which  he  desired  to  die ;  out  shire  and  Leicestershire.  In  2  John  he  was 
r  a  few  years  he  was  disturbed  in  the  employed  as  a  justicier  in  Normandy^  and 
•vment  of  it  by  the  ambition  of  Sir  j  in  5  John  he  was  one  of  the  justiciers 
rge  Jeffreys.  'Jdiat  impudent  aspirant  before  whom  fines  were  acknowledged 
Bed  the  king  so  hard  for  the  place  that,  j  in  Hampshire  and  Nottinghamshire,  and 
lake  way  for  him,  it  was  resolved  that ,  in  the  same  year  the  king  pardoned  him 
Job  should  be  removed  to  a  seat  in  the  |  a  sum  of  money  which  he  owed  to  cer- 
imon  Pleas.  This  Sir  Job  took  heavily  tain  Jews.  He  was  also  employed  in 
Mart,  and,  deidring  to  see  the  king  to  making  inauisition  at  all  the  ports  as  to 
iavour  to  divert  him  from  the  purpose,  |  those  who  Drought  com  from  Xormandy  ; 
t  to  Wliitehall  and  placed  himself  and  the  castle  of  Kenil worth  was  committed 
le  the  king  must  pass ;  but  his  majesty,  to  his  custody.  He  held  it  for  four  rears, 
]g  him  at  a  distance  and  knowing  lus  :  and  then  for  some  unrelated  cause  he  lost 
ct,  tamed  short  off  and  went  another    the  royal  favour;  for  in  0  John  he  was 


The  disappointed  judge  'pitied  his 

r  master^  and  never  thought  of  troubling 

i  more,  but  boclded  to  nis  business  in 

Common  Pleas.'    Roger  North,  who 


ordered  to  deliver  the  castle  to  Robert  de 
Roppel,  and  was  fined  800  marks  to  recover 
the  goodwill  of  the  king.  His  proper^ 
lay  in  the  counties  of  Lincoln  and  OoEford^ 

m2 


164 


OHATKELL 


•nd  his  wife's  name  was  Hodiernn.    {Hot. 
Pat.  74;  Ha.  de  FtnOnUy  382.) 

CHAYVSLL,  John,  was  summoned  in  5 
Edward  IL,  1312,  among  the  legal  assistants 
to  parliament)  in  what  precise  character  is 
not  stated,  and  his  attendance  continued 
to  be  required  in  most  of  the  parliaments 
till  1324.  He  is  first  mentioned  as  a  j  ustice 
of  assize  in  1314^  and  the  last  commission 
in  which  his  name  occurs  is  in  17  Edward 
II.  {ParL  Writs,  ii.  p.  ii.654 ;  Pot.  Pari.  i. 
450.) 

CHELM8F0SD,  Lord.    See  F.  Thesioeb. 

CHE8TEB,  Easl  OF.   See  R.  Blund£vil. 

CHESTEB,  Peteb  de,  was  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  in  54  Henry  III.,  1270, 
for  pleas  of  the  forest.  He  was  appointed 
as  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  in  12  Edward 
I.,  1284,  and  continued  to  act  till  1288.  In 
1282  he  received  the  provostship  of  Bever- 
ley, and  died  about  1298.  (Madox,  ii.  322 ; 
MonasL  vi.  1307.) 

CHEYVS,  WiLLiAX,  appears  in  an  apocry- 
phal List  of  Readers  of  Gray^s  Inn,  but  tne 
Year  Books  prove  that  he  was  in  practice 
as  an  advocate  from  8  Henry  Iv.  till  2 
Henry  V.  In  12  Henry  FV.  he  was  called 
seijeant;  and  on  Jime  16,  1415,  3  Henry 
v.,  he  was  constituted  a  justice  of  the 
King*s  Bench,  and  was  reappointed  on  the 
accession  of  Henry  VI.  In  2  Henry  \^., 
January  21,  1424,  ho  was  raised  to  the 
office  of  chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench 
(Acts  Privy  Comicilj  iii.  132)  and  knighted. 
Ho  presided  in  that  court  till  1439,  when 
he  resigned.  His  death  occiured  in  1442, 
and  he  was  buried  in  the  church  of  St 
Benet,  Paul's  Wharf.     (  Weever,  680.) 

By  his  wife  Margaret  he  left  a  son  and 
a  daughter,  to  the  former  of  whom  he  be- 
queathed 400/.  and  all  his  estates  at  Stoke 
and  Trapeseles.    (Testofn.  Vetiut.  249.) 

CHI8HTJLL,  John  de  (Bishop  of  Lon- 
don), in  1264,  48  Henry  UL,  was  chan- 
cellor of  the  Exchequer,  and  records  state 
that  the  king's  signature  was  made  to 
divers  patents  while  the  Seal  was  in  his 
custody  {Cal  Pot  Pat.  35),  and  that  he 
gave  It  up  in  February  1265.  He  was 
archdeacon  of  I^ndon  in  1262,  and  be- 
came dean  in  1268.  In  the  latter  year, 
on  October  30,  the  Great  Seal  was  again 
committed  to  his  custody,  to  be  held  at  the 
king's  pleasure,  which  ne  retained  till  the 
end  of  the  following  July,  but  whether 
with  the  title  of  chancellor  does  not  ap- 
pear. 

In  February  1270  he  was  constituted 
treasurer,  in  which  office  he  continued 
about  two  years. 

He  was  elected  to  the  bishopric  of 
London  on  December  7,  1273.  He  died  on 
February  8,  1280,  and  was  buried  in  St. 
Paulas.  {Godwin,  183;  Le  Keve,  177,  183, 
324.) 

OEOXE,  Hjchabd^  was  of  a  Somerset- 


t:;H0LMLE7 

shire  family,  and  the  son  of  John  Choke,  of 
the  manor  ol  Long  Ashton  in  that  countv. 
He  is  first  mentioned  as  an  advocate  in  f9 
Henry  VI.,  1440,  and  was  called  to  the  de- 
gree of  seijeant  in  July  1453.  Six  montht 
after  the  accession  of  Edward  IV.  he  wia 
raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Common  Pleas,, 
not  however  as  chief  justice,  as  Dngdale- 
erroneously  states,  but  as  '  one  of  the- 
judges'  of  that  court,  according  to  his 
patent,  which  is  dated  September  5, 146L 
That  he  was  a  useful  juoge,  and  did  not 
unnecessarily  interfere  vdm    the   violent 

Eolitics  of  the  time,  may  be  presumed  from 
is  successive  reappointments  on  the  tern* 
porary  restoration  of  Henry  VI.  in  1470^ 
on  the  return  of  Edward  rV .  in  the  follow* 
ing  year,  and  on  the  accessions  of  Edward 
V.  and  Richard  HI.  in  1483,  in  the  first 
year  of  the  latter  of  whom  he  died,  and 
was  buried  at  Long  Ashton. 

His  first  wife  was  Joan,  daughter  of 
William  Pavev,  of  Bristol,  by  whom  he 
had  several  chi'ldren.  His  second  vnfe  was 
Margaretta  Mones,  who  survived  him  a 
year.  The  family,  after  three  generationB^ 
was  settled  at  Avington  in  Berkshire. 
{Ashmole's  Berks,  iiL  318;  CoUinsonU 
Somerset^  ii.  291.) 

CHOLMLEY,  RooER,  was  the  natural 
son  of  Sir  Richard  Cholmlev,  descended 
from  the  ancient  race  of  Cholmondeley  in 
Cheshire,  who  was  lieutenant  governor  of 
Berwick  under  Henry  VII.,  and  afterwards 
governor  of  Hull  and  lieutenant  of  the 
Tower  of  London.  He  died  in  1522,  leav- 
ing a  handsome  provision  for  Roger,  whom 
he  placed  at  Lincoln's  Inn.  The  date  of 
his  first  admission  there  cannot  be  found; 
but  the  fact  of  his  beinj?  re-admitted  m 
1600,  which  the  books  of  the  inn  record, 
give^  some  substance  to  the  story  that  the 
embryo  chief  justice  entered  at  first  rather 
freely  into  the  frolics  of  youth.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  he  soon  reformed,  and  diligently 
pursued  his  legal  studies,  laying  up  stores 
for  future  use  so  assiduously  ^at  within 
two  years  after  his  father's  death  he  was 
admitted  to  the  bench  of  the  society.  He 
filled  the  office  of  reader  there  no  less  than 
three  times — in  Lent  1524,  in  Lent  1529, 
and  in  autumn  1531,  on  the  occasion  of  hia 
being  called  to  the  degree  of  the  coif, 
which  he  assumed  in  the  follovring  Mi- 
chaelmas Term. 

Roger  Ascham  tells  a  story  which 
Cholmley  used  to  relate  of  himself^  that 
when  he  was  an  ancient  in  Lincoln's  Inn, 
certain  students  being  brought  before  him 
to  be  corrected  for  their  irregularitiesy  out 
of  them,  remembering  the  old  man's  early 
career  in  the  same  house,  said  to  him, '  Sir, 
we  be  yong  gentlemen,  and  wise  men  be- 
fore us  have  proved  all  fashions,  and  yet 
have  done  well.'  'Indeed,'  answmd 
Cholmley,  'in  youthe  I  was  as  yea  m* 


CHOLMLEY 

DOW,  and  I  had  twelve  felloes  like  unto 
niTflelf ;  bat  not  one  of  them  came  to  a  good 
enl  And  therefore  foloe  not  my  example 
in  yoiith,  bot  foloe  my  counaell  in  agv,  if 
erer  ye  think  to  come  to  this  place,  or  to 
theia  yeaiea  that  I  am  come  unto,  lesse  ye 
meet  either  poTertie  or  Tibum  in  the  way.' 
(Setcards  AtiecdoUa,  ir.  275.) 

In  1530  he  was  appointed  one  of  the 
commissioneri  to  enquire  into  Cardinal 
WolieT*s  possessions  in  Middlesex  (JRymer, 
xiT.  403) ;  and  in  October  1530  he  was 
knigfate^  having  in  the  preceding  year 
been  elected  recorder  of  London,  (this 
office  he  held  for  ten  years,  during  which 
he  was  twice  returned  as  representative  of 
that  dty  in  parliament — vii.,  in  1537  and 
1512.  lie  was  named  in  1540  as  a  com- 
floisnaner  in  London  to  search  for  and  bum 
sU  heretical  books,  and  to  enquire  into 
tranmeesions  against  the  acts  of  the  Six 
Articles.  His  London  residence  was  in  the 
Old  fiailey,  and  probably  formed  part  of 
the  property  (now  the  London  Coffee 
House)  which  he  granted  to  his  scnool  at 
flkhgate. 

ft  was  not  till  1544  that  he  was  made 
<Kie  of  the  king's  Serjeants.  He  then  sur- 
lendered  the  recordership,  on  which  occa- 
aon  the  corporation  granted  him  yearly  a 
lew  year*8  gift  of  twenty  angels  (nobles) 
k  gold.  In  the  following  year,  on  Xo- 
reuber  11,  he  was  appointed  chief  baron 
«f  the  Exchequer — an  office  which  he  rc- 
tiined  for  the  remainder  of  Henry's  rei^, 
sod  for  above  tive  years  under  Edward  VI., 
when  on  March  21,  1552,  he  was  promoted 
to  the  chief  justiceship  of  the  King*8 
Bench. 

He  had  been  seated  there  little  above  a 
year  before  be  was  called  upon  to  witness 
the  will  by  which  King  Edward  attempted 
to  exclude  his  sister  Mary  from  the  throne. 
Although  this  was  probably  not  a  voluntary 
act,  but  under  pressure  of  the  powers  that 
nled,  yet  withm  a  few  days  after  the  ac- 
cession'of  that  princess  he  was  committed 
to  the  Tower,  where  he  remained  six  weeks, 
at  the  end  of  which  he  was  liberated  on 
payment  of  a  large  fine.  Though  never  re- 
placed on  the  bench,  he  was  Hoon  restored 
to  favour,  and  named  in  several  commissions 
in  the  first  year  of  Mary's  reign.  One  of 
these  was  lor  the  trial  of  Sir  Nicholas 
Throckmorton,  from  whose  remarks  at  the 
outset,  as  recorded  by  Ilolinshed  (iv.  33),  it 
may  be  inferred  that  his  character  for  im- 
partiality did  not  stand  very  high. 

Queen  Mary  admitted  him  into  her  privy 
cooncil,  by  the  books  of  which  it  appears 
that  he  was  on  several  occasions  appointed 
to  examine  certain  prisoners  in  the  Tower, 
with  the  Addition  of  the  horrible  discretion 
of  patting  them  *  to  such  tortures  as .  .  . 
shsh  be  thought  most  convenient.'  (Jar' 
^     m  Toriur^  76,  70.) 


CHUBCHUL 


165 


Sir  Roger  lived  for  seven  years  after 
Elizabeth's  accession,  and  his  name  occurs 
as  lata  as  1502  in  a  commission  for  the  trial 
of  persons  charged  with  coining.  The  even- 
ing of  his  life  he  passed  in  the  calm  delights 
of  literary  retirement,  dosing  it  by  eeta- 
blishinflr  and  amply  endowing  one  oi  those 
useful  foundations  which  then  became  tiie 
happy  substitutes  for  chantries  for  priests, 
and  which  now  remain  as  glorious  memo- 
rials of  the  piety  and  forethought  of  their 
originators.  This  was  a  free  grammar  school 
at  Ilighgate,  incorporated  on  May  0, 1505. 
One  of  his  last  acts  was  an  additional  grant 
in  its  favour  of  various  premises  in  the  fol- 
lowing month,  at  the  close  of  which  he  died. 
He  was  interred  on  July  2  at  St.  Martinis, 
Ludgate,  where  his  wife  Christine  had  been 
buried  in  December  1558.  (Machun's  Diary • 

181, 290, 3ea^ 

lie  left  only  two  daughters,  who  inhe- 
rited very  extensive  property,  the  books  of 
the  Augmentation  Onice  showing  that  the 
judge  had  a  considerable  share  in  the  lands 
distributed  on  the  dissolution  of  the  mo- 
nasteries. (Hadedj  i.  450,  &c. ;  Onnerod* 
CheAire,  iii.  208.) 

Sir  lloffer  is  confounded  by  Strvpe  and 
others  with  his  Cheshire  kinsman  iianulph 
or  Randle  Cholmley,  who,  like  him,  was  a 
reader  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  a  serjeant-at-law, 
recorder  of  London,  and  M.P.  for  that  city. 
He  died  two  years  before  Sir  Roger. 

OHTIBCHIliL,  John,  and  his  namesake 
the  first  Duke  of  Marlborough  were  cousins, 
each  beinp  descended  from  Jasper  Churchill, 
Esq.,  of  Bradford  in  Somersetshire,  who  was 
the  great-grandfather  of  the  duke,  and  the 
grandfrithcr  of  Sir  John,  whose  father  was 
also  named  Jasper.  {ColUiwm,  iii.  580.) 
He  was  called  to  the  bar  at  Lincoln's  Inn  in 
1(U7,  and  elected  autumn  reader  in  1070, 
having  then  the  title  of  knighthood.  Thirt 
dignity  he  had  attained  by  his  eminence  at 
the  bar,  which  enabled  him  to  purchase  in 
105.3  the  manor  of  Churchill,  near  Banwell, 
in  Somersetshire,  probably  attracted  bv  its 
name,  and  caused  nis  selection  as  one  o^  the 
king  s  counsel,  and  attorney-general  to  the 
Duke  of  York.  He  practised  in  the  Court 
of  Chancery,  and  Ito^r  North  (p.  190)  re- 
lates of  him  that  on  his  walk  from  Lincoln's 
Inn  to  the  Temple  Hall,  where  the  court 
sat  out  of  term  in  Ijord  Keeper  Bridgenian*s 
time,  he  had  taken  no  less  than  28/.  for 
motions  and  defences  for  'hastening  or 
retarding  the  hearings  of  causes  onlv:  a 
practice  greatly  amended  by  Lord  (l^uil- 
ford. 

He  was  the  first  counsel  named  by  the 
House  of  Lords  in  1075  to  manage  the  fa- 
mous case  of  Sir  Nicholas  Crispe  against  a 
member  of  the  House  of  Common>,  which 
occasioned  the  absurd  contest  about  privi- 
lege between  the  two  houses.  In  the  course 
of  the  dii^ute  Sir  John-  and  the  other 


1 66  CLAD  AUL  CLARKE 

counsel,  nolwithBtanding  the  protection  of   earl,  without   issue.    {Baronage^  i.  200  ^ 
the  Peers,  were  committed  to  the  Tower  hy  \  Hasted,  v.  159,  203.) 
the  Commons ;  and  to  such  an  extent  was  '      CLASEMBALD  (Abbot  of  St.  ATrGXTS- 
the  quarrel  carried  that  the  king  was  obliged    tineas,  Cantbrbtjbt)  is  placed  by  Dugdale 


to  prorogue  the  parliament,  when  Sir  John 
ana  his  imprisoned  colleagues  were  of  course 
released.  He  afterwards  oecame  a  member 
of  this  parliament  for  Dorchester,  and  in 
the  next  for  Newtown  in  Hampshire,  and 
lastly  for  Bristol,  which  city  chose  him  as 
its  recorder  in  April  1683.  On  the  death  of 
Sir  Harbottle  (irimston  he  was  invested 
with  the  office  of  master  of  the  Rolls  on 


at  the  head  of  the  twelve  whom  he  caUs- 
'Justiciarii  itinerantes'  into  certain  coun- 
ties in  1170,  but  who  were  rather  inqui- 
sitors into  the  conduct  of  the  sheriiiB  and 
other  pfficers  of  the  king. 

The  abbot  was  either  a  secular  or,  as 
some  say,  a  fugitive  and  apostate  monk  io 
Normandy.  Obtruded  by  King  Henry  in 
1163  on  the  monks  as  their  abbot,  thev 


January  12. 1685,  less  than  a  month  before  refused  to  permit  him  to  sit  in  their  chapter 
King  Charles  died ;  but  an  early  end  was  :  or  to   celebrate  any  of  the  holy  offices. 

Sut   to   his  judicial    career  by   his  own  Notwithstanding  this  opposition,  he  con- 

ecease  in  the  summer  vacation  following,  trived  to  possess  himself  of  the  temporal!- 

He  left  four  daughters  by  his  wife  Susan,  ties  and  to  retain  them  for  fifteen  years, 

daughter  of  Edmund  Prideaux,  Esq.   {State  when,  on  the  representation  of  the  monks 

TriaU,  vi.  1144  et  seq, ;  LuttreU,  i.  254, 324 ;  that  he  was  a  bad  man  and  had  wasted  the 


2  Shoiver,  434.) 

CLAHAUL,  Hugh  de,  held  a  judicial 
position  in  0  Henry  HI.  as  one  of  the 


revenues  of  the  monastery,  a  papal  mandate 
was  directed  to  the  Bishops  of  Exeter  and 
Worcester  and  the  Abbot  of  Faversham^ 


justices  itinerant  for  Essex  and  Hertford-  I  under  which  he  was  deposed  in  1176. 
shire,  in  the  latter  of  which  counties  his  '  During  his  time  the  neater  part  of  the 
property  was  situate.  He  was  among  those  abbey  was  destroyed  by  a  fire  in  1168. 
who,  having  taken  the  barons*  part  in  King  (Manast,  i.  122:  Treever,  255;  Hastedj  xiL 
John's  reign,  returned  to  his  duty  at  the    190.) 

beginning  of  Henry's.    {Rot.  Claut.  i.  323,  {      CLABEHDOH,  Earl  of.     See  R  Htbe. 
324,  ii.  67, 147.)  CLAEKE,  Robert,  was  probably  of  the 

CLABE,  HooEB  DE  (Earl  of  Clare  ,  county  of  Essex,  as  he  purchaaed  and 
AXB  Hertford),  was  one  among  the  twelve  resided  in  the  mansion  house  of  Newarks, 
designated  as  itinerant  judges  in  1170  by  or  Newlands-fee,  in  the  parish  of  Good 
Dugdale.  There  are  good  reasons,  how-  Estre,  and  as  be  also  possessed  the  manor 
ever,  for  considering  that  they  did  not  really  ;  of  Gibbecrake  in  Purley,  in  that  county, 
bear  that  character,  but   that  they  were    (Morant,  i.  345,  ii.  450.)     He   was  called 


rather  inquisitors  into  the  abuses  attri- 
buted to  tne  sheriffs  and  other  officers  of 
the  king.  This  earl  was  great-grandson 
of  Richard  Fitz-Gilbert,  called  Richard  de 


to  the  bar  by  Lincoln's  Inn  in  1568,  and  was 
reader  in  autumn  1582.  He  was  consti- 
tuted a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  in  JunCv 
1587,  29   Elizabeth.     {CokesSrdJRfpori, 


Beuefacta,  or  Bienfait,  aftervrards  noticed, '  p.  16.)  In  the  summer  of  1590  he  was  the 
and  son  of  Kichard  who  was  created  Earl  judge  of  assize  at  Croydon,  before  whom 
of  Hertford.  John  Udall,  the  Puritan,  was  tried  for  the 

In  3  Henry  U.  Earl  Roger  obtained  the  nublication  of  the  alle^d  libel  called  ^  The 
king*8  grant  of  all  lands  be  could  win  in  Demonstration  '—a  tnal  which,  notwith- 
Wales,  and  accordingly  marched  a  great  standing  the  evident  wish  of  the  judge  to 
army  there,  and  fortified  divers  castles  in  be  lenient  with  him  if  he  would  have  sub- 
the  neighbourhood  of  Cardigan.  ,  mitted,  is  a  curious  instance  of  the  shameful 

One  of  the  first  acts  of  Socket,  after  he  and  absurd  manner  in  which  criminal  pro- 
was  raised  to  the  archbishopric  of  Canter-  I  ceedings  were  then  conducted.  {State  TWo/t, 
bur}',  was  to  summon  the  earl  to  do  him  '  i.  1277.)  On  the  accession  of  King  James 
homage  for  the  castle  of  Tunbridge.  He  his  patent  was  renewed,  and  on  July  23, 
refused  to  appear,  asserting  that  he  held  it  1603,  he  was  knighted.  He  sat  on  the 
by  military  service  of  the  crown,  and,  as  the  bench  for  nearly  twenty  years,  and  a  few 
king  abetted  him  in  his  plea,  the  archbishop  ]  months  before  his  death  the  information 
refrained  from  pursuing  the  claim.    His    against  Bates,  raising  the  great  constitu- 


grants  to  religious  houses,  which  were 
numerous  and  munificent,  are  stated  in 
detail  by  Dugdale.  After  his  death  in  1 173, 
Matilda,  his  widow,  the  dauffhter  of  James 
de  St.  Hilaire,  married  William  de  Albini, 
Earl  of  Arundel,  and  the  earldoms  of  Clare 
and  Hertford  descended  to  his  son  Richard, 


tional  question  whether  a  duty  could  be 
imposed  on  the  subject  by  the  mere  act  of 
the  kinsr,  was  he^  in  the  Exchequer. 
His  feeble  argument  in  favour  of  the 
crown  is  fully  stated  in  *  Lane's  Reports  ^ 
(p.  22). 
He  died  on  January  1, 1606-7.  and  was- 


whose  son  Gilbert  became  Earl  of  Glou-  i  buried  at  Good  Estre.  Though  Moraat 
cester.  All  the  earldoms  became  extinct '  says  that  he  had  only  two  wives,  two 
in  1313  on  the  death  of  Gilbert,  the  tenth    more  must  be  added,  and  all  of  them  wert 


CLARKE 

%ridairs.  The  ptxiahre^sterof  GoodEstve 
ncoids  that  Maiy  Cwke,  his  wife,  was 
huried  '  the  20  dwof  Febrnary  1685/  aod 
ahe  M>pean  to  have  been  the  widow  of 
—  Hula.  It  farther  recorda  the  burial  of 
Cathenm,  another  wife  of  the  baron,  on 
January  16, 1590,  and  ahe  appears  to  have 
iMen  the  widow  of  —  Chapman.  By  each 
of  these  he  had  sereral  chiklren.  The  third 
wife  waa  Margaret,  the  daughter  of  John 
Maynard,  ItLP.  for  St  Albans,  and  gmnd- 
lather  of  the  first  Lord  Majmard,  and  widow 
of  Sir  Edward  Osborne,  lord  mayor  of 
London  in  1582,  and  ancestor  of  the  first 
Duiw  of  I^eeds.  This  bdy  died  in  1002, 
kaying  two  dauffhters  by  the  baron.  The 
iMirth  wife  was  Joyce,  the  widow  of  James 
Anaten,  who  surrived  the  baron  for  twenty 
yean^  and  was  buried  in  1020  in  the  church 
of  St.  Saviour's,  Southwark. 

CTiAmFR,  Charles,  was  the  son  of  Alured 
Clarke,  of  Godmanchester  in  Huntingdon- 
shire, bv  Ann,  daughter  of  the  Rev.  Charles 
Trimneu,  rector  of  Abbots  Repton  in  Hamp- 
shire, aiid  sister  to  the  Bisnop  of  Win- 
fester  of  that  name.  In  171/ he  entered 
Iiucobi*s  loD,  and  was  in  1723  called  to 
the  bar,  at  which  he  was  rewarded  by  so 
large  a  share  of  practice  that  he  amassed  a 
eonsiderable  fortune.  The  neighbouring 
bofough  of  Huntingdon  elected  him  re- 
corder in  1731,  end  ne  was  returned  mem- 
ber for  the  county  in  1739.  In  the  new 
parliament  of  1741  he  was  elected  for 
Whitchurch  in  Hampshire ;  and  in  its 
second  session  he  was  raised  to  the  bench, 
as  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  in  Hilary  Term 
1743. 

His  judicial  career  wss  terminated  seven 
years  afterwards  by  an  infectious  fever 
caught  at  the  Black  Sessions  at  the  Old 
Bailey  in  May  1750,  already  described  in 
the  memoir  of  Sir  Thomas  Abney,  another 
vietim  of  the  imclesnliness  of  the  prisons. 
His  death  occurred  on  the  17th,  and  he 
was  buried  at  Godmanchester.  His  first 
wife  was  Anne,  a  daughter  of  Dr.  Thomas 
Green,  Bishop  of  Ely ;  and  his  second  was 
Jane,  daughter  of  Auijor  Mullins,  of  Win- 
chester, and  by  both  he  left  issue. 

His  brother.  Dr.  Alured  Clarice,  became 
dean  of  Exeter.  {Mader'$  Corp.  Chridi  CoU., 
Cmmbridge.) 

CTiAETK,  Thomas,  was,  according  to  Mr. 
Niehola  {ZiUrary  AnecdoiMj  viiL  507), 
'genermlly  supposed  to  be  a  natural  son, 
and  as  having  no  relations.'  Of  his  eariy  life 
little  ia  known,  beyond  his  beinff  educated 
at  Westminster  SchooL  That  he  was  in- 
timate with  the  second  Earl  of  Macclesfield, 
••d  was  a  fellow  of  the  Royal  Society, 
devoting  himself  to  philosophical  pursuits, 
appears  from  a  letter  of  Lord  Hard  wickers : 
sad  that  he  waa  reputed  to  be  deep  read 
a  Roman  law,  is  apparent  firom  the  deaerip- 
tisB  of  him  in  the '  Cansidicade '  aa  a  lap- 


CLEASBY 


167 


posed  candidate  for  the  vacant  solicitor- 
generalship  in  1742  :— 

Then  Q— ke,  who  sat  mug  all  this  while  in  his 

place, 
Kose  up  and  put  forwaid  his  ebony  face : 
'  I  have  reason,'  quo'  be,  *  now  to  take  it  amiss, 
That  your  lordsnip  ha'n't  call'd  to  me  long 

before  thiA. 
If  the  old  civil  law,  on  which  I  would  build. 
Is  in  so  moch  n^ect  and  indifference  held* 
Let  your  comrooo  law  dunces  go  on  and  apply, 
Qnotinj(  chapter  and  sect,  insipidljr  diy  I 
A  student  of  moderate  parts  and  discerning. 
With  intense   application  may   master   soch 

learning : 
But  I,  as  a  genius,  the  office  demand. 
That  office  my  qualifications  command!' 

It  is  ^bable  that  his  advance  to  the 
post  of  king's  counsel  took  place  before  this 
date.  In  1747  he  was  member  for  St.  Mi- 
chaeFs,  and  in  1764  for  Lostwithiel,  both 
Cornish  boroughs^  but  had  no  seat  in  the 
house  in  17(51. 

On  the  death  of  Sir  John  Strange  in 
1754  Mr.  Clarke  was  immediately  pomted 
out  both  by  Lord  Hardwicke  and  the  Duke 
of  Newcastle  to  succeed  him  as  master  of 
the  Rolls ;  to  which  place  he  was  appointed 
on  May  29,  1754,  and  was  thereupon 
knighted.  The  duke  calls  him  a  very 
deserving  man,  and  intimates  that  he  waa 
greatly  before  his  competitors  in  the  Court 
of  Chancery.  He  held  the  office  with 
great  credit  a  few  months  beyond  ten  years, 
dying  on  November  IS,  1764.  He  was 
buriwi  in  the  Rolls  Chapel;  and  by  his 
will  he  left,  among  other  legacies,  90,000/. 
to  St.  Luke*s  Hospital,  and  appointed  the 
Earl  of  Maoclesiield  his  residuary  legatee, 
his  whole  property  being  estimated  at 
200,000/.    (karris's  Lord  Hardwicke.) 

CLLTKR,  JoHir,  is  introduced  amooff 
the  advocates  under  Edward  II.  and  UL 
He  was  a  native  of  Norfolk,  and  acted  as 
custos  of  the  see  of  Norwich  during  its  va- 
cancy in  both  reigns.  He  talli^ed  that 
county  and  Suffolk  in  6  Edward  UL ;  and 
in  the  following  year  he  wss  added  to  the 
commission  of  lustioes  itinerant  into  Kent. 
(Pari.  WriU,  ii.  p.  iL  679  j  Abb.  JRoi.  Orig. 
u.  103, 106, 121.) 

CLAT,  SxEPHXV  DK,  held  under  King  John 
the  manor  of  linden  in  Northamptonshire, 
at  a  rent  of  26iL  per  annum.  (Eat.  Chart. 
40.)  He  was  one  of  the  justiciers  before 
whom  fines  were  levied  in  2  and  3  John. 

CLIASBT,  Akthont,  the  additional 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  appointed  under 
the  recent  act  relating  to  election  petitions, 
is  the  son  of  Stephen  Cleasby,  Esq.,  of 
Crsgff  House,  Westmoreland,  by  Mary,  the 
daughter  of  George  John,  Esq.,  of  Pen- 
zance. 

He  was  educated  at  Eton,  and  at  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge,  and  came  out  when 
he  took  his  depee  m  1827  third  wrangler 
and  first  olass  in  dassicsi  and  in  1828  waa- 


•16« 


•CLENCH 


.elected  fellow  of  his  college^  He  studied 
law  at  the  Inner  Temple,  and  was  called  to 
the  bar  on  June  10,  1881,  choosing  the 
Northern  Circuit  In  1861  he  became  a 
queen*8  counsel ;  and  on  August  6, 1868, 
ne  wab  appointed  to  his  present  post 

He  married  Lucy  Siisan^  daughter  of 
Walter  Fawkes,  lisq.,  of  Famley  Hall, 
Yorkshire,  which  county  he  formerly  re- 
presented. 

CIEVCH,  John,  the  son  of  John 
Clench;  of  Wethersfield  in  Essex,  and 
Joan,  daughter  of  John  Amias,  of  the 
same  county,  was  called  to  the  bar  in 
LincoUi^s  Inn  in  1568,  and  Was  elected 
reader  in  Lent  1574.  In  the  same  year 
he  was  elected  the  first  recorder  of  Ips- 
wich, and  in  Michaelmas  1580  he  was 
raised  to  the  degree  of  the  coif,  from  which 
glrade  he  was  promoted  to  be  third  baron  of 
the  Exchequer  on  November  27, 1581,  and 
acted  in  that  capacity  till  May  29,  1584, 
when  he  was  removed  into  the  Court  of 
Queen^s  Bench.    He  was  one  of  the  four 

i'udges  who  were  assigned  to  hear  causes 
n  Chancery  in  November  1591,  when  the 
Great  Seal  was  in  commission  after  the 
deatJi  of  Sir  Christopher  Ilatton.  Tradi- 
tion says  that  Queen  Elizabeth  used  to  call 
him  *  her  good  judge.* 

He  continued  to  sit  till  the  beginning 
of  1602,  but  his  death  did  not  occur  till 
August  19,  1607.  He  was  buried  in  Hol- 
brook  Church,  and  upon  his  tomb  are  two 
fuU-letigth  marble  emgies  of  the  judge  and 
his  wife  in  the  costume  of  the  day,  with 
smaller  figiures  on  each  side  of  his  seven 
sons  and  eight  daughters.  The  inscription 
describes  him  as  the  oldest  judge  ot  his 
timei  He  i*emoved  into  Suffolk,  and  is  de- 
scribed as  of  four  different  places  there — 
Creetiug,  All  Saints,  Holesley,  and  Hol- 
brook. 

His  wife  was  Katherine,  daughter  and 
heiress  of  Thomas  Almot,  of  Greeting. 
Thomas,  their  eldest  son,  in  1020  was 
member  for  Suffolk.  The  family  is  now 
quite  extinct  (SkobeH's  Suffolk,  i.  160: 
Jbary'^MSS.) 

CLEBK,  John  le.  In  20  Henry  II., 
1174,  the  assize  or  tallage  of  the  united 
counties  of  Nottingham  and  Derby  was 
set  by  the  following  itinerant  justices — 
viz.^  William  Basset,  John  Malduit,  'et 
Johannem  Clericum.'  Whether  this  John 
was  a  clerk  of  the  Exchequer  sent  doT\'n  to 
assist,  or  a  clergyman  resident  in  one  of 
those  counties,  or  a  person  who  bore  that 
designation  as  his  surname,  it  would  be 
useless  to  enquire. 

CUERKE,  JoHiSt  Ford,  near  Wrotham, 
in  Kent,  was  the  seat  of  the  family  of 
Clerke,  or  le  Clerke,  as  the  name  was 
anciently  called.  John  Clerke  the  father 
flourished  there  in  the  reigns  of  Henry  V. 
«Dd  H^tty.YL;  and  John  ClerJce  the  *on 


*  CLESSE 

was  raised  io  the  benci  of  the  £xche^v4r 
as  second  baron  on  October  20, 1460,  httle 
more  than  four  months  before  the  deposi- 
tion of  the  latter  king.  He  evidently  fe* 
tained  place  daring  the  first  reign  Off  Ed* 
ward  IV.,  as  he  is  named  aa  second  bamt, 
not  only  in  the  new  patent  of  Henry  VL, 
but  in  that  of  Edward  IV.  on  his  resimip- 
tion  of  the  crown  six  months  afterwaraa. 
From  the  latter  period  till  Febniaiy  8, 
1481,  20  Edward  IV..  no  other  teocmd 
baron  is  mentioned.  He  married  one  of 
the  daughters  and  co-heiresses  of  ^—^ 
Tateshum,  of  Tateshum ;  and  the  estate  at 
Ford  continued  in  the  possession  of  his  d^ 
scendants  till  1644,  when  William  Clerira^ 
who  had  been  kniffhted  for  his  loyalty,  WM 
slain  at  Cropredy  ^Bridge,  commandii^  the 
regiment  he  had  raised  to  aid  the  cause  of 
his  sovereign,  Charles  1.    {Hast^,  y.  191) 

CLSSXS,  John  (Bishop  of  Bath  Ain» 
Wells),  was  educated  at  Cambridp, 
where  he  took  the  degree  of  doctor  in 
divinity.  He  probably  was  the  John 
Clerke  who,  with  Richard  Pace,  was  in 
the  service  of  Cardinal  Bainbridge  when 
he  was  poisoned  at  liome  in  July  1/>14,  and 
attributed  the  crime  to  Silvester  de  Gil^ 
the  Bishop  of  Worcester.  Wolsey,  how- 
ever, took  both  into  favour,  making  Five 
secretarv  of  state,  and  John  Clerke  dean 
of  the  Chapel  Eoval  in  1510.  (Col.  StaU 
Papers  [16001,  868,  892,  [1515],  875.)  On 
October  22,  151i),  he  was  collated  to  the 
archdeaconry  of  Colchester.  He  must 
have  been  recommended  by  extraordinanr 
abilities  to  be  selected  in  1521  for  a  missicm 
so  important  in  the  eyes  of  its  royal  author 
as  that  of  laying  at  the  feet  of  Leo  X.  King 
Henry's  book  against  Luther.  His  oration 
on  its  delivery  is  not  an  inelegant  comjMH 
sition,  and  is  appended  to  the  published 
work.  His  return  to  England  as  the 
bearer,  not  only  of  the  pope*s  complimen- 
tary  repW,  but  also  of  tne  bull  conferring 
on  the  King  of  England  the  coveted  title  (n 
*  Defender  of  the  Faith,'  was  secure  of  a 
cordial  welcome ;  and  his  services  did  not 
receive  a  less  substantial  reward  from  his 
having  acted  as  Wolsey *s  private  ageilft 
while  at  the  Roman  court. 

On  October  20, 1522,  he  was  appointed 
master  of  the  liolls,  but  held  the  office  not 
quite  a  year,  vacatiug  it  on  October  9, 
1523,  in  consequence  of  his  elevaticm  to 
the  bishopric  of  Bath  and  Wells,  to 
which  he  was  elected  on  March  20. 

Despatched  to  the  court  of  the  Duke  of 
Cleves  with  the  lame  explanation  of  hi# 
variable  sovereign's  repudiation  of  th^ 
Princess  Anne,  the  unwelcome  messenger 
is  reported  to  have  had  poison  administered 
to  him  in  his  food,  aa  several  of  his  auitt 
died  after  naHaking  of  it  The  biahop^  m^ 
fected  witn  thcK  ^-enom,  survilred  till  'Ui 
xetum,  wheaiwidied  in  LooidMi  w  Jimtmf 


GUDEBHOU  CLIFFORD  169 


Zf  15I0-1.    He  "WW  buried  in  the  nunneiy  [      GUFF,  Willux  DEt  probablj  the  bro* 
<i  ike  M inoriesy  whonoe  his  renuuna  were  ,  ther  of  the  foregoizig  Henry  de  CLiflf,  was 


lemored  -to  the  church   of  St  Botolph, 
Aldgete,  his  epitaph  •  in  which  is  giren 


in  3  Edward  II.  commissioned  to  prepare 
certain  ships  in  Yorkshire  against  the  »Scots. 


mWmrnr.:(Gedwm,  S67 ;  Iaw^  {N.  Fotdera,  iL  lOU.)     Two   years  after- 

dOi:  Mjfmert  ziiL  758,  702;  Wttver^  42G.)  !  wards  he  was  appointed  the  kinfr*s  steward 
CTiTPKRWOH,  RoBEBi  DE,  held  the  manor  '  in  the  forest  of  Galtres,  in  the  nei^hbour- 


A  township  in  the  neighbourhood 


hood  of  York.     (^66.  Rot.  Ong,  1.  18$).^ 


of  Clidmouy  or  Cbtherow,  in  Lancashire.  In  12  Edward  II.  he  was  presented  witn 
In  35  Edward  I.  he  recovered  20(M,  from  the  prebend  of  Kylbryde,  in  the  church  of 
three  brothers  who  attacked  him  at  that  Glasgow,  and  about  the  same  time  became 
shce,  and  beat  him  tiQ  they  left  him  for  |  one  of  the  clerks  of  the  Chancery,  in  which 
dead.  i  capacity  he  was,  from  l.'UO  to  13:23,  with 

He  was  a  derk  in  the  Chancery  under  others  of  his  fellows,  frequently  entrusted 
Edward  I.  and  Edward  II.,  and  in  the  '  with  the  Great  Seal,  in  the  absence  of  the 
fbnrth  year  of  the  reign  of  tlie  latter  was  chancellors,  whose  duties  they  accordingly 
appointed  one  of  the  three  justices  of  assize    performed. 

nr  Kent,  Sussex,  and  Surrey.  During  the  It  seems  not  improbable  that  he  shared 
^ghth  and  ninth  years  of  that  reign  he  was  in  the  disgrace  of  tne  Despencers,  inasmuch 
tl^  king's  escheator  beyond  Trent,  and  as  a  complaint  was  made,  in  the  first  par- 
afierwazds  became  parson  of  the  cnurcb  liament  of  the  following  i^ipii  by  ERza- 
cf  Wigan.  He  took  so  strong  a  part  in  j  beth  de  Burgh,  that  she  had  been  arrested, 
behalf  of  the  Earl  of  Lancaster  that  he  not .  in  10  £dw^  II.,  by  the  conspiracy  and 
enly  sent  bis  son  Adam,  and  another  man-  i  crafty  plotting  of  Ilu^h  le  1  )e8pcncer  the 
at-arms,  with  four  foot  soldiers,  to  his  as-  '  younger,  Robert  de  IWdock  (afterwards 
astance,  but  preached  at  Wigan  in  his  chancellor),  and  William  de  Cliff;  and  in 
&Tonr,  and  promised  absolution  to  those  the  parliament  of  the  second  year  another 
who  aided  him.  The  punishment  he  sui-  ,  complaint  was  made  that  Hugh  leDespcncer 
fered  for  these  offences  was  a  fine  of  200^  and  ne  had  disseised  John  de  Larchelev  of 
He  vnm  alive  in  7  Edward  HI.  his  manor.    {Hot.  Pari  ii.  23,  440. )    If  thin 

As  he  was  a  priest,  it  must  be  presumed  .  were  so,  however,  his  offence  appears  to 
that  his  son  Adam  was  bom  before  he  took  i  have  been  overlooked,  as  he  was  one  of  the 
oniers.  (Ahb.  PiacU.  300;  Abb,  Rat»  Orig,  |  commiRsioners  appointed  in  3  Edward  III. 
i.  217-220:  ParL  Writs,  ii.  p.  ii.  G^.)  :  to  enquire  into  the  chattels  belonging  to 

CLSTEj  Ukxby  de.  There  were  two  ;  Hugh  le  Despencer,  in  his  Lincolu^^hiru 
derks  or  masters  in  Chancery  of  the  name  |  manors.  {Abb.  Rot,  Orig,  ii.  24. ) 
of  Cliff  or  Clyff  in  the  reign  of  Edward  II.,  '■  CLIPFOSD,  William  dk,  whose  name  is 
who  probably  were  brothers.  Henry  de  frequently  abbreviated  in  tlio  Hulls  to  Clitr, 
Cliff  accompanied  the  king  abroad  in  Mav  was  the  king'8  escheator  on  this  side  Trent 
1313  {X,  Fcedera^ii.  215),  and  is  first  men-  from  October  1205  till  May  12(J8.  Dng- 
tiooed  in  connection  with  the  Chancery  in  dale  introduces  him  oa  a  baron  of  the  Kx- 
May  1317,  when,  during  an  absence  of  the  chequer  in  5o  llenr}'  HI.,  1270,  n1>out  wliich 
chanc8llor,JohndeSandale,  Bishop  of  SVin-  I  period  he  wom  aupointed  chancellor  of  the 
Chester,  the  Oreat  Seal  was  left  m  the  hi-  Exchequer,  and  iiad  a  liberate  grtmting  him 
shop's  house  in  Southwark,  in  the  charge  of  i  a  salary  of  40/.  a  year.  (Madoj\  ii.  «i20.) 
Master  Henry  de  Cliffl  Erom  this  time  till  ^  CLIFFOSD,  Kooek  de,  traced  his  descent 
the  year  13^4  he  was  usually  one  of  the  j  from  Itichard,  Duke  of  Xonnandy,  grand- 
darks  in  Chancery  under  whose  seals  the  |  father  of  William  the  ( 'unqueror.  The 
Great  Seal  was  secured  during  the  occa-  duke  s  grandson  became  lord  of  Clifford 
ikwal  absences  of  the  chancellors.   On  July    Cottle  in  Herefordshire,  and  left  a  son. 


4, 1325  (being  then  a  canon  of  York),  he 
irai  raised  to  the  office  of  keeper  or  master 
of  the  Rolls ;  and  after  the  virtual  abdica- 
tion of  Edward  II.,  in  the  foU owing  year, 
he  was  commanded,  on  December  17, 1320, 
to  add  his  seal  to  that  of  the  Bishop  of 
Norwich  for  the  custody  of  the  Great  »Seal, 
sad  they  together  transacted  the  business 
till  the  appointment  of  John  de  Hothani 


Walter  (the  father  of  Fair  Iloi*amond),  who 
assumed  that  surname.  Walter's  grandson, 
Koger,  married  Sibilla,  daughter  and  heir 
of  Robert  de  Ewyos  and  widow  of  Ix)rd 
Tregoz,  and  by  her  had  the  subject  of  the 
present  notice,  who  at  his  father's  death, 
m  10  Henry  III.,  1231,  was  a  minor.  He 
9  attended  the  king  in  his  expedition  into 
,  i  France  in  43  Henrv  HI.    For  a  short  time 


BUhop  of  Ely,  as  chancellor,  a  few  days  \  he  joined  the  rebellious  barons,  but,  riturn- 
after  the  accesnon  of  Edward  HI.  *    '•      ^    i-    ^^     i  iv   .• 

He  continued  in  the  office  of  master 
the  Rolls  for  the  fiist  seven  years 
Kign,  during  which  the  Great  Seal  was 


qnently  entmsted  to  his  custody,  and  died 
iboBt  the  Wgiiudiig  of  Janu|iry  133i. 


year  ne  was  made  juiitice  of  the  forests 
south  of  the  Trent,  the  duties  of  which  he 


170 


CLINTON 


perfonned  till  August  1,  1270;  when  he 
went  to  the  Holy  Land.  Dugdale  places 
him  in  the  year  previous  to  his  retirement 
at  the  head  of  the  justices  itinerant  visiting 
Kutland  and  five  other  counties,  and  he 
again  held  the  same  position  in  8  Edward  I., 
1280. 

His  bravery  and  experience  in  military 
affairs  obtained  for  him  many  important 
governments,  among  which  wei'e,  at  various 
times,  the  custody  of  the  castles  of  Marl- 
borough, Ludgershall,  Gloucester  (with  the 
sheriffalty  of  that  county),  and  Eraesley  in 
Herefordshire.  His  last  office  of  trust  and 
responsibility  was  justice  of  North  "Wales, 
to  which  he  was  appointed  in  8  Edward  I. ; 
and  his  severity  m  the  execution  of  its 
duties  is  said  to  have  induced  David,  the 
son  of  the  IVince  of  Wales,  to  break  out 
into  open  hostility.  He  was  attacked  by 
the  ^\  elsh  in  the  castle  of  Hawaidyn  in  10 
Edward  I.,  and  taken  prisoner;  and  in  a 
skirmish  that  followed  in  the  next  year  his 
eldest  son^  Roger  junior,  was  unfortunate! v 
slain  on  ^  ovcuiber  6, 1282.  His  own  deatii 
occurred  in  14  Edward  L,  1280,  when  he 
was  succeeded  by  his  grandson  Kobert,  the 
son  of  Roger  junior. 

The  name  of  his  first  wife  is  not  recorded, 
but  his  second,  whom  he  married  a  few 
years  before  his  death,  was  the  Countess  of 
Lauretania,  who  survived  him. 

Robert,  his  grandson,  was  summoned  to 
parliament  from  28  Edward  I.;  and  his 
descendants  enjoyed  the  title  till  I52o,  when 
Henry  Clifllbi-d,  the  then  baron,  was  created 
Karl  of  Cumberland.  By  the  death  of  the 
fourth  earl  in  1043  the  earldom  became 
extinct.  The  barony,  however,  fell  to  his 
daughter,  and  the  future  succession  is  re- 
roarKable  for  the  frequency  with  which  it 
fell  into  abeyance.  The  present  Baroness 
de  Clifford  is  the  heir  of  the  eldest  daugh- 
ter of  the  previous  possessor.  Another  de- 
scendant of  the  family  was  created  Baron 
Cliflbrd  of  Chudleijjh  in  1072  by  Charles  H., 
a  title  which  is  enjoyed  at  thepresent  time. 

CLIKTOH,  Geoffbet  de.  Tnere  are  two 
accounts  of  the  origin  of  Geoffrey  de  Clin- 
ton— one  that  he  was  of  mean  parentage 
and  raised  to  high  office  by  Henry  I. ;  the 
other  that  he  was  the  grandson  of  William 
de  TankerviUa,  chamberlain  of  Normandy, 
and  Maud,  the  daughter  of  William  de 
Arches. 

How  early  he  became  in  favour  with 
King  Henry  I.  there  are  no  means  of 
tracing.  He  is  a  witness,  with  no  title 
attached  to  his  name,  to  that  king's  charter 
to  Westminster  Abbey,  granted  either  in 
1121  or  1122 ;  and  be  is  also  witness  to  a 
deed  of  King  Henry,  confirming  a  grant  of 
the  Soke  of  Knij^hten  Guilde  to  the  church 
of  tho  Holy  Txuiity  in  Aldgate,  London, 
€ixecated  between  1121  and  1128.  In  1123 
he  calls  himself  chamberlain  of  the  king ; 


CUVE 

and  in  one  of  his  grants,  dated  after  112^ 
treasurer ;  and  in  the  charter  of  confirma* 
tion  the  king  gives  him  both  titles.  {M/mtuL 
i.  308,  vLl53,  221.) 

In  31  Henry  I.  he  is  mentioned  as  hold- 
ing pleas  in  no  less  than  eighteen  comities^ 
in  the  roll  appropriated  to  that  year,  and 
also  as  being  justice  of  the  forest  for  Hon* 
tingdonshire  and  sheriff  of  Warwickshire. 
No  presumption,  however,  can  be  formed 
from  this  fact  that  he  was  chief  justiciaiy, 
as  there  is  very  little  doubt  that  Roger,. 
Bishop  of  Salisbury,  was  then  invested  with 
the  highest  dignity  in  the  kingdom. 

It  appears  from  that  roll  that  his  posses- 
sions  were  very  large,  and  extended  through 
no  less  than  fourteen  counties;  and  &»• 
exemptions  from  the  Danegeld  and  other 
amerciaments  to  which  they  were  liable 
amount  to  the  large  sum  of  oQL  ICU.  Id. 

He  built  the  castle  at  Kenilworth,  and 
gave  all  the  lands  he  held  there,  except 
those  attached  to  the  castle  and  park,  to 
endow  the  priory  of  Augustin  monks  wldch 
he  founded. 

The  male  branch  of  his  own  familv  failed 
at  the  death  of  his  creat-grandson,  "Heniv,. 
in  1232 ;  but  from  nis  nephew,  Osbert  de 
Clinton,  descended  a  long  line,  which  i» 
now  represented  in  the  House  of  Lords 
by  the  Duke  of  Newcastle-under-Lyme 
and  Baron  Clinton. 

CLIYE,  Geoboe,  of  an  ancient  and 
honourable  family,  deriving  their  name 
from  the  village  of  Clive  in  Shropshiie, 
was  the  son  of  Geor;^e  Clive,  who  became 
possessed  of  Wormbndge  in  Herefordshire, 
Dv  his  marriage  with  Mary,  the  daughter  of 
Martin  Husbands,  Esq.  They  hsd  three 
sons,  of  whom  the  eldest,  Kohert,  was  the 
grandfather  of  the  great  Lord  Clive,  whose 
son  assumed  the  name  of  Herbert,  and  was 
created  Earl  of  Powis ;  and  the  third  sod, 
Edward,  was  the  father  of  Sir  Edward 
Clive,  the  subject  of  the  next  article. 

George  was  bom  about  1660,  and  became 
a  benclier  of  Lincoln's  Inn  in  1719,  thoi^ 
he  obtained  no  eminence  in  the  courts.  Ho 
was  appointed  cursitor  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer on  November  6,  1735,  and  filled 
the  oiiice  for  four  years.  He  died  onmamed 
on  December  31, 1730,  and  was  buried  iir 
Lincoln's  Inn. 

CLIVE,  Edward,  was  the  nephew  of  the 
last-mentioned  George  Clive,  being  the 
eldest  son  of  his  brother,  Edward  Clive,  of 
Wormbridge  in  Herefordshire,  by  Suah, 
daughter  of  —  Key,  of  the  city  of  Bri^d, 
merchant,  and  was  bom  in  17(M.  He  wis 
called  to  the  bar  by  the  sodetj  of  Linooln's 
Inn  in  1725,  and  wasretomed  topariiMiifiit 
in  1741  as  member  for  St.  Michael's  in 
Cornwall,  for  which  he  sat  till  hisolemitioB 
to  the  bench,  as  a  baron  of  the  EachefMrt 
in  April  1745.  He  iramiiied  in  thafc  ooot 
nearly  eight  yean  without  ths  hoBOUt  €t 


CLOPTON  COBBEHAM  171 

knighthood,  which  he  did  not  receive  till  ranity,  and  to  become  a  friar  of  the  Friars 
January  1753,  when  he  was  removed  into  Minors.'  (Blomefields  Norwich,  ii.  115.) 
the  Common  Pleas.  He  sat  there  for  seven-  He  died  aoout  1410.  (Cd,  Inquis,  p.  m. 
teen  years  more,  thus  extending  his  judicial    iii.  335.) 

service  to  twenty-five  jeaFs,  at  the  end  of  |  COBBEHAM,  Heitby  de,  is  the  first 
which  he  resigned  in  i^bruary  1770.  The  |  named  member  of  a  noble  family,  holding 
pension  of  1200L  then  granted  to  him  he  ,  large  possessions  in  Kenty  of  which  tho 
enjoyed  for  little  more  than  a  year,  dying  ;  lordship  of  that  name  near  Kochester  waa 
at  Bath  on  April  10, 1771.  ,  the  principal.    Hasted  (iii.  407)  mentiona 

He  married  twice.  His  first  wife  waa  him  as  being  one  of  ^  recognitores  magna? 
Ehzabeth,  dau^ter  of  Richard  Symons,  '  assisse '  in  1  John,  and  in  4  John  for  not 
Esq.,  of  Mynde  Park  in  Herefordshire ;  and  obeying  some  precept  of  the  king  he  was 
his  second  was  Judith,  the  youngest  daughter  obliged  to  pay  one  nundred  marks  to  re- 
of  his  cousin  the  Hev.  Benjamin  Clive,  a  cover  the  roval  favour.  {Madax,  i.  473.) 
son  of  his  uncle  Robert  Clive,  of  St^che  in  !  In  3  Heniy  III.  he  was  appointed  one  of  the 
Shropshire,  but  he  left  no  issue  by  either,      justices  itinerant  into  Sussex,  Surrey,  Mid- 

The  judge*s  brother  George  was  the  hus-  diesex,  and  Kent,  and  in  the  tenth  year 
band  of  the  eminent  actress  of  that  name,  |  of  that  reign  he  was  in  the  commission  to 
unrivalled  in  her  particular  walk.  '  collect  the  quinzime  there.    {^Rot.  Clau$^ 

CLOPTOV,  Walter  de,  descended  from  ii.  147.)  At  his  death,  the  date  of  which 
a  knightly  fiimily,  established  originally  at  does  not  appear,  he  left  three  sons — John, 
Newenham,  in  the  parish  of  Ashdon,  in  |  Ref^ald,  and  William — each  of  whom  oc- 
Essex,  but  which  afterwards  removed  into  cupied  the  judicial  bench.  Henry,  the  ^rand- 
Sulfolk,  was  the  son  of  Sir  William  de  Clop-  '  son  of  the  first,  was  summoned  to  parliament 
ton.  a  commissioner  of  array  in  that  county.  |  by  Edward  II.  The  barony,  after  many 
( Weevtr,  0^ ;  JV.  Fctdera,  iii.  4^9.)  He  changes,  is  now  represented  by  the  Duke 
is  named  as  an  advocate  in  the  Year  Books    of  Buckingham. 

in  40  Edward  HL,  1360,  and  was  one  of  \  COBBEHAM,  John  de,  was  the  eldest 
the  king's  seneants  from  1  Richard  U.,  son  of  the  above,  and  succeeded  to  his 
1377.    {Itot.  Purl  iii.  61, 169.)  i  father's  manor  on  his  death.    In  20  Henry 

On  the  eve  of  the  parliament  in  which  I  HI.  he  was  constable  of  Rochester  Castle 
Sir  Robert  Tresilian  was  impeached  he  I  (Col.  Rot.  Fat,  18),  and  from  26  to  32 
was  raised  to  the  office  of  chief  justice  of '  Henry  HI.  held  the  office  of  sheriff  of  Kent, 
the  King*8  Bench  on  January  31,  1388,  and  with  Bertram  de  Criol.  He  was  raised  to 
received  the  order  of  knighthood.  Towards  the  bench  about  28  Henry  HI.,  lines  being 
the  end  of  the  reign  he  waa  called  upon  to  levied  before  him  from  Easter  in  that  year^ 
fay  what  he  thought  of  the  answers  given  1244,  till  Michaelmas  1250  (Dvgdale^B  Orig. 
by  the  judges  to  the  questions  propounded  43),  during  which  time  also  writs  of  assize 
to  them  in  11  Richard  II.  by  Sir  Robert  were  frequently  directed  to  him.  He  mar- 
Tresilian,  by  whose  removal  on  that  account  ried  twice.  His  first  wife  was  a  daughter 
he  had  himself  been  raised  to  the  chief  of  Warine  Fitz-Benedict,  by  whom  he  had 
seat.  It  must  be  confessed  that  his  answer,  j  two  sons — Johu,  afterwards  noticed ;  and 
that '  had  he  been  asked  he  should  have  Henry,  of  Roundal,  in  Shome,  Kent  His 
mode  the  same  reply'  (/^  '377),  looks  I  second  wife,  Joane,  daughter  of  Hugh  de 
Very  like  an  evasion,  to  be  justified,  perhaps,  ;  Nevill,  produced  to  him  Reginald,  from 
by  the  consideration  of  the  perilous  conse-  •  whom  the  Cobhams  of  Sterborough  Castle, 
q'uencea  which  might  have  resulted  from  in  Surrey,  sprung.  (Hasted^  iii.  231,  407.) 
hu  pronouncing  a  more  decided  opinion.       i     COBBEHAK,  Reoii7ald  de,  the  second  son 

Notwithstanding  this  submission  to  the  of  the  above-mentioned  Henry^  was  in  32 
pliant  parliament  of  Richard  II.,  the  chief  Ilenr^  III.,  1248,  one  of  the  justices  itine- 
^ibttice,  although  all  the  acts  of  that  assem-  rant  into  Essex  and  Surrey,  and  in  the 
bly  were  repealed  two  years  afterwards, ,  next  year  into  Kent,  Middlesex,  Hamp- 
€^ica{>ed  the  censure  of  Henry  IV. ;  for  he  ;  shire,  and  Wiltshire.  In  33  Henry  III.  ha 
was  in  the  first  parliament  of  that  usurper  !  was  appointed  sheriff  of  Ken^  and  con- 
a|rpointed  to  investigate  the  case  of  Judge  |  tinned  to  hold  that  office  during  the  re- 
Kiekhill,  whose  visit  to  the  Duke  of  Glou-  i  mainder  of  his  life,  which  temunated  on 
cester  while  in  prison  at  Calais  was  made  |  December  14,  1257.  Some  time  after, 
the  aobject  of  enquiry,  and  no  doubt  felt  a  Maria,  his  widow,  had  permission  to  pay 
— 1  _i i •__  ^x..  X.'. — » *v^  j^v*g  jj^j  owed  to  the  crown  by  instal- 

(£xcerpt.  e  Rot.  Fin.  u.  268,  328.> 


mX  pleasure  in  receiving  the  king*s  com-  the  debts  he  owed  to  the  crown  by  instal- 
manoB  to  acquit  him  of  all  crimimdity  ments.  (Excerpt,  e  Rot.  Fin.  iL  208,  328.) 
therein.     (IM  416,  430,  432.)    In  No-  |  While  he  held  the  sheriffalty  he  was  ap- 


vember  14Q0  he  vacated  his  seat  in  the 
King's  Bench ;  and  it  is  stated  that '  by  the 
petyr,  mildness^  and  commendable  example 
of  Dr.  Robert  Coleman,  chancellor  of  Ox* 
fold,  he  waa  indooed  to  contemn  all  woildly 


pointed  governor  of  Dover  Castle  and 
warden  of  the  Cinque  Ports.  {Baronage^ 
ii.  65.) 

COBBEHAM,  Williax    de^   the    third 
son  of  the  above  Henry  de  Cobbeham^ 


172 


COBBEHAM 


inlierited  the  manor  of  East  Shelve,  or 
Shelve  Cobhaniy  in  Lenham,  in  Kent  En- 
tnistedy  as  well  as  his  two  brothers,  John 
And  Reginald,  with  judicial  duties,  he  was 
in  tliree  successive  years^  S9,  40,  and  41 
Henry  IIL,  1255-7,  employed  as  a  justice 
itinerant  into  a  vane tv  of  counties.  Hasted 
dates  his  death  in  14  Edward  H.,  1320; 
but  it  seems  scarcely  possible  that  this 
was  the  same  person.  {Hatted^  iii.  407^ 
V.  435,  526.) 

COBBEHAK,  John  de,  the  grandson  of 
the  above  Henry  de  Cobbeham,  and  eldest 
«on  of  the  above  Jx)hn  de  Cobbeham,  was 
made   constable   of   Rochester    Castle  so 
early  in  life  that  ho  was  called  the  young 
constable^   and  was   entrusted   wit£    the 
sheriffalty  of  Kent  for  four  years  from  44 
Henry  111.    His  seat  was  at  Monkton  in 
the  Isle  of  Thanet     In  62  Heniy  HI., 
1268,  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  for 
Surrey  and  Kent,  and  was  advanced  to  the 
beuch  at  Westminster  in  February  1270, 
54  Henry  III.,  but  in  which  court  is  un- 
certain, as  the  mode  of  designating  them 
was  then  scarcely  fixed.     In  4  Edward  I. 
he  was  certainly  constituted  a  baron  of  the 
Exchequer,  the  mandate  for  which  is  dated 
June  6,  1276,  with  a  salary  of  forty  marks 
per  annum,  and  there  are  several  records 
sho^-ing  that  he  continued  in  that  office 
during  the  remainder  of  his  life.    By  an 
entry  in  the  Year  Book  of  Hilary,  28*Ed- 
wai'd  I.,  1300,  it  appears  that  he  was  autho- 
rised to  stay  at  home  at  his  pleasure,  and 
to  coiAe  to  the  Exchequer  and  remain  there 
when  he  would.    This  licence  was  no  doubt 
granted  to  him  in  consequence  of  bodily 
infirmity,  as  he  died  in  the  same  year. 
(CW.  Inquis.  p.  m.  i.  156.) 

He  was  twice  married.  His  first  wife 
was  Joane,  daughter  and  heir  of  Sir  Robert 
de  Septvans,  by  whom  he  left  two  sons — 
Henry  and  Re^uald.  His  second  wife  was 
uameii  Methania.     (Jffiuted,  iii.  408.) 

COCKBTTBN,  ALEXANDER  Jakes  Ed- 
HUXD,  the  present  lord  chief  justice  of  the 
Court  of  Queen*s  Bench,  is  the  son  of  Alex- 
ander Cockbum,  Esq.,  formerly  envoy  ex- 
traordinarv'  and  minister  plenipotentiary  to 
Columbia,  by  the  daughter  of  the  Viscomte 
de  Vignier  of  St.  Domingo,  and  the  grand- 
son of  Sir  James  Coekbum,  the  seventh 
baronet,  of  Nova  Scotia,  created  in  1027 ; 
whose  next  brothers,  Admiral  Sir  George, 
and  the  Very  Rev.  Sir  William,  dean  of 
York,  the  eighth  and  ninth  ■  baronets,  died 
without  male  issue. 

He  became  a  member  of  Trinity  Hall, 
Cambridge,  in  1822,  and  in  his  second  year 
gained  prizes  for  the  best  exercises  in  En- 
glish and  Latin,  and  afterwards  for  the 
Englii^  essay.  He  graduated  as  B.C.L.  in 
18i^,  and  was  electei  fellow  of  his  colleffe. 
He  was  called  to  the  bv  by  the  Middle 
■Temple  on  Ftbr^tty  6, 1829,-   Joining  the 


COCKBUBir 

Western  Circuit,  aud  attending  tlie  DeTon* 
shire  sessions,^  he  quickly  established  for 
himself  a  considerable  busineaa.  Soon  afttr 
the  Reform  Bill  was  paased,  he  and  and  Mr. 
Rowe  commenced  the  publication  of  re- 
ports of  decisions  which  arose  out  of  that 
measure,  and  the  volume  in  which  they 
were  collected  is  of  great  and  substantial 
merit  He  was  consequently  engaged  ia 
several  contests  before  election  committeei^ 
in  which  he  showed  so  much  ability  that  in 
1834  he  was  placed  on  the  Municipal  Co^ 
poration  Commission.  His  parliamentazy 
emplo}7nents  and  the  more  regular  businav 
of  the  courts  became  of  such  magnitude 
that  he  felt  warranted  in  1841  in  obtaining 
the  precedence  of  a  silk  gown.  *  (Jf£  his 
powers  of  advocacy,'  one  of  his  most  dis- 
tinguished contemporaries  and  professional 
competitors  says,  ^  it  is  impossible  to  speak 
too  highly.  lie  was  not  perhaps  so  well 
fitted  lor  the  duly  work  of  the  professiooL 
because  he  was  always  indisposed  to  beoa 
his  mind  to  it.  But  when  any  great  occa- 
sion called  for  extraordinary  exertion,  he 
excelled  all  the  eloquent  advocates  who 
were  amongst  my  contemj^raries.  Al- 
though he  soared  to  a  high  pitch,  he  never 
lost  himself  iu  the  clouds,  and  he  dealt  wi^ 
the  facts  of  the  case  in  a  practical  and  at  the 
same  time  in  a  masterly  manner.'  The  same 
discriminating  critic  used  to  say  to  him  in 
allusion  to  his  powers, '  You  fly  better  than 
you  walk.' 

In  the  year  of  his  obtaining  rank  he  aUy 
defended  his  uncle,  and  assisted  in  over- 
turning the  attempt  to  deprive  him  of  the 
deanery  of  York.  Among  other  cases  in 
which  he  distinguished  himself  as  a  leader 
was  his  eloquent  and  impressive  defence  in 
1843  of  M'Naughten,  who  had  shot  Mr. 
Drummond,  in  which  he  satisfied  the  jniy 
that  his  client  was  not  a  responsible  being. 
In  the  meantime  he  had  been  appoints 
recorder  of  Southampton,  and  in  1847  wu 
elected  member  for  thAt  borough,  which  he 
continued  to  represent  till  he  was  elevated 
to  the  bench.  His  speeches  iu  Parliament 
were  less  professional  than  those  for  which 
the  members  of  the  bar  are  generally  noted, 
aud  he  was  of  great  assistance  in  supporting 
the  liberal  party,  ^vith  whom  he  acted. 

In  July  1850  he  was  made  solicitor- 
general  and  knighted,  and  in  the  following 
March  he  became  attorney-general  He  held 
this  office  till  November 'iSK(,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  ten  months  between  February  27 
and  December  28^  1852,  during  which  the 
Earl  of  Derby  conducted  the  ffovemment 
His  next  promotion  was  that  of  recorder  of 
Bristol  in  1854,  and  on  November  21, 1866^ 
he  was  constituted  chief  justice  of  the 
Common  Fleas.  He  presided  in  that  oout 
for  nearly  three  yeazB,  durinff  which,  Ua 
unde  the  dean  of  xork  dying|M aoeoeedad 
to  the  bazonetf^  in  186&    (tathselttilkB 


COKAYXE 

of  Ijostd  Campbell  to  the  office  of  lord 
chancellor^  Str  Alexander  was  raised  to  hia 
praent  podtxon  of  lord  chief  Justice  of  the 
Qaeen's  Bench  on  June  34, 1&'S9. 

The  leatriction  under  which  I  placed 
mjaelf  of  not  givinp  an  opnion  of  my  own 
OB  the  Judicial  merita  of  tne  existing"  mem- 
bers of  the  bench  ought  not  to  prevent  me 
from  recording  the  eatimatioD  in  which  they 
are  regarded  by  their  eminent  contempo- 
larieK.  It  ia  but  justice  therefore  to  quote 
a  {wrtion  of  the  eloquent  eulogy  of  Mr. 
Serjeant  (afterwarda  Mr.  Justice)  Shee,  in 
ptopoaing  the  health  of  the  chief  justice, 
when  presiding  aa  chairman  of  the  anniver- 
«aiT  festival  of  the  United  Law  Clerki* 
Society  in  1863.  After  a  few  words  intro- 
ducing his  name,  he  proceeded  thus:  'He  is 
the  successor  in,  ix  not  the  highest,  the 
Mcond  poet  in  the  law  of  England — of  men 
than  whom,  as  great  nuigirtnites,  in  no 
eoantry  of  the  world  will  men  be  found  their 

equakj  or  at  least  their  superion 

To  say  of  him  that  he  surpasses  in  the  great 
tod  highest  quality  of  a  chief  justice — the 
hijrh  legal  attainments  of  some  of  his  pre- 
dflregMTs — ^would  be  flattery,  of  whicn  I 
vill  not  be  guilty ;  but  this  I  will  venture 
to  iST,  that  he  possesses  qualities  which 
hsre  endeared  him  to  us  all,  in  which  none 
ci  them  have  surpassed  him.  .  .  .  We  like 
him  because  we  Know  that  his  distinction 
wv  achieved  by  no  back-stairs  influence, 
by  DG  politicftl  intrigue,  bv  no  political  sub- 
Mnience.  We  like  him  Wrause  we  know 
that  he  did  not  arrive  at  the  high  position 
which  he  now  occupes  without  having  flrst 
obtained,  solely  by  his  own  endowments 
and  superior  talents,  the  highest  position  at 

the  bar We  like  him  because  we 

know  that  not  merely  the  honour  of  the 
profession,  but  the  honour  and  character  of 
every  man  who  comes  before  him,  are  safe 
in  his  hands.  We  like  and  admire  him  be- 
csose  we  observe  every  day  that  the  com- 
mand which  he  possesses  of  all  the  treasures 
and  all  the  beauties  of  our  noble  lanprua<re 
enables  him,  whenever  there  is  occasion  for 
iL  to  refute  whatever  fallacies  and  sopbis- 
trii*s  are  put  forward  before  him  at  the  bar, 
sod  to  vindicate  at  the  dose  of  every  cause 
the  innocence  that  belongs  to  those  that  are 
tried.  But  most  of  all  we  like  him,  we  re- 
spect him,  we  love  him,  for  this,  because, 
whenever  he  has  occasion  to  reprove  or  to 
rebuke — and  no  man  in  his  position  can  bo 
without  having  some  occasion  to  reprove 
sad  to  rebuke — ^he  takes  care  alwa^'s  to 
temper  authority  with  (^ntleness,  and  to 
rebuke  without  giving  pain.' 

WKAYWEf  JoHV,  was  the  second  son  of 
John  Cokayne,  of  Ashboum  in  Derbyshire, 
H.P.  for  that  county  in  several  parliaments 
of  Edward  IIL,  by  his  wife  Ceeuia  Vernon. 
His  name  ia  mentioned  as  an  advocate  in 
the  Reports  of  the  :time  of  Richard  IL, 


COKE 


173 


collected  by  Richard  Bellewe;  aiid  from 
18  to  22  Richard  II.  he  was  recorder  of 
London.  In  addition  to  the  oflice  of  chief 
baron  of  the  Exchequer,  to  which  he  was 
raised  on  November  lo,  1400, 2  Henry  IV., 
a  puisne  judgeship  in  the  Common  *Plea» 
was  granted  to  him  on  June  17, 1400,  and 
he  performed  the  duties  of  both  offices 
during  the  remaining  seven  years  of  the 
reign. 

On  the  accession  of  Henry  V.  his  two 
offices  were  again  divided,  and  a  new  pa- 
tent WAS  granted  to  him  as  a  judge  of  the 
Common  Pleas  only.  This  was  renewed 
by  Henry  VI.,  and'  he  continued  to  per- 
form his  judicial  functions  during  the  tirst 
seven  yean  of  that  reign.  Having  then  sat 
on  the  benoh  nearly  thirty  years,  lie  retired 
to  private  life,  and  died*about  nine  years 
afterwards,  in  1438.  (CaL  Inquin.  p.  in.  iv, 
182.)  He  was  buried  in  Ashboum  Church. 
(Dugdak's  Orig.  100.) 

By  his  wife  Edith,  sister  of  Ijord  Grey 
de  "Ruthyn,  he  had  four  sons  and  two 
daughters.  A  descendant  from  his  elder 
brother  Edmund,  in  1042,  was  created  Vis- 
count Cullen,  a  title  which  became  extinct 
in  1810.  (Lodges  Irish  Peerage,  iv.  .3i>:{. ) 
«  €OKX,  William,  was  bom  at  Cbestertoiv 
in  Cambridgeshire,  and  was  educated  at  the 
univereity  of  Cambritlge.  From  Barnard's 
Inn  he  removed  to  CJray's  Inn  in  1»>28,  and 
was  called  to  the  bar  in  l/).')0.  lie  becamo 
reader  there  in  l^nt  1044,  and  again  in 
autumn  1540.  On  Februarj-  .'i,  lo47,  ho 
was  called  seijeant,  and  was  presented  by 
Grey's  Inn  with  eight  pounds  in  gold  on 
the  occasion,  nomine  rrgardi.  On  October 
22,  1500,  ho  was  made  one  of  th(»  kind's 
Serjeant"*,  and  on  November  10,  lOr,^,  he 
^vfts  nominated  a  judge  of  the  Conimou 
Picas.  Ho  had  previously  been  appointed 
steward  of  no  less  than  four  houses  in  his 
university,  and  in  JaniuiTy  154^  had  been 
elected  recorder  of  Cambridge.  (Cooiyer's 
Ath,  Cantab,  i.  114.) 

The  story  told  by  Machyn  (Dianj^  20, 
38),  that  he  way?,  on  July  2*7,  160:^,  sent  to 
the  Tower  for  signing  King  Edward's  will 
settling  the  crown  on  Ladv  Jane  Grev,  is 
evidently  a  mistake,  as  Code's  name  ^ocs 
not  appear  among  the  signatures  to  that 
document:  and  as  his  death  occurred  on 
tho  24th  of  the  following  month,  it  is  clear 
that  Machvn  mistook  the  name  of  (Sir 
Thomas)  Wroth  for  Coke. 

On  Coke's  monumental  biu«*d  at  Milton 
both  he  and  his  wife  Alice,  tc^^^uther  with 
two  sons  and  three  dauglitor?*,  are  repre- 
sented— ho  in  his  judicial  robes,  and  they 
in  the  costume  of  the  period.  Above  his 
head  is  a  label,  the  inscription  on  which — 
*  Plebs  sine  lege  ruit ' — was  the  motto  on 
the  rings  of  the  Serjeants  who  were  called 
in  tho  same  term  in  which  he  was  raised  to 
the  bench.     (JBoutelly  45 }  Bytr,  71.) 


174 


COKE 


COKE,  Edward.  The  ancestors  of  Sir 
Edward  Coke  are  traced  as  far  htuck  as  the 
twelfth  century,  Henry  Coke,  of  Dodding- 
ton  in  Norfolk,  bearing  arms  and  being 
mentioned  in  a  deed  dated  8  John.  (HtM» 
iedy  iL  479.)  In  direct  descent  came  Ro- 
bert Coke,  Sir  Edward's  father,  of  Mileham 
in  the  same  county,  who  was  a  lawyer  and 
A  bencher  of  Lincoln's  Inn.  He  married 
Winifred,  daughter  and  coheiress  of  Wil- 
liam Knightley,  of  Morgrave  Knightley  in 
Norfolk,  and  dying  at  his  chambers  in  Lin- 
coln's Inn  on  Noyember  15, 15C1,  he  was 
buried  in  St  Andrew's  Church,  Ilolbom. 
There  Sir  Edward  erected  a  monument  to 
his  memory,  as  he  did  also  in  the  church  of 
Tittleshall  to  that  of  his  mother,  who,  after 
marrying  Robert  Bosanne  and  haying  by 
him  a  son  named  John,  died  in  January 
1509. 

Edward  Coke,  who  was  the  only  son  out 
•of  eight  children,  was  bom  at  Mileham  on 
February  1,  1551-2;  so  that  he  was  ten 
years  old  when  his  father  died,  and  near 
eighteen  at  the  decease  of  his  mother.  He 
received  the  rudiments  of  his  education  at 
the  grammar  school  at  Norwich,  and  was 
thence  remoyed  in  September  1567  to  Tri- 
nity College,  Cambridge,  where  he  remuned 
three  years  and  a  half.  On  the  21st  of  Ja- 
nuary'1571  he  was  admitted  a  student  of 
€liiFord*s  Inn,  and  was  in  the  following 
year,  on  April  24,  entered  of  the  Inner 
Temple.  On  April  20,  1578,  he  was  called 
io  the  bar ;  and  in  the  yery  next  term  he 
held  his  first  brief  in  the  Court  of  King's 
Bench,  and  was  successful  in  defending  Mr. 
Denny,  a  clergyman  of  his  natiye  county, 
in  an  action  brought  against  him  by  Lord 
Cromwell  for  scandalum  magnatum,  (4  2?e- 
jyorU^  14.)  His  reputation  for  learning  was 
already  so  great  that  within  a  year  after  his 
call  the  benchers  of  his  house  selected  him 
as  reader  at  Lyon's  Inn — an  honour  usually 
conferred  on  an  older  barrister — where  his 
lectures  fully  confirmed  the  character  he 
had  acquired. 

On  August  18, 1582,  he  married  his  first 
:wife,*Bridget,  the  daughter  and  heir  of  John 
Paston,  Esq.,  deceased,  of  Huntingfield  in 
Suffolk,  a  descendant  of  Judge  Paston.  At 
this  time  his  name  was  pronounced  Cooke, 
and  is  so  snelled  in  the  registry  of  his  mar- 
riage, as  also  in  a  special  commission  ten 
years  later,  when  solicitor-general.  His 
acquisition  of  a  fortune  of  30,000/.  with 
iiis  wife,  in  addition  to  his  paternal  inheri- 
tanoe,  did  not  diminish  his  industry;  for 
from  this  date  he  seems  to  haye  been  en- 
gaged in  almost  every  prominent  ca^e  no- 
ticed by  the  different  reporters.  About 
1586  he  was  chosen  recorder  of  Coyentry ; 
in  the  next  year  the  same  ofiice  was  given 
to  him  by  the  citizens  of  Norwich ;  and  in 
January  1501-2  the  corporation  of  London 
^called  him  to  the  disting^uished  post  of  re- 


COEE 

corder  of  the  metropolis.  The  latter  office 
he  retained  for  six  months  only,  resigning 
it  on  being  selected  by  Lord  Burleigh  m 
solicitor-general  on  June  16,  1692.  On 
his  being  nominated  autumn  reader  of  the 
Inner  Temple  in  1502,  he  coniposed  seven 
lectures  on  the  Statute  of  Uses,  five  of 
which  he  delivered  to  100  auditors  in 
August,  when,  on  the  appearance  of  the 
plague,  he  was  compelled  to  withdraw 
m>m  London.  In  his  progress  to  his  seat 
at  Huntingfield,  he  says  that  '  nine  of  the 
benchers,  forty  of  the  bar,  and  other  fellowi 
of  the  Inner  iTemple,'  accompanied  him  m 
far  as  Eomford.  In  1606  he  was  elected 
treasurer  of  his  inn. 

Hitherto  he  had  confined  himself  to  his 
legal  avocations :  he  was  now  to  enter  on 
his  political  career.  Before  the  parliament 
of  1503  was  assembled,  and  eyen  befine 
Coke  had  been  elected  a  member  of  it,  tibe 

Sueen  and  council,  on  January  28,  nuned 
im  as  the  speaker.  On  the  5th  of  Fe- 
bruary he  was  returned  as  representative  of 
his  native  county,  'nullo  contradioente ; ' 
and  he  pn)udly  adds  that  it  was  a  free 
election,  'sine  ambitu,  seu  aliqua  requisi- 
tione,  ex  parte  mea.'  On  the  meeting  of 
the  house  he  was  elected  speaker,  asnad 
been  previously  arranged.  The  parliament 
lasted  only  seven  weeks,  and  his  speeches 
in  it  have  the  same  ponderous  yeibosi^  for 
which  they  were  ever  remarkable,  and  too 
much  of  sycophantic  subserviency,  iU  ac- 
cording with  tne  boldness  of  his  later  yesn. 
But  he  was  then  a  seeker  after  advance- 
ment, and  he  felt  he  had  a  mistress  wiUi 
whose  power  no  one  dared  to  trifle.  Ex- 
actly one  year  after  his  speakership  termi- 
nated, on  April  10, 1504,  ne  became  attor- 
ney-general. 

Coke  had  lived  happily  with  his  fint 
wife  for  sixteen  years,  when  he  lost  her  on 
June  27,  1598.  Within  five  months  after 
this  event  he  entered  into  another  matzi* 
monial  speculation,  which  began  inauspi- 
ciously,  and  was  fktal  to  his  future  peace. 
His  second  wife  was  Elizabeth,  relict  of  Sir 
William  Hatton,  and  daughter  of  Thomas 
Cecil,  who  had  just  succeeded  his  father  as 
Lord  Burleigh,  and  the  marriaffe  to^  place 
at  her  house  in  Holbom  on  Noyember  6, 
1598,  without  either  bans  or  licence,  but 
is  recorded  in  the  register  of  that  parish 
without  remark.  Even  his  firiend  Arch- 
bishop Whitgift  could  not  overlook  this 
irregularity,  and  it  was  only  by  a  humble 
submission,  and  the  extraordinary  plea  of 
ignorance  of  the  law,  that  Coke  and  all  tlM 
parties  concerned  escaped  excommuiuca- 
tion.  The  powerful  connections  and  the 
large  fortune  of  the  lady  had  also  attnetod 
Bacon,  who  had  previously  beomie  a  snitor 
for  her  hand,  and  the  success  of  bis  great 
rival  did  not  tend  to  diminish  the  hoitfle 
feelings  between  the  parties. 


COKE  COKE  17d 

Coke  condniied  ftttoraeT-geDenl  during    more  disgusting  scene  had  never  been  wit-> 
the  remunder  of  ElizabetVs  reign,  no.Ta-    nessed  in  court 

cancy  haiiiig  oocuxied  in  the  chief  seats  of  |  During  the  triala  of  the  conspirators  in 
the  common  law  courts  during  the  nine  ;  the  gunpowder  plot.  Coke  repeated  his 
years  that  it  lasted.  The  only  important  :  gross  flattery  of  the  king,  and  his  cruel 
state  trial  which  ia  reported  in  the  interval  language  to  tne  prisoners.  Soon  after  their 
that  of  the  Earls  otEsaex  and  South-  .  termination  he  was  elevated  to  the  bench 


amptrm  in  Febraaiy  1601.    Here  he  gave  '  as  chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  on 

the  first  roedmen  of  that  objoigatoiy  and  '  June  30,  1606. 

toarse  s^e  which  makes   his  oratory  so  ,      On  ascending  the  judicial  seat  he  dis- 


api 

in  God*8  judspnenty  fie  of  his  earldom  shall  •  ment  he  told  the  king,  in  the  case  of  pro- 
i)e  Robert  the  laat,  that  of  the  kingdom  hibitions,  that  his  majesty  had  not  power 
thought  to  be  Robort  the  first'   (Jardines  ,  to  adjudge  any  case,  either  criminal  or  be- 


Cn'm.  Trials,  L  318-329.)  His  airoffance 
ind  ill-temper  were  displayed  in  1601, 
▼hen  Bacon,  in  the  Court  of  Exchequer, 
made  some  motion  which  Coke  thought 
trenched  upon  hia  duties.    Bacon  was  not 


tween  party  and  party,  but  that  it  ought 
to  be  determined  in  some  court  of  justice ; 
and  upon  the  king's  saying  that  he  thought 
the  law  was  founded  on  reason,  and  that 
he  and  others  had  reason  as  well  as  the 


Wkwaid  in  reply,  and  after  many  dis-   judges,  Coke  answered  that  'true  it  was 

i  that  God  had  endowed  his  majesty  with 


gnceful  words  on  both  aides,  the  scene  |  that  God  had  endowed  his  majesty 
«nded  by  Coke's  threatening  to  '  clap  a  cap,    excellent  science  and  great  endowments  of 
jiU^ehtm '  on  hia  back.  :  nature,  but  his  majesty  was  not  learned  in 

(hi  the  commencement  of  the  new  reign,  the^  laws  of  the  realni  of  England : '  with 
Coke,  who  had  cordially  co-operated  in  the  |  which  the  kin^  was  greatly  offended.  In 
inangementa  for  the  peaceable  accession  of  another  case,  m  1008,  wlien  lie  and  the 
James,  was  not  only  confirmed  in  his  office,  j  other  judges  were  summoned  before  the 
bnt  received  the  honour  of  knighthood,    council  to  account  for  a  judgmeut  they  had 


He  soon  had  ample  opportunity  of  exhi- 
lidng  hia  zeal  in  the  prosecution  of  state 
offenders.  On  Sir  Walter  Raleigh's  trial 
his  heartless  and  unmanly  behaviour  forms 
lio  appropriate  introduction  to  the  shameful 
mode  in  which  the  proceedings  were  con- 


given,  he  said  to  the  lords,  <  We  do  hope 
that  where[as]  the  judges  of  this  realm 
have  been  more  often  called  before  your 
lordships  than  in  former  times  they  have 
been,  which  is  much  observed,  ani  gives 
much  emboldening  to  the  vulgnr,  that  after 


ducted,  and  the  disgraceful  verdict  given  this  day  we  shall  uot  be  so  often,  upon  such 
bv  the  jury ;  and  his  fulsome  adulation  of .  complaints,  your  lordships  being  truly  in- 
the  king*s  wisdom  and  innocence  has  an  <  formed  of  our  proceeding}*,  hereafter  called 
awkward  illustration  in  the  absurd  farce  \  before  you.'  In  1<)10  he  ^ve  an  opinion 
which  the  monarch  caused  to  be  performed  ;  in  opposition  to  the  council,  that  the  king 
it  the  intended  execution  of  the  lords  im-  !  could  not,  by  his  proclamation,  create  any 
plicated  in  the  same  treason,  and  in  the  |  offence  which  was  not  an  oilence  before, 
cniel  tragedy  which,  thirteen  years  after,  :  In  the  next  year  he  and  the  other  judges 
he  perpetrated  in  Raleigh's  death  on  that  of  the  Common  Pleas  discharged  Sir  Wil- 
(ondemnation.  To  Raleigh,  a  prisoner  on  |  liam  Chancey,  brought  before  them  by 
triil  for  hia  life,  he  brutally  says,  '  Thou  \  Habeas  Corpus,  who  had  been  imprisoned 
art  a  monster ;  thou  hast  an  Euj^lish  face,  i  by  warrant  from  the  High  Commission  in 
but  a  Spanish  heart;'  'Thou  viper,  for  I  :  Causes  Eccloaiastical,  and  afterwards justi- 
tAoM  thee,  thou  traitor! '  *  Thou  art  thyself  fied  their  decision  before  the  council  When 
4  spider  of  hell ! '  '  Oh,  damnable  atheist ! '  a  new  commission  wa«  issued,  in  which  he 
kt.  Even  Chief  Justice  Popbam  felt  it  was  named,  he  refused  to  sit  upon  it.  (12 
oeoessary  to  apologise :  '  Sir  Walter,'  said  Heporis,  Til,  (VI,  74,  82, 84,  88.) 
be,  <Mr.  Attorney  speaks  out  of  the  zeal  :  II is  old  enemy,  Bacon,  did  not  fail  to 
'•f  his  duty  for  the  service  of  the  king,  and    tnke  advantage  of  Coke*s  resistance.    On 


to  speak.'    and,  among  others,   he  gave  the  follow- 
Oa  which  Coke^angrily  exclaimed,  '  I  am  .  ing  reasons  for  this    measure  : — *  It  will 


Xr.  Attorney,  give  him  leave 

Oa  which   Coke  angrily  exdaimeu,  '  x  aui  ;  iu{^  rr nsuns  lur    t,ina     uivnnurv  : xb 

^  king's  sworn  servant,  and  must  speak ;  |  strengthen  the  king's  causes  amongst  the 
if  I  may  not  be  patiently  heard,  you  dis-  |  judges,  for  my  Lord  Coke  will  think  hi 
eoQigethe  king%  counsel^  and  encourage  :  near  a  privy  counse" 
tndton;'  and  sat  down  m  a  chafe.    A    upon  turn  obsequi 


mself 

counsellor's  place,  and  there- 

ous.'    *The  remove  of 


176 


COKE 


mj  Jjord  Coke  to  a  place  of  less  profit  .  .  . 
i;yjll  be  thought  abroad  a  kind  of  discipline 
to  him  for  opposing  himself  in  the  kmg's 
causes,  the  example  whereof  will  contain 
others  in  more  awe.'  (Bacon's  Works 
{Montagu],  vii.  840.)  His  craft  succeeded ; 
Coke  was  promoted  to  the  office  of  chief 
justice  of  the  King's  Bench  on  October  26, 
1613,  and  was  sworn  of  the  privy  council 
on  NoTcmber  4.  He  received  a  sincerer 
and  more  welcome  compliment  in  the  fol- 
lowing June,  by  his  unanimous  and  un- 
sought election  as  steward  of  the  University 
of  Cambridge.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
reign  he  had  obtained  for  the  university 
the  privilege  of  sending  two  members  to 
parliament.     (SeicarfTs  Anecdotes^  iii.  390.) 

Coke  was  not  more  '  obsequious '  in  his 
new  office  than  he  had  been  in  his  old. 
Some  portion  of  his  uncomplying  conduct 
may  perhaps  be  attributable  to  his  being 
brought  frequently  into  collision  witn 
Bacon,  now  attorney-general,  whom  he 
despised,  and  whom  he  could  not  but  con- 
sider as  a  watchful  spy  on  his  conduct, 
and  a  delighted  talebearer  of  his  supposed 
lapses.  In  Bacon's  letters  to  the  king  his 
onences  are  carefully  reported.  The  in- 
famous case  of  Peacham  was  the  first  of 
these.  The  king  having  desired  to  have 
the  private  opinion  of  the  judges  whether 
Peacham  coiud  be  convicted  of  treason. 
Bacon  undertook  to  procure  it.  Coke, 
however,  told  him  '  tnat  this  auricular 
taking  of  opinions,  single  and  apart,  was 
new  and  dangerous ; '  but  on  being  pressed 
that  the  other  judges  bad  jnven  theirs,  he 
consented ;  and,  to  Bacon's  disappointment, 
it  was  in  writing,  and  was  apparently 
against  the  prosecution.  (Johmmis  Lifey 
i.  240.)  Notwithstanding  the  infinite  pains 
be  took  in  regard  to  the  murderers  of  Sir 
Thomas  Overbury,  he  offended  also  on  those 
trials  by  8ome  mvsterious  and  indiscreet 
expressions  he  used  in  the  course  of  them. 
In  their  progress  he  not  only  repeated  his 
iiatterj'  of  the  king,  but  resumed  the  coarse  I 
invectives  in  which  he  had  formerly  in- 
dulfred,  degrading  the-  seat  of  justice  by 
telling  Mrs.  Turner  before  the  verdict  was 
given  that  'she  had  the  seven  deadly  sins — 
viz.,  a  whoro,  a  bawd,  a  sorcerer,  a  witch,  a 
papist,  a  felon,  and  a  murderer.'  Guilty 
as  the  parties  undoubtedly  were.  Coke 
conducted  the  trials  most  unfairly,  and  the 
daily  letters  that  passed  between  James 
and  him  on  the  subject  of  them  are  in 
strong  contrast  with  his  former  protest 
against  giving  auricular  opinions.  (Great 
Case  of  Poisoning,  300-420.) 

But  the  immediate  causes  that  appeared 
to  determine  the  court  to  remove  him  were 
his  independent  refusal  to  submit  to  its 
interference  in  the  case  of  Commendams, 
and  his  more  doubtful  denial  of  the  power 
of  the  Court  of  Chancery.   In  the  first  case, 


COKE 

the  legality  of  Commenduni  'liaving  been 
incidentally  disputed  bj  a  eoimtel  in  hir 
argument  'in  a  private  cause,  tha  king's 
pleasure  was  signified  to  the  judges  t£it 
they  should  not  go  on  with  the  case  till 
they  had  first  consulted  his  majesty.  But 
the  judges  thought  it  their  duty,  tms  bebg- 
only  a  aispute  between  party  and  psrty,  to 

Sroceed  notwithstanding  the  king's  huuk 
ate :  and  all  the  twelve  signed  a  letter  to 
the  king,  stating  their  reasoos  and  JustiAr* 
ing  their  condudt;  They  were  immediately 
summoned  before  the  council,  and,  being 
reprimanded  by  the  king,  they  all  fell  down 
on  their  knees,  and  acknowledged  their 
error,  except  Coke,  who  defended  the  letter; 
and  upon  further  interrogation,  whether 
they  would  stay  their  proceedings  on  a 
future  command  Coke  said,  ^  When  the 
case  should  be,  he  would  do  that  whick 
should  be  fit  for  a  judge  to  do.'  (Bacon's 
Works,  vii.  307-338.) 

In  the  other  case,  Coke  had  not  only 
resisted  the  power  of  the  Court  of  Chan- 
cery to  toucn  any  cause  which  had  been 
decided  in  the  courts  of  common  law,  but 
had  encouraged    indictments   being   pre- 
sented against  all  who  had  been  concerned 
in  a  case  where  relief  in  equity  had  been 
applied  for,  including  the  counsel  and  sfh 
licitor  to  the  parties,  and  even  the  master 
in  Chancery  to  whom  it  had  been  refened. 
The  question  was  taken  up  by  the  king, 
whose  decision,  confirming  the  Court  of 
Chancery    in    all    the    powers    which  it 
claimed,  is  acted  on  to  this  dav. 

On  both  of  these  occasions  ISacon's  hsnd 
is  visible.  In  the  case  of  the  Commendams 
he  enlarges,  in  his  letter  to  the  king,  oa 
Coke's  contempt;  and  in  the  Chanceiy 
question  he  dwells  on  the  time  chosen  for 
pressing  the  indictments,  'that  which  all 
men  condemn — the  supposed  last  day  of 
my  lord  chancellor's  life,'  as  if  that  was  h 
tlie  power  of  the  chief  justice  to  select 
The  result  of  all  this  '  turbulent  carriage,' 
as  the  king  called  it,  was,  that  on  June  20^ 
1010,  he  was  sequestered  from  the  council 
table,  and  ordered  to  *  forbear  to  ride  the 
summer  circuit.'  This  was  soon  followed 
by  his  removal  from  office,  his  discharge 
from  which,  on  November  15,  he  is  stated 
by  one  contemporary  letter- writer  to  have 
*  received  with  dejection  and  tears,'  while 
another  describes  him  as  bearing  *  his  mie- 
fortunes  well,'  and  as  retiring  *  with  general 
applause.' 

On  Coke*s  receiving  a  hint  that  his  com- 
pliance with  a  private  job  of  Buckingham's 
would  prevent  nis  dismissal,  he  refused  the 
temptation,  saying,  *  A  judge  must  not  pay 
a  bribe  or  take  a  bribe.'  His  successw^ 
Sir  Henry  Montagu,  sent  him  an  offer  te 
purchase  the  collar  of  SS ;  but  Coke  an- 
swered that  ^he  would  not  part  with  iV 
but  leave   it  to  his  posterity^  that  th^. 


COKE 

niglit  one  dsf  know  tiiat  tliey  liad  a  chief 
mtiee  to  their  ancestor/ 

Bacon,  while  this  was  in  agntation,  had 
the  meannesB  to  address  a  letter  to  Coke, 
is  which,  with  an  nngenerons  and  mali- 
Eions  pen,  he  describes  the  character  of  the 
ddef  instice.^  Whatever  tiuth  there  is  in 
this  aelineation,  who  must  not  wish  it 
painted  bj  another  hand,  and  at  another 
time? 

^An  epigram,  by  Ben  Jonson  (Oiford, 
t5L  4S0)y  written  about  the  same  time,  is 
a  better  proof  of  the  estimation  in  which 
Coke  was  then  held  by  his  contemporaries 
SB  a  lawyer  and  a  judge,  and  afToros  some 
evidence  that  players  were  not  inimical  to 
jiim,  nor  he  to  them.  And  Milton  (Works^ 
'i,  218),  years  after,  thus  speniks  of  him,  in 
i  sonnet  addressed  to  his  grandson,  Cyriac 
Skinner: — 

Cjniacp  whoMgruidrire  on  the  royal  bench 
Of  British  Themis,  with  no  mean  applanae, 
PnmooncM  and  in  hia  volumes  tangiit  onr  Unrs, 

Wliidi  others  at  their  bar  so  often  wrench. 

Coke,  at  the  time  of  his  dismissal,  was 
commanded  to  expunge  and  retract '  such 
Borelties  and  errors  and  offensive  conceits 
IS  were  dispersed  in  his  '*  Reports." '  But 
he  showed  that  there  were  no  more  errors 
b  his  300  cases  than  in  a  few  cases  of 
Plowden,  and  deliyered  in  a  paper  explain- 
ing other  points.  This  fHrolous  enquiry, 
howerer,  soon  ceased,  andj  thoufj^  he  was 
Mt  replaced  in  his  judicial  seat,  he  was 
eceiTed  into  a  certain  degree  of  favour. 
Bacon  also,  who  had  become  lord  keeper. 
Ills  sharply  rebuked  by  the  king  on  Coko's 
iceoont,  and  was  nearly  losing  the  friend- 
ibip  of  Buckingham  for  opposing  the  mar- 
iage  of  Coke's  daugrhter  oy  L^y  Hatton 
irith  the  earl's  brother,  Sir  John  Villiers, 
ifterwards  Lord  Purbeck.  This  marriage 
[^oke  had  evidently  negotiated  for  the  pur- 
pose of  securing  the  interest  of  Buckmg- 
Mm,  and  thus  furthering  his  return  to 
»mt.  In  thiri  he  was  partially  successful, 
being  restored  to  the  council  table  in 
September  1617,  and  ap^inted,  on  July 
21. 1618,  one  of  the  commissioners  for  exe- 
9Bllng  the  office  of  lord  high  treasurer. 
[Fdi  Reewd^y  211.)  During  three  years  ! 
ke  was  employed  in  various  commissions,  I 
nd  his  assistance  was  required  in  the  Star 
Cbmaber  in  all  cases  of  difficulty ;  but  he 
Keetved  no  substantial  proof  of  the  renewal 
if  the  royal  confidence. 

He  had  not  been  in  parliament  since 
LS9c3,  the  office  of  attorney-general  dis- 
jaalifying  him  from  sitting  in  the  House 
tf  Ccnnmcms  in  1597,  1601,  and  1604,  and 
bning  the  short  parliament  of  1614  he  was 
ddef  justice.  But  when  James  summoned 
tbt  of  1631  Coke  was  again  eligible,  and 
"w  aceordingly  returned  for  the  borough  | 
3f  Liakeard  in  Cornwall  His  parliament- , 
ny  career  may  be  truly  said  to  have  then  . 


COKE 


177 


commenced,  his  mouth  being  no  lon^ 
stopped  by  the  silence  imposed  upon  him 
by  his  former  office  of  speaker.    He  at 
once  distinguished  himself  by  taking  a 
prominent  ^irt  against  monopoues,  patents, 
and  other  grievances,  and  was  one  of  the 
principal  movers  against  Sir  Giles  Mom- 
pesson.    In  the  impeachment  of  his  old 
enemy  Bacon,  he  did  not,  though  one  of 
the  managers,  actively  interfere,  nor  in  the 
other  triab  which  then  took  place ;  but  on 
the  adjournment  in  June  he  is  said  to  have 
stood  up  '  with  tears  in  his  eyes,'  and  to 
have  '  redted  the  collect  for  the  king  and 
his  issue,  adding  only  to  it,  ''  and  defend 
them  from  their  cruel  enemies." '    When 
{ the  house  met  again  in  November  it  im- 
mediately proceeded  on  the  Spanish  match 
.  and  the  supply  for  the  palatinate,  and  Coke 
;  was  made  cnairman  of  a  committee  to  con- 
I  aider  these  and  other  subjects.    A  remon- 
'  strance  and  petition  to  the   king   being 
resolved  on,  Coke  spoke  strongly  in  their 
support.    He  made  a  bold  stancL  also  for 
the  privileges  of  the  house,  and  the  pro- 
testation,   which    was   then    carried,    so 
offended  the  king  that  with  his  own  hand 
he  tore  it  out  of  the  journals.    The  par- 
liament was  agfun  adjourned  on  December 
Id,  and  on  Januaiy  6,  16!21-2,  was  dis- 
solved by  a  proclamation  enlarging  on  the 
'  cunning  diversions '  of '  some  ill-tempered 
spirits  who  sowed  tares  among  the  com.' 
In  the  interim  between  the  MJoumment 
and  the  dissolution  several  of  these  'ill- 
tempered  spirits'  were  visited  with  the 
vengeance  of  the  court.    Coke  had  made 
himself  a  special  mark  for  the  royal  indig- 
nation.   The  council  debated  on  the  means 
of  excluding  him  from  the  general  pardon 
at  the  end  of  the  year ;  he  was  sent  to  the 
Tower  on  Decemoer  27;  bis  papers  were 
seized,  and  prosecutions  were  commenced 
against  him  on  trumped-up  and  frivolous 
charges.    His  incarceration    lasted   seven 
months,  at  first  without  intercourse  with 
his  family  or  friends,  and  even  when  he 
obtained  his  discbarge  in  August  1622,  the 
king  said  'be  was  the  fittest  instrument 
for  a  tyrant  that  ever  was  in  the  realm  of 
England,'  and  ordered  him  to  confine  him- 
self to  his  mansion  at  Stoke  Pogis.  Yonge, 
in  his  Diary  (p.  02),  records  that '  the  great 
cause  concemmg  the  Lord  Coke,  for  50,000/., 
followed  in  the  king's  behalf  in  the  Court 
of  Wards,  is  adjudged  for  my  Lord  Coke 
by   the  three  chief  judges  and  Justice 
Doderidge.' 

In  the  new  parliament  which  neces- 
sity compelled  James  to  call  in  February' 
1023-4  Coke  took  his  seat  as  member  for 
Coventry.  The  questions  on  which  he 
seemed  mostly  to  interest  himself  were  the 
Spanish  match,  tlie  means  of  recovering 
the  palatinate,  and  the  impeachment  of  the 
Efurl  of  Middlesex,  on  each  of  which  he 


178 


COKE 


managed  the  conferences  with  the  House 
of  Lords.  The  session  closed  on  May  29, 
and  King  James  died  on  the  27th  of  the 
following  March. 

In  the  first  parliament  of  Charles^  Coke, 
who  was  chosen  by  his  native  county,  at 
first  dissuaded  the  house  from  renewing  the 
committee  for  ^evances,  advising  a  peti- 
tion for  the  kmg*8  answer  to  the  former 
application;  but  afterwards  he  opposed 
the  grant  of  a  supply  without  a  reareaa  of 
grieyances.  This  aemand,  and  an  evident 
preparation  to  bring  charges  against  the 
DuKe  of  Buckingham^  led  to  a  hasty  dis- 
solution on  August  12,  1625,  and  to  an 
endeavour  to  prevent  the  most  unruly  mem- 
bers from  sitting  in  the  next  parliament, 
which  Charles  was  necessitated  to  call  in  the 
month  of  February  following,  by  nomina- 
ting them  sheriffs  of  the  counties  in  which 
they  resided.  Coke  was  made  sheriff  of 
Buckinghamshire,  but  was  elected  member 
•  for  Norfolk ;  and,  notwithstanding  a  message 
from  the  king,  no  new  writ  was  issued, 
though,  in  consequence  of  the  parliament 
beinff  dissolved  before  his  shenffalty  ex- 
pired, he  did  not  take  his  seat.  Two  years 
elapsed  before  the  third  parliament  was 
called,  when  Coke  was  returned  for  two 
counties,  Buckingham  and  Suffolk,  choosing 
the  former  because  he  resided  there.  It  met 
on  March  17,  1628,  and  in  the  first  session, 
which  ended  on  June  26,  and  was  the  last 
in  which  he  took  any  part  in  public  afiairs, 
he  advocated  the  liberty  of  the  subject  with 
an  energy  that  was  surprising  in  a  man  who 
had  attamed  the  age  of  seventy-eight  He 
suggested,  and  succeeded  in  carrying,  the 
&mous  Petition  of  Hight,  in  the  conferences 
vnth  the  Lords  being  one  of  the  principal 
managers,  and  overcoming,  by  his  argu- 
ments and  perseverance,  all  the  objections 
and  impediments  raised  against  it.  In  the 
violent  proceedings  of  the  second  session  of 
this  parliament  he  took  no  part ;  but,  re- 
tiring to  his  seat  at  Stoke  Pogis,  he  occupied 
the  nve  remaining  years  of  his  life  in  pub- 
lishing that  celebrated  work  on  which  his 
fame  is  permanently  established  —  '  The 
f^t  Institute,  or  Commentary  on  Little- 
ton,'— and  in  preparing  for  the  press  the 
three  other  volumes  of  the  Institutes,  treat- 
ing respectively  on  Mania  Charta,  on  Cri- 
mmal  Law,  and  on  the  Jurisdiction  of  the 
Courts.  These,  with  his  will  and  fifty-one 
other  manuscripts,  were  seized  while  he  was 
on  his  death-bed,  by  an  order  of  the  privy 
council,  made  by  the  peremptory  direction 
of  King  Charles  nearly  three  years  before 
(Col.  St.  Papers  [1629],  490),  under  the 
pretence  of  searching  for  seditious  papers, 
and  were  not  published  till  seven  years 
afterwards,  when,  by  a  vote  of  parliament, 
they  were  delivered  up  to  his  son.  Four 
years  before  his  decease,  one  Nicholas 
ieaffiBB  was  indicted  and  fined  in  the  King*s 


COKE 

Bench  for  writing  a  petition  wherein  he 
said  that  Lord  Cnief  Justice  Coke  was  a 
traitor.     (State  Triak,  iiL  1375.) 

He  died  on  September  3,  1633,  being 
then  nearly  eighty-two  years  of  affe,  ana 
was  buried  in  uie  church  of  Tittleanall,  in 
Norfolk,  in  which  a  marble  monument, 
bearing  his  efiigy  at  full  length,  is  erected 
to  his  memory. 

Besides  the  four  books  of  Inatitutes,  he 
published  eleven  volumes  of  Reports^  to 
which  two  other  volumes  were  added  many 
years  after  his  death,  but  not  finished  or 
prepared  by  him  for  publication.  Thefint 
part  came  out  in  l&X),  when  he  was  in 
the  height  of  his  professional  fame,  and 
attorney-general  to  Queen  Elizabeth.  The 
others  foUowed  in  quick  succession  tiU  the 
eleventh,  pubHshed  in  1615,  about  a  year 
before  he  was  deprived  of  his  office  of  chief 
justice  of  the  King*s  Bench  by  James — an 
example  of  perseverance  and  mdefatigable 
industry  which  no  one  occupied  as  he  was 
with  judicial  and  political  duties,  and 
harassed  by  domestic  broils,  could  have 
exhibited,  had  not  a  cold-blooded  tempera- 
ment maae  him  indifferent  to  the  one,  and 
a  habit  of  early  rising  enabled  him  to  over- 
come the  other.  They  are  distinguished  in 
Westminster  Hall  by  the  name  of  'The 
Reports,'  and  his  jealous  enemy,  Bacon, 
is  obliged  to  say  of  them,  '  Had  it  not  beoi 
for  Sir  Edward  Coke's  reports  . . .  the  law 
by  this  time  had  been  almost  like  a  ship 
without  ballast,  for  that  the  cases  A 
modem  experience  are  fled  from  those  that 
are  adjudged  and  ruled  in  former  time.' 
For  some  law  tracts,  also,  of  minor  impor- 
tance, but  of  great  learning,  the  profession 
was  indebted  to  him.  They  were  not  pub- 
lished till  after  his  death,  and  are  now, 
from  the  alterations  in  practice,  become 
obsolete. 

The  early  portion  of  Coke's  life  was  not 
distinguished  from  that  of  any  other  ad- 
vocate, except  by  his  deeper  studies  and  a 
more  extensive  and  successfid  practice.  The 
reputation  he  attained  for  legal  knowledge 
pointed  him  out  without  a  rival  for  the 
office  of  solicitor-general,  which  he  fiUed  at 
the  age  of  forty.  In  less  than  two  years  he 
succeeded  as  attorney-general,  and^  during 
the  twelve  years  that  he  held  that  office  he 
raised  it  to  an  importance  it  had  never 
before  acquired,  and  which  it  has  ever  since 

E reserved.  The  coarseness  and  brutality  of 
is  language,  both  at  the  bar  and  on  the 
bench,  will  ever  leave  a  stigma  on  his  me- 
mory ;  but  it  may  be  observed  that  no  such 
ebullitions  occurred  till  his  rivalry  with 
Bacon  began,  whose  underhand  endeavouit 
to  supplant  and  annoy  him  evidently  tended 
to  exacerbate  his  temper,  which  was  not 
naturally  good ;  and  some  of  his  violent  and 
indecent  exhibitions — towards  Essex,  for 
instance,  who  was  supposed  to  be  Baooo't 


bftTtt  Clmich  liviiigs  paas  by  liverY  and 
aeiein,  not  hj  bargain  and  sale.'  He  was 
libenl  in  his  entertainments,  but  moderate 
in  bia  kooiehold ;  and  wben  a  neat  man 
came  to  dinner  without  previously  inform- 
ing' hiniy  bia  oomin<m  saying  was, '  Sir,  since 


COKE 

friend — ^may,  perbape,  be  traced  to  that 
influence,    llis  pride  and  arrogance,  how- 
ever, cannot  be  doubted,  and  to  them  it 
may  be  attributed,  together  with  the  cold- 
ness of  his  nature  and  his  retired  habits, 
that  his  biographers  record  no  friendly 
intimacies,  and  that  fewer  sayings  of  his 
are  repeated  than  of  an^  person  who  held 
so  prominent  a  position  in  public  life.    In 
his  station  as  a  judge,  which  he  occupied 
for  ten  years,  he  shone  with  the  brightest 
lustre ;  and,  making  some  allowance  for 
his  equivocal  conduct  with  regard  to  Over- 
buiy*8  murderers,  he  deserves  ffreat  praise 
^r  his  resistance  of  royal  interference,  and 
for   upholding   the   independence    of  the 
bench.  Jndge^l[dtelocke(LiberFameUcu8) 
inves  testimony  of  his  freedom  from  the 
prevailing  vice  of  the  time.     'Never  was 
man,'  he  says,  *  so  just,  so  upright,  so  free 
from  oormpt  solicitations  of  great  men  and 
friends,  as  he  was.    Never  put  counsellors 
that  practised  before  him  to  annual  pen- 
sions of  money  or  plate  to  have  his  favour. 
In  all  causes  before  him  the  counsel  might 
assure  his   client    from    the    danger    of 
bribery.'    By  his  subsequent  career  in  par- 
liament,   and   his  energetic   advocacy  of 
liberal  measures,  he  would  have  gained  the 
admiration  and  applause  of  the  world,  were 
it  not  for  the  opinion,  by  some  entertained, 
that  his  opposition  to  the  court  savoured 
too  much  of  personal  discontent  and  dis- 
tppointed   amoition.    This  mixed  feeling 
bu  prevented  him  from  being  a  popular 
character,   and  has  led  men  to  doubt  his 
judgment  and  to  deny  his   authority  in 
matters  unconnected  with  his  profession; 
io  that  many,  who  allow  his  merit  as  a 
^reat  lawyer  and  an  incorrupt  judge,  refuse 
to  acknowledge  his  claims  as  a  disinter- 
ttted  patriot,  or  as  an  estimable  man. 

Agionst  his  private  character  even  his 
memies  could   bring  no  charge;  but  the 
contentions  with  his  second  wile,  which  did 
oot  terminate  till  his  death,  do  not  speak 
veil  for  the  temper  of  either.    If  his  oivi- 
lion  of  the  hours  of  the  day,   'Quatuor 
orabis,*  was  the  rule  of  his  life,  he  must  be 
allowed  to  have  been  a  pious  man.    Of  his 
friendship  to  the  Church  he  gave  many 
proofs  in  his  settlement  of  ecclesiastical 
property,  and  in  his  careful  selection  in  the 
distribution  of  the  patronage  attached  to 
his  estates.    With  regard  to  the  first,  he 
threatened  a  nobleman,  who  was  applying 
tor  some  lands  belonging  to  the  see  oi  Nor- 
wich, to  put  on  his  cap  and  gown  again  and 
plead  in  aupport  of  its  rights ;  and  as  to  the 
lafft  he  was  wont  to  say  that  'he  would 


COKEFIELD 


179 


you  have  sent  me  no  notice  of  your  coming, 
you  must  dine  with  me ;  but  if  I  had  known 
it  in  due  time,  I  would  have  dined  with 


you. 


Sir  Edward,  by  his  first  wife,  Bridget 
Paston,  had  seven  sons  and  three  daughters. 
The  succession  to  the  family  estates  fell 
finally  on  Robert,  the  grandson  of  Henry, 
his  fifth  son.  Robert's  grandson,  Thomas, 
was  created  Baron  Lovel  in  1728,  and  Vis- 
count Coke  and  Earl  of  Leicester  in  1744; 
but,  the  earl  leaving  no  surviving  issue,  the 
titles  became  extinct  in  1759.  The  estates 
then  devolving  on  Wenman  Roberts,  Esq., 
the  son  of  the  earVs  sister,  Anne,  that  gen- 
tleman assumed  the  name  of  Coke,  and  his 
son,  Thomas  William  Coke,  for  many  years 
the  representative  of  Norfolk  in  parliament, 
was  at  last,  in  1837,  created  Viscount  Coke 
and  Earl  of  Leicester,  titles  which  are  now 
borne  by  his  eldest  son. 

Clement,  the  sixth  son  of  the  chief  jus- 
tice, was  the  father  of  Edward  Coke  of 
Longford,  who  obtained  a  baronetcy  in  1G41, 
which  became  extinct  in  1727.  (Many  of 
these  dates  and  facts  are  taken  from  Coke's 
*  Vade  Mecum,'  as  he  calls  the  interleaved 
copy  of  Littleton's  *  Tenures,'  written  by 
himself,  and  extracted  in  the  '  Collectanea 
Topomphica  et  Genealogica,'  by  the  late 
John^ruce,  Esq^ 

COKEFISLD,  JOHK  D£,  so  called  from  a 
place  of  that  name  in  Sufiblk,  and  probably 
connected  with  a  powerful  family  seated 
there,  is  first  recorded  on  a  fine  levied  at 
Michaelmas  1250,  40  Henry  III.,  and  on 
others  till  the  following  Michaelmas,  in 
which  latter  year  he  was  added  to  the  jus- 
tices itinerant  into  the  county  of  Suffolk. 
After  that  time  payments  were  made  for 
assizes  to  be  taken  before  him,  commencing 
in  August  1258,  42  Henr^  m.,  and  ending 
in  June  1259.  A  long  interval  of  eleven 
years  then  occurs,  no  payments  being  made 
for  assizes  before  him  till  May  1270,  54 
Henry  IH..  after  which  they  are  frequent 
till  May  1272.  During  thid  latter  period 
he  had  a  grant  of  40/.  a  year  for  his  support, 
according  to  Dugdale,  as  a  justice  or  the 
King's  Bench.  His  death  is  recorded  on 
the  Close  RoU  of  5Q  Henry  HI.  (Excerpt,  e 
Jiot.  Fm.  ii.  286-573.) 

COK£FISLD,RoB£BT  de,  or  KOKEFIELD, 
holding  a  high  position  in  Yorkshire,  was 
selected  in  9  Henry  IH.  as  one  of  the  jus- 
tices itinerant  for  that  county.  He  was 
constable  of  the  castles  of  Scarborough  and 
Pickering,  for  the  custody  of  which  he  had 
a  salary  of  two  hundred  marks  per  annum. 
(JRoi,  Clous,  ii.  77, 107,  117.)  From  1226, 
10  Henry  IH.,  to  1229,  the  sheriffalty  of 
the  county  was  entrusted  to  him,  and  he 
was  excused  150/.  which  remained  due  from 
him  for  the  profits  of  the  county.  He  mar- 
ried Nichole,  the  daughter  ot  Jordan  de 
Sancta-Maria,  by  Alice,  the  daughter^  oi 

v  2 


180 


COLEPEPER 


sister,  of  Geoflrey  Haget.  (Archaol.  xxx. 
486.) 

COLEPEFES,  John.  The  Colepepers 
were  of  a  yeiy  ancient  Kentish  family, 
which  in  the  reign  of  Edward  m.  sepa- 
rated into  two  branches,  one  settled  at  Bay 
Hall,  near  Pepenbury,  from  which  descen- 
ded Baron  Colepeper,  master  of  the  Rolls 
in  the  time  of  Charles  I. ;  and  the  other 
seated  at  Preston  Hall,  near  Aylesford,  to 
which  John  Colepeper  this  judge  belonged. 

ffis  grandfather  was  Sir  Jeffrey  Cole- 
peper, who  was  sheriff  of  Kent  in  40  Ed- 
ward ni.,  and  his  father's  name  was 
William.  John  is  first  reported  in  4  Henry 
rV.,  as  being  appointed  a  king's  serjeant, 
and  as  one  of  tnat  degree  who  advanced 
100/.  each  on  loan  to  the  king.  (Act$ 
Primj  CoirncU,  i.  202.)  On  June  7, 1406, 
7  Henry  IV.,  he  was  made  a  judge  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  and  received  a  new  patent 
on  the  accession  of  Henry  V.  He  oied  in 
1414,  and  was  buried  in  the  church  of 
West  Peckham,  which  manor,  together  with 
those  of  Oxenhoath  and  of  Swanton  Court, 
he  gave  to  the  Knights  Hospitallers  of  St. 
John  of  Jerusalem. 

By  his  wife  Catherine  he  left  a  son, 
William,  to  whose  lineal  descendant  a  baro- 
netcy was  granted  in  1627,  which  became 
extinct  in  1723. 

COLEFEPEB,  John  (Lord  Colbpeper), 
was  of  the  same  family  £rom  one  branch  of 
which  the  preceding  judge  descended.  He 
was  the  son  of  a  knight  of  the  same  name, 
living  at  Wiesell  in  Sussex;  and  he  spent 
some  years  m  foreign  part<9,  doing  good 
service  as  a  soldier,  ana  reputed  to  be  of 
ffreat  courage,  but  of  a  rough  nature,  his 
hot  temper  leading  him  too  nequentl^  into 
quarrels  and  duels.  When  he  married  he 
settled  in  the  county  of  his  ancestors,  where 
he  soon  became  popular  among  his  neigh- 
bours, and,  in  consequence  of  the  know- 
ledge of  business  which  he  exhibited,  and 
the  ability  with  which  he  conducted  it,  he 
was  frequently  deputed  by  them  to  the 
council  board,  and  at  lenirth  was  knighted, 
and  elected  member  for  Kent  in  the  Long 
Parliament. 

Within  a  week  after  its  meeting  he 
summed  up  in  an  eloquent  speech  the 
grievances  of  his  country,  concluding  thus : 
*  One  grievance  more,  which  compriseth 
many ;  it  is  a  nest  of  wasps,  or  swarm  of 
vermin,  which  have  overcrept  the  land ;  I 
mean  the  monopolies  and  polers  of  the 
people.  These,  like  the  frogs  of  Ejrypt, 
nave  gotten  possession  of  our  dwellings, 
and  we  scarce  have  a  room  free  from  them. 
They  sup  in  our  cup.  They  dip  in  our  dish. 
They  sit  by  our  fire.  We  find  them  in  the 
dye- vat,  wash-bowl,  and  powdering- tub. 
They  snare  with  the  butler  in  his  box. 
They  have  marked  and  sealed  us  from  head 
to  foot    Mr.  Speaker,  they  will  not  bate 


COLEPEPER 

us  a  pin.  We  may  not  buy  our  own 
clothes  without  their  brokaM  Theee  are- 
the  leeches  Uiat  have  suckea  the  common- 
wealth so  hard  that  it  ia  almost  become 
hectical.'    (Hushworth,  ii.  917.) 

The  king,  sensible  of  his  value,  admitted 
him  of  his  priyv  council,  and  on  January 
6. 1642,  made  him  chancellor  d  the  Ex- 
cnequer.  {Rymer^  xx.  516.)  During  that 
eventful  year  he,  with  the  asaistBiioe  of 
Lord  Falkland  and  Edward  Hyde,  thoogh 
sometimes  disconcerted  by  the  Miiig'a  hasty 
measures,  did  what  he  could  to  serve  hu 
majesty.  He  acquired  great  influence^  but 
his  counsels  were  not  idways  very  wise  or 
temperate.  To  his  advice  is  attributed  the 
king's  consent  to  pass  the  bill  for  removing 
the  oishops  from  the  House  of  Peeis,  the 
transference  of  the  court  from  Windsor  to 
York,  and  the  attempt  to  obtain  poesesaon 
of  Hull.  After  the  royal  standard  had  been 
set  up  at  Nottingham,  Colepeper  was  one 
of  the  bearers  of  the  king's  message  to  the 
Commons,  with  an  offer  to  treat,  so  as  to 
prevent  the  effusion  of  blood  and  the  mise- 
ries of  civil  war.  He  must  have  anticipated 
the  answer,  from  the  manner  in  which  he 
was  received  by  the  house.  They  would 
not  permit  him  to  take  his  seat  as  a  mem- 
ber, out  obliged  him  to  deliver  his  mesBSge 
at  the  bar,  and  then  withdraw.  ( WkUt' 
locke,  61.) 

On  January  28, 1643,  he  was  promoted 
to  the  mastership  of  the  Rolls,  an  office  for 
which  his  previous  education  had  in  do 
decree  prej^ared  him.  He  took  it  as  adding 
to  nis  dignity  and  profit,  without  regard  to 
its  accustomed  duties,  for  in  those  troubled 
times  there  was  less  need  of  lawyers  than 
of  counsellors  and  soldiers.  As  a  oounseUor^ 
he  was  used  on  the  most  private  occasiaiiBy 
and  was  added  to  the  junto  which,  as  a 
cabinet  council,  managed  the  kin^s  afifain ; 
as  a  soldier,  he  was  ever  by  the  kmg's  ride, 
and  took  part  in  aU  his  oattles  with  the 
most  distin^ished  bravery. 

In  reward  for  these  services,  the  king,  on 
October  14, 1644,  created  him  a  peer,  by  the 
title  of  Lord  Colepeper,  of  Thoreswayin  Lin- 
colnshire, and  named  him  of  the  council  of 
the  Duke  of  York.  At  the  beginning  of  ^e 
next  year  he  was  one  of  the  commiasioneTS 
on  the  part  of  the  king  in  the  proiK)sed 
treaty  of  Uxbridge.  A  very  unpromiring 
commencement  was  made  dv  the  parlia- 
ment's refusing  to  recognise  the  peerage  of 
Colepeper,  or  the  titles  of  any  of  the  othexs- 
whicn  nad  passed  the  Great  Seal  since 
Lord  Lyttelton  had  sent  it  to  the  king. 
The  commissioners  wasted  their  time  prin- 
cipally in  religious  discussions,  and  the 
treaty  was  ultimately  broken  off.  In  the 
calamitous  events  which  followed,  Lord 
Colepeper  was  zealously  and  actively  eo- 
»igea  in  serving  the  king  and  Pnaob 
Charles,  the  latter  of  whonii  in  1646^  he- 


COLERIDGE 


COLERIDGE 


181 


scompuied  to  Paris  to  join  the  queen. 
^om  this  tune  be  was  the  constant  com- 
mion  of  the  prince  in  his  wanderings^ 
od  while  at  the  Hague,  in  1648,  he  had  a 
srioos  quaixel  with  Prince  Rupert^  who 
ras  atzonfldy  prejudiced  against  huu,  which, 
ut  for  Hyde's  interfexence,  might  have 
Bd  to  a  fatal  result  When  Prince  Charles 
ecame  king  by  the  tragic  death  of  his 
ither,  he  sent  Lord  Colepeper  to  Russia,  to 
btain  money  to  supply  his  necessities ;  and 
he  nussion  resulted  in  the  czar  granting 
iO,000^  in  rich  eonunodities. 

At  the  Restoration  he  accompanied  the 
dng  to  Fjigland,  and  resumed  his  place  of 
oaster  of  the  RoUs ;  but  he  was  not  des- 
ined  long  to  enjoy  it,  for  within  little 
nam  than  a  month  after  his  landing  in 
fhgiand  be  was  seized  with  an  illness,  of 
riueh  be  died  on  July  11, 1060.  He  was 
Miried  in  the  church  of  Hollin^boum  in 
lent,  in  which  and  the  neighbouring  narlBh 
he  family  property,  indudmg  Leeds  Castle, 
VIS  situate. 

Lord  Clarendon,  though  evidently  Jealous 
>f  his  ascendency  over  Charles  I.,  and 
srtainly  not  prepossessed  in  his  favour, 
[ires  him  full  credit  as  well  for  his  great 
larta^  ready  wit,  and  universal  understond- 
Dg,  as  for  bis  sufficiency  in  council,  his 
ooiaire  in  the  field,  and  his  devoted  fidelity. 
lis  ktter  to  the  chancellor,  just  after 
>omwell*s  death,  as  to  the  counsels  to  be 
lorsued,  and  the  probable  course  of  General 
lonk,  confirms  the  opinion  of  his  wisdom, 
nd  seems  to  be  dictated  by  prophetic  in- 
pixadon.     {Seward,iY,  888.) 

By  his  fintwife,  Philippa,  daughter  of 
-  Snelling,  Esq.,  he  had  one  son,  wbo 
ied  young. .  His  second  wife,  who  was  his 
ODsin^  Judith,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas 
/olepepei^  of  Hollingboum,  knight,  brought 
dm  four  sons,  the  three  elder  of  whom 
ojqyed  the  title  in  succession,  which  then, 
or  want  of  male  issue,  became  extinct  in 
725.     (Baronage,  ii.  472^ 

COUdtlDOE,  JoH27  Tatlob  (a  lately 
etired  judge),  belongs  to  a  family  the 
isme  of  wnidi  never  occurs  without  a.s- 
odations  of  intellectual  eminence — whe- 
her  as  poet,  philosopher,  biographer,  scho- 
IT,  ecclesiastic^  or  jurist  In  the  foremost 
nk  ci  these,  as  a  scholar  and  a  lawyer, 
Qost  be  placed  this  retired  judse. 

John  Taylor  Coleridge  was  bom  at  Ti- 
erton  on  ^uly  0,  1790.  His  grandfather 
rss  Ticar  of  the  parish  of  Ottery  St 
laiy  in  Devonshire,  and  master  of  the 
iMnm^r  school  there.  His  father  was 
!aptain  James  Coleridge,  who  retired 
rom  the  army  soon  after  his  marriage 
nth  Frances  Ihike  Taylor,  the  daughter 
{  one  of  the  coheiresses  of  the  family  of 
M»  of  Otterton  and  Power  Hayes,  one  of 
hit  Most  ancient  in  the  county  of  Devon. 
^ficT  receiving  an  excellent  training  from 


his  uncle,  the  Rev.  G^rge  Coleridge,  then 
master  of  the  achod  at  Otteiy  St  Maiy, 
young  Coleridge,  in  June  1803,  went  to 
Eton,  where  he  acquired  a  considerable 
reputation. 

In  April  1809  he  was  elected  to  a  scho- 
larship at  Corpus  Chxisti  College,  Oxford, 
where  his  career  was  most  triumphant 
In  1810  he  won  the  chancellor*s  Latin 
verse  prize,  the  subject  being  '  Pyramides 
iEgvptiace.'  In  1812  he  was  placed  alone 
in  tne  first  class  for  classics,  and  in  the 
same  year  he  was  elected  fellow  of  Exeter 
College  and  Vinerian  law  scholar.  In 
1813  he  won  the  cbanceUor*s  prizes  for 
prose  composition,  both  in  English  and 
Latin,  the  former  having  for  its  subject 
'  Etymology,'  and  the  hitter  *  The  Moral 
Effects  of  the  Censor's  Office  in  Rome.' 
Since  the  foundation  of  these  prizes  it  has 
only  happened  three  times  that  they  both 
have  be^iimed  by  one  man  in  the"^  same 
year,  the  three  conquerors  being  Mr.  Cole- 
ridge, Mr.  Keble,  and  Dr.  Milman ;  and  on 
each  occasion  the  chancellor  (Lord  Gren- 
ville)  testified  his  pleasure  and  approbation 
by  adding  to  the  prizes  the  gift  of  a  costly 
and  valuable  classic  In  1852  the  univer- 
sity presented  to  him  the  honorary  degree 
of  D.C.L. 

In  the  same  year  in  which  he  was  elected 
Vinerian  law  scholar  he  entered  the  Mid- 
dle Temple;  and,  after  practising  for  n  short 
time  as  a  certificated  special  pleader,  ho  was 
called  to  the  bar  on  June  20,  IS  10,  hav- 
ing in  the  preceding  year  married  Mary, 
daughter  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Buchanan,  rector 
of  vVoodmanstone  in  Surrey.  For  more 
than  fifteen  years  he  was  a  regular  atten- 
dant on  the  Western  Circuit,  and,  though 
he  had  for  his  competitors  such  eminent 
men  as  Serjeant  Wilde  (afterwards  Lord 
Truro),  Sir  William  FoUett,  Chief  Justice 
Erie,  Mr.  Justice  Erskine,  and  Mr.  Justice 
Crowder,  he  obtained  considerable  success. 
As  he  expresses  himself  in  one  of  his  future 
lectures,  '  The  law  was  not  a  hard  mistress 
to  him,  and  did  not  allow  him  long  to  lan- 
guish without  business,  nor  sufier  him  to  be 
without  hope.'  During  this  period  he  had 
been  appointed,  in  1827,  a  commissioner  of 
bankruptcy;  and  in  1832  the  corporation 
of  Exeter  elected  him  their  recorder ;  the 
ofier  of  a  similar  honour  from  both  the 
boroughs  of  Southmolton  and  Barnstaple 
having  been  declined  by  him.  In  P'ebruary 
1832  he  was  raised  to  the  dignity  of  the 
coif,  and  when,  in  April  1834,  the  attempt 
was  made,  under  the  warraut  of  King 
William  IV.,  to  open  the  Court  of  Com- 
mon Pleas  to  all  oarristers,  he,  with  the 
other  serjeants-at-law,  was  supposed  to  be 
compensated  by  receiving  a  patent  of  pre- 
cedence, giving  him  rank  after  the  existing 
kind's  counsel. 

Engaged  as  he  was  in  his  legal  occupa- 


182 


COLERIDGE 


tions,  Mr.  Coleridge  never  deserted  his 
literary  pursuits.  He  contributed  occa- 
sionally to  the  'Quarterly  Keview/  and 
on  the  retirement  of  its  editor,  William 
Gifford,  he  for  one  year  (1^24^  undertook 
the  post;  but  at  the  end  of  it,  nnding  that 
its  labours  interfered  too  much  with  his 
professional  practice,  he  resigned  it  into  the 
able  management  of  the  late  Mr.  Lockhart. 
To  professional  literature  he  supplied  an 
excellent  edition  of '  Blackstone's  Commen- 
taries '  in  1825. 

Mr.  Coleridge  was  soon  called  upon  to 
take  the  position  which  aU  allowed  ne  was 
the  most  competent  to  fill.  On  January  27, 
1835^  he  was  appointed  a  judge  of  the  Ejng*s 
Bench,  by  the  recommendation  of  Lord 
Lyndhurst,  and  knighted.  For  more  than 
tliree-and-twenty  years  he  administered  jus- 
tice on  that  bench  and  on  the  different  cir- 
cuits in  a  manner  which  was  most  eloquently 
and  truthfully  described  in  the  affectionate 
language  of  the  bar,  as  expressed  by  their 
spokesman,  the  attorney-general  (Sir  Fitz- 
roy  Kelly,  now  chief  baron  of  the  Exche- 
quer), oh  June  28,  1868,  the  day  of  his 
retirement.  He  was  immediately  admitted 
to  a  seat  in  the  privy  council,  and  to  be  a 
member  of  its  judicial  committee.  On  the 
sittings  of  that  tribunal  he  has  ever  since 
regularly  attended. 

That  his  character  and  merits  were  ap- 
preciated most  highly  by  those  in  power 
nas  been  fully  proved'by  the  varied  services 
that  have  been  required  of  him.  He  was 
selected  as  a  member  of  many  important 
commissions.  Among  them  was  uiat  in 
1834^  to  enquire  into  the  arrangements  of 
the  mns  of  court  and  Chancery  for  pro- 
moting the  study  of  the  law  and  juris- 
prudence ;  that  in  1868,  to  enquire  into  the 
expediency  of  bringing  into  one  neigh- 
bourhood the  different  courts  of  justice; 
besides  the  Oxford  University  Commission, 
which  sat  for  four  years,  and  the  Educa- 
tion Commission,  which  sat  for  three. 

Li  the  devotion  of  his  services  to  the 
public  he  has  not]  been  unmindful  of 
private  and  local  calls.  On  his  resignation 
he  retired  to  Heath^s  Court,  Ottery  St. 
Mary,  the  house  in  which  his  father  re- 
sided, and  devoted  a  good  portion  of  his 
leisure  to  the  charitable  and  educational 
establishments  of  the  county,  and  by 
several  interesting  and  amusing  lectures 
(none  of  them  more  so  than  his  *  Recol- 
lections of  the  Circuit')  delivered  to 
various  literary  societies,  encouraged  the 
efforts  to  promote  rational  enjoyment 
among  all  classes.  The  internal  restora- 
tion of  the  beautiful  priory  church  in  his 
neiffhbourhood  has  been  completely  effected 
by  his  liberality  and  exertions. 

Of  Sir  John  Coleridge's  six  children, 
four  still  survive,  the  eldest  of  whom, 
Sir  John  Duke  Coleridge,  i«  following  his 


COLTMAN 

fiather*s  footsteps  in  the  law,  and  is  now 
solicitor-general  and  M.P.  for  Exeter. 

COLSVILL,  GiLBSBT  DB,  Appears  on  one 
occasion  only  in  a  fine  of  zd  Heniy  U. 
as  bein^  present  in  the  Einff's  Court  at 
Westmmster  when  it  was  acknowledged. 
(Madox,  i.  113 ;  Hunter's  Preface,  p.  xxi) 
As  he  is  not  again  mentioned  in  a  judicial 
character,  it  is  possible  that  he  merely 
held  some  ofiicial  post  there  which  re- 
quired his  attendance. 

COLEYHiLS,  Hekbt  de,  was  employed 
in  18  Henry  III.  to  assess  the  tallage  ia 
Cambridge  and  Huntingdon,  and  was  twice 
appointed  sheriff  for  those  counties — ^in  21 
Henry  UL,  when  he  held  the  office  for  fix 
vears ;  and  again  in  34  Henry  IIL,  when 
he  held  it  for  two.  {MadoXy  i.  736,  ii. 
169.)  In  1262  he  acted  as  justice  itineruit 
for  Berkshire,  Oxford,  and  Northampton, 
and  in  the  following  year  for  Cambridge, 
Huntingdon,  Essex,  and  HOTtfcurd.  (jiUh, 
HacU.  141.)  Whether  either  of  the  two 
belonged  to  the  noble  family  of  Colerille 
in  Yorkshire  is  uncertain. 

COLNETE,  William  de,  represented 
Robert  de  Tateshal  in  a  suit  the  subject 
of  a  petition  to  the  parliament  in  18  Ed- 
ward I.,  and  on  the  accession  of  Edward 
II.  he  was  summoned  to  the  coronation, 
and  to  the  next  two  parliaments,  his  place 
in  the  lists  being  low  among  those  of  the 
legal  profession.  He  was  returned  85 
member  for  Norfolk,  and  when  the  jus- 
tices of  assize  were  appointed  for  that  and 
the  four  neighbouring  counties  in  1310  he 
was  the  last  of  the  three  who  were  then 
nominated.  His  name  does  not  appear 
after  the  next  year,  but  that  of  his  eon 
Ralph  is  mentioned  in  8  Edwud  IL,in 
which  he  certified  that  he  was  one  of  the 
lords  of  Scottow  and  Lammas  with  Little 
Hautbovs.  {Rot.  Pari  L  37 ;  Pari  JTnJte, 
ii.  p.  ii.  708 ;  Abb.  Rot.  Orig.  L!  212, 
246.) 

COLTHAN,  TnoKAS,  was  descended  from 
an  old  and  respectable  family  in  the  comity 
of  Lincoln,  wnere  they  enjoyed  consider- 
able possessions.  He  was  the  youngest 
son  ot  John  Coltman,  Esq.,  then  resident 
at  Beverley,  and  was  bom  on  July  9, 
1781,  but  ultimately  succeeded  to  the 
paternal  estate.  His  education  was  com- 
menced at  the  Charterhouse  in  London, 
fi*om  which  he  proceeded  to  Rugbv,  where 
he  obtained  an  exhibition,  and  in  1798  was 
removed  to  Trinity  College,  Cambridge, 
where  he  took  his  degree  of  B.A.  in  Ja- 
nuary 1803,  and  in  1805  he  gained  the  'blue 
ribbon '  of  the  imiversity  by  being  elected 
a  fellow  of  his  college. 

Entering  the  Inner  Temple,  he  acquired, 
under  the  tuition  of  that  eminent  special 
pleader  Mr.  Tidd,  that  masteiy  of  the  law 
which  enabled  so  niany  of  that  gentleman's 
pupils  to  rise  to  high  distinction.    CalW 


i 


COLUMBEERS 

»  the  htr  in  1806^  he  attended  the 
wsdons  at  Manchester,  and  joined  the 
Northern  Circuit,  in  which  he  secured  so 
xmsiderable  a  ahaie  of  business  that  even- 
toallj  in  1832  he  was  appointed  a  king's 
mmsel. 

On  Februanr  24, 1887,  he  was  raised  to 
the  bench  of  the  Common  Fleas,  receiving 
the  custcnnaiy  honour  of  knighthood.  In 
diat  court  he  remained  for  the  last  twelve 
feaia  of  his  life,  performing  his  duties  in 
Aat  quiet  and  calm  manner  which  does  not 
attract  the  'million,'  but  which  greatlj 
anisted  and  was  highly  appreciated  by  his 
eoneajnies,  who,  in  uie  languaffe  of  a  ffrace- 
fid  mbute  to  his  memoir  puQished  by  one 
of  them  (Lord  Wensleyoale)  soon  after  his 
death,  *  Imew  and  admired  his  dispassionate, 
esndid,  and  just  mind ;  his  clear,  acute,  ana 
Uroog  underatandiug ;  his  sound  and  accu- 
nteknowled^  of  the  law;  his  even  temper, 
padenoe,  and  firmness ;  his  care  and  aldll 
m  investigating  cases;  his  excellent  judg- 
ment in  aeciding  them.'  Though  some- 
what slow  in  forming  his  opinions,  they 
were  always  to  be  relied  on,  and,  though 
not  brilliant  or  dashing,  he  was  essentially 
s  just  and  ri^ht-mind^  jud^. 

He  feU  a  victim  to  the  Asiatic  cholera  at 
his  house  in  Hyde  Park  Gardens  on  July  11, 
1819,  leaving  four  children  by  his  wife, 
Anna,  sister  of  Samuel  Duckworth,  Esq., 
master  in  Chancerv. 

OOLVIEBIEBS,  OiLBEBT  DE,  or  COLITM- 
SABII8,  was  of  a  Norman  family.  He  is 
mentioned  only  once  by  Madox  (i  131)  as  a 
justice  itinerant  into  Wiltshire  on  the  roll 
of  23  Henr^  II.,  1177.    He  held  a  fourth 

rb  ui  a  kmght*8  fee  in  England  of  William 
Roumare;  and  Philip  de  Columbiers, 
probably  his  son,  was  fermor  of  the  forest 
of  Roumare,  in  Normandy,  in  1180.  (JRot. 
Seace,  ybrmannia,  ii.  dx.) 

OOLVKBIEBS,  Matthew  de,  is  con- 
founded by  Dugdale  {Baronage,  i  683)  with 
three  others  of  the  same  name  and  family 
flomishing  about  the  same  time.  It  seems 
probable  uiat  he  was  the  son  of  Michael,  the 
mother  of  another  Matthew,  by  his  wife 
Avicia,  daughter  of  Elias  Croc 

In  44  Henry  HI.  he  was  constituted  go- 
vernor of  the  castle  of  Salisbury,  and  soon 
after  joined  the  rebellious  barons,  by  whom, 
after  the  battle  of  Lewes,  he  was  made 
8Dvemor  of  Rockingham  Castle.  He  avaUed 
bimself  of  the  Dictum  de  Kenilworth  to 
make  his  peace,  and  was  appointed  warden 
of  the  forests  south  of  the  Trent.  Although 
Dugdale  introduces  him  as  an  ordinary  jus- 
tice itinerant  in  53  Henry  HI.,  1268.  it 
seems  more  probable  that  his  duties  on  tnat 
oeeamon  were  confined  to  the  trial  of  pleas 
of  the  forest,  aa  well  on  account  of  his  above- 
OMBtiooed  appointment  as  because  the  com- 
mimMxi  waa  neaded  by  Roger  de  Clifford, 
tbe  ddef  justice  of  the  forests.    If  Dug- 


COMYNS 


183 


dale's  statement,  that  this  Matthew  died  in 
1  Edward  I.,  be  correct,  which  is  not  im- 
probable (diL  Inoms.  p.nL  L  53),  there 
must  have  been  still  another  Matthew,  who 
was  chief  assessor  in  Hampshire  of  the  fif- 
teenth granted  in  3  Edward  I.  (Pari:  Writs, 
i.  3),  and  one  of  the  king's  butiers  in  the 
following  year,  to  whom  was  committed  in 
the  sixth  year  the  office  of  one  of  the  king's 
chamberhuns,  and  of  gau((er  of  the  wines 
sold  in  Englimd.  (Devon's  Issues  Exck,  ilL 
02 ;  Abb,  RoL  Orig.  i.  31.)  He  was  a  jus- 
tice itinerant  of  the  forests  in  8  Edwara  L, 
1280,  and  his  death  is  recorded  in  10  Ed- 
ward L,  when  his  brother  Michael  did 
homage  for  the  lands  he  held  in  capite. 
(Abb.  Hot.  Orig.  I  41.)  To  make  the  diffi- 
cult still  greater,  there  is  among  the  re- 
corcts  a  roll  entitied  '  Compotus  Math»i  de 
Columbariis  Camerarii  vinorum,'  from  Mi- 
chaelmas at  the  end  of  the  ninth  year  to 
the  same  feast  in  the  thirteenth;  and  a 
Matthew  is  again  mentioned  as  king's  butier 
in  18  Edward  L  (2  Benort,  PMic  Hecards, 
App.  ii.  55 ;  CaL  Hot.  Pat.  54.) 

C01CTH8,  Jonx,  was  bom  about  the  year 
1667.  His  father,  WiUiam  Comyns,  a  bar- 
rister of  Lincoln's  Inn,  was  descended  from 
a  family  of  that  name  seated  at  Dagenham 
in  Essex;  and  bis  mother  was  Elizabeth, 
daughter  and  coheir  of  Matthew  Rudd,  of 
Little  Baddow  in  the  same  county.  Their 
son  was  educated  in  Queens'  College.  Cam- 
brid^,  and  became  a  student  in  his  father's 
inn  m  May  1683^  where  he  took  his  degree 
of  barrister  in  May  1690.  Elected  member 
of  tbe  House  of  Commons  in  the  last  par- 
liament of  William  III.  for  Maiden,  be  re- 
presented that  borough  (except  from  1708 
to  1710)  till  1726,  when  he  was  promoted 
to  the  bench. 

As  a  lawyer  he  early  laid  the  foundation 
of  tbat  character  for  learning  and  industry 
which  he  ultimately  attained.  The  first 
case  in  his  Reports  is  dated  so  soon  as 
Hilary  Term  1605.  His  reputation  was  soon 
established,  and  in  1706  he  was  summoned 
to  tbe  degree  of  serjeant  He  travelled 
the  Home  Circuit,  and  in  1719  he  was 
counsel  for  the  defence  in  the  absurd  pro- 
secution for  vagrancT  instituted  against  a 
clergyman  for  preaching  a  charity  sermon 
at  Chislehurst  in  behalf  of  the  poor  children 
of  a  parish  in  London,  four  or  five  of  them 
being  present. 

Notwithstanding  his  high  repute  as  a 
lawyer,  it  was  not  till  twenty  years  after 
he  assumed  the  coif  that  he  was  promoted 
to  the  bench.  On  November  7,  1726,  he 
was  appointed  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer, 
where  ne  remained  upwards  of  nine  years, 
when  he  removed  to  the  Common  Pleas  in 
January  1736.  Two  years  and  a  half  after 
this  he  was  •promoted,  on  July  7, 1738,  to 
the  head  of  the  Court  of  Exchequer,  where 
his  presidency  lasted  littie  more  than  two 


184  CONINGSBY  CONSTANTnS 


yean,  his  death  occurring,  at  the  age  of 
seventy-three,  on  Novemher  13, 1740.  He 
was  hurled  at  Writtle,  near  Chelmsford, 
where  is  a  monumental  inscription  to  him, 


of  the  above-named  Humphrey,  was  edu- 
cated at  Eton,  and  Kin^*s  College,  Cam- 
bridge, whither  he  went  in  1407.  He  then 
became  a  member  of  the  Imier  Temple, 


surmounted  by  his  bust.  (State  Triab,  zv.  |  where  he  was  reader  in  Lent  1519,  and 
1412;  Lord  Jtai/mond,  1430 ;  Comyn^  Be^  \  again  in  Lent -1526.  In  1616  he  was  in 
portSy  687.)  \  the  commission  for  gaol  delivezy  at  King^s 

The  two  works,  the  labour  of  his  life,  |  Lynn,  and  was  named  in  June  1629  a 
on  which  his  fame  as  one  of  the  greatest  j  commissioner  to  assist  Cardinal  Wolsey 
lawyers  of  his  time  is  permanently  esta-  in  hearing  causes  in  Chancery.  He  was 
blisued,  did  not  see  the  light  till  some  years  recorder  of  Lynn,  for  which  he  sat  in  par- 
after  his  death.  His  Reports,  which  ter-  |  liament  in  1637,  one  of  the  prothonotaiiea 
minate  in  his  last  year,  were  first  published  of  the  Common  Pleas,  and  attorney  of  the 
in  1744,  and  his  '  Digest  of  the  Laws  of  |  duchy  of  Lancaster,  from  the  latter  t£ 
England '  was  delayed  till  1762.  By  the  !  which  he  was  removed  on  February  1640 
unanimous  assent  of  the  most  eminent  men  on  being  chaiged  with  counselling  Sir  John 
in  the  profession,  the  latter  is  acknowledged  ;  Shelton  to  inake  a  fraudulent  will  of  his 
to  be  the  most  accurate,  methodical,  and  lands,  and  committed  to  the  Tower.  That 
comprehensive  abridgment  of  the  law,  pro-  I  this  charge  was  without  foundation  may 
found  in  its  learning  and  easy  of  reference  be  pre.sumed  from  his  beiufi:  released  in 
to  the  authorities  cited.  |  ten  days,  and  being  selected  within  five 

Sir  John  married  three  times.  His  first  months  to  be  a  judge  of  the  King*s  Bench, 
wife  was  Anne,  daughter  and  coheir  of  Dr.  '  to  which  he  was  appoiuted  ou  July  6, 
Nathaniel  Gurdon,  rector  of  Chelmsford ;  '  1640.  It  would  seem  that  he  sat  fittls 
his  second  was  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  —  more  than  four  months,  and  that  Edward 
Courthope,  of  Kent;  and  his  third  was  Morvin  succeeded  him  ou  November  20. 
Anne,  daughter  of — Wilbraham.  Neither  (Dtiff dale's  Orig,  163,  172;  Hifmer,  ziv. 
brought  him  any  issue.  (MoraiWs  Essejc^  '  738.) 
ii.  60 ;  Gent.  Mag,  x.  671,  Ix.  300.)  He  resided  in  the  Woollen  Market  in 

CONINOSBT,  HuMPnREY,  whose  ancestor  '  Lynn,  and  at  Eston  Hall,  Wallingtoo, 
was  lord  of  the  manor  of  Coningsby  in  Lin-  ;  Norfolk.  By  his  wife,  a  daughter  of  — 
colnahire  as  early  as  the  reign  of  King  '  Thursby,  of  that  county,  he  had  an  only 
John,  was  the  son  of  Thomas  Coningsby,  of  son,  Christopher,  who  was  killed  at  MusmI- 
Nene  Solers  in  Shropshire,  by  his  wife,  the  burgh  in  Scotland.  (^Aih,  Cantab.  76.) 
daughter  and  heir  of^ —  Waldyfie.  ,      CONBTAllTnB,    W  alter     de    (Aech- 

^ter  pursuing  his  legal  studies  at  the  Bisnor  of  Houen),  was  a  canon  of  Kouen, 
Inner  Temple,  he  is  mentioned  as  an  advo-  and  held  a  responsible  post  in  the  Cum 
cate  in  the  Year  Books  in  1480,  and  as  Kegis  under  Henry  II.,  but  whether  as 
being  called  to  the  degree  of  the  coif  at  the  chancellor  or  vice-chancellor  it  would  be 
end  of  Tiinity  Term  1494,  9  Henry  VII.    difficult  to  define. 

During  the  whole  of  that  reign  he  had  a  In  1176  ho  was  raised  to  the  archdea- 
considerable  share  of  practice,  and  on  Oc-  |  conry  of  Oxford :  in  1170  he  liad  an  allov- 
tober  30,  1600,  was  made  one  of  the  king*s  |  ance  of  fifty  marks  for  providing  for  the 
Serjeants.  i  ambassadors  of  the  King  of  SicUy,  when 

Within  a  month  after  the  accession  of   they   came    to    demand    Henry's    second 


Henry  VHI. — ^viz.,  on  May  21,  1500 — he 
was  placed  in  the  King's  Bench  as  sole 
nuisne  j udge  and  was  knighted.    The  num- 


daughter,  Jane,  in  marriage ;  and  in  1180 
he  accounted  for  the  proceeds  of  the  abbeys 
of  Wilton  and  Eamsav,  and  of  the  honor 


oer  of  judges  was  afterwards  increased,  and  |  of  Arundel,  then  in  tlie  king's  hands,  <^ 
Sir  Humphrey  retained  his  ^lace  among  which  he  had  been  appointed  custos. 
them  for  a  very  extended  period,  his  seat  -  (Madojc,  i.  201,  367,  ii.  252. )  On  none  of 
not  appearing  to  be  supplied  till  the  middle  j  these  occasions  is  any  ofiicial  title  affixed 
of  1532.  !  to  his  name. 

He  resided,  and  according  to  Clutterbuck  I  He  held  the  living  of  Woolpit,  belon^iJDg 
(i.  444)  was  buried,  at  Aldenham  in  Hert-  '  to  the  abbey  of  St.  Edmunds,  until  June 
fordshire,  but  that  author  evidently  errs  in  1183,  when  he  was  elected  Bishop  of  Ian- 
dating  his  death  in  1551.  By  liis  wife,  coin  (Chron,  Jono,  Brakvlonda,  oo,  126), 
who  was  a  daughter  of  —  Fercbie,  of  Lin-  |  from  which  see  he  was  promoted  in  the 
colnshire,  ho  left  three  sons  and  four  •  following  year  to  the  archbishopric  of 
daughters.  William,  his  second  son,  was  ^  Rouen.  In  1180  he  was  one  of  Henry's 
the  next-mentioned  judge ;  and  one  of  the  ambassadors  to  King  Philip  of  Fiance,  and 
descendants  of  Thomas,  his  eldest  son,  was  i  succeeded  in  obtaining  a  truce  with  that 
raised  to  the  earldom  of  Coningsby  in  1719,  |  monarch ;  and  in  1180  he  and  BaldwiDy 
which  is  now  extinct  (Chauncy,  461 ;  '  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  were  anpointed 
Blomf/ieitrtt  Xorfofk,  vii.  413.)  |  umpires  to  decide  the  diaputea  uuimilB 

C0VIVO8B7,  WiLUAX,  the  second  son    them. 


i 


COH8TA1ITIIS  OOOFER  185 

On  He]iiy*t  death  he  invested  Richard,  been  guided  by  prudence  and  diacretion, 
in  the  csthednl  of  Boneni  with  the  sword  and  not  to  have  been  deficient  in  firmness 
of  Nonnandy ;  and  attending  him  into  '  and  courage.  A  strong  proof  of  the  latter 
Fagland,  aaniled  at  his  coronation,  and  ■  would  be  shown  by  the  admonition  which, 
was  present  at  the  Goundlhdd  at  the  abbey  ..  according  to  Brompton,  he  gave  to  Kii^ 
of  KpewelL  He  accompanied  that  king  '.  Richard  against  ue  indulgence  of  his 
on  his  piomas  to  the  Holy  Land,  but  re*  three  vices — ^pride,  avarice,  and  lust ;  which 
toned  to  JBngland  in  February  1191,  es-  produced  the  monarch's  jesting  reply,  that 
ecoting  Queen  Eleanor  on  her  departure  |  he  would  give  the  first  to  the  Templars,  the 
from  Sicily.  He  brought  with  him  a  letter  second  to  the  monks,  and  the  third  to  the 
from  King  Richard,  appointing  him  the  bishops.  Other  writers,  however,  attribute 
head  of  the  council  for  tiie  rule  of  the  king-  I  the  rebuke  to  another  divine.  (Godwin, 
dom ;  but  a  doubt  has  been  raised  as  to  its  ,  286 ;  Wendover,  iL  435,  iii  2-138 ;  Lord 
tttthenticity,  from  its  not  having  been  pro-  \  LytteUon^s  Henry  II.  iii.  441 ;  Linyard,  ii. 
dueed  till  some  months  after  his  arrival  in  |  335.) 

England.  Longchamp,  however,  was  dis-  .  COOFEB,  Ai^thoxy  Ashley  (Earl  of 
iiii»ed  in  October  1191,  and  the  Arch-  Shaptesbuby).  The  ancestor:}  of  this  sa- 
biehop  of  Rouen,  by  virtue  not  onlv  of  this  i  gadous  but  versatile  statesman  were  of  a 
letter,  but  of  the  appointment  of  Prince  I  class  of  opulent  gentrv ;  but,  from  the  fre- 
John  and  the  barons,  was  constituted  chief  :  quent  occurrence  of  the  surname,  his  direct 
jasticiarT.  i  lineage   cannot  with  certainty  be  traced 

Warned,  perhaps,  by  the  example  of  his  beyond  the  reign  of  Henry  \ll.  His  great- 
jffedeceasor,  he  was  moderate  in  the  exer-  ,  great-grandfather,  John  Cooper,  possessed 
dse  of  his   oflice,  and  cautious   to   avoid  ;  estates  in  Sussex  and  Hants,  ana  died  in 


undertaking  any  important  act  without  the 
advice  of  the  barons  and  the  consent  of  his 
associated  coundL    (Madox,  i,  220.) 

When  Richard*s  place  of  confinement  was 
discovered,  and  the  terms  of  his  enlarge- 
ment were  settled,  Walter  de  Constantiis 

wss  summoned  to  attend  him  in  Germany,  \  he  was  succeeded  by  his  son,  also  John,  who 
and  his  place  of  chief  justiciary  was,  m    was  created  a  baronet  in  1022,  was  member 


1495.  His  great-grandfather  Richard,  de- 
signated Solutarius  under  Henry  VIII.,  pur- 
chased Paulett  in  Somersetshire,  ond  died 
in  15G0.  His  grandfather  John  represented 
Whitchurch  in  parliament,  and  was  knighted 
by  Queen  Elizabeth.    On  his  death  in  1010 


Sqitember    1103,   conferred    on    Hubert 
Walter,  the  new  Archbishop  of  Canter- 


for  Poole  in  1628,  and  by  his  first  marriage, 
with  Anne,  daughter  and  heir  of  Sir  An- 


borv.    He    accompanied    Queen    Eleanor  |  thony  Ashley,  of  Wimbonic  St.  Giles,  Bart., 
with  the  king's  ransom,  paid  it  to  the  em-  j  became  the  father  of  two  sons,  the  eldest 
peror  at  Mentz,  and  procured   Richard's    of  whom  was  the  future  lord  chancellor, 
liberation.  Anthony   .Vshley  Cooper  was  bom  at 

In  1190  a  contest  arose  between  Walter  Wimbome  St.  Giles,  on  July  22,  1021, 
and  King  Richard,  in  consequence  of  the  and,  having  lost  his  father  in  10*31,  he  in- 
latter  interfering  with  some  of  the  property  heritod  a  largo  estate  before  he  was  ten 
of  the  church  of  Rouen.  The  archbishop  !  years  of  age.  From  Puritan  private  tutors 
thereupon  placed  Normandy  under  an  inter-  he  received  his  early  instruction,  till,  in 
diet,  which  produced  such  liorrible  con-  Lent  Term  1030,  he  was  entered  a  fellow- 
fusion  in  the  country  that  Richard,  unable  commoner  at  Exeter  College,  Oxford, 
to  relieve  the  inhabitants  by  any  other  I.  luler  the  tuition  of  Dr.  Prideaux,  the 
means,  was  compelled  to  appeal  to  Rome.  ]  rector,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Worcester,  he 
By  the  pope*s  interposition  the  interdict  made  such  progress  as  to  be  accounted, 
was  removed,  and  a  convention  was  made  according  to  the  description  of  his  eulogist, 
between  the  king  and  the  archbishop,  '  the  most  prodigious  youth  in  the  whole 
exchanging  the  land  in  dispute  for  certam  university.'  Bv  his  own  account  ho  was 
other  property  and  privileges,  no  doubt  more  famous  for  putting  an  end  to  the 
gzeatly  to  the  advantage  of  the  Church.  *  ill  custom  of  tuctdn^  freshmen,'  and  for 
(Xicoias's  Chronoioyy,  303.)  preventing  an  alteration   in  '  the   size  of 

On  the  accession  of  King  John  he  per-  ,  the  beer.  (Shaftesbury  Papers^  17.)  Re- 
/bmied  the  ceremony  of  investiture  to  the  maining  at  college  about  two  years,  he 
dokedom  of  Normandy  in  the  church  of  then,  in  consequence  of  lawsuits  in  which 
Rouen,  as  he  had  previously  done  to  his  he  was  involv^  with  some  near  relatives, 
rop]  brother ;  and  in  the  course  of  that  -  caused  liimself  to  be  admitted  into  the 
t^fcn  his  active  life  was  terminated.  society  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  on  February  18, 

Richard  of  Devizes  (27,  31,  45)  wrote  1638.  His  legal  studies  there  were  not 
too  near  his  time^  and  was  too  much  of  a  j  interrupted  till  the  commencement  of  the 
(MrtiBan,  to  wammt  his  readers  in  placing  !  Great  Rebellion,  for  though  he  was  elected 


tatiie  credence  on  the  hvpocritical  character 


^  contrary,  hia  conduct  seems  to  have 


member  for  Tewkesbury  in  the  paruament 


vhieh  he  ascribes  to  the  archbishop.    On    of  April  1040,  when  he  was  not  yet  nine- 


teen, his  senatorial  duties,  during  the  short 


186 


COOPER 


time  it  lasted,  could  not  have  been  very 
onerous ;  and  he  was  not  admitted  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Long  Parliament,  which  hema 
its  eventful  sittings  in  the  following  No- 
vember, although  elected  for  Downton  in 
Wiltshire  by  a  double  return,  decided  in 
his  favour  by  the  committee  of  privileges, 
that  body  having  omitted,  purposely,  to 
report  their  decision  to  the  house. 

At  the  commencement  of  the  contest 
between  the  king  and  the  parliament  Sir 
Anthony  was  a  professed  loyalist.  In  1G42 
he  acknowledges  that  he  was  with  the  king 
at  Nottingham  and  Derby,  adding  eva- 
sively, *  but  only  as  a  spectator ; '  yet  soon 
after  he  accepted  a  commission  from  the 
Marquis  of  Iiertford,  the  king's  general,  to 
treat  for  the  surrender  of  Dorchester  and 
Weymouth.  This  he  effected,  and  was  j 
thereupon  made  governor  of  the  latter 
place,  colonel  of  a  regiment  of  foot,  and 
captain  of  a  troop  of  horse,  both  of  which 
he  raised  at  his  own  charge.  And  after  ; 
Hertford's  dismissal  he  received  the  king's  i 
confirmation  in  his  government,  and  the  ! 
appointments  of  high  sheriff  of  Dorset  and  ! 
president  of  the  council  of  war  in  those 
parts. 

But  the  baronet's  loyalty  was  not  very 
deeply  rooted.    According  to  Clarendon,  i 
when  it  was  thought  necessarv  to  substi-  | 
tute  Colonel  Ashbumham  in  his  place  as 
governor   of   Weymouth,    he    tooK   such  | 
offence  that  he  deserted  his  colours,  and,  j 
immediately  joining  the  other  side,  gave  i 
himself  up  '  body  and  soul  to  the  service  of  j 
the  parliament,  with  an  implacable  animo- 
sity against  the  ro^al  interest.*   He  himself 
says  in  his  autobiography  that,  not  with-  j 
standing  a  flattering  letter  from  tiie  king,  he 
resigned  his  government  and  came  away 
to  the  parliament,  '  resolving  to  cast  him- 
self on  God,  and  to  follow  the  dictates  of 
a  good   conscience.'    Mr.  Locke    gives  a 
somewhat  different  account  of  tlie  cause  of 
his  defection ;  but  the  uncontradicted  fact 
remains  that  he  went  over  to  the  malcon- 
tents and  was  hailed  by  them  as  a  great 
acquisition.  He  was  at  once  entrusted  with 
a  command  as  field-marshal-^neral  of  the 
army  in  Dorsetshire,  and  with  hb  forces 
he  besieged  and  took  Wareham,  and  com- 
manded in  chief  at  the  taking  of  Blandford 
and  Abbotsbury,  and  in  the  relief  of  Taun- 
ton, besieged  by  the  royalists.    His  mili- 
tary career  seems  to  have  terminated  with 
the  year  1645,  in  the  September  of  which 
he  was  probably  renewing  his  attempt  to 
have  his  right  to  his  seat  for  Downton 
acknowledged.   Though  he  did  not  succeed 
in  this,  he  was  in  such  favour  and  trust 
with  the  parliament  that  in  November  he 
was  made  sheriff  of  Norfolk,  and  in  January 
1647  sheriff  of  Wiltshire,  with  the  addi- 
tional favour  of  permisaion  to  live  out  of 
the  county,    Donog  the  two  months  pr&- 


COOPER 

vious  to  the  king's  execution  he  was  at 
his  house  in  Dorsetshire,  and  that  event  i» 
not  even  noticed  in  his  d^air,  which  merelj 
records  his  arrival  at  l^nhot  in  his 
journey  to  London,  where  be  arrived  on 
the  following  day.  He  subscribed  the  en- 
gagement in  1650,  and  in  January  1652  he 
was  appointed  one  of  the  committee  on 
the  abuses  and  delays  of  the  law^  and  the 
remedies  to  be  adopted.  For  his  foimer 
connection  with  the  king  he  had  been  pei^ 
mitted  in  1644  to  compound  by  the  payment 
of  oOOil,  which  was  arterwarda  remitted  by 
Cromwell ;  but  he  was  not  entirely  cleare!^ 
of  his  delinquency  till  March  16^3,  when 
the  Commons  passed  the  following  resola- 
tion :  '  That  Sir  A.  A.  Cooper,  fiart,  be 
and  is  hereby  pardoned  of  all  delinqncoicv, 
and  be  and  is  hereby  made  capable  of  all 
other  privileges  as  any  other  of  the  people 
of  this  nation  are.' 

On  the  forcible  expulsion  of  that  body, 
Sir  Anthony  was  summoned  to  Barebone'ft 
Parliament  in  July  1650,  as  one  of  Crom- 
well's nominees  for  Wiltshire^  and  was 
elected  for  the  same  county,  and  also  for 
Poole  and  Tewkesbury,  in  the  subsequent 
parliament,  which  met  in  September  I6>>4, 
and  which  was  dissolved  in  the  following 
January.  In  both  these  assemblies  he  wu 
in  Cromweirs  confidence,  acting  in  his  in- 
terest in  each,  and  being  one  of  his  coundi 
of  state,  both  as  general  and  protector. 
Dryden,  in  his  '  Mc&l,'  with  much  malice, 
but  with  some  apparent  truth,  describes 
him  at  this  time  as 

A  vermin,  wriggling  in  th*  osurpcr^s  ear: 
Bartering  his  venal  wit  for  sums  of  f^old. 
He  cast  himself  into  the  saint-like  mould, 
Groan*d,  si^h*d,  and  pray'd,  while  godliness 

was  gain. 
The  loudest  bagpipe  of  the  squeaking  train. 

But  soon   another  change  took  place. 
From  the  supporter,  he  became  the  enemy 
of  Cromwell,  who,  according  to  Anthoinr 
Wood  and  Ludlow,  understanding  his  cha- 
racter, refused  to  receive  him  as  his  son- 
in-law.     Whatever  was  the  cause,  it  is 
certain  that  in  the  parliament  of  September 
1656,  to  which  he  was  returned  again  for 
Wiltshire,  he  did  not  receive  the  requisite 
certificate  of  approval  from  the  council; 
and  he  was  consequently,  with  above  ninety 
other  members  in  the  same  predicament 
partly   l^sbyterians  and   partly  Bepub- 
licans,  excluded  from  sitting,  notwithstand- 
ing the   bold  remonstrance    andost  this 
tyrannous  proceeding  addressed  by  them 
to  the  house.  Those  who  remained,  having 
confirmed  Cromwell*s  power,  and  enabled 
him  to  appoint  a  certain  number  of  peen» 
the  exclucied  members,  taking  ^e  oaHi  of 
fidelity  to  the  protector,  were  admttted  to 
sit  in  the  session  that  fdlowed  in  JmoMf 
1668,  and  by  their  nnmbernetiljf  tf  f  qtUuiwd 
aU  that  had  preceded.    A  ouuUiwcny  WM 


COOPER 

immediately  raised,  in  which  Sir  Anthony 
actively  joined,  aa  to  the  title  and  pri- 
Tileges  of  the  'other  houM,'  as  it  was 
called,  which  was  carried  on  with  so  much 
violence  that  the  protector  hurriedly  dis- 
solved  the  parliament  after  a  fortnight's 
ritthif .  He  never  called  another  during 
his  life,  which  terminated  seven  months 
afterwards. 

The  short  session  of  Protector  Richard's 
parliament,  to  which  Sir  Anthony  was  re- 
turned both  for  his  old  county  and  for 
Poole,  was  wasted  in  tiresome  and  insidious 
debates,  renewing  the  old  question  about 
the  'other  house,'  and  discussmg  various 
points  in  the  new  form  of  government.  In 
these  Sir  Anthony  took  a  prominent  part ; 
ind  in  a  publishei^  speech  of  great  satirical 
power  he  had  the  bad  taste  to  blacken 
the  character  of  the  protector  who  had 
fosteied  him,  and  with  whose  administra- 
tion he  had  been  intimately  connected. 
{Bmicn's  Diary ,  iv.  286.)  The  dissolution 
of  this  parliament  on  Anril  22,  1060,  was 
Riduurd  8  fall ;  and  the  Rump  Parliament, 
which  then  resumed  its  sittings,  appointed 
a  council  of  state,  of  which  Sir  Anthony 
was  elected  as  a  member.  His  fidelity  to 
the  Commonwealth  began,  however,  to  be 
doubted.  In  May  he  was  publicly  chai^d 
inth  holding  correspondence  with  the  kmg, 
and  so  loud  were  his  professions  of  in- 
nocence, and  his  imprecations  on  himself 
if  he  were  guilty,  that  they  only  added 
weight  to  the  suspicions  against  him. 
Whether  he  was  imprisoned  on  this  charge 
£eems  uncertain,  but  it  was  some  months 
before  he  got  rid  of  it.  Though  there  can 
be  little  doubt  that  he  was  enj^aged  in  the 
plots  that  were  then  contrivmg  in  behalf 
of  the  king,  he  managed  so  artfullv  that 
he  procured  his  acquittal  by  the  parliament 
in  ue  following  September.  On  the  second 
expulsion  of  the  Kump  by  the  army,  in 
October,  the  government  was  carried  on  by 
a  council  of  safety,  whose  powers  lasted 
only  two  months,*  when  the  Rump  was 
agam  restored.  To  this  last  event  Sir  An- 
thony mainly  contributed,  and  was  admitted 
upon  his  former  election  to  take  his  seat 
for  Downton  on  Januaiy  7, 1660.  Besides 
resuming  his  position  as  a  member  of  the 
council  of  state,  he  was  made  colonel  of 
the  regiment  of  horse  lately  commanded  by 
Fleetwood,  with  which  he  joined  Monk, 
and  continued  to  act  in  conjunction  with 
that  general  till  the  restoration  of  the  king. 

llie  Long  Parliament  dissolved  itself 
in  March  1(160^  and  to  the  convention,  or 
Healing  Parliament,  that  met  in  the  follow- 
ing month,  Sir  Anthony  was  retunied  by 
kis  old  constituents.  lie  was  one  of  the 
depatation  sent  by  the  two  houses  to  the 
Bsgoe  to  invite  the  king  to  return,  and 
ms  among  tiie  first  who  were  sworn  of  the 
pny  ooDHcil;  ^  the  rather/  says  Clarendon, 


COOPER 


187 


'  because,  having  lately  married  a  niece  of 
the  Earl  of  Southampton,  it  was  believed 
that  his  slippery  humour  would  be  easily 
restrained  and  fixed  ^7  the  uncle.'  When 
that  earl  was  made  lord  high  treasurer, 
in  September  1660,  Lord  Clarendon  states 
that  sir  Anthony  was  appointed  chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer.  Other  authorities  delay 
his  entrance  mto  the  office  till  May  1667  ; 
but  Clarendon's  account  is  confirmed,  not 
only  by  several  documents  addressed  to 
him  in  that  character  in  the  State  Paper 
Office,  but  by  Sir  Anthony  himself,  in  nis 
speecn  in  1672  on  Mr.  Serjeant  Thurland's 
beine  constituted  a  baron,  in  which  he 
alludes  to  his  '  eleven  years'  experience  in 
that  court'  He  has  been  blamed,  though 
without  much  reason,  for  allowing  himself 
to  be  named  on  the  commission  for  the  trial 
of  the  regicides,  in  the  proceedbgs  of 
which,  however,  he  does  not  appear  to  have 
taken  any  part.  On  April  20,  1661,  he 
was  called  up  to  the  House  of  Peers  by  the 
titie  of  Baron  Ashley  of  Wimbome  St. 
Giles,  the  introduction  to  his  patent,  while 
it  records  his  loyalty  '  in  man^  respects '  to 
Kin^  Charles  L,  and  his  assistance  in  re- 
stonng  King  Charles  II.,  carefully  abstain- 
ing from  all  allusion  to  his  conduct  in  the 
interval,  in  deserting  the  former  kin^,  in 
aiding  his  rebellious  subjects,  and  in  joming 
in  the  counsels  of  the  usurper. 

Till  the  death  of  his  uncle  Southampton 
in  1667  Lord  Ashley  took  comparatively 
little  ostensible  interest  in  party  politics, 
but  showed  himself  an  adept  in  the  busi- 
ness of  the  state.  At  the  same  time  ho 
was  preparing  his  way  by  making  himself 
agreeable  to  the  king,  and  by  encouraging, 
or  at  least  countenancing,  the  scandalous 
intrigues  of  the  court.  Ever  ready  in  re- 
partee, in  which  the  king  delighted,  he 
once,  when  his  majesty,  in  reference  to  his 
amours,  said  niilingly  to  him,  '  I  believe 
thou  art  the  wickedest  fellow  in  my  domi- 
nions,' replied  with  a  low  bow  and  grave 
face,  '  Of  a  mbjecty  may  it  please  your  ma- 
jesty, I  believe  I  am.' 

On  the  dismissal  of  Lord  Chancellor 
Clarendon  in  that  year  a  new  career  was 
opened  to  Ashley*s  ambition.  He  had 
already  been  appointed  lord  lieutenant  of 
Dorsetshire,  and  president  of  the  new  coun- 
cil of  trade  and  plantations ;  and,  gradually 
ingratiating  himself  with  his  easy  sovereicrn, 
as  well  by  his  pliancy  and  wit  as  by  his 
facilitv  in  the  invention  of  expedients,  he 
soon  became  one  of  a  secret  cabinet  with 
Buckingham,  Clifford,  Arlington,  and  Lau- 
derdale, by  which  every  measure  was  de- 
termined before  it  was  brought  publicly 
forward,  and  which,  from  the  initials  of  the 
names  of  its  members,  acquired  the  desig- 
nation of  the  Cabal.  Their  ministry  was 
rendered  conspicuous  by  the  shutting  up  of 
the.  Exchequer,  the  rupture  of  the  tnple 


188 


CX)OPER 


alliance,  and  the  mismanagement  of  the 
religious  questions  which  then  agitated  the 
country ;  out  though  the  dlBczemt  of  these 
measures  has  been  ffenerallj  fathered  upon 
Lord  Ashley,  Mr.  Christie,  in  the  '  Shaftes- 
bury Papers'  (iL  77,  90),  has  shown  sa- 
tisfactorily that  he  objected  to  and  op- 
posed the  two  former.  Whether  he  were 
the  opponent  or  supporter  of  them,  the 
king,  regarding  him  with  ^rsonal  affection, 
and  appreciating  his  abilities,  raised  him  to 
the  earldom  of  Shaftesbury  on  April  23, 
1672.  Not  satisfied  with  this  elevation, 
the  new  earl  aspired  to  a  still  higher  posi- 
tion, for  the  attainment  of  which  the  re- 
moral  of  Lord  Keeper  Bridgeman  was 
necessary.  His  intrigue  for  that  purpose 
was  successful.  An  opportunity  &oon  was 
taken,  on  tlie  lord  keeper's  resistance  to 
some  of  the  ministerial  measures,  to  repre- 
sent him  as  weak  and  incapable,  and  the 
Great  Seal,  being  consequently  taken  from 
him,  was  given  to  Shaftesbury  on  the  17th 
of  the  follcwinff  November,  with  the  title 
of  lord  chancellor.  While  he  held  that 
oilice  he  resided  at  Exeter  House. 

Though  educated  at  Lincoln's  Inn,  he 
had  never  practised  as  a  lawyer,  his  time 
during  the  rebellion  having  been  employed 
in  active  service,  and  since  the  Restoration 
in  court  attendance.  The  consequence  was 
that  he  had  so  little  respect  for  the  profes- 
sion for  which  he  had  been  intended  that 
he  despised  the  forms  by  which  its  proceed- 
ings were  res^ulated,  and  even  reiused  to 
assume  the  decent  habit  of  a  judge.  *He 
sat  on  the  bench  in  an  ash-coloured  gown, 
silver-laced,  and  full-ribboned  pantaloons 
displaved,  without  any  black  at  all  in  his 
garo;  and  at  first,  setting  all  rules  at 
defiance,  he  was  frequently  obliged  on 
rehearing  to  reverse  his  own  orders,  so 
that  at  last  he  became  more  reasonable, 
and  submissive  to  the  formulae  of  the  court. 
Without  regarding  the  extravagant  praises 
of  his  eulogists  on  the  one  side,  or  the  ad- 
verse insinuations  of  his  detractors  on  the 
other,  his  decrees  in  Chancery  would  appear 
to  have  met  with  general  approbation ;  for 
in  Dryden*s  severe  description  of  him  under 
the  name  of  Achitophet  he  gives  him  full 
credit  for  j  udicial  integrity.  Xing  Charles, 
too,  is  reported  to  have  said  of  him,  on  de- 
ciding a  very  difficult  case,  that  '  he  had  a 
chancellor  that  was  master  of  more  law 
than  all  his  judges,  and  was  possessed  of 
more  divinity  than  all  his  bishops.* 

It  was  not  in  Shaftesbury's  nature  to  be 
steady;  even  the  high  position  which  he 
enjoyed  could  not  fix  him.  Finding  the 
opposition  more  strong  than  he  expected, 
and  fearing  the  personal  consequences 
which  the  leaders  threatened,  he  deter- 
mined to  avert  the  danger  by  joining 
their  ranks.  Even  while  chancellor  he 
ahowed  hit  waveriDg  dispoatian  by  gra- 


COOPER 

dually  deserting  the  measures  he  had 
originated^  and  endeavouring  to  thwart 
the  objects  of  the  king.  But  his  imiii»> 
diate  hopes  were  disappointed:  hie  plans 
being  discovered,  the  parliament  was  pro- 
rogued, and  the  Seal  taken  from  him  on 
November  9,  1673,  after  a  tenure  of  hm 
than  a  year. 

Immediately  on  his  disgrace  he  was  ihe 
chosen  leader  of  the  discontented  jNurtj, 
and,  without  entering  into  the  qnestion  •• 
to  the  policy  pursued  on  either  side^  fSor 
which  this  is  not  the  place,  we  can  aotj 
look  to  the  repeated  treachery  of  the  man. 
From  an  arbitrary  minister  he  was  con- 
verted into  the  head  of  a  popular  faetko, 
and  from  a  royal  favourite  he  became  the 
king's  enemy,  ungratefully  repaying  the 
honours  and  favours  he  had  received  by 
continual  attempts  to  injure  and  ruin  the 
family  of  his  benefactor.  It  bears  too 
strong  a  resemblance  to  his  former  de- 
fections, and  exhibits,  if  not  the  perfidy, 
at  least  the  fickleness  of  his  character. 

The  remainder  of  his  life  was  spent  in 
factious  opposition,  his  chief  object  eppe* 
rently  being  to  exclude  the  Duke  of  loik 
from  the  succession.    For  this  purpose  he 
entered  into  all  sorts  of  intrigues  and  oon- 
spirades,  exciting  the  cry  of  *  No  Popeiy/ 
and  pretending  first  that  his  own  life  wm 
in  danger  from  the  Koman  Catholics,  tad 
next  that  the  murder  of  the  king  was  thdr 
object.    Foremost  in  opposing  tul  the  mea- 
sures proposed  by  the  court,  his  manosuvras 
at  one  time  subjected  him  to  an  imprison- 
ment in  the  Tower  for  nearly  a  year,  and 
at  another  they  were  so  far  successful  that 
he  forced  himself  again  into  the  ministiy 
as  president  of  the  new  council  of  thirty. 
This  event  was  effected  in  April  1679,  on 
the  fall  of  the  Earl  of  Danby,  and  durin? 
the  excitement  produced  by  the  pretendea 
Popish  Plot,  which  had  been  openly  nor* 
tiii-ed  by  Shaftesbury,  and  aided  by  luoi 
through  all  its  ramifications,  encouraf^ 
its  inventor,  the  infamous  Titus  Oates,  and 
explaining  away  his  various  contradictiou, 
and  those  of  his  peijured  coadjutors.    Even 
during  his  presidency  he  continued  to  conn- 
teract  the  wishes  of  his  royal  master ;  and, 
opposing  a  bill  offered  by  the  king,  limiting 
the  powers  of  a  Catholic  successor  to  the 
throne,  supported  one  to  exclude  the  duke 
from  the  throne  itself.    On  this  the  king^ 
who  had  never  trusted  his  mutable  minisr 
ter,  designating  him  (from  his  stature  and 
his  falsehood)  as  *  Little  Sincerity,'  dis- 
missed him  from  his  councils  in  the  follow- 
ing October.    He  then  became  more  violsnt 
and  less  cautious  in  his  endeavours  to  ha- 
rass the  court     He  made  an  attempt  to 
present  the  Duke  of  York  aa  a  mjuawiti 
which  was  defisated  by  the  judgea  nmiilaailf 
disdiarging  the  grand  jury ;  IteadiocntWi 
if  he  did  not  originate,  moAmt  UU  d 


COOPER 

exdnnoEU  wKdeh,  though  it  passed  the 
House  of  Commons,  was  triumphantly  re- 
jected by  the  Lords;  and  he  even  pro- 
posed  a  nil  diTorcing  the  queoBy  that  the 
sudg  might  many  again  and  ha^e  a  Pro- 
testant Irair. 

The  Tiolence  of  his  agitation  at  length 
caused  its  own  defeat  The  people  beran 
to  open  their  eyes,  and  the  court  mti- 
Bately  regained  the  ascendency.  From 
the  poptilfur  and  patriotic  leader,  Shaftes- 
hury  became  the  suspected  and  tremblinff 
tnitor.  He  was  anested  and  committea 
to  the  Tower  in  July  1681 ;  and,  though 
SB  indictment  against  him  for  compasnng 
sod  imagining  the  death  of  the  king  was 
thrown  out  in  the  following  November  by 
a  grand  jury  packed  by  sherifb  of  his  own 
mrty  (a  medal  to  commemorate  this  event 
n  uie  subject  of  Dryden*8  bitter  poem 
esDed  'The  Medal'),  the  discovery  of  a 
tiessonable  association,  in  which  he  pro- 
bably was  engaged,  and  the  fear  lest  his 
eomiection  with  other  desperate  projects 
siionld  be  betrayed,  made  it  advisable  for 
him  to  At  the  country.  By  various  dis- 
guises  and  concealments  he  eluded  a  war- 
zant  iflsoed  against  him,  and  at  last  suc- 
cesded  in  escajping  to  Amsterdam,  where, 
two  months  aner,  he  died  on  January  21, 
1688,  of  the  gout  in  his  stomach.  His 
remains  were  conveyed  to  England,  and 
buried  at  Wimbome  St.  Giles,  where  his 
gieat-grandsou  in  1732  erected  a  noble 
monument,  with  just  such  an  encomiastic 
inscription  as  might  be  expected  from  an 
atoirmg  descendant. 

While  on  his  mission  to  King  Charles 
in  Holland  in  1660  he  received  an  injuiy 
fnm  the  overturning  of  his  carnage, 
triiich  caused  him  great  inconvenience  in 
his  after-life,  and  obliged  him  to  have 
continued  recourse  to  medical  advice. 
Among  those  who  attended  him  was  the 
celebrated  philosopher  John  Locke,  then 
a  young  man,  with  whom  his  lordship  was 
so  mvuSi  pleased  that  he  took  him  into  his 
household^  entrusted  to  him  the  education 
of  both  his  son  and  grandson,  and,  when  in 
office,  placed  him  in  some  responsible  and 
profitable  positions.  Shaftesbury's  publi- 
cations are  confined  to  speeches  and  poli- 
tical pamphlets  at  different  periods  of  his 
life,  and  contain  abundant  evidence,  were 
all  else  wanting,  of  his  unprincipled  muta- 
faihty  and  his  restless  turbulence. 

Shaftesbury  is  charged  with  participating 
is  all  the  vices  of  the  time  except  that  of 
bring  tenipted  by  pecuniarv  brioes;  and, 
though  all  must  acknowledge  his  talents, 
Ids  eloquence,  and  his  wi^  his  memoir 
orast  be  regarded  with  repugnance  by  all 
vho  remember  ^e  various  desertions  and 
iatiignes  of  his  career,  and  the  factious 
ficUeness  of  his  character.  His  only  claim 
for  the  respect  and  gratitude  of  posterity  is 


COPLET 


189 


the  Habeas  Corpus  Act,  which  was  passed 
by  his  instrumentality. 

The  earl  married  three  times — ^first,  so 
early  as  1639,  to  ^largaret,  daughter  of 
Thomas  Lord  Coventry,  lord  keeper,  who 
died  in  July  1649 ;  secondly,  in  April  1650, 
to  Frances,  daughter  of  David  Cedl,  Earl 
of  Exeter,  who  died  in  1654;  and  lastly, 
in  1656,  to  Margaret,  daughter  of  William 
Lord  Spencer  of  Wormleighton,  and  niece 
to  the  £ari  of  Southampton,  who  survived 
him.  He  had  issue  by  his  second  wife  only, 
two  sons,  of  whom  one  survived  him.  Of 
his  descendants  the  third  earl  was  the  cele- 
brated author  of  the  '  Characteristics ; '  and 
the  present,  the  seventh  earl,  has  already 
acqmred  a  high  reputation  for  his  charitablo 
exertions  for  the  good  of  mankind. 

COPLXT,  John  Sjsqletov  (Lobd  Ltnd- 
hurst),  was  bom  at  Boston  in  America  on 
May  21, 1772,  before  the  war  of  indepen- 
dence had  commenced,  and  he  lived  to  see 
the  disseverance  of  those  states,  the  union 
of  which  was  the  result  of  that  war.  His 
father,  John  Singleton  Copley,  of  Irish  ex- 
traction, was  then  practising  in  that  city 
the  art  in  which  he  became  afterwards  dis- 
tinguished in  Ensrland,  whither  he  brought 
his  family  when  nis  son  was  two  years  old. 
His  fame  was  soon  established  as  a  painter, 
both  in  portraiture  and  history;  and  the 
high  value  at  which  his  works  are  now  esti- 
mated is  proved  by  the  large  prices  they 
produced  m  the  recent  sale  of  the  late  lord 
chancellor's  collection.  The  artist  died  in 
1815,  aged  seventy-four,  when  his  son  had 
already  taken  the  first  steps  in  his  success- 
ful career :  and  his  wife,  who  was  a  daughter 
of  Richard  Clarke,  Esq.,  survived  till  1836, 
happv  in  witnessing  the  highest  honours  by 
which  her  son  was  graced. 

YouDg  Copley  was  originally  destined  for 
his  father's  profession,  in  the  elements  of 
which  he  made  some  pro^ss,  but  the  plan 
was  happily  set  aside  m  consequence  of 
the  mental  powers  he  early  exhibited.  At 
the  age  of  nineteen  he  was  sent  to  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge,  where  he  pursued  his 
studies  so  ener^tically  that  he  took  his 
degree  of  B.A.  m  1794,  with  the  honours 
of  second  wrangler  and  Smith's  prizeman, 
and  of  M.A.  in  1797,  having  in  the  interim 
b^n  elected  a  fellow  of  his  college.  His 
delight  in  mathematical  studies,  and  also 
in  practical  chemistry  and  mechanics,  he 
retained  throughout  his  long  life,  and  his 
attainments  in  them  were  of  infinite  service 
to  him  in  his  professional  career.  This  he 
commenced  by  entering  himself  as  a  member 
of  Lincoln's  Inn,  and  by  becoming  a  pupil 
of  Mr.  Tidd,  from  whose  instructions  so 
many  men  have  risen  to  eminence.  He 
spent  part  of  the  following  years  in  visiting 
tne  land  of  his  birth. 

On  June  8,  1804,  he  was  called  to  the 
bar,  and  selected  the  Midland  Circuit.   One 


190 


COPLEY 


of  his  earliest  clients  was  Lord  Pabnerston, 
the  late  prime  minister,  then  first  entering 
into  political  life,  for  whom  he  appeared 
before  a  committee  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons on  a  double  return  for  the  borough  of 
Horsham  in  1806,  but  failed  in  securing 
the  seat.  The  only  book  which  Mr.  Copley 
ever  published  with  his  name  was  a  renort 
of  that  case.  Both  on  the  dicuit  ana  in 
Westminster  Hall  he  gradually  acquired  a 
sufficient  practice  to  induce  him  to  accept 
the  degree  of  sexjeant-at-law  in  1813.  En- 
tering now  in  some  measure  into  public  life, 
he  avowed  tory,  or  what  would  now  be 
called  conservative,  prindples,  to  the  sur- 
prise of  some  of  his  contemporaries,  who 
charged  him  with  having  been  notorious  in 
the  enrlv  part  of  his  life  for  the  ultra-libe- 
rality of  nis  professions.  Whatever  were 
his  youthful  notions,  and  however  un- 
guardedly he  may  have  expressed  them 
among  his  private  associates,  it  is  hardly 
fair  to  refuse  a  man  the  exercise  of  more 
mature  reflection,  and  to  bind  him  down  to 
the  rash  phrases  of  a  juvenile  imagination, 
especially  when  he  had  never  joined  any 
whig  society,  nor  connected  himself  with 
any  public  measure  of  that  party.  But  the 
subject  of  the  charge  ever  denied  its  truth ; 
and  the  best  proof  of  the  sincerity  of  his 
convictions  is  his  steady  adherence  to  them, 
through  good  report  and  bad  report,  for  the 
long  period  of  fifty  subsequent  years. 

As  a  leading  advocate,  by  the  beautiful 
simplicity  of  nis  style,  by  the  logical  ar- 
rangement of  his  arguments,  and  by  the  apt- 
ness of  his  illustrations,  his  speeches  were 
wonderfuUy  effective  both  on  juries  and 
judges.  The  government  were  so  struck 
witn  the  talent  which  he  exhibited  that  in 
October  1817  he  was  spedally  retained  for 
the  crovm  in  the  indictments  against  Brand- 
reth  and  others  for  high  treason  tried  at 
Derby.  In  the  next  year,  besides  being 
made  king*s  serjeant  and  chief  justice  of 
Chester,  he  was  introduced  into  parliament 
for  the  ministerial  borough  of  Yarmouth  in 
the  Isle  of  Wight,  which  he  soon  after  ex- 
changed for  ^\^hburton;  and  in  1826  he 
had  the  honour  of  being  elected  as  repre- 
sentative of  his  own  university. 

In  the  senate  his  great  capacity  for 
debate  vrtm  so  efficiently  displayed  that 
in  July  1819  he  was  appointed  solicitor- 
general,  and  received  the  usual  accolade  of 
knighthood.  During  his  tenure  of  this 
office  the  spirit  of  sedition  was  prevalent 
throughout  England,  and  in  the  le^lative 
rememes  that  were  then  introduced,  as  well 
as  in  the  prosecution  of  Thistlewood  and  the 
other  Cato  Street  conspirators,  Sir  John  Cop- 
ley exhibited  his  extraordinary  talent.  In 
the  imfortunate  trial  also  of  Queen  Caroline 
it  was  his  duty  to  take  an  active  part,  in 
the  performance  of  which  he  tempered  the 
conviction  he  felt  of  the  guilt  or  the  ac- 


COPLEY 

cused  lady  with  the  decoruih  due  to  her 
exalted  rank,  satisMng  his  emplojers  l^^ 
his   admirable   performance,  witJioat  in- 
curring the  oblo<]^uy  to  which  thej  were 
'  subjected.    At  this  time  Lord  TenterdeOy 
in  a  letter  to  Sir  Egerton  Bridges,  gives 
this  opinion  of  him :  '  The  solidtor-geooal 
has  less  learning  than  the  attomey-genenl 
(QifTord),  but  a  much  better  person,  coun- 
tenance, and  manner ;  a  ^ood  head  and  a 
kind  heart,  and  not  deficient  in  1< 
I  suppose  he  will  soon  fill  one  of  our 
offices  in  the  law.'    (Lord  Campbelft 
Just.  iii.  296.)    In  January  1824  he  was 
promoted  to  the  attorney-generalship,  and 
on  September  14,  1826^  he  received  the 
patent  of  master  of  the  Rolls. 

He  held  the  latter  office  only  d^ht 
months.  On  Mr.  Canning  becoming  pnme 
minister  Lord  Eldon  resigned  the  Greet 
Seal,  which  was  delivered  to  Sir  Jdin 
Copley  on  April  80,  1827,  as  lord  chan- 
cellor, he  having  been  created  Baron 
Lyndhurst  a  few  days  before.  This  hk 
first  chancellorship  lasted  three  vears  uid 
seven  months,  dunng  the  succesnve  admi- 
nistrations of  Mr.  Canning,  Lord  Goderidh, 
and  the  Duke  of  Wellington.  On  the  ac- 
cession of  the  whigs  to  power  in  1  William 
IV.,  he  resigned  the  Seal  on  November 
22,  1830,  but  did  not  remain  unemployed 
quite  two  months.  He  accepted  the  jw- 
pointment  of  lord  chief  baron  of  the  £x- 
che(^uer  on  January  18,  1831,  in  the  place 
of  Sir  William  Alexander,  with  the  perfect 
imderstandin^  that  he  retained  his  political 
opinions.  His  independence  of  ministerial 
influence  was  shown  by  his  resistance,  with 
all  his  energy  and  strength,  of  the  bills  for 
reform  in  parliament,  and  of  various  other 
measures  proposed  by  the  party  while  it 
remained  in  power. 

When  the  conservatives  regained  the 
administration  he  was  at  once  replaced  at 
the  head  of  the  Court  of  Chanceir,  on 
November  21, 1834,  retaining  the  office  of 
lord  chief  baron  for  the  next  month.  His 
presidency  of  the  Exchequer  had  exhibited 
nis  high  judicial  canacitv,  and  had  been 
principally  distinguisned  \)j  the  luminooi 
judgment  which  he  pronounced  in  the 
great  case  of  Small  v,  Attwood.  which, 
though  it  was  reversed  on  appeal  in  the 
House  of  Lords  by  a  close  majority  of  a 
single  vote,  was  by  most  people  considered 
to  oe  well  founded,  and  by  all,  whether 
supporters  or  opposers,  greatly  admired. 

After  a  short  term  of  five  months  he 
again,  on  A^ril  23, 1835,  resigned  the  Seal 
to  his  political  opponents,  who  retained 
power  for  the  next  six  years.  During 
that  interval  he  maintained  the  asean- 
dency  he  had  gained  in  the  House  of 
Lordis,  bjr  his  powerful  oppoaitioii  to  As 
various  innovations  introdnoed  hj  tha 
whig  mimsten^   and   by   auhmitalig  to. 


COBBET 

the  houae  uaefal  amendments  of  the  law ; 
and  still  more  by  the  annual  comprehensive 
-exposure  of  the  meffective  legislation  at  the 
end  of  each  session,  in  which  he  visited  the 
successive  £ulures  with  alternate  rebuke 
and  sarcasm.  These  regular  attacks  in- 
creasing the  general  unpopularity  of  the 
partVy  Sie  ministers  were  at  lengtn  obliged 
to  reei^,  and  Lord  Lyndhurst.  was  in- 
stalled in  his  third  and  last  chancellorship 
on  September  3,  1841.  His  merits  haa 
been  recognised  and  rewarded  in  the  pre- 
vious year  by  his  university  electing  him 
their  lord  high  steward. 

For  nearly  five  years  he  devoted  himself 
to  his  jndiaal  duties,  till  the  retirement  of 
Sir  Rob^t  Feel,  when  he  resigned  the  Seal 
on  July  4,  1846.  When  the  conservative 
party  regained  power  for  short  periods  in 
1852  and  1858,  Xord  Lyndhurst  felt  him- 
€elf  too  old  to  undertfdce  the  responsible 
labours  of  the  chancellorship,  or  to  accept 
the  offered  seat  in  the  cabinet,  being  in  his 
eightieth  year  at  the  first  of  these  ^riods ; 
bat  during  nearly  the  whole  time  since  his 
resignation  to  almost  the  last  year  of  his 
life,  when  he  had  attained  his  ninetieth 
year,  he  entered  with  his  accustomed  spirit 
into  most  of  the  constitutional  questions 
that  arose,  and  surprised  the  house  by  his 
inteUectual  vigour. 

No  statesman  maintained  for  so  lonff  a 
succession  of  years  a  name  so  unsullied  as 
Lord  Lyndhurst,  and  few  have  died  in  pos« 
desdon  of  more  veneration  and  regard.  His 
death  occurred  from  natural  decay  on  Oc- 
tober 18, 1863,  in  the  ninety-third  year  of 
his  age,  at  his  house  in  George  Street, 
Ilanover  Square,  where  his  father  had 
lived  and  died. 

He  married,  first,  Sarah  Geary,  the 
daughter  of  Charles  Brunsden,  Esq.,  and 
widow  of  Colonel  Charles  Thomas,  of  the 
lust  Foot-fl;uards,  who  fell  at  Waterloo. 
By  her  he  had  three  daughters.  His  se- 
cood  wife  was  Georgiana,  daughter  of 
Lewis  Goldsmith,  Esq.,  by  whom  he  had 
one  daughter. 

COBBET,  Reoixau),  was  descended  from 
an  honourable  fiunily  seated  in  Shropshire 
ever  since  the  Conquest,  some  members  of 
^hich  were  barons  of  the  realm  from  the 
reign  of  Henry  II.  to  that  of  Edward  II., 
and  others  were  ancestors  of  baronetcies, 
all  of  which  are  extinct  except  that  of 
Corbet  of  Moreton  Corbet,  created  in 
l^^O^.  Reginald  was  the  second  son  of 
Sir  Robert  Corbet  of  Moreton  Corbet,  by 
Elizabeth,  the  daughter  of  Sir  Henry  Ver- 
non of  Haddon.  He  pursued  his  legal 
itodies  at  the  Middle  Temple,  and  was 
elected  reader  there  in  autumn  1551,  but 
hi«  reading  was  deferred  till  the  following 
Lent  On  October  27, 1568,  he  received  a 
summons  to  take  upon  him  the  degree  of 
the  coif  in  the  following  Easter,  but  Queen 


COBDELL 


191 


Mary's  death  intervening,  a  new  writ  be- 
came necessary,  and  the  solemnity  of  his 
inauguration  took  place  on  April  19,  1559. 
On  the  16th  of  the  next  October  he  was 
constituted  a  jud^  of  the  Queen's  Bench, 
where  he  sat  till  his  death  in  1566. 
(Plowdeti's  BeparU,  356.) 

He  married  Alice,  daughter  of  John 
Grate  wood,  Esq.,  and  by  her  he  had  a 
son  Eichajrd,  who  was  father  of  John 
Corbet,  of  Stoke  in  Shropshire,  created  a 
baronet  in  1627.  This  title  became  extinct 
in  1750  bj  the  death  of  its  sixth  possessor 
without  issue  ;  but  his  nephew,  Corbet 
d'Avenant  succeeding  to  his  estates  and 
assuming  nis  name,  had  a  new  creation  in 
1786,  which  also  became  extinct  at  his 
death  in  1823.  (  WotUm's  Baronet,  ii.  74, 
272,  274,  312.) 

COBDELL,  WiLLiAic,  the  son  of  John 
Cordell,  Esq.,  and  Eva,  daughter  of  Henry 
Webb,  of  lumbolton,  was  bom  at  Edmon- 
ton in  Middlesex,  and,  having  become  pos- 
sessed of  the  manor  of  Long  Melford  m 
Suffolk,  he  fixed  his  residence  there,  his 
family  having  been  long  seated  in  that 
county.  From  a  branch  of  it  descended 
Sir  Eobert  Cordell,  who  received  the  dig- 
nity of  baronet  in  1660,  which  became 
extinct  in  1704  by  the  death  of  his  grand- 
son without  issue. 

After  being  educated  at  Cambridge,  he 
was  admitted  a  member  of  Lincoln's  Inn, 
and  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1543.  He  sat 
in  the  parUameut  of  March  1553  as  mem- 
ber for  Steyning,  and  on  September  30, 
two  months  after  Queen  Marv  came  to  the 
crown,  he  was  made  her  solicitor-general. 
On  the  1st  of  the  followinff  November  the 
benchers  of  the  socie^  of  Lincoln's  Inn 
appointed  him  their  butler,  and  on  February 
2,  1554,  he  was  fined  in  the  sum  of  '  xxvjs. 
viijr/.'  *  for  not  exercysing  the  office.' 
{Black  Booky  iv.  270,  272.J  This  curious 
entry  seems  to  show  that  tne  junior  mem- 
bers of  the  bench  had  this  duty  imposed 
upon  them,  for  in  the  Lent  of  that  year  he 
was  nominated  to  the  post  of  reader.  As 
solicitor-general  he  took  a  part  in  the  pro- 
secution of  Sir  Thomas  A\yat  for  his  at- 
tempt against  the  queen ;  and  on  November 
5, 1557,  he  was  promoted  to  the  office  of 
master  of  the  Kolls  and  knighted.  In  the 
last  parliament  of  Queen  Mary,  being  then 
member  for  Essex,  he  was  chosen  speaker ; 
but  her  death  at  the  close  of  it  made  no 
difference  in  his  judicial  position,  which 
he  retained  for  nearly  twenty-four  years. 
(Duffdale's  Ori^.  231.) 

Troubling  himself  apparently  very  little 
with  politics,  though  successively  member 
for  Middlesex  and  Westminster,  he  was 
regarded  with  favour  by  the  court,  and 
Queen  Elizabeth  paid  him  the  compliment 
of  commencing  her  progress  in  Sunolk,  in 
1578,  by  visiting  him  at  Long  Melford 


192 


CORNHUJi 


Hall,  where  he  glorioculy  feasted  her.    He 
died  on  May  17, 1681. 

He  married  Mary,  the  daughter  of 
Richard  Clopton,  Eaq.,  but  left  no  chil- 
dren. 

COBHHILL,  Geryasb  be,  was  so  called 
from  the  ward  of  that  name  in  London, 
where  probably  he  resided,  and  was  clearly 
a  man  of  high  note  and  authority  there, 
holding  in  2, 3,  6,  and  7  Heniy  XL  the  post 
of  sheriff  (Madox,  i.  204^  602),  an  ofBcer 
in  whom  the  temporal  government  of  the 
city  was  then  Tested.  After  the  latter  year 
he  is  not  noticed  in  connection  with  the 
metropolis ;  but  his  next  residence  bein?  in 
Surrey,  he  was  appointed  sheriff  of  diat 
county  in  10  Henry  II.,  1164,  and  remained 
in  that  office,  with  the  exception  of  one 
year,  until  1183. 

In  15  Henry  II.,  and  for  the  seven  suc- 
ceeding years,  he  held  the  same  responsible 
office  in  Kent,  where  he  had  a  seat  at  liuke- 
dale,  in  the  parish  of  Littleboume ;  and  in 
the  contest  with  Becket  he  sided  strongly 
with  the  king. 

Among  the  justices  itinerant  in  the  15, 
16,  20,  and  23  Henry  JI.,  1169-1177,  his 
name  appears  as  acting  in  various  counties. 
It  does  not  clearly  appear  whether  at  that 
time  he  performed  the  same  duties  in  the 
Curia  Koffis,  but  it  is  certain  that  he 
attended  there  in  28  Henry  U.,  1182,  as 
his  name  is  inserted  as  one  of  the  barons 
and  justiciers  before  whom  fines  of  that 
year  were  taken.  {Madox,  i.  113, 123, 132, 
143. 144.) 

From  the  termination  of  his  sheriffalty 
in  Surrey,  it  may  be  presumed  that  his 
death  occurred  in  20  or  30  Henry  II. 

He  left  three  sons,  Henry,  Reginald,  and 
Ralph,  the  two  former  of  whom  held  the 
office  of  sheriff  of  Kent  for  several  years. 
Henrv  was  bailiff  of  London,  and  also 
sheriff  of  Surrey.  He  was  chancellor  of 
St.  PauVs,  and  had  the  management  of  the 
Mint  (Cambium)  of  England  in  3  Richard 
1.  Reginald  was  the  next  named  justice 
itinerant.  {Hasted,  i.  178 ;  Lord  LffU^ton^s 
Henry  II,  5a3.) 

COBHHILL,  RE0I17ALD  DE,  was  the  second 
son  of  the  above  Gervase  de  Comhill,  and 
after  the  death  of  his  elder  brother  Henry, 
in  4  or  5  Richard  L,  he,  or  his  son  of  the 
same  name,  held  the  sheriffalty  of  Kent, 
with  some  short  interval,  until  5  Henry 
in.  His  seat  at  Minster,  in  the  Isle  of 
Thanet,  acquired  the  name  of  'Sheriff's 
Court,'  which  it  still  retains ;  and  he  him- 
self, discontinuing  his  own  name,  was 
styled  Rejfinald  le  Viscount,  even  his 
widow  being  designated  Vicecomitessa 
Cantii.  {Hasted^  i.  178-9.)  He  succeeded 
his  brother  also  m  the  manojgement  of  the 
Mint  of  England,  and  continued  in  con- 
nection with  it  and  with  the  Treasury  till 
late  in  the  reign  of  John,   (itfarftw,  i.  459.) 


CORNHILL 

That  he  acted  in  a  ju^oial  capadty  in  1 
John  appears  firom  the  Rotulos  de  Obktis 
(p.  47),  where  certain  pemms  aie  eommone^ 
before  him  and  John  de  Geetling  and  Wil- 
liam de  Wrotham,  also  justiciers.  In  the 
fines  of  that  reign  his  name  ooeiin  as  being 
present  in  court  tiU  10  Jolm. 

Various  other  employmentB  show  that 
he  was  high  in  the  king^s  confidence.  In 
5  John  he  was  one  of  ue  cuatodee  of  the 
ports  of  England  and  the  quinxime  of  mer- 
chants ;  ana  in  the  next  year  he  and  Wil- 
liam de  Wrotham  were  i^pointed  '  supe- 
riores  custodes,'  when  the  king  made  an 
assize  '  de  moneta  custodienda,  et  retoosori- 
bus  et  falsonariis  monete  nostre  destruen- 
dis.' 

He  was  a  staunch  adherent  of  that  kin^ 
in  all  his  earlier  troubles,    and  received 
many  substantial  marks  of  his  favour.    The 
Regmald  de  Comhill  who,  in   the  latter 
contests  of  his  reign,  joined  the  butxis, 
and  who  was  one  of  those  taken  prisoner 
in  Rochester  Castle  in  December  121o, 
was  probably  his  son,  to  whom,  and  to 
William  de  ComhiU,  the  '  Cameraria'  wb» 
granted  in  14  John.    His  wife,  Isabelli, 
paid  a  fine  of  five  thousand  mtncs  for  hit 
liberation.     (Rot.  Clam.  i.  241 :  Rot.  At 
189.) 

COBNHILL,  William  de  rBisHOP  of 
LicnFTELD  AND  CovEKTRx),  eiUier  the  son 
or  the  nephew  of  the  above  ReginaU  de 
Comhill,  was  an  officer  of  the  Exchequer, 
and  connected  with  the  Mint  oi  Engkiid. 
{Madoxy  i.  338.) 

Some  houses  in  London  were  granted  to 
him  bv  the  kinff  in  5  John ;  and  in  thst 
year  Geoffirey  ^tz-Peter  was  ordered  to 
make  a  provision  for  him  of  twenty  mariD 
out  of  the  first  ecclesiastical  benefice  of  the 
king*s  patronage  that  should  drop.  In  & 
John  he  had  a  grant  of  twenty  acres  of  the 
wood  of  Tilgholt  in  Kent ;  in  7  J<^  he  wee 
made  rector  of  Maidstone  by  the  king's  col- 
lation ;  in  the  same  year  he  was  appointed 
custos  of  the  abbey  of  Malmesbnry ;  in  the 
next  year  he  had  the  same  office  in  the 
bishopric  of  Lincoln,  and  in  9  John  he  was 
raised  to  the  archdeaconry  of  HuntingdcHi. 
(Jtot.  de  Liberate,  09,  80 :  ChaH.  137, 167; 
Pat.  67,  65,  73.) 

His  name  occurs  as  a  justider  in  fines 
levied  in  10  John,  1208,  but  not  in  any 
other  vear.  In  the  two  next  years,  and 
in  14  John,  his  personal  attendance  on  the 
king  is  noticed  on  the  roUs,  and  in  the  latter 
vear  he  was  presented  to  the  churches  of 
^omerton  in  Somersetshire, and  of  Feieby  in 
Yorkshire,  and,  in  conjunction  with  Regi- 
nald, the  son  of  Reginald  de  Comhill,  re- 
ceived a  grant  of  '  Cameraria  nostra '  firom 
the  king.    {Rot.  Pat.  95,  96.) 

On  Janunrv  25,  1215,  17  John,  he  was 
consecrated  Bishop  of  Coventry  and  Lich- 
field, and  dying  on  June  19,  1223,  he  was 


GOBMWALL 

Imried  in  TJchfiwld  Gftthedzal.  (Oodtcm, 
315.) 

OOBSWALL,  ElBL  OF.    See  Robsrt. 

fSOMALE,  William  sb,  so  called  from 
Ids  numor  of  GosMle  in  Nottmghamfthire, 
WM  a  beoefactor  of  Newstead  Abbey  in 
that  county.  He  was  appointed  a  baron  of 
tiie  Exchequer  in  8  Edward  m.,  but  is  not 
mentioned  after  the  14th  year.  (CaL  Hot, 
BkL  106 ;  BoL  Orig.  ii.  78,  81 ;  Inqme.  p. 
m.  iL  97.) 

00TS8MOBS,  JoHKy  rended  at  Baldwin 
Bdghtwell  in  Oxfordshire.  He  married 
Fkmnce,  the  daughter  of  Sir  Simon  Har- 
eoort,  ancestor  of  Cord  Chancellor  Haxoourt 
He  appears  among  the  advocates  in  the 
Tear  JBook  till  8  Henry  Y.,  and  was  made 
a  seijeant-at-law  in  5  Heniy  V.  In  9 
Henry  V.  he  was  sent  as  a  justice  of  assize 
to  Norwich  and  other  places  with  Justice 
William  Babington.  (Ctd.  Bxch.  iii.  380.) 
He  afterwards  became  one  of  the  king^s 
8eijeant%  and  was  elerated  to  the  bench  as 
a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  October 


COVENTRY 


193 


t 


IS,  1420,  8  Henry  VL  After  sitting  in 
that  court  for  nearly  ten  years,  he  succeeded 
as  diief  justice  there  on  January  20, 1430, 
17  Hemy  VL,  but  presided  Httle  more  than 
eight  months^  the  executors  of  his  will  being 
CO  October  14  following  commanded  to  give 
wf  the  records  to  his  successor.  He  was 
bmied  at  Brightwell,  where  there  is  a 
moonmental  brass  to  his  memory.  (Notes 
mi  Queries,  1st  S.  x.  620.) 

[,    Eabl   of.     See   C.    C. 


OOTTVGHAX,  Thoxas  dm,  was  one  of 

the  clerks  in  Chancery  for  nearly  thirty 

TeaiSyfiom  14  to  48  £dward  HL,  1340-1369, 

Vut  only  on  one  occasion  is  mentioned  as 

keeper  of  the  Great  Seal — viz.,  on  the  death 

of  tiie  chancellor,  John  de  Offord,  when  it 

wsa  placed  in  the  custody  of  him  and  others 

from  May  28  till  June  16,  1349.     (Hot. 

Cbme.  23  £dw.  HI.  p.  1,  m.  8, 10.)  During 

jirt  of  this  period,  however,  he  went  to 

Inland  as  master  of  the  Rolls  there,  to 

iriiich  office  he  was  appointed  in  30  Edward 

HL,  1356.     (Col.  JRot.  Pat  166.)    He  was 

BO  doubt  brought  up  in  the  Chancery,  as  he 

vas  presented  by  tne  king  so  early  as  13 

Edward  IL,   1319,  with    the   church  of 

Wrseton,   and  acted  as  the  attorney  of 

Wiffism    de    Herlaston,    a   derk   in   the 

Chancery,  in  1325.    (N.  Fcedera,  iL  401, 

Q6L) 

OOTEVTBT,  Thoicas.  TVith  John  Co- 
ventiy,  lord  mayor  of  London  in  the  reign 
of  Heluj  VL,  and  one  of  the  executors  of 
Ae  renownea  Richard  Whittin^n,  began 
tke  prosperity  of  this  family,  which  deriyed 
itiianiame  from  the  city  of  Coventry,  ^ere 
it  vas  originally  established.  One  of  his 
imaadtmU,  Ridbard  Corentry,  was  settled 
at  CiSBngton  in  Oxfordshire,  and  by  his 
wife,  a  dttDghter  of  —  Tuner,  had  two 


sons,  the  younger  of  whom  was  Thomas  the 
future  judge.  He  was  bom  in  1547,  and 
educated  at  Oxford,  where  he  took  the  de- 
gree of  M. A.  on  June  2^565,  and  afterwards 
was  elected  fellow  of  Balliol  College.  He 
entered  the  Inner  Temple,  and  became 
reader  there  in  autumn  1593.  He  was  one 
of  those  named  on  Sir  Edward  Coke's  pre- 
ferment to  succeed  him  in  the  solicitor's 
place,  and  Bacon  (  Works,  xiL  157)  tells  Sir 
Robort  Cecil,  though  with  a  profession  of 
disbelief,  that  it  was  asserted  that  Coventr}- 
had  bought  his  interest  for  2000  angels. 
Ndther  of  them  obtained  the  promotion, 
and  it  was  not  till  two  months  before  the 
queen's  death  that  Coventry  received  a  writ 
to  take  upon  him  the  degree  of  the  coif  in 
the  following  Easter.  On  January  13, 160G, 
he  was  appointed  a  judffe  of  the  Common 
Pleas,  and  knighted.  He  enjoved  his  place 
less  than  a  year.  Dying  on  December  12, 
1606,  he  was  buried  at  Croome  d'Abitot  in 
Worcestershire.  IDs  estate,  osdled  Earles 
;  Croome^  he  had  acquired  by  his  marriage 
,  with  Miargaret,  the  daughter  and  heir  of 
—  Jeffreys,  of  that  place,  and  it  still  is  the 
chief  seat  of  his  family. 

The  judge  left  three  sons,  of  whom  Tho- 
mas was  the  lord  keeper. 

COVIHTBT,  Thomas  (Lord  Covkwtbt), 
was  the  eldest  son  of  the  above-noticed 
judge.  He  was  bom  in  1578,  and,  having 
passed  the  first  fourteen  years  of  his  h& 
I  under  the  tuition  of  his  parents,  he  was 
placed  as  a  gentleman  commoner  at  Balliol 
College,  Ouord,  at  Michaelmas  1502.  At 
the  end  of  three  years  he  was  admitted  a 
member  of  the  Inner  Temple,  and,  having 
been  called  to  the  bar,  he  is  mentioned  in 
Coke's  Reports  as  an  advocate  so  early  as 
1611 ;  he  was  elected  reader  in  autumn 
1610. 

By  the  respect  he  showed  to  Sir  Edward 
Coke  he  entailed  upon  himself  the  enmity 
of  Bacon,  who  sought  to  impede  his  pro- 
fessional advance  by  prejudicing  the  king 
against  him.  When  Coven  try  was  a  candi- 
date for  the  recordership  of  London,  Bacon 
suggested  to  the  king  that  'it  is  very 
material,  as  these  times  are,  that  your 
majesty  have  some  care  that  the  recorder 
succeeding  be  a  temperate  and  discreet 
man.  .  .  .  The  man  upon  whom  the  choice 
is  like  to  fidl,  which  is  Coventry,  I  hold 
doubtful  for  your  service ;  not  but  that  he 
is  well  learned  and  an  honest  man,  but  he 
hath  been,  as  it  were,  bred  by  Lord  Coke 
and  seasoned  in  his  ways.'  The  shaft 
fell  harmless,  and  Coventry  was  not  only 
elected  recorder  on  November  16,  1616, 
but  on  March  14,  1617,  was  taken  into  tlie 
king's  own  service  as  solicitor-general,  and 
knighted.  Four  years  after,  also,  when  Sir 
Henry  Yelverton,  the  attorney-general,  was 
condemned  by  the  Star  Chamber,  Covent^ 
received  the  appointment^  on  January  11, 


194 


COVENTRY 


1621.  One  of  the  first  duties  he  had  to 
perform  in  his  new  office  was  to  take  a 
message  from  the  Lords  to  Bacon,  requiring 
him  to  send  specific  answers  to  the  cnarges 
against  him.  Soon  after  he  had  to  pro- 
secute Edward  Flojde  for  his  presumption 
in  calling  the  king's  daughter  and  her  hus- 
band 'Goodman  Palsgrave  and  Goodwife 
Palsgrave ; '  hut  he  was  not  answerable  for 
the  brutal  sentence  which  the  Lords  pro- 
nounced upon  the  silly  speaker.  (Pari. 
Hist,  i.  1230, 1260.) 

On  King  James's  death  he  was  retained 
in  his  office  by  King  Charles,  and  before 
the  end  of  the  year  was  called  upon  to 
supply  the  place  of  Bishop  "Williams,  re- 
ceiving the  Great  Seal  as  lord  keeper  on 
November  1, 1626.  His  letter  to  Bucking- 
ham forms  a  strong  contrast  with  Bacon's 
on  a  similar  occasion.  It  is  a  manly  and 
modest  doubt  of  his  own  capacity  for  the 
place,  a  dutiful  submission,  after  full  con- 
sideration, to  the  roval  will,  and  a  courtly 
aclmowled^ent  of  the  duke's  favour. 
But  there  is  nothing  in  it  that  shows  any 
previous  application,  nor  any  undue  reliance 
on  the  interference  of  the  favourite. 

He  had  to  onen  the  second  parliament 
of  the  reign,  ana  soon  after  to  aeliver  the 
king's  reprimand  to  the  Commons  for  their 
negligence  in  completing  the  supply,  and 
their  encouragement  of  seditious  speeches. 
He  had  little  to  do  in  reference  to  the 
imprisonment  of  the  Earl  of  Arimdel  and 
the  demand  of  the  Peers  for  his  release, 
except  as  the  messenger  of  the  king  and 
the  organ  of  the  house.  The  anfi^ry  disso- 
lution of  this  parliament,  notwithstanding 
his  earnest  enaeavours  to  prevent  such  a 
termination,  soon  after  talan^  place,  the 
king  endeavoured  to  supply  his  necessities 
by  forced  loans ;  but,  not  succeeding  to  his 
wish,  he  called  a  third  parliament  in  March 
1628.  Sir  Thomas  Coventry  opened  this 
in  an  eloquent  speech,  which  would  have 
been  more  effective  had  it  not  contained  an 
intimation  that,  if  there  were  not  a  readi- 
ness in  voting  supplies,  the  king  might 
resort  to  other  means  by  the  use  of  nis 
prerogatives.  But  before  the  end  of  the 
cession  he  had  to  prav  of  the  king  a  more 
explicit  answer  to  the  Petition  of  Right, 
which  was  accordingly  given  on  June  7, 
1628,  in  the  well-known  formula, '  Soit  droit 
feat  comme  il  est  d^sir^.'  {Pari,  HUt,  ii. 
218,  409.) 

On  April  10  the  lord  keeper  was  created 
a  baron  by  the  title  of  Lord  Coventry  of 
Aylesborough  in  the  county  of  Worcester. 
When  Buckingham  applied  for  the  dormant 
office,  and  almost  uimmited  powers  of  lord 
high  constable.  Lord  Coventry  showed  a 
patriotic  spirit  in  opposing  the  grant,  and 
thus  incurring  the  hatred  of  the  favourite. 
Peremptorily  accosting  him,  the  duke  said, 
<  Who  made  you  lord  keeper  P '  '  The  long,' 


COVENTBY 

said  Coventry  boldly.  'It*8  false/  said 
Buckingham ;  '  'twas  I  did  make  you,  and 
you  shsll  find  that  I  who  made  you  can 
and  will  immake  you.'  Coventry  retorted, 
^  Did  I  conceive  1  held  my  place  by  your 
favour,  1  would  presently  unmake  myself 
by  rendering  the  Seal  to  his  majesty.' 
Buckingham  would  have  put  his  thrwt 
into  execution,  and  probably  have  obtained 
the  Seal  for  Sir  Henry  Yelverton,  had  he  not 
been  assassinated  in  the  following  August. 
This  parliament,  after  another  session,  was 
hastily  dissolvea  like  the  former,  the  dose 
of  it  being  distinguished  by  the  fordUe 
detention  of  the  speaker  (Sir  John  Finch) 
in  the  chair  while  the  protestation  of  the 
Commons  agunst  tonnage  and  poundage 
was  passed. 

No  other  parliament  met  for  the  eleven 
remaining  years  of  Coventry's  life — a  cir- 
cumstance which,  however  impolitic,  could 
not  be  distasteful  to  his  personal  disposi- 
tion. He  was  more  of  a  lawyer  than  a 
politician,  and  would  no  doubt  be  glad  to 
be  relieved  from  defending  measures  which 
he  could  not  honestly  justify.  The  holder 
of  the  Great  Seal  was  no  longer,  as  in 
Wolsey's  time,  the  director  of  the  state; 
other  and  more  active  spirits  aoquired  tiie 
ascendency,  and  their  o^nions  prevailei 
No  one  can  read  the  history  of  the  time 
without  seeing  that  Coventry  had  but  Uttle 
influence  in  uie  councils  of  his  sovereign, 
which  were  in  a  great  measure  directed 
personally  by  the  king,  under  the  guidance, 
first  of  a  favourite,  and  then  of  unscm- 
pulous  and  intemperate  advisers.  In  times 
when  all  men's  actions  were  open  to  cen- 
sure, and  none  escaped  who  could  be  charged 
with  too  violent  a  support  of  the  rojal 

Srerogative,  or  with  too  manifest  a  ten- 
ency  to  infringe  on  the  liberty  of  the 
subject,  the  very  absence  of  the  name  of 
one  who  held  so  high  an  offidal  position 
tells  strongly  in  his  favour,  as  showing  thai 
his  personal  demeanour  and  his  imputed 
principles  were  not  to  any  great  extent 
obnoxious  to  those  who  were  assuming 
the  rule  and  punishing  their  opponents.  In 
Lilbum's  case,  though  Coventry  presided 
on  the  condemnation,  his  estate  was  not  in 
the  first  instance  attempted  to  be  charged 
with  the  compensation  awarded,  and  it  was 
not  till  the  estates  upon  which  the  repara- 
tion was  voted  were  disposed  of  in  another 
manner,  nor  till  eight  years  after  the  lord 
keeper's  death,  that  the  pertinadous  suf- 
ferer conceived  the  idea  of  coming  on  Lord 
Coventry's  heir.  The  attempt  wns  frus- 
trated, even  in  the  strong  exdtement  of 
that  period,  by  a  large  majority ;  and  the 
vote,  though  perhaps  influenced  by  aome 
personal  motives,  was  no  doubt  dictated 
principally  by  the  conviction  that  ti^e 
cruelty  and  illegality  of  the  sentence  against 
Lilbum  could  not  be  justly  imputed  to  thi 


COVENTRY 

lord  keeper.  At  the  same  time  it  is  diffi- 
cult altogether  to  excuse  his  lordship  from 
participation  in  the  iniquitous  punishments 
which  were  too  often  awarded  in  the  Star 
Chamber,  except  on  the  presumption  that, 
though  presiding,  he  had  But  a  single  voice, 
and  that,  b^  t£e  course  of  the  court,  he 
gave  his  opinion  last,  and  was  compelled 
to  pronounce  the  censure  of  the  majority. 
That  his  inclinations  were  on  the  side  of 
mercy  the  judgment  in  Chambers*s  case 
proves.  In  Hfeniy  Sherfield's  case,  for 
breaking  a  painted  glass  window,  he  was, 
ax'ter  giving  a  lenient  sentence,  actually 
outvoted ;  and  in  the  case  of  Dr.  Leighton. 
for  publishing  'A  Plea  against  Prelacy,* 
and  in  other  similar  accusations,  it  requires 
not  much  discrimination  to  decide  to  whom 
the  severity  of  the  punishment  is  to  be 
attributed.  {SUde  Trtals,  iii.  374, 383, 519, 
1315.)  In  April  1635  James  Maxwell  and 
Alice  his  wife  were  brought  before  the 
Star  Chamber,  for  asserting  in  a  petition 
to  the  king  that  the  lord  keeper  disobeyed 
his  majesty  and  oppressed  the  subject,  and 
were  fined  3000/.  to  the  king  and  the  same 
sum  to  the  lord  keeper,  the  female  narrowly 
escaping  a  whippmg  moved  for  by  one 
of  the  members.  {Cal,  St.  Papers  [1635], 
3L) 

At  the  introduction  of  the  imposition  of 
ship-money,  in  the  speeches  which  he  ad- 
dreaeed  to  the  judges  previously  to  the 
commencement  of  the  circuits  both  in  June 
1GS5  and  Lent  1636,  he  enjoined  them,  in 
their  charges  to  the  grand  jury,  to  urge 
the  people  to  pay  their  contnbutions  with 
alacrity  and  cheerfulness;  but  from  his 
Dostion  as  lord  keeper  he  was  precluded 
nom  giving  any  legal  opinion  on  the  case 
of  Hampden,  who  resisted  the  levy,  the 
judgment  being  pronoimced  by  the  twelve 
judges  alone,  ana  he  was  not  a  party  to, 
nor  a  witness  of,  the  consequences  that 
resulted  from  these  proceedings ;  for  before 
the  next  parliament  met  his  death  occurred 
at  Durham  House  in  the  Strand  (where  the 
Adelphi  now  stands),  on  January  14, 1640, 
and  nis  remains  were  removed  for  in- 
terment in  the  family  vault  at  Croome 
d*Abitot.  His  last  message  to  the  king 
was  a  request '  that  his  majesty  would  take 
all  distastes  from  the  parliament  summoned 
against  April  with  patience,  and  suffer  it 
to  sit  without  an  unkind  dissolution.' 
(ffack^s  Bp.  Wmianu  ii.  137.) 

He  had  held  the  Seal  for  above  fourteen 
yean,  and  every  writer  of  any  authority  has 
reframed  frt>m  making  any  specific  charge 
against  him.  Even  Whitelocke,  who  had 
evidently  no  goodwill  towards  him,  can 
say  DO  mare  than  he  was  '  of  no  transcen- 
dent parts  or  fame.*  His  other  contempo- 
raries differ  from  this  judgment,  and  umte 
in  pnumg  him.  Croke  c^ls  him  ^  a  pious, 
prudent,  and  learned  man,  and  strict  m  his 


COUKTENEYE 


195 


practice,  ...  he  died  in  great  honour,  and 
much  lamented  by  all  the  people.'  Claren- 
don says  he  discharged  all  nis  earlier  offices 
'  with  great  ability  and  singular  reputation 
for  integrity/  and  that  in  ms  place  of  lord 
keeper  *he  enjoyed  it  with  an  universal 
reputation  (and  sure  justice  was  never 
better  administered).'  Of  his  'parts'  the 
same  author  says,  '  He  was  a  man  of  won- 
derful gravity  and  wisdom,  and  imderstood 
not  only  the  whole  science  and  mystery  of 
the  law,  at  least  equally  with  any  man 
who  had  ever  sate  in  that  place,  but  had 
a  clear  conception  of  the  vmole  policy  of 
the  government,  both  of  Church  and  state, 
which  by  the  unskilfulness  of  some  well- 
meaning  men  justled  each  the  other  too 
much.  He  knew  the  temper,  disposition, 
and  genius  of  the  kingdom  most  exactly^ 
saw  their  spirits  grow  every  day  more 
sturdv,  inquisitive,  and  impatient;  and 
therefore  naturally  abhorrea  all  innova- 
;  tions.'  Anthony  Wood,  Fuller,  and  David 
Lloyd  are  equally  encomiastic;  and  Lord 
Clarendon  says,  in  recording  his  death, 
that  he  had  Hhe  rare  felicity  in  being 
looked  upon  generally  throughout  the  king- 
dom with  great  afiection,  and  a  sin^ar 
esteem,  when  very  few  men  in  any  nigh 
trust  were  so.'  A  charge  of  bribery  was 
got  up  against  him  by  a  disappointed 
suitor,  but  was  so  palpably  unfounaed  and 
malignant  that  the  Star  Chamber  visited 
the  contriver  and  all  his  assistants  with 
severe  penalties  of  purse  and  person.  (Rwh" 
worthy  li.  App,  30.) 

Lord  Coventry  was  twice  married.  His 
first  wife  was  Sarah,  daughter  of  Edward 
Sebright,  of  Besford  in  Worcestershire; 
and  his  second  was  Elizabeth,  daughter  of 
John  Aldersey,  of  Spurston  in  Cheshire, 
and  widow  of  WiUiam  Pitchford,  Esq. 
By  both  of  them  he  left  issue.  His  grand- 
son, Thomas,  was  advanced  in  1697  to  the 
titles  of  Viscount  Deerhurst  and  Earl  of 
Coventry,  with  a  special  limitation,  under 
which  they  are  now  held,  the  original 
barony  having  become  extinct  in  171§,  by 
the  death  of  the  fourth  earl  without  male 
issue.         

COUBTEKETE,  HuoH  de  (Earl  of 
Devon),  was  at  the  head  of  the  commission 
of  justices  itinerant  into  Bedfordshire  in  4 
Edward  lU.,  1330,  but  he  seems  to  have 
been  placed  there  more  as  one  of  the  prin- 
cipal barons  of  that  county  than  as  in  any 
other  way  connected  with  the  law.  He  was 
also  at  the  head  of  another  commission, 
for  the  trial  of  offenders  in  the  forests, 
in  the  same  year.     (^Ahh,  Rot    Orig.  iL 

240 

He  was  the  eldest  son  of  Hugh  de  Courte- 

neye,  Baron  of  Oakhampton,  and  Eleanor, 

daughter   of   Hugh    Despencer  the  elder, 

Earl  of  Winchester.    His  father  died  in 

;  1291,  when  he  was  sixteen  yeura  oi  «b^^. 

o2 


196 


COURTENETE 


He  had  no  sooner  attained  his  majority 
than  he  joined  in  various  expeditions  under 
Edward  I.,  by  whom  he  was  knighted.  He 
was  summoned,  also,  to  all  the  parliaments 
as  a  baron,  botii  under  that  Inng  and  his 
two  successors,  until  8  Edward  UL,  1334 ; 
and  on  February  22,  in  the  following  year, 
he  was  created  ^Eail  of  Devon,  as  the  lineal 
descendant  of  Baldwin  de  Eipariis,  the 
seventh  eail.  He  died  in  1340,  14  Ed- 
ward ni.,  and  was  buried  at  Gowick,  near 
Exeter. 

By  his  wife  Agnes^  daughter  of  John, 
Lord  St.  John,  of  Basmg,  he  had  six  chil- 
dren. The  title  still  remains  in  one  of  his 
descendants.  The  eighteenth  earl  was 
created  Marquis  of  Exeter  in  1553 ;  but, 
dying  without  issue  three  years  after- 
wards, this  additional  honour  became  ex- 
tinct.          

COUBTEKEYE,  William  de  (Abch- 
BiSHOP  OF  Canterbury),  was  the  grandson 
of  the  last-mentioned  Huffh  de  Courteneye, 
Earl  of  Devon,  bein?  tne  fourth  son  of 
Hugh,  the  second  earl,  by  Mai^aret,  daugh- 
ter of  Humphrey  de  Bohun,  Earl  of  Here- 
ford, and  £!lizabeth,  a  daughter  of  Edward 
I.  He  was  bom  at  Exminster  about  1327, 
was  educated  at  Oxford,  where  he  took  his 
degree  of  Doctor  of  Civil  Law,  and  was 
afterwards  chancellor  of  that  university. 
With  such  connections  he  soon  procured 
rich  benefices,  among  which  were  ^bends 
at  Exeter,  Wells,  and  York.  He  was 
elevated  to  the  bishopric  of  Hereford  in 
1.369.  and  thence  translated  in  1375  to 
London. 

Among  the  followers  of  Wickliffe,  whose 
opinions  at  this  time  gained  so  much 
ground  as  to  alarm  the  Church,  was  John 
of  Gaunt,  Duke  of  Lancaster ;  and  when, 
towards  the  end  of  Edward' s  reign,  Bishop 
Courteneye,  in  obedience  to  the  pope  s 
mandate,  summoned  the  reformer  to  be 
examined,  the  duke  attended  him  to  St. 
Paul's  Churchy  where  the  meeting  was  held. 
There  some  violent  words  passed  between 
the  duke  and  the  bishop,  which  ended  in 
an  unseemly  threat  on  the  part  of  the 
former.  The  assembled  people,  who  as 
yet  cared  little  for  the  religious  question, 
fancying  their  bishop  in  danger,  prepared 
to  defend  him,  and  by  their  clamours  com- 
pelled the  duke,  who  was  no  fevourite  with 
them,  to  retire.  The  populace,  outside, 
excited  by  other  reports  to  his  disadvantage, 
joined  in  the  outcry;  and  the  ferment  was 
not  appeased  till  they  had  broken  open  the 
Marshalsea  prison,  ransacked  the  duke's 
house  in  the  Savoy,  and  contemptuously 
dragged  his  arms  through  the  streets. 

On  Edward's  death,  which  occurred  soon 
after,  it  was  not  likely  that  the  council  of 
the  young  king,  the  Duke  of  Lancaster 
being  at  its  head^  would  allow  the  prosecu- 
tJon  agfaiDst  Wickliffe  to  proceeci.     His 


COWPER 

doctrine,  accordingly,  spread  widely  through 
the  kingdom;  and  though  he  died  at  his 
living^  Lutterworth  in  1384,  his  follow- 
ers, under  the  name  of  Lollards,  rapidly 
increased. 

On  the  murder  of  Archbishop  Sudbury, 
the  king,  on  August  10,  1381,  appointed 
Bishop  Courteneye  Chancellor  of  fjigland, 
and  assented  to  £is  election  as  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury.  Thus  it  would  appear  that 
the  Duke  of  Lancaster  no  longer  felt  any 
animosity  against  him  ;  yet  it  is  difficult  to 
account  for  Courteneye's  resigning  the  Seal 
three  months  after,  on  November  80. 

During  the  remainder  of  the  archbishop's 
life,  a  period  of  nearly  fifteen  years,  he  was 
engaged  in  various  contests  wiui  his  bishops 
as  to  the  right  of  visitation,  in  all  of  which 
he  was  triumphant ;  but  the  demand  which 
he  made  on  his  clergy,  of  a  sixtieth  part  of 
their  revenues,  being  resisted  by  the  Bishop 
of  London,  was  carried  by  appeal  to  the 
court  of  Home,  where  it  was  not  decided 
while  he  lived. 

He  died  at  his  palace  at  Maidstone,  on 
July  31, 1396,  and  was  buried  in  the  church 
there.  A  monument  was  erected  to  his 
memory  in  his  cathedral  church,  to  which, 
besides  contributing  largely  to  the  erection 
of  the  nave,  he  gave  various  rich  pre- 
sents. 

Walsingham  declares  that  he  was  digni- 
fied with  a  cardined's  hat ;  but  the  doubts 
of  others  seem  to  be  supported  bjr  the 
absence  of  all  notice  of  tne  fact  m  the 
epitaph  inscribed  on  his  flravestone  in 
Maidstone  Church.  This  edifice  he  had 
entirely  rebuilt,  and  had  restored  the  churdi 
of  Mepham ;  besides  many  liberal  donatioos, 
among  others  to  the  church  of  Exminster, 
his  native  town. 

He  is  represented  as  having  a  noble  pre- 

'  sence  and  courtly  manners,  with  the  leain- 

I  ing  fit  for  his  position,  a  clear  and  acute 

understanding,  and  a  favourite  with  the 

monks  of  his  cathedral.    (  Godwin,  120, 186; 

Weever,  225,  285.) 

COWPEB,  WiLLiAH   (Earl  Cowpkk), 
descended  from  that  branch  of  the  ftmilj 
which  held  a  respectable  position  in  Sussex 
in  the  reign  of  Edward  IV.,  and  then  resided 
at  Strode  in  the  parish  of  Slingfield.     His 
immediate  ancestor  became  an  alderman  of 
London  in  Elizabeth's  time,  and  had  a  son, 
Sir  William,  who  was  created  a  baronet  bjf 
Charles  I.,  and  suffered  imprisonment  for  his 
loyalty  to  that  unfortunate  king.  His  grand- 
son the  second  baronet  represented  Hertford 
in  severalparliaments  of  Charles  IL  and 
William  III.,  adopting  the  whig  aide  in 
politics,  and  taking  a  prominent  part  in  the 
proceedings  against  James  II.  when  Duke 
of  York.    By  his  wife  Sarah,  daughter  of 
Sir  Samuel  Hoiled,  of  London,  he  had  two 
I  sons,  William  and  Spencer. 

William  Cowper  was  bom  at  Hertfind 


COWPER 

-Castle  aboat  four  or  five  years  after  the 
Kestoration.  He  was  some  years  at  a 
ecbool  at  St.  Albans,  and  became  a  stu- 
dent at  the  Middle  Temple  on  March  8, 
1681-2.  His  years  of  probation  were  di- 
vided between  his  law-oooks  and  his  plea- 
sures^ the  latter  it  is  reported  didming  the 
greatest  share,  but  the  former  evidently 
not  neglected.  Whatever  were  his  ex- 
cesses durinff  that  interval,  it  may  be  pre- 
sumed that  before  the  end  of  it  he  termi- 
nated them  by  his  marriage  about  1686 
with  Judith,  daughter  of  Sir  Robert  Booth, 
a  merchant  of  London  living  in  Walbrook. 
He  was  called  to  the  bar  on  May  25, 1688. 
Bred  up  in  the  principles  of  political  li- 
berty and  with  a  deep  hatred  of  popery, 
bis  youthful  ardour  prompted  him  a  few 
months  later  to  offer  his  personal  aid  in 
resisting  the  obtuse  tyranny  of  James  II. 
He  and  his  brother  Spencer,  with  a  band 
of  men,  joined  the  Prince  of  Orange  in 
his  march  to  London :  but  on  the  peaceful 
lejtablishment  of  William  and  Mary  on 
the  throne  he  returned  to  the  stage  of  his 
profession,  on  which,  whether  on  the  Home 
Circnit  or  in  the  courts  of  Westminster,  he 
0oon  became  a  favourite  performer.  He 
was  chosen  recorder  of  Uolchester,  and 
^t  into  considerable  practice  within  the 
lirst  five  years  after  his  call.  Before  Easter 
16d4  he  had  been  raised  to  the  position  of 
king^s  counsel,  and  by  his  assist^ce  to  the 
attorney  and  solicitor  seneral  in  the  prose- 
cutions arising  out  of  tne  assassination  plot 
in  1696  he  conspicuously  demonstrated  his 
superiority  as  an  advocate.  In  the  only 
otner  state  trial  in  which  he  appears — that 
of  Lord  Mohun  for  the  murder  of  Richard 
Coote— the  peers  paid  him  the  compliment 
of  naming  him  particularly  to  simi  up  the 
evidence  instead  of  Sir  John  Hawles.  the 
solidtOT-general,  whom  from  his  duiness 
and  lowness  of  voice  they  could  not  mider- 
stand.  But,  as  it  was  contrary  to  the  eti- 
quette of  the  bar,  Sir  John  was  allowed  to 
proceed.  (StaU  Trials,  xU.  1446,  xiii.  123, 
1056.) 

In  l&Vi  he  was  returned  with  his  father 
to  parliament  for  Hertford,  and  tradition 
reports  that  on  the  dav  of  his  entrance  into 
the  house  he  spoke  uiree  times,  and  with 
foch  effect  as  to  establish  his  character  as 
an  orator.  He  represented  the  same  con- 
fltitnency  in  the  parliament  of  1698,  but  in 
the  following  year  the  family  interest  in  the 
bovoog^  was  disturbed,  and  his  own  pro- 
fcMioiial  success  materially  endangered,  by 
the  tmfoiiDded  charge  brought  against  his 
hrother  Spencer  of  the  murder  of  a  young 
Qnaker  named  Sarah  Stout  Notwith- 
ftBidixig  the  acquittal  that  followed,  the 
inftnimce  of  the  Uowpers  in  Hertford  was 
so  damaged  that  they  did  not  venture  to 
^taad  in  the  election  of  1701 ;  but  William 
xetnmed  for  Beeralston  m  that  and  the 


COWPER 


197 


last  parliament  of  William  IH.  and  in  the 
first  of  Queen  Anne,  at  the  end  of  which 
he  ceased  to  be  a  commoner.  'The  parlia- 
mentary history  records  only  two  im^rtant 
speeches  delivered  by  him  while  m  the 
House  of  Commons — one  on  the  bill  of 
attainder  against  Sir  John  Fenwick  in 
1696,  and  the  other  on  the  Aylesbury 
case  in  1704,  in  support  of  the  right  of  the 
subject  to  seek  reoress  at  law  against  a 
returning  officer  for  corruptly  refusing  to 
receive  his  legal  vote.  He  also  defended 
Lord  Somers  when  impeached,  and  in  1704 
he  was  censured  by  the  house  for  pleading 
for  Lord  Halifax.  (Pari  Hid.  v.  1007, 
1141,  vi.  279;  Bumet,  iv.  480;  LuUreU, 
V.  488.) 

When  the  tory  ascendency  began  to  be 
diminished,  the  removal  of  Lord  Keeper 
Wright,  the  weakest  and  most  inefficient 
man  of  the  party,  was  determined  on. 
Passing  over  the  attorney  and  solicitor 
general,  Cowper,  at  the  urgent  instigation 
of  the  Duchess  of  Marlborough,  was  se- 
lected from  the  whig  ranks  to  hold  the 
SeaL  It  was  delivered  to  him  as  lord 
keeper  on  October  11,  1705.  The  com- 
mencement of  his  judicial  career  was  illus- 
trated by  a  noble  reform.  It  had  been  a 
custom  of  long  standing  for  the  officers  of 
the  court  and  the  members  of  the  bar  to 
present  new  years'  gifts  to  the  chancellor 
or  keeper,  a  practice  which,  if  not  actual 
bribery,  he  considered  looked  very  like  it. 
These  he  at  once  refused  to  receive ;  and 
the  extent  of  the  sacrifice  may  be  esti- 
mated, if  not  by  his  wife*s  calculation  that 
they  amounted  to  nearly  3000i,  by  Bur- 
net s  more  probable  computation  of  1500^ 
With  such  a  proof  of  his  moderation  and 
delicacy,  it  is  curious  that  he  did  not  abo- 
lish the  equally  obnoxious  custom  of  selling 
the  offices  in  the  chancellor's  gift.  Bv  the 
evidence  on  the  trial  of  the  Earl  of  Mac- 
clesfield it  appears  that  he  received  500/. 
on  the  admission  of  a  master  in  Chancery. 
Although  it  is  difficult  to  perceive  the  dis- 
tinction between  the  two  customs,  it  is  clear 
that  he  did  not  consider  them  as  coming 
under  the  same  category,  and  that  he  did 
not  anticipate  the  evil  consequences  to 
which  the  latter  might  lead.  At  the  same 
time  he  forbad  the  clerks  to  demand  anj 
extra  fee  for  the  performance  of  their 
duties.  On  the  death  of  his  father  in 
November  1706  he  succeeded  to  the  ba- 
ronetcy, and  on  the  9th  of  the  same 
month  he  was  ennobled  with  the  title  of 
Lord  Cowper  of  Wingham.  {Evelyn^  iii. 
407;  Burnet,  v.  243;  LuUrell,  vi.  Ill; 
StaU  Trials,  xvi.  1154.) 

His  first  wife  having  died  six  months 
before  his  elevation,  he  married,  secondly, 
Mary,  daughter  of  John  Clavering,  Esq.,  of 
Chopwell  m  the  bishopric  of  Durham. 

Lord  Cowper  was  one  of  the  commit* 


198 


COWPER 


sioners  for  the  Union  with  Scotland,  and 
zealously  assisted  Lord  Somers  in  the  nego- 
tiations. Upon  its  beinff  completed  the 
Sueen  invested  him,  on  May  4, 1707,  with 
lie  title  of  lord  high  chancellor  of  Great 
Britain ;  and  from  that  time  the  designa- 
tion of  lord  keeper  fell  into  desuetude,  only 
one  other  possessor  of  the  Great  Seal  having 
been  so  distinguished  up  to  the  present  day. 
For  the  next  three  years  the  whig  party 
retained  its  influence ;  but  at  last,  by  its  own 
folly  in  the  impeachment  of  Dr.  Sacheverell, 
the  popularity  it  had  acquired  was  trans- 
ferred to  its  political  opponents.  The  pro- 
secution stirred  up  all  the  dormant  feelmgs 
of  the  people,  revived  the  ciy  of  'The 
Church  m  aanger,'  and  so  strengthened  the 
efforts  of  the  tory  advisers  of  the  queen 
that  the  whig  members  of  the  government 
were  soon  after  dismissed.  The  Duke  of 
Marlborough  had  during  the  contest  am- 
bitiously demanded  to  be  made  captain- 
general*  for  life  ;  but  Lord  Cowper,  though 
united  with  him  in  politics,  represented  to 
the  queen  that  such  an  appointment  would 
be  highly  unconstitutional,  and  by  his 
advice  the  application  was  rejected.*  His 
lordship,  though  strongly  pressed  by  the 
queen  to  keep  the  Sed,  was  iirm  in  his 
resolve  to  follow  the  fate  of  his  colleagues, 
and  resigned  on  September  23,  1710.  He 
then  entered  at  once  into  an  avowed,  and  it 
must  be  acknowledged  sometimes  a  factious, 
opposition  to  the  new  ministry;  and,  ac- 
cording to  the  fashion  then  prevalent,  occa- 
sionally supported  his  views  and  answered 
the  attacks  of  his  opponents  in  the  periodi- 
cal publications  of  the  day.  He  remained 
unemployed  for  the  four  remaining  years  of 
Queen  Anne's  reign  ;  but  on  her  death  he 
was  found  to  be  one  of  the  lords  justices 
nominated  by  the  Elector  of  Hanover,  who 
showed  the  tendency  of  his  opinions  by 
selecting  them  principally  from  the  whig 
party.  The  queen  diea  on  August  1, 1714, 
and  King  George,  arriving  in  Enc^land  on 
September  18,  immediately  formed  his  mi- 
nistry and  reinstated  Lord  Cowper  in  the 
office  of  lord  chancellor  on  the  21st. 

On  his  appointment  he  presented  to  the 
king  a  long  paper  which  he  called  'An  Im- 
partial History  of  Parties,'  but  which  is 
anything  but  what  its  title  imports.  In 
professing  to  describe  the  two  pailies,  whig 
and  torv,  into  which  the  people  were  di- 
vided, he  artfully  depreciates  all  the  acts 
and  principles  of  the  latter,  and  represents 
the  tormer  as  the  only  one  which  it  woidd 
be  expedient  or  safe  for  his  majesty  to  trust. 
The  antipathjr  of  one  faction  against  the 
other  was  at  its  height,  and  was  exhibited 
hj  the  vindictive  course  which  the  new 
ministry  pursued  against  the  leaders  of  ihe 
party  they  had  supplanted.  Lord  Covrper 
took  too  prominent  a  part  in  these  proceed- 
mgB,  and  it  may  not  be  improbable  that  the 


COWPER 

extremes  to  which  their  animodty  waa 
carried  hurried  on  the  rebellion  of  1715. 
To  his  energetic  representation  to  the  king 
may  perhaps  be  attributed  the  speedy  sup- 
pression of  that  rebellion.  His  conduct  on 
the  trial  of  the  rebel  lords,  when  he  acted 
as  lord  high  steward,  supported  his  pre- 
vious reputation. 

During  his  second  chancellorship  the  Biot 
Act,  the  Septennial  Bill,  and  the  Mutiny 
Bill,  after  violent  opposition,  became  law^ 
and  to  the  passing  of  them  he  gave  his 
powerful  aid.  Intrigues  were  formed  for 
his  removal  as  early  as  October  1716,  and 
continued  in  the  two  succeeding  yean^  till 
at  last,  though  his  party  remain^  in  power, 
he  resigned  the  Seal  on  April  15,  1718^ 
having  been  on  the  18th  of  the  preceding 
month  honoured,  as  a  special  mark  of  the 
royal  approbation,  with  the  additional  title 
of*  Viscount  Fordwich  and  Earl  Cowper. 
He  lived  more  than  four  years  afterwudi^ 
and  continued  to  the  last  days  of  his  life  to 
take  a  prominent  lead  in  the  debates,  sod 
a  deep  and  impartial  interest  in  the  varioiis 
measures  proposed  on  the  one  side  or  the 
other.  He  died  after  a  few  days'  illness  at 
his  seat  at  Colne  Green  on  October  10, 
1723,  and  was  buried  in  the  parish  chuidt 
of  Hertingfordbury.  His  wife  followed 
him  four  months  afterwards,  literally  dymg 
of  a  broken  heart. 

Of  Lord  Cowper's  character  as  a  states- 
man there  will  always  be  two  opinions. 
The  course  of  his  conduct  that  would  ex- 
cite Burnet's  or  Wharton*s  applause  would 
certainly  be  decried  by  Swift  and  the  toiy 
writers.  But  all  would  allow  that  he  wis 
a  firm  adherent  to  the  principles  he  pro- 
fessed, and  that  those  pnnciples  tended  t» 
civil  and  religious  liberty,  and  that  the 
motives  which  guided  him  were  pure  and 
straightforward,  though  occasionally  tainted 
with  a  little  too  much  of  party  prejudice. 
Of  his  extraordinary  oratorical  powers^  oT 
the  singular  gracefulness  of  his  elocutioD, 
of  the  sweetness  of  his  disposition,  and  of 
his  integrity  and  impartiality  as  a  jnd^ 
there  has  never  been  an^  question.  Of  his 
urbanity  and  consideration  for  the  feeUnp 
of  others  we  have  a  striking  instance  in  his 
repressing  the  harsh  personal  remarks  made 
by  a  coimsel  against  Richard  Cromwell,  in 
a  cause  to  which  he  was  a  party,  by  imme- 
diately addressing  the  old  protector,  and 
kindly  begging  him  to  take  a  seat  besidft 
him  on  the  bench. 

Though  not  particularly  eminent  for  das- 
sical  learning,  he  was  well  versed  in  tha 
literature  of  nis  country,  and  was  a  gene- 
rous patron  to  its  professors,  amongwliflai 
were  John  Hughes  and  Ambroee  nilb% 
who  devoted  some  paceM  venea  to  tk 
memory.  Among  his  proee  enloflMti  nvn 
Burnet,  Steele,  Lords  Cheatnlald  aai 
Wharton,  and  a  hoft  of  other  minor  HiAaiiL 


COWPER 

ETen  Swift  himgelf,  in  his  'Four  Last 
Yean  of  Queen  Anne,'  is  compelled  to  speak 
of  him  with  as  much  praise  as  his  craobed 
nature  and  narbr  prejudices  would  allow. 

The  earl  s  London  residences  were  in 
Russell  Street  and  Powis  House,  Lincoln's 
Inn  Fields,  and  subsequently  in  Great 
George  Street ;  and  his  country  one  was  at 
a  spot  caUed  Colne  Green,  in  the  parish  of 
Herdngfordbury,  the  manor  of  which  he 
had  purchased.  The  house  which  he  built 
there  was  pulled  down  in  the  beginning  of 
this  century,  and  replaced  by  the  present 
stately  mansion  of  Penshanger,  where  his 
successors  flourish. 

OOWPSE,  Spencer,  was  the  younger 
brother  of  the  above  William  Earl  Cowper. 
Bom  in  1669,  he  received  his  education  at 
Westminster  School,  and  havinff  been  called 
to  the  bar  by  the  society  of  Lmcoln's  Inn, 
he  was  immediately  appointed  by  the  cor- 
poration of  London,  in  June  1690,  comp- 
troller of  the  Bridge  House  estates,  a  post 
of  considerable  responsibility,  which  en- 
titled him  to  a  residence  at  the  Bridge 
House,  in  the  parish  of  St.  Olave,  South- 
wark.  There  he  lived  for  some  years,  and 
gained  the  respect  of  his  neighbours  by 
his  exemplaiy  conduct  and  social  manners. 
There,  too,  he  executed  with  great  useful- 
ness the  duty  of  a  magistrate,  having  been 
soon  placed  on  the  commission  of  the  peace ; 
and  tnere  he  filled  many  offices  of  trust  con- 
nected with  the  locality. 

In  the  midst  of  these  prosperous  circum- 
stances he  was  suddenly  charged  with  a 
crime  which  threatened  not  only  to  blast 
the  character  he  had  acquired,  but  to  con- 
sign him  to  an  ignominious  end.  In  the 
course  of  the  Home  Circuit  which  he  tra- 
velled he  was  in  the  habit  of  visiting  Hert- 
ford^ of  which  both  his  father  and  his  brother 
were  representatives  in  parliament.  Ke- 
iiding  with  her  mother  in  that  town  was 
a  young  woman  named  Sarah  Stout,  the 
daughter  of  a  respectable  Quaker  deceased, 
who  had  been  a  firm  friend  of  the  Cowpers ; 
and  both  the  brothers  and  their  wives  had 
shown  a  kind  interest  in  her  welfare.  At 
the  spring  assizes  of  1699  Spencer  had  dined 
with  her  on  March  13,  and  after  supper  had 
gone  home  to  his  lodgings  about  eleven 
o^clock.  On  the  next  morning  she  was 
ftmnd  in  the  river,  and  an  inquest  was 
immediately  held  on  the  body,  at  which 
Spencer  Cowper  was  present  and  ffave  his 
evidence,  which  resulted  in  a  verdict  that 
the  deceased  drovmed  herself,  being  non 
c9mpo9  mentis.  About  a  month  after  this, 
with  DO  further  evidence  than  was  sub- 
mitted to  the  coroner's  jury,  the  mother  and 
brother  commenced  a  prosecution,  charging 
not  only  Spencer  Cowper,  but  two  attorneys 
and  a  scrivener,  who  had  been  heard  making 
some  looae  remarks  at  their  lodgings  about 
the  girl,  with  iint  strangling  her  and  then 


COWPER 


199 


throwing  her  into  the  veater  where  she  was 
found.  The  parties  were  summoned  before 
Lord  Chief  Justice  Holt,  who  at  first 
dismissed  them,  but  after  two  subsequent 
examinations  was  induced  on  May  19  to 
conunit  Mr.  Cowper  for  trial  to  the  King's 
Bench  prison,  wnere  he  remained  till  tne 
next  assizes.  The  prisoners  were  arraisned 
at  Hertford  on  July  16,  and  after  a  long 
trial  were  acquitted,  as  Luttrell  remarks, 
^  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  auditors.'  Eveij 
one  who  reads  the  trial  must  join  in  this 
satisfiaction,  for  a  more  unfounded  charge 
could  not  be  made.  Judge  Hatsel  presided, 
and  by  his  querulousness  at  the  trial  and 
the  stupidity  of  bis  summing  up,  the  pri- 
soners had  certainly  no  cause  to  thank  him 
for  their  acquittal. 

But  Cowper's  persecution  was  not  yet 
over.  Whether  trom  a  conviction  of  his 
guilt  and  a  thirst  for  revenge,  which  seems 
scarcely  possible ;  or  from  a  desire  to  dear 
the  Society  of  Friends  from  the  imputation 
that  one  of  their  body  could  be  affected  by 
worldly  passions,  which  no  doubt  in  some 
measure  operated ;  or  from  the  excitement 
of  party  spirit  prompting  the  opponents  of 
the  Cowpers  to  endeavour  to  destroy  the 
interest  of  the  family  in  the  borough,  which 
is  far  more  likely,  as  a  new  election  was 
near  at  hand ;  for  one  or  the  other  of  these 
reasons  the  question  was  kept  alive,  at  first 
by  pamphlets,  and  subsequently  by  much 
more  unjustifiable  means.  The  law  allowed 
an  appeal  for  murder  to  be  instituted  within 
a  year  and  a  day  after  the  death  by  the  next 
heir  of  the  deceased.  Such  an  heir  was 
immediately  found,  who  was  an  infant ;  but, 
instead  of  at  once  obtaining  the  necessary 
writ,  the  prosecutors  purposely  delayed  is- 
suing it  till. three  or  four  days  before  the 
expiration  of  the  term ;  and  this  they  did 
without  the  knowledge  or  consent  of  the 
infant  heir,  the  nominal  appellant,  or  of  his 
mother,  who  were  not  even  made  acquainted 
with  the  proceeding  for  a  month  afterwards. 
Naturally  disgusted  at  the  prosecutors*  con- 
duct, they  applied  for  ana  obtained  from 
j  the  sheriff  the  writ  and  return,  which  they 
forthwith  put  into  the  fire.  This  the  pro- 
secutors endeavoured  to  remedy  bv  apply- 
ing to  the  lord  keeper  for  a  new  wnt,  which 
he,  assisted  by  four  learned  judges,  very 
properly  refused,  on  the  ground  that  the 
first  writ  had  been  clandestinely  and  frau- 
dulently procured,  that  it  was  absolutely 
renounced  by  the  pretended  plaintiff,  and 
the  delay  in  its  issue  showed  that  the  pro- 
secutors did  not  design  justice,  but  to  spin 
out  a  scandal  as  Ion?  as  they  could,  mali- 
ciously and  vexatiously.  Mr.  Cowper  during 
these  discussions  appeared  in  court,  and  de- 
clared his  readiness  to  answer.  Thus  this 
affair  terminated ;  but  the  principal  object 
was  answered,  by  the  dissolution  for  the 
time  of  the  Cowper  interest  in  the  town. 


200 


CRANWORTH 


(State  TriaU,  xii.  1106 ;  Luttrdlf  iv.  618- 
660 ;  Lord  Raymondj  666.) 

Eveiy  impartial  man  acquitted  Gowper, 
whose  professioDal  success  was  only  tem- 
porarily impeded.  He  steadily  adyanced 
at  the  bar,  and  in  1706,  when  he  resigned 
the  office  of  comptroller,  he  succeeded  his 
brother  as  member  for  Berealston,  which 
he  continued  to  represent  in  the  two  follow- 
ing parliaments.  During  the  last  of  them 
he  was  one  of  the  managers  in  the  im- 
peachment of  Dr.  Sacheyerell,  and  had 
to  conduct  the  second  article.  (LuttreUf 
vi.  661,  566  J  State  Trials,  xv.  162.)  This 
prosecution  lost  him  his  election  for  the 
next  parliament ;  and  he  did  not  sit  again 
till  the  accession  of  George  I.,  when  he 
was  returned  for  Tniro.  He  then  became, 
on  October  22,  1714,  attorney-general  to 
the  Prince  of  Wales,  and  in  1717  chief  jus- 
tice of  Chester. 

On  George  H.  coming  to  the  crown  he 
at  once  promoted  his  old  servant,  raising 
him  first  to  the  attomey-generabhip  of  the 
duchy  of  Lancaster,  and  then  to  the  bench 
at  W  estminstor.  He  was  constituted  a  j  udge 
of  the  Common  Pleas  on  October  24,  1727, 
but  died  in  the  next  year,  on  December  10, 
at  his  chambers  in  Lmcoln's  Inn.  He  was 
buried  at  Ilertingfordbury,  where  there  is  a 
beautiful  monument  to  his  memory  by  Hou- 
biliac,  erected  by  order  of  his  second  wife, 
Theodora,  widow  of  John  Stepney,  Esq.  By 
her  he  had  no  issue,  but  by  his  first  wife, 
Pennington,  daughter  of  John  Goodeye, 
Esq.,  he  left  three  sons,  the  second  of  whom, 
the  Rev.  John  Cowper,  D.D.,  was  the  father 
of  the  delightful  poet,  William  Cowper. 
(Lord  Raymond,  1318, 1610.) 

CBAKWOBTH,  Lord.    See  R.  M.  Rolfe. 

CSA88US,  RiCHABD,  had  been  prior  of 
Henley  in  Buckinghamshire  before  he  be- 
came abbot  of  Evesham.  On  the  expulsion 
of  Simon  the  Norman  in  24  Henry  III., 
1239,  the  Great  Seal  is  said  to  have  been 
placed  in  his  custody,  and  to  have  continued 
m  his  possession  till  his  election  as  Bishop 
of  Lichfield  and  Coventry  (or  Chester,  as  it 
was  then  sometimes  called)  in  1242,  when 
he  resi|fned  it.  This  election  took  place 
about  ^November,  but  before  he  had  received 
the  rite  of  consecration  he  died  at  Riola  in 
Gascony,  on  December  8,  1242.  (Godictn, 
817  ;  Le  Neve,  124.) 

CRAUCOICBE,  John  de,  was  probably  the 
son  of  Godfrey  de  Craucombe,  who  served 
King  Henry  UI.  as  seneschal.  (Madox,  i. 
63.)  He  was  e\idently  a  clerk  in  the  Chan- 
cery, and,  like  most  of  his  fellows,  an  ec- 
clesiastic, sharing  in  the  dignities  usually 
distributed  amonff  that  class  of  officers,  by 
being  made  archdeacon  of  the  East  Riding 
of  Yorkshire. 

The  Great  Seal  was  deposited  in  his  hands 
and  in  those  of  Master  John  de  Caen  and 
William  do  Byrlay  during  the  tempomry 


CBAWLEY 

absence  of  the  chancellor,  John  de  Langton, 
in  March  1208,  and  again  in  December. 
He  continued  to  be  summoned  to  the  par- 
liament among  the  clerks  of  the  Chancery 
till  February  1305,  33  Edward  L  (iW. 
Writs,  L  138.) 

CfSAWLST,  Frajtcis,  was  of  a  Bedford- 
shire family,  residing  at  Someri8,near  Luton. 
He  received  his  legal  education  at  Staple 
Inn  and  Gitiy's  Inn,  to  the  latter  of  which 
he  was  admitted  on  May  26^  1598,  aikL 
having  been  called  to  the  bar  in  the  usual 
time,  was  elected  autunm  reader  in  1623,  on 
the  occasion  of  his  beinff  summoned  to  take 
the  degree  of  the  coi£    In  1626  he  was  one 
of  the  counsel  whom  the  Earl  of  Bristol  de- 
sired to  be  assigned  to  him  on  his  impeach- 
ment, and  on  October  11,   1632,  he  was 
appointed  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas,  and 
kmghted.    In  the  great  case  of  ship-money 
he  not  only  joined  the  rest  of  thejud^  in 
their  answer  to  the  king^s  letter  ai&ming  its 
legality,  but  in  an  elaborate  argument  in 
the  Exchequer  Chamber,  in  February  1638, 
he  gaye  a  decided  opinion  in  favour  of  the 
kinfi^  against  Hampden,  which  he  repeated 
at  the  assizes,  asserting  in  his  charge  to  the 
grand  jury  *  that  ship-money  was  so  in- 
herent a  nght  in  the  crown  that  it  would 
not  be  in  the  power  of  a  parliament  to  take 
it  away.'    For  these  opinions,  and  pardcu- 
larly  the  last,  he  was  impeached  by  the  Long 
Parliament.      In  August  1641  the  house 
resolved  that  the  impeached  judges  should 
have  no  commissions  to  go  the  circuits ;  but 
I  it  appears  that  they  still  continued  to  sit  in 
I  Westminster  HaU.    Justice  Crawley  joined 
the  king  at  Oxford  in  1642,  and  in  the  fol- 
lowing January  was  made  doctor  of  civil 
law.     (  WoodCs  Fasti,  ii.  44.)     The  state  of 
the  kingdom  probably  prevented  his  trial 
from  taldng  place,  notwithstanding  his  ex- 
treme unpopularity ;  but  on  November  24, 
1045,  the  Commons  passed  an  ordinance 
disabling  him  and  four  others  '  from  being 
j  udges,  as  though  they  were  dead.'  (  White' 
locke,  181.) 

He  died  on  Februaiy  13, 1649,  and  was 
buried  at  liUton.  His  wife  was  Elizabeth, 
daughter  of  Sir  John  Rotherham,  knight, 
of  that  place,  by  whom  he  left  two  sons, 
the  younger  of  whom  was  tlie  imdermen- 
tioned  Fi-ancis. 

CBAWLEY,  Francis,  second  son  of  the 
aboye  Sir  Francis  Crawley,  was  also  of 
Gray^s  Inn,  being  admitted  on  August  7, 
1623,  and  called  to  the  bar  in  Feoruary 
1638.  His  appointment  to  the  office  of 
cursitor  baron  of  the  Exchequer  took 
place  in  1679,  when  he  must  nave  been 
nearly  seventy  years  of  age,  and  he  held  it 
for  four  years,  till  his  death  in  1683. 

He  is  described  as  having  fm  estate  of 
1000/.  a  year  in  Bedford^re  in  1660, 
when  named  as  one  of  the  kniffhte  of  the 
contemplated  order  of  the  Royal  Oak;  but 


CBEFFINa 

he  afienraids  redded  at  Northaw  in  Hart* 
foxdflhiie.  By  Ina  wife,  Mary,  dauprhter  of 
Richard  Clatterbuck,  Esq.,  he  had  seven 
children,  the  descendants  of  whom  now 
flonzish  at  Stockwood  Park  in  Hertford- 
shire. 

CBEPPnrO,  Waltsb  de,  resided  at 
Crepping,  a  manor  in  Essex  which  belonged 
to  the  £arlB  of  Oxford,  and  was  one  of  the 
jiutices  itinerant  who  set  the  tallage  on 
that  county  in  8  Richard  I.,  1186.  He 
was  soon  after  raised  to  the  bench  at 
Westminster,  and  his  name  appears  on 
many  fines  levied  during  the  first  eleven 
years  of  the  reign  of  Kij^  John,  and  he  is 
named  on  a  record  of  13  John.  (Madox,  L 
704 :  Abb.  PlaeU,  82.) 

CBEPPnrO,  Richard  de,  was  of  a  York- 
shire family,  and  it  seems  probable  was  the 
Aon  of  Robert  de  Crepping,  who  for  several 
years  in  the  reign  of  Henry  IIL  was  one  of 
the  king's  escheators  beyond  the  Trent.  (  Cal, 
Ltpas,  p.  m.  i.  69.)  ^  Kichard  can  scarcely 
be  considered  to  have'  been  a  regular  justice 
itinerant  (as  Dugdale  colls  him),  as  he  only 
acted  in  reference  to  pleas  of  the  forest 
in  Lancashire  and  Nottrnghamshire,  in  14 
Edward  I.,  1286.  He  was  returned  as 
knight  of  the  shire  for  York  in  18  Edward  I. 
{FtirL  Writs,  I  21.) 

CSESHELD,  Richard,  is  called  three 
times  by  Whitelocke  (269,  842,  378)  '  Mr. 
Serjeant  Creswell,'  and  in  the  propositions 
made  by  the  parliament  to  the  king  in 
February  1643,  of  those  whom  they  desire 
to  be  appointed  justices  of  the  Common 
Pleas,  his  name  is  so  inserted.  (Clarendon, 
m.  407. ) 

But  there  was  no  sexjeant  of  the  name. 
The  person  intended  is  Richard  Cresheld, 
who  was  summoned  to  take  the  coif  in 
1636  (RymeTj  xx.  22),  and  who  is  recorded 
nnder  that  name  in  bugdale's  List  of  Ser- 
jeants. By  an  abbreviated  mispronuncia- 
tion of  the  name  it  became  corrupted  to 
Crearwell,  for  even  in  Sir  W.  Jones's  Re- 
ports (390)  of  the  period  he  is  called,  when 
appointed,  '  CreawelL' 

He  was  admitted  into  the  society  of 
Linooln^s  Inn  on  June  18,  1608,  imder  the 
description  of  'Richard  Cresheld,  son  of 
Edwud  Cresheld,  of  Mattishall-Bunj^h  in 
the  county  of  Norfolk,'  and  was  called  to 
the  bar  on  October  17,  1615,  and  became 
bencher  in  1633.  He  sat  for  the  borough 
of  Evesham  in  Worcestershire  in  King 
James's  last  parliament,  and  was  returned 
member  for  the  same  place  (of  which  he 
was  recorder^  in  all  the  parliaments  in 
King  Charles  a  reign.  {Notes  and  QuerieSy 
2iid  S.  L  460.)  In  16^  he  led;  the  van  in 
the  Committee  of  Grievances,  in  a  speech 
anfficiently  complimentary  to  the  king,  but 
argniiig  sfcrangly  against  the  legali^  of 
impriaooment  without  declaration  of  the 
(JM.  Hid.  IL  240);  but  he  does , 


CBESSI 


201 


not  appefur  to  have  often  taken  part  in  the 
debates. 

That  he  accommodated  himself  to  the 
views  of  the  popular  party  is  apparent  by 
his  receiving  the  thanks  of  the  Commons 
on  November  2, 1642,  for '  the  good  service 
done  bv  Serjeant  Cresweld  in  the  country 
upon  the  matter  of  contributions  and  other 
services '  {Commons^  JoumaU,  ii.  831),  hj 
their  proposing  him  to  be  a  judge  in  1643, 
and  bv  their  appointing  him  one  in  1048 ; 
but  that  he  oisapproved  of  their  violent 
proceedings  is  equally  apparent  from  his 
refusal  to  act  under  their  usurped  authority 
on  the  death  of  the  king.  He  died  in  Ser- 
jeants* Inn  in  1652,  and  was  buried  in  St. 
Andrew's,  Holbom,  in  the  register  of  which 
his  name  is  properly  spelled. 

CBESSI,  HuoH  DE,  was  for  six  succes- 
sive years  of  the  reign  of  Henry  II.,  com- 
mencing in  1175,  employed  as  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant,  and  m  1177  his  name 
appears  among  the  king's  regular  justiders 
at  Westminster.     {M(moXj  i.  94.) 

He  was  a  Norman  bv  birth,  and  had 
been  some  time  previously  attached  to  the 
king's  service ;  and  that  he  added  military 
to  nis  judicial  services  is  shown  by  his 
having  the  custody  of  the  tower  of  Rouen 
in  1180,  at  a  salary  of  200/.  a  year,  and 
by  a  grant  which  he  received  in  1184,  80 
itenry  H.,  of  100/L  on  the  Norman  Roll,  for 
the  soldiers  whom  he  led  in  the  war  of 
Poictou.     (Rot,  Scacc,  Normannia,  i.  70, 

1150 

He  married  Margaret,  the  daughter  and 
heir  of  William  de  Cayneto,  or  Quesnay, 
who  survived  him,  and  afterwards  became 
the  wife  of  Robert  Fitz-Roger,  lord  of 
Clavering  in  Essex.  He  left  a  son  named 
Roger,  who  was  in  the  wardship  of  this 
Robert  Fitz-Roger  till  his  majority  in  1205, 
when  he  obtained  possession  of  his  father's 
lands  in  Suffolk,  Sussex,  aud  Lincoln. 

The  barony  does  not  appear  to  have  con- 
tinued beyond  the  fifth  generation,  finish- 
ing with  the  after-named  William  de  Cressi, 
justice  of  trailbaston  under  Edward  I. 

CBESSI,  WiLLiAU  DE.  His  relationship 
with  the  above  Hugh  de  Cressi  is  not 
known.  Though  he  had  a  ^rant  of  forty 
librates  of  the  Norman  lands  in  Norfolk  in 
6  John  (Ca/.  Hot.  Fat.  8),  he  seems  to  have 
joined  the  barons  in  the  last  years  of  that 
reign,  a  safe-conduct  having  been  given 
to  hun  in  December  1215  to  go  and  speak 
to  the  king  as  to  making  his  peace.  (Hot. 
Pat,  162.)  In  this  he  was  no  doubt  suc- 
cessful, being  employed  in  the  next  year 
with  others  to  take  a  recognition  as  to  the 
last  presentation  of  the  church  of  Mareseye 
in  Nottinghamshire.  In  that  and  the  neip^n- 
bouring  counties  he  was  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant  in  3  Henry  IH.,  1219,  and  again 
in  1225. 

CKE88I,  W^nuAK  DE,  was  the  lineal 


202 


CRESSINGHAM 


descendant  of  the  above  Hugh  de  Oressi,  and 
the  son  of  Stephen  de  Cressi,  and  Sibylla, 
the  daughter  and  heir  of  John  de  BraytofL 
He  was  summoned  to  attend  the  king  on 
urgent  affairs  in  22  and  25  Edward  I.  He 
was  returned  as  holding  lands  in  Notting- 
hamshirey  Derbyshire,  and  Lincolnshire, 
and  when  the  commission  of  trailbaston  was 
issued  for  those  counties,  on  November  23, 
1304, 33  Edward  I.,  he  was  the  second  of 
the  three  justices  then  assigned.  (Pari, 
Writs,  i.  407-8 ;  Nicoht^s  Synopsis,) 

CSE8SIK0HA1I,  Hugh  de,  son  of  Wil- 
liam de  Oressingham,  was  an  officer  of  the 
Exchequer.  In  18  Edward  1.  he  is  called 
seneschal  of  the  queen  {Abh,  Fiacit  i.  30, 
33),  and  in  1292  he  was  appointed  with 
two  others  to  investigate  and  audit  the  debts 
due  to  Henry  in.  (iBarfcu',  ii.  291.)  In  that 
and  the  three  following  years  he  was  at  the 
head  of  the  justices  itmerant  for  the  north- 
em  counties.  (Year  Bookji,^.)  He  was 
a  canon  of  St  Paid's,  and  held  at  least  nine 
parsonages.  Pr3mne  calls  him  '  an  insatiable 
pluralist;'  and  Hemingford  gives  a  similar 
character,  and  ascribes  to  him  an  immode- 
rate passion  for  hoarding  money.  {Archao' 
hgia.  zxv.  608.) 

When  the  king  defeated  the  Scotch,  and 
Baliol  renounced  the  throne,  in  1206,  Cres- 
singham  was  appointed  treasurer  of  that 
country,  and  on  the  disorders  which  fol- 
lowed Edward's  departiu'e  was  commanded 
not  to  scruple  to  spend  the  whole  money 
in  the  exchequer  to  put  them  down.  Proud, 
k^orant,  and  violent,  he  made  himself  hate- 
ful to  the  Scots  by  his  oppressions :  and  on 
the  rising  of  Wallace  in  the  following  year, 
preferring  the  cuirass  to  the  cassock,  he 
joined  the  Earl  of  Surrey  in  leading  the 
royal  army  to  Stirling.  Wallace  left  the 
sie^  of  Dundee,  in  which  he  was  engaged, 
and  by  a  rapid  march  drew  up  his  army  on 
the  other  bank  of  the  river  Forth  before  the 
arrival  of  the  English  forces.  By  Cressing- 
ham's  rashness  the  latter  were  led  over  the 
bridge,  and  were  terribly  defeated,  he  being 
among  the  first  who  felL  ^So  deep  was 
the  detestation  in  which  his  character  was 
re^rded  that  his  body  was  mangled,  the 
skm  torn  from  his  limbs,  and  in  savage  tri- 
umph cut  to  pieces.'  It  is  said  that  Wal- 
lace ordered  as  much  of  bis  skin  to  be  taken 
off  as  would  make  a  sword-belt,  a  story 
which  has  been  absurdly  extended  to  its 
naving  been  employed  in  making  girths  and 
saddles.  (TifUer's  Scotland,  I  123-143.) 
The  Scots  called  him  *  non  thesaurarium  sed 
trayturarium  rems.'  (Triveti  Amiales,  366, 
note.)  He  held  the  town  of  Hendon  and 
land  in  Finchley  in  Middlesex,  with  the 
manor  of  Coulinge  in  Suffolk.  {Cal.  Inqms, 
p.  m.  i.  134.) 

CSE88WELL.  Cbesswell.  The  family 
of  Cresswell,  or  Cresswell,  near  Morpeth,  in 
Northumberland,  dates  from  the  earhest  age 


GEEWE 

of  English  histoiy,  a  regular  succession  of 
male  heirs  having  possessed  the  estate  from 
the  days  of  Richard  I.  till  the  death  of  John 
Cresswell  in  1781.  That  gentleman  left 
two  daughters,  one  of  whom,  Frances 
Dorothea,  married  Francis  Easterby,  Esq.,  of 
Blackheath,  who,  purchasing  the  other  sis- 
ter's moiety,  became  possessed  of  the  whole 
estate,  and  assumed  tne  name  of  CreaswelL 
Of  that  union  Sir  Cressvrell  Cresswell  was 
the  fourth  son.  He  was  bom  in  1793, 
and,  passing  through  the  Charterhouse  from 
1806  to  1810,  he  went  in  the  latter  year 
to  Emmanuel  College,  Cambridge,  where  he 
had  for  his  tutor  the  future  Justice  Maule. 
He  took  his  degree  of  B.A.  in  1814,  and  of 
M.A.  in  1818,  and  then,  pursuing  his  legal 
studies  in  the  Inner  Temple,  was  called  to 
the  bar  in  1819,  and  naturally  joined  the 
Northern  Circuit.  Here  he  soon  showed 
that  ability  and  power  that  ever  after  dis- 
tinguished him,  and  long  before  he  became 
by  seniority  the  leader  ^f  the  circuit,  scarcely 
any  cause  was  tried  in  which  he  was  not 
engaged  on  one  side  or  the  other.  In  1890 
he  was  appointed  recorder  of  Hull,  and  m 
1834  received  a  silk  gown. 

In  1841  he  defeated  Mr.  William  Ewart, 
the  whig  member,  in  a  contest  for  Liverpool, 
and  soon  secured  to  himself  that  admiration 
in  the  house  which  it  is  not  generally  the 
fortune  of  lawyers  to  gain. 

Sir  Robert  Feel,  on  the  very  first  vacancy 
that  occurred,  selected  him  as  a  judge  of 
the  Common  Pleas,  whereupon  he  was 
knighted.  In  that  court,  from  J  anuaiy  184^ 
to  January  1858,  he  discharged  the  duties 
in  the  most  admirable  manner ;  and  at  the 
latter  date  he  consented  to  undertake  the  or- 
ganisation of  the  new  court  then  created  for 
deciding  testamentary  and  divorce  causes. 
The  manner  in  which  he  overcame  the  diffi- 
culties attendant  on  the  new  judicature,  and 
met  the  perpetuallv  increasing  demands  on 
its  decisions,  which  unexpectedly  accumu- 
lated in  overwhelming  numbers,  were  elo- 
fuently  and  justly  described  by  Sir  Robert 
^hillimore,  the  queen's  advocate,  on  the 
opening  of  the  court  after  his  lamented  de- 
cease, which  occurred  on  July  29,  1863, 
from  the  effects  of  a  fall  from  his  horse  ten 
days  before. 

CSEWE,  Ranulphe,  was  a  descendant 
from  the  younger  branch  of  a  family  resi- 
dent at  Crew,  or  Crue,  a  manor  in  Cheshire^ 
in  the  reign  of  Edward  L  {CaL  L^,  p.  m. 
i.  119.)  His  &ther,  John  Crewe,  was  set- 
tled at  Nantwich,  where  he  is  said  to  have 
been  a  tanner.  By  his  wife,  Alice  Main- 
waring,  he  left  two  sons,  both  of  whom 
were  the  ancestors  of  noble  families.  This 
Ranulphe  (as  he  himself  spelled  it)  was  the 
elder.  Thomas,  the  vounger,  was  a  ser- 
jeant-at-law, and  speaker  of  the  House  of 
Commons  in  the  reigns  of  both  James  L 
and  Charles  I.,  and  his  son,  John  Crewe,  in 


CBEWE 

1661  was  created  Baron  Crewe,  of  Stene  in 
I^orthamptonahire,  which  barony  became 
extinct  in  1721. 

Banolphe  Crewe  was  bom  about  1658. 
He  ms  called  to  the  bar  of  Lincoln's  Inn 
on  Xovember  8,  1584,  and  was  elected 
reader  in  1G02.  In  1587  he  entered  par- 
liament as  member  for  Bracklej;  ana  in 
1598  he  married  Juliana,  the  daughter  and 
heir  of  John  Clipsbj,  of  Clipsbj  in  Norfolk, 
withwhom  he  had  a  fair  inheritance.  {Fkdier, 
L 188.)  He  does  not  seem  to  lutTe  been 
much  employed  in  the  courts,  yet  it  is  eri- 
dent  that  his  reputation  as  a  lawyer  must 
haye  been  considerable,  as  he  was  selected 
to  defend  the  Idnga  title  to  alnage  in  the 
House  of  Lords  in  1606,  for  his  'travail 
Old  puns'  in  which  he  received  10/L  (FieU 
JEUeortU,  Jac,  64),  and  as  his  professional 
inoome  was  so  considerable  that  be  was 
enabled,  two  years  afterwards,  to  gratify 
the  ^reat  object  of  his  ambition  by  the  ac- 
qimition  of  the  ancestral  property  from 
iihach  he  derived  his  name ;  and  thus  be- 
coming repossessed  of  the  estate  which  for 
nearly  three  hundred  years  had  had  no 
Ciewe  for  its  owner,  he  built  the  magnifi- 
cent mansion  there  which  has  ever  since 
Wa  the  seat  of  the  family. 

He  was  selected  as  spelaker  of  that  par- 

Banent  which  met  on  April  5,  1614,  and 

ns  80  hastily  dissolved  on  the  7th  of  the 

Allowing  June,  to  which  he  was  returned 

H  representative  of  his  native  county,  and 

VII  koighted  the  day  after  the  dissolution. 

Odkd  to  the  degree  of  the  coif  and  made 

bg*s  Serjeant  in  the  following  month,  he 

itt  in  1015  as  a  commissioner  on  the  trial 

<i  Weston  for  the  murder  of  Sir  Thomas 

Oreibuiy,  and  was  one  of  the  counsel  for 

Uie  crown  against  the  Earl  and  Countess 

of  Somenet     (StaU  Truds,  u.  911,  952, 

^.)    He  was  also  concerned  in  the  shame- 

hl  trial  of  Edward  Peacham  for  treason  at 

laimton.    (  Waiter  Yonge't  Diary,  28.) 

He  was  not  in  the  next  parliament  of 
1680,  but  conducted  the  proceedings  in  the 
Bouse  of  Lords  asainst  Sir  Frnnds  Micbell, 
ht  monopolist,  Sir  Henry  Yelverton,  late 
tttomej-general,  and  Sir  John  fiennet, 
tidge  of  the  Prerogative  Court.  (^4xte 
frWf,  ii.  1136.  1148,  1146.)  In  the  par- 
iament  of  1624  he  onened  some  of  the 
haiges  against  Cianfield,  Earl  of  Middle- 
ez  (i\ir/.  Hid.  i.  1447) ;  and  when  Sir 
ames  Ley  succeeded  that  nobleman  as  lord 
reasnrer.  Sir  Banulphe  was  selected  to  fill 
is  place  as  chief  justice  of  the  King'sBench, 
)  which  he  was  promoted  on  January  26, 
635. 

King  James  died  in  the  following  March. 
Ds  soccessor^  having  angrily  dissolved  two 
•diaments  in  leas  thim  fifteen  months. 
*as  compelled  to  resort  to  unconstitutional 
Qcaiia  to  replenish  his  exhausted  exche- 
[QO.    One  of  these  was  by  forced  loans 


CREWE 


203 


from  his  subjects  according  to  the  amount 
they  would  nave  paid  towards  a  subddy. 
The  judges,  who  among  the  rest  were  ap- 
pliea  to,  paid  the  money  demanded,  but 
refusing  to  subscribe  a  paper  recofmising 
the  legality  of  thef  collection.  Chief  Justice 
Crewe  was  selected  as  an  example,  and  was 
discharged  from  his  office  on  November  0. 
1626.  In  1628  he  wrote  a  manly  and 
modest  letter  to  the  Duke  of  Bucking- 
ham, pleading  for  his  restoration  to  the 
king's  favour.  Whatever  intentions  the 
duke  might  have  had  of  repairing  the 
.  injuiy  he  had  done  to  the  chief  justice, 
'  they  were  frustrated  by  his  assassmation 
by  Felton,  in  the  August  of  that  year. 
After  another  application  to  the  king 
himself,  which  pxoduced  no  residt,  Sir 
Ranulphe  retired  from  public  life.  lie 
survived  his  dismissal  more  than  nineteen 
years,  witnessing  the  calamitous  effects  of 
those  ille^  measures  to  which  he  bad 
refused  his  judicial  sanction,  and  suffer- 
ing much  from  the  consequences  of  the 
civil  war,  his  revenues  being  seized  and 
his  mansion  ransacked  by  the  soldiers  of 
that  parliament  which  had  made  those 
measures  the  ostensible  motive  of  the 
rebellion.  {UinchcUffe's  JBarthotiUef/, 
2oo.) 

He  died  at  his  house  in  Westminster  ou 
January  13, 1646,  and  his  remains  were  in- 
terred in  a  chapel  he  had  erected  in  the 
church  of  Barthomley,  the  parish  in  which 
Crewe  Hall  is  situate. 

As  a  lawyer  he  was  learned  and  pains- 
taking; as  a  judge  he  was  assiduous  and 
patient ;  of  his  honesty,  independence,  and 
integrity  he  gave  the  best  proof  that  man 
can  offer ;  and  of  his  eloquence  he  has  left 
a  most  favourable  specimen,  in  his  speech 
to  the  Lords  on  tne  titles  of  De  Vere. 
After  describing  the  500  years  of  unbroken 
lineage  in  the  fiamily.  he  exclaimed :  '  I 
have  laboured  to  make  a  covenant  with 
myself  that  affection  may  not  press  upon 
judgment;  for  I  suppose  there  is  no  man 
that  hath  any  apprenension  of  ffentry  or 
nobleness,  but  his  afiection  stands  to  the 
continuance  of  so  noble  a  name  and  house, 
and  would  take  hold  of  a  twig  or  a  twine- 
thread  to  uphold  it  And  yet  Time  has  his 
revolutions;  there  must  be  a  period  and 
an  end  of  all  temporal  things— ^nw  rentm^ 
— an  end  of  names  and  dignites,  and  what- 
soever is  terrene ;  and  why  not  of  De  Vere  ? 
For  where  is  Bohun  P  Where  is  Mowbray  P 
Where  is  Mortimer  P  Nay,  which  is  more 
and  most  of  all.  where  is  PlantagenetP 
They  are  entomoed  in  the  urns  and  se- 
pulchres of  mortidity.  And  yet  let  the 
name  and  dignity  of  Be  Vere  stand  so 
long  as  it  pleaseth  God  I'  (TF.  Johm's 
Heports,  101.) 

By  his  first  wife  he  left  a  son,  Clipsby 
Crewe,  whose  granddaughter  (married  to 


204 


CRIOL 


John  Offley,  Esq.,  of  Madeley  in  Stafford- 
shire) ultimately  succeeded  to  the  inherit- 
nnce.  Their  son  took  the  name  of  Crewe, 
whose  grandson  was  in  1806  created  Lord 
Crewe  of  Crewe  in  Cheshire.  Sir  Ra- 
nulphe's  second  wife  was  another  Juliana, 
daughter  of  Edward  Fusey,  of  London,  ana 
relict  of  Sir  Thomas  Hesketh,  Knt,  by 
whom  he  had  no  children.  {Barthondey] 
239.) 

CSIOLy  Nicholas  de,  was  the  son  of 
Bertram  de  Criol,  who  was  apparently  an 
officer  in  the  Exchequer  and  sheriff  of 
Kent  for  many  years,  being  then  in  such 
favour  with  Henry  IIL  that  part  of  the 
debt  he  owed  to  the  crown  was  remitted. 

That  his  son  Nicholas  retained  the  influ- 
ence his  father  had  possessed  is  shown  by  his 
receiving  many  favours  from  the  king,  and 
by  his  being  entrusted  with  the  sheriffalty 
of  Kent  in  48  Henry  III.  (Excerpt,  e  Hot, 
Fin,  ii.  2S2\  and  by  his  being  made  go- 
vernor of  Rochester  Castle  and  warden  of 
the  Cinque  Ports.     (Cat.  Hot.  Pat,  34) 

In  12(15  he  is  mentioned  as  a  baron  of  the 
Exchequer,  and  as  such  sued  one  of  his 
debtors  in  that  court  (MadoXj  ii.  13, 310.) 
He  died  in  1272.     (Ahh.  Rot.  (h-ig,  i.  20.) 

By  his  wife  Joan,  daughter  and  heir  of 
William  de  Auberville,  he  left  a  son  Ni- 
cholas, who  was  summoned  to  parliament 
by  Edward  I.,  but  not  afterwards. 

CSOKE,  JoHi7.  The  original  name  of  the 
Croke  family  was  Le  Blount.  Two  bro- 
thers, Robert  and  William  Le  Blount, 
younger  sons  of  the  Count  de  Guisnes, 
held  high  military  commands  in  the  army 
of  Wiluam  of  Normandy  on  his  descent 
upon  England.  After  the  Conquest  they 
were  rewarded  by  extensive  grants  of 
lands.  The  elder  branch  failed  by  the 
death  of  the  sixth  baron  at  the  battle  of 
Lewes  in  1264 ;  and  of  the  younger  branch. 
Sir  Robert  Blount,  who  was  deeply  impli- 
cated in  the  conspiracy  to  restore  Richard 
II.,  was  beheaded  in  1400.  Nicholas,  his 
kinsman,  being  engaged  in  the  same  con- 
spiracy, was  outlawed,  and  took  service 
under  the  Duke  of  Milan ;  but  four  years 
afterwards  he  ventured  into  England,  and 
I'scaped  observation  by  changing  his  name 
to  Cfroke.  On  the  death  of  Henry  IV.  he 
came  out  of  his  retirement,  and  bought 
lands  in  Buckinghamshire,  where  he  re- 
sided at  Easington,  in  the  parish  of  Chil- 
ton. His  great-grandson,  John  Croke,  a 
master  in  Chancery  in  the  reigns  of  Henry 
VUL,  Edward  VL,  and  Maiy,  by  his  wife, 
Prudentia  Cave,  left  a  son,  who  succeeded 
to  his  ample  inheritance.  His  name  was 
also  John,  and  he  was  knighted  by  Queen 
Elizabeth  when  he  was  sheriff  of  Bucking- 
hamshire, which  county  he  also  represented 
in  parliament.  Marrying  Elizabetn,  daugh- 
ter of  Sir  Alexander  Unton,  of  Chequers  in 
that  comity,  he  had  by  ner  a  numerona 


CROKE 

family,  of  whom  two,  this  John  and  the 
next-mentioned  Oeorge,  became  judges. 
The  fifth  sdh,  William,  is  the  only  one 
whose  male  representatiyea  have  oontmned 
to  the  present  time.  One  of  them,  Sir 
Alexander  Croke,  judge  of  the  Vioe-Ad- 
miralty  Court  in  Ainerica,  has  commemo- 
rated nis  family  in  an  elaborate  '  Genealo- 
gical Histoiy,'  of  which  full  advantage  hai 
here  been  taken. 

John  Croke,  the  eldest  son,  was  bom  in 
1553,  and  entered  the  Inner  Temple  on 
April  13,  1570,  and,  having  been  m  doe 
course  called  to  the  bar,  was  appointed 
Lent  reader  in  1506,  and  treasurer  ib 
1598.  At  a  very  early  period  he  had  ac- 
quired so  great  a  reputation  for  his  nrcH 
^ssional  attainments  that  he  was  consuted 
by  Sir  Christopher  Hatton,  who  gave  hm 
as  his  fee, '  for  his  couusell  in  lawe,  a  sHTor 
gilt  bole  and  cover.'  In  1505  he  wm 
elected  recorder  of  London,  and  his  bio- 
grapher gives  a  copy  of  one  of  his  speechei 
on  presenting  the  lord  mayor  to  the  Court 
of  Exchequer,  which,  in  its  elaboration, 
puts  to  shame  the  curtailed  addresses  of 
the  present  day.  The  same  city  chose  \am 
for  tneir  representative  in  the  parliameitfi 
of  1507  and  IGOl,  he  having  before,  in 
1585,  been  returned  for  the  borough  of 
Windsor. 

Of  the  parliament  that  met  in  October 
1001  he  was  unanimously  chosen  speaker, 
and    in   his   speech    on*  presentation  he 
offered  up  his  solemn  prayers  to  heaTCO 
to    continue    the    prosperous    estate  and 
peace   of  the  kingdom,  which,  he  avd, 
had  been  defended  by  the  mighty  arm  oc 
our  dread  and  sacred  queen.    £^betli, 
interrupting  him,  cried  out,  *  No ;  but  by 
the  mighty  hand  of  God,  Mr.  SpeakK* 
Early  in  the  session  Serjeant  Heale,  on  tte 
question  of  a  subsidy,  marvelled  much  thit 
the  house  should  stand  upon  granting  it^  or 
the  time  of  pa3rment,  when  fdl  we  had,  he 
said,  was  her  majesty's,  and  she  may  law* 
fully  at  her  pleasure  take  it ;  '  yea,*  added 
he, '  she  hath  as  much  right  to  all  our  landi 
and  ffoods  as  to  any  revenue  of  the  crown.* 
At  which  all  the  house  laughing  and  hem* 
ming,  the  speaker  was  obliged  to  call  them 
to  order,  saying  that  '  he  that  is  spealmg 
should  be  suffered  to  deliver  his  mind  witlb 
out  interruption.*    The  grievance  of  mono- 
polies occasioned  great  debates  in  this  par- 
liament, and  the  queen  having  politicaUy 
anticipated  the  decision  of  the  Commooay 
the  speaker  had  the  gratification  of  an- 
nouncing to  the  house  her  resolntion  to 
revoke  the  patents  that  existed,  and  not  to 
grant  any  otner.    On  the  division  upon  tlM 
bill  for  enforcing  attendance  at  chiadii  As 
ayes  being  105,  and  the  noes  106^  it  iril 
contended  that  the  speaker  had  %  toIo 
which  would  make  tne  Totes  efeii|  bat 
Croke  said  'he  was  foredoaed  of  lili  TvlBi 


CBOEE 

\}j  taking  that  place  which  it  had  pleased 
them  to  impoee  upon  him,  and  that  he  was 
to  be  indifferent  to  both  parties.'  At  the 
doee  of  the  seanon^  on  December  19,  the 
loTd  keeper  concluddl  his  speech  by  saying, 
*For  yourself,  Mr.  Speaker,  her  majesty 
commanded  me  to  say  that  you  have  pro-  ! 
ceeded  with  such  ^nsdom  and  discretion 
that  it  is  much  to  your  commendations, 
and  that  none  before  you  have  deserved 
more.' 

About  a  year  after  this  Groke  received  a 
smnmons  to  take  u{K)n  him  the  degree  of 
the  coif  on  a  day  which  occurred  after  the 
queen's  death.  The  writ  in  consequence 
abated,  but  a  new  one  was  issued  returnable 
the  same  day.  He  was  called  seneant  in 
Easter  Term  1603,  and  knighted  by  King 
Jimes,  one  of  the  king's  Serjeants  on  May 
29,  and  a  Welsh  judge,  whereupon  he  re- 
adied the  recordship.  In  1604  he  was 
■ppointed  deputy  to  Sir  Oeorge  Hume, 
chancellor  of  the  Exchequer.  (CaL  St. 
Fkmen  [16031,  79.) 

On  June  25,  1607,  he  was  created  a 
judge  of  the  King's  Bench,  and  fiilly  sus- 
ttirod  the  character  he  had  acquired  as  an 
advocate. 

After  performing  his  judicial  duties  for 
nearly  thirteen  years,  he  died  at  his  house 
m  Holbom  on  January  23,  1620,  aged 
nz^-az,  and  was  buried  at  Chilton. 

HLs  wife  was  Catherine,  daughter  of  Sir 
Michael  Blount,  of  Maple  Durham  in  Ox- 
fordshire, lieutenant  of  tne  Tower,  by  whom 
be  had  five  sons,  of  whom  no  descendants 
remain. 

CBOKB,  Geoboe,  was  seven  years  junior 
to  his  brother  the  above  Sir  John  Croke. 
He  was  educated  at  the  school  at  Thame, 
and  at  Christ  Churph  College^  Oxford. 
Having  been  entered  of  the  Inner  Temple, 
he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1684,  and  ap- 
pointed autuom  reader  in  1599,  and  again 
m  Lent  1618.  He  commenced  his  parlia- 
mentaiy  career  in  1597  as  member  for 
Beeralston. 

Though  not  mentioned  in  his  own  Reports 
as  an  advocate  tiU  Michaelmas  1588.  he 
had  conmienced  his  collections  for  uiem 
sevetn  yean  before,  showing  an  early  devo- 
tion to  the  practical  part  of  his  profession. 
He  ^d  not  attain  l^;al  honours,  however, 
till  four  years  after  nis  brother's  death,  in 
1623,  when  he  was  made  seijeant-at-law 
and  kinfr^s  seijeant  nearly  at  the  same 
time.  King  James  knighted  him  on  the 
oecaaioo.  Judce  Whitelocke,  in  his  Diary, 
■ays  that  he  did  not  receive  the  coif  sooner 
because  he  refused  to  give  monev,  and 
offence  waa  taken  at  his  saying  be  thought 
'  it  was  not  for  the  king ' — so  common  it 
was  in  tfaoee  days  to  pay  for  honours,  and 
•0  laiyre  a  pftrt  of  these  unholy  payments 
were  known  to  be  appropriated  by  those 
about  the  court. 


CBOKE 


205 


He  was  raised  to  the  bench  on  February 
11, 1625,  as  a  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas, 
and  in  six  weeks  the  death  of  James  L 
occurred,  when  his  patent  was  renewed  by 
King  Charles,  who,  on  October  9,  1628, 
removed  him  to  the  Court  of  Kind's  Bench 
on  the  death  of  Sir  John  Doderid^e.  He 
had  no  successor  in  the  Common  Pleas,  the 
opportunity  being  taken  to  reduce  the 
judges  from  five,  to  which  thev  had  been 
mcreased  by  James  L,  to  the  original  num- 
ber of  four.    {Crokej  Car,  127.) 

The  twelve  years  that  he  sat  there  were 
those  that  immediately  preceded  the  Great 
Kebellion,  which  the  courts  of  justice  were 
greatly  instrumental  in  hastening.  They 
were  used  as  tools  to  enforce  the  unconsti- 
tutional behests  of  the  crown,  which  by  the 
subservient  decisions  of  the  judges  were 
declared  to  have  the  force  of  law.  This 
servile  spirit  did  not  extend  over  the  whole 
bench,  and  Sir  George  Croke  was  one  of 
the  minority  whom  neither  the  threats  of 
power  nor  the  hopes  of  favour  could  induce 
to  swerve  from  the  dictates  of  conscience. 
He  was  the  only  judge  of  the  King's  Bench 
excepted  in  the  vote  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons from  responsibilitv  for  delaying  jus- 
tice towards  Selden,  Holies,  and  the  other 
members  of  parliament  who  were  com- 
mitted to  the  Tower  for  their  speeches 
there ;  and  in  the  great  case  of  ship-money, 
though  he  had  been  induced  in  the  first 
instance  to  join  the  rest  of  the  judges,  for 
the  sake  of  conformity,  in  signing  an  abstract 
opinion  declaring  its  legality,  yet  when  it 
came  judicially  before  him  m  Hampden's 
case  he,  in  opposition  to  the  majority,  gave 
judgment  against  the  crown;  and  in  this 
courageous  conduct  he  was  imitated  by  Sir 
Richard  Hutton,  Sir  Humphrey  Davenport, 
and  Sir  John  Denham.  About  1640  Sir 
George,  being  then  eighty  years  old,  had 
petitioned  to  be  relieved  from  his  duties, 
and  had  received  from  the  king  a  dispensa- 
tion from  his  attendance  in  court  or  on  the 
circuit,  his  judicial  title,  salary,  and  al- 
lowances being  continued  to  him. 

Sir  George  retired  to  his  estate  at  Water- 
stock,  where  he  spent  the  remainder  of  his 
life.  He  died  on  February  16, 1641-2,  in 
the  82nd  year  of  his  age,  and  was  buried  at 
Waterstock  in  Oxfordshire,  under  a  monu- 
ment on  which  he  is  represented  in  his 
judicial  robes,  with  an  inscription  comme- 
morative of  his  private  virtues  and  public 
patriotism,  whicn,  unlike  the  usual  lan- 
^age  of  epitaphs,  was  acknowledged  both 
by  contemporaries  and  posterity  to  be  a 
faithful  picture  of  his  character.  His  learn- 
ing as  a  lawyer  and  his  bearing  as  a  judge 
are  well  described  by  his  son-in-law.  Sir 
Harbottle  Grimston,  in  the  preface  to  his 
Reports,  which^were  not  published  till  after 
his  death.  They  were  originally  written 
by  Sir  George  in  the  Norman-French  Ian- 


206 


CROKEDAYK 


guage,  but  were  translated  by  Sir  Harbottle 
into  English,  and  they  consist  of  three 
volumes^  one  beinff  appropriated  to  each  of 
the  reigns  of  Elizabetn,  James,  and  Charles. 
The  cases  comprehend  a  period  of  sixty 
years,  and  afford  an  example  of  perseyering 
industry  not  to  be  equalled.  In  the  abbre- 
yiated  language  of  the  courts  they  are 
referred  to  as  *  Cro.  Eliz./  'Cro.  Jac.,'  and 
*  Cro.  Car..*  and  are  always  quoted  with  re- 
spect for  their  learning  and  accuracy. 

He  married  Mary,  the  daughter  of  Sir 
Thomas  Bennet,  who  was  lorn  mayor  of 
London  in  1  James  L,  and  whose  brother 
Hichard  was  ancestor  to  the  noble  houses 
of  Arlington  and  Tankeryille.  This  lady  is 
said  to  haye  encouraged  and  confirmed  ner 
busband  in  his  resolution  not  to  be  in- 
fluenced by  the  persuasions  of  the  king's 
friends  to  giye  a  judgment  in  the  case  of 
ship-money  contrary  to  conscience.  She 
sunriyed  him  fifteen  years,  and  died  on  De- 
cember 1, 1657.  By  her  he  had  one  son, 
who  died  early,  and  three  daughters,  one  of 
whom  married  Sir  Harbottle  urimston,  the 
master  of  the  Rolls. 

CBOKSDATK,  Adah  de,  was  one  of  the 
two  justices  of  assize  appointed  in  21  Ed- 
ward I.,  1293,  for  Lincoln  and  nine  other 
counties,  and  was  summoned  among  the 
j  ustices  to  seyeral  parliaments.  (Pari.  Writs, 
1.  29-188.)  He  is  mentioned  in  25  Edward 
L  as  assigned  to  assess  and  collect  the 
ninth  imposed  for  the  king's  confirmation 
of  Magna  Charta  in  the  northern  counties. 
(i2o<.  Par/,  i.  239-241.)  Three  years  after- 
wards he  was  appointed  to  perambulate 
the  forests  of  the  counties  or  York  and 
Cumberland,  and  in  31  and  33  Edward  I. 
there  are  writs  in  his  name,  showing  he 
was  still  engaged  in  legal  employment& 
In  the  latter  year  he  died,  possessed  of 
yery  considerable  property  in  Cumberland. 
(Pari  Writs,  L  398;  Abb.  Hacit.  249, 
264 ;  CaL  Inq,  p.  m.  i.  198.) 

CS0KE8L£Y,  JoHN  DE,  was  one  of  the 
king's  escheators  of  the  forest  of  Rocking- 
ham, and  also  custos  of  Skipton  and  other 
royal  manors.  (Rot.  Pari,  ii.  414 ;  Madox, 
i.  721.)  It  was  only  for  pleas  of  the  forest 
that  he  was  a  justice  itmerant  in  Essex, 
from  20  to  29  Edward  L,  1292-1301, 
where  he  receiyed  six  shillings  a  day  for 
his  expenses.  (Pari  Writs,  i.  88,  397.) 
He  died  in  the  following  year. 
V  CE0KE8L£Y,  BiCHARD  D£,  succeeded  the 
before-mentioned  Hichard  de  Barking  as 
abbot  of  Westminster  on  March  25, 1247. 
(Monasticon,  ii.  283.)  He  is  twice  named 
by  Madox  (iL  318,  319)  in  his  List  of 
Barons  of  the  Exchequer  in  35  and  42 
Henry  HI.,  taking  presence  of  the  trea- 
surer, insteuEid  of  bein^  placed,  as  his  pre- 
decessor was,  after  him.  In  the  intcSral 
between  these  two  dates  he  had  been  de- 
.epatched  by  the  king  as^his  ambassador  to 


CROMPTON 

j  the  court  of  Rome  (Bymerj  L  344),  and  < 
two  other  occasions  had  been  sent  on  mi 
sions  to  the  Duke  of  Brabant^to  negotia 
a  marriage  between  Prince  Edward  an 
the  duke's  daughter.  Matthew  Pkois  d 
scribes  him  as  a  learned  and  elegant  mai 
with  a  handsome  person  and  a  pleasin 
yoice.  He  died  alx)ut  July  21,  1258,  i 
some  say  by  poison  (Darts  Westtmnite 
ii.  xxi.),  leaying  such  extrayagant  heqwA 
to  the  poor  that  a  mandate  was  procure 
from  the  pope  limiting  the  expense.  (Pod 
dingtony  Past  and  Present,  by  W.  RobiDi 
1853.) 

CBOXPTOV,  Charles,  was  descendat 
from  an  old  family  setUed  at  Derby  a 
eminent  bankers,  seyeral  of  them  havio^ 
been  members  for  the  county,  and  one  ol 
them  raised  to  a  baronetcy  in  1838,  whid 
died  with  him  in  1849.  The  jud^  wai 
the  third  son  of  Peter  Crompton,  Eb^. 
M.D.,  of  Eaton,  near  Liyerpool,  by  hu 
cousin  Mary,  the  daughter  of  John  Cromp- 
ton, Esq.,  ot  Chorley  in  Lancashire. 

It  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  of  the 
judges  of  the  reign  of  Victoria  there  an 
at  least  eight  who  can  boast  of  medioi] 
paternity— -Lords  Denman,  Langdale,  and 
Westbury,  and  Justices  Maule,  Paik; 
Vaughan,  Crompton,  and  Willes.  To 
these  may  be  added  Lord  Chancellor  Loid 
Cotte^iham,  who  was  the  nephew  of  the 
eminent  physician  to  George  HI,  Sir 
Lucas  Pepys,  Bart 

Charles  Crompton  was  bom  at  Derby  in 
1797,  and  was  eaucated  at  Trinity  CoUsge^ 
Dublin,  where  he  graduated  with  greit 
distinction,  obtaining  honours  in  iSiif 
1815,  and  1816.  He  then  entered  tiie 
Inner  Temple,  and  was  admitted  as  a  iMff- 
rister  in  Noy ember  1821.  On  the  Northern 
and  the  Western  Circuits  he  soon  became 
known  as  a  deeply  read  lawyer,  and  conee- 
quently  acquired  great  experience  in  tbe 
practical  part  of  the  profession  both  there 
and  in  Westminster  HalL  He  succesaiTelj 
filled  the  posts  of  tub-man  and  post-man 
in  the  Court  of  Excheauer,  where  he  viU 
counsel  for  the  Board  of  Stamps  and 
Taxes.  Of  the  decisions  in  that  court  he 
was  a  reporter  from  1830  to  1836.  in  con- 
junction  at  first  with  Mr.  rafxerwaidfl 
Chief  Justice)  Jeiris,  and  subsequently 
with  Messrs.  Meeson  and  Eoscoe.  In  ISSv 
he  was  appointed  assessor  of  the  Court  oi 
Passage  at  Liyerpool,  and  in  1851  he  wai 
selected  as  one  of  the  commissioners  ol 
enq^uiry  into  the  proceedings,  practice,  and 
jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  Chancery.  Ot 
the  retirement  of  Sir  John  Patteson  frooi 
the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench,  Mr.  Cgonmtfli 
was  appointed  in  February  1852,  ana  va- 
ceiyed  the  customary  knighthood.  Ha  wn 
obliged  from  illness  to  reeagn  Ua  aaat  ii 
October  1865.  and  on  the  aOlk  of  IM 
month  he  dieo. 


C£OMW£LL 

He  manned  a  daughter  of  Thomas 
Fletcher,  Esq.,  of  IdTerpool,  by  whom 
he  left  seyeral  children. 

CBOKWBLL,  Thokas  (Earl  of  Essex), 
was  bom  towards  the  latter  end  of  the 
fifteenth  centmy,  at  Pntney,  where  his 
father  Walter  Cromwell  carried  on  the 
busineasy  first  of  a  blacksmith,  and  then  of 
a  brewer.  His  mother,  after  Walter's 
death,  was  married  to  a  doth-sheerer  in 
London.  His  education  was  that  of  his 
dasa,  but  his  activity  and  intelligence  were 
great,  and  early  in  life  he  had  the  advan- 
tage of  going  abroad,  in  what  capacity  is 
not  known.  During  this  period  he  so  un- 
proved his  opportunities  tnat  he  mastered 
several  foreign  languages,  and  acquired 
that  ^tness  in  the  conduct  of  affairs  for 
which  he  was  afterwards  distinguished. 
He  seems,  firom  a  letter  addressed  to  him 
by  Cecily,  Marchioness  of  Dorset,  com- 
mencing '  Cromwell,  I  woU  that  you  send 
to  me,*  &c.,  to  have  been  at  one  time  in 
the  househohl  of  that  lady,  (mis's  Let- 
ters, 1st  S.  L  218.) 

While  at  Antwerp  he  was  retained  hy 
the  English  merchants  there  to  be  their 
derk  or  secretary^  and  during  his  employ- 
ment in  their  amirs  he  became  acquamted 
with  Sir  Richard  Gresham,  the  father 
of  the  founder  of  the  Royal  Exchange. 
{Burgom'M  Gresham,  i.  218.)  Whether 
this  took  place  before  or  after  his  admis- 
Bon  to  Gray's  Inn  in  1524  is  uncertain; 
bat  there  is  no  doubt  that  he  afterwards 
went  to  Rome,  since  he  was  present  as  a 
soldier  at  the  sacking  of  that  dty  in  May 
1527  under  the  Duke  of  Bourbon.  He  is 
represented  as  having  been  engaged  at 
Antwerp  by  two  persons  from  Boston  in 
Lincolnshire  to  accompany  them  and  en- 
deavour to  obtain  from  the  pope  a  renewal 
of  the  indulgences  granted  to  the  guild  of 
Our  Lady  in  their  diurch  of  St.  Botolph, 
and  as  having  succeeded  by  gratifying  nis 
holineas's  pabte  with  some  dainty  jellies 
made  after  the  English  fashioiL  Drayton, 
in  '  The  BGrror  for  Magistrates,'  iutimates 
that  the  pope's  &vour  was  obtained  by 
Cromwell's  singing  to  him  'freemen's 
catches,'  and  farther  alludes  to  his  playing 
there,  with  other  of  his  countrymen, '  as  a 
comedian/    {Xoiet  and  QueneSf  Srd  S.  xi. 

Ketuning  to  England,  Cromwell  was 
admitted  into  the  family  of  Cardinal  Wol- 
leTy'who  had  met  him  in  France  and  at 
Qooe  amireciated  his  abilities.  What  office 
he  held  in  that  household  does  not  dearly 
appear,  bat  in  the  two  years  that  he  was 
Tetained  in  the  funily  he  made  himself 
eaioeotlynsefiil,  asajsting  Wolsey  in  many 
importaiit  matters,  and  particularly  in  the 
foaodatioD  of  bis  colleges  at  Ipswich  and 
Oxfoid.  This  short  service  was  suffident 
to  cmto  io  cpieat  an  affection  as  to  prompt 


CKOMWELL 


207 


him  to  come  boldly  forward,  apparently  at 
the  risk  of  the  king  s  displeasure,  in  defence 
of  his  fallen  master.  Having  procured  a 
seat  in  the  House  of  Commons, '  there  was 
nothing,'  to  use  Cavendish's  words, '  at  any 
time  objected  against  my  lord  but  he  was 
ready  to  make  answer  thereunto ;  by  means 
whereof  he,  being  earnest  in  his  master's 
-  behalf  was  reputed  the  most  faithful  ser- 
'  vant  to  his  master  of  all  other,  and  was 
generally  of  all  men  highly  commended.' 
When  the  bill  of  impeachment  was  sent 
down  to  the  Commons,  '  against  it  Master 
Cromwel  did  inveigh  so  discreetly,  and 
with  such  witty  persuasions,  that  tiie  same 
would  take  no  effect'  It  is  impossible, 
however,  considering  the  general  subser- 
viency of  parliament,  not  to  believe  that  he 
had  received  some  encouragement  from  the 
king  before  he  ventured  on  this  opposi- 
tion. 

That  he  had  then  access  to  Jhis  [majesty 
is  manifest  from  his  being  sent  on  various 
comforting  messages  to  Wolsey,  among 
which  was  the  communication  of  the  royid 
intention  to  give  10,000^  when  the  cardinal 
was  going  into  the  north.  He  was  almost 
I  immediately  taken  into  the  kinff's  service. 
Wolsey  died  on  November  29, 1530 ;  and 
in  less  than  eighteen  months  Cromwell  had 
made  himself  so  serviceable  to  the  king 
that  he  was  rewarded  with  the  post  of 
master  and  treasurer  of  the  king's  jewels, 
on  April  14, 1582.  {Auditor's  Patent  Book, 
I  130.) 

Stow  (Thonis%  67)  tells  a  story  which 
charges  Cromwell  with  making  an  oppres- 
sive use  of  the  power  he  had  thus  attamed, 
in  the  erection  of  his  house  and  the  enlarge- 
ment of  his  garden  in  Throgmorton  Street ; 
but  is  is  not  unlikely  that  there  is  some 
exaggeration  in  the  tale,  since  Cromwell 
on  other  occasions  showed  a  grateful  and  a 
feeling  heart,  remembering  in  his  prospe- 
rity the  services  he  had  received  Ti^en  ne 
was  poor.  At  the  gate  of  this  very  house 
also,  in  Throgmorton  Street,  which  is  now 
the  site  of  Diapers'  Hall,  two  hundred  per- 
sons were  served  with  bread,  meat,  and 
drink  twice  a  day  when  Cromwell  had  the 
means  to  be  bountiful. 

On  July  16, 1532,  he  recdved  the  profit- 
able office  of  clerk  of  the  Hanaper,  with  an 
annual  rent  of  40/. ;  and  on  April  12,  1533, 
the  still  more  important  one  of  chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer.  (iZ^wtfr,  xiv.  456.)  It  was 
about  this  time  that  Sir  Thomas  More  gave 
him  that  excellent  advice,  which  it  would 
have  been  well  for  him  to  have  followed, 
and  which  was  dictated  probably  by  the 
great  man's  suspidons  that  Cromweu  was 
the  prompter  of  those  ecdesiastical  ques-> 
tions  which  were  then  being  agitated. 
After  communing  together  on  a  message 
Cromwell  had  delivered  from  the  king,  Sir 
Thomas,  who  had  latdy  resigned  the  duoi- 


208 


CROMWELL 


cellorship;  said  to  lum,  *  Mark,  Cromwell, 
you  are  now  entered  into  the  service  of  a 
most  noble,  wise,  and  liberal  prince ;  if  you 
will  foUow  my  poor  advice,  you  shall,  in 
your  coimcil-giving  to  his  grace,  ever  tell 
him  what  he  otigM  to  do,  but  never  what 
he  is  able  to  do.  .  .  .  For  if  a  lion  knew 
his  own  strength,  hard  were  it  for  anv  man 
to  rule  him.  {Smger^s  Roper^  55.)  On 
October  8,  1534,  he  was  made  master  of 
the  Ilolls,  having  previously  been  appointed 
principal  8eci«toi7  to  the  kinp.  ^^  the 
next  year  he  was  nominated  visitor-general 
of  the  monasteries,  under  the  pretence  of 
correcting  the  known  abuses  in  them,  but 
in  fact  to  lay  the  foundation  of  their  ulti- 
mate dissolution. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Cromwell 
was  an  early  convert  to  the  reformed  opi- 
nions, and  he  is  said  even  in  his  journey  to 
Home  to  have  learned  by  heart  Erasmus's 
translation  of  the  New  Testament    He 
had  encouraged  the  writers  and  promoted 
the  circulation  of .  ballads  and  books  ridi- 
culing the  pope  and  all  popish  idolatry. 
(MttSlatuTs  JieformatioH,  2o6.;    His  name 
therefore  was  naturally  held  in  utter  de- 
testation by  all  those  who  adhered  to  the 
old  religion,  and  every  species  of  wicked- 
ness and  cunning  was  charged  upon  him. 
We  must   consequently   be   cautious   in 
adopting  the  terms  of  vituperation  with 
which  writers  of  that  church  assail  his  cha- 
racter, and  hesitate  to  give  full  credit  to  all 
the  stories  thej  tell  to  his  disadvantage. 
At  the  same  tmie  there  is  no  doubt  that 
his  zeal  in  the  king*s  service,  strengthened 
possibly  by  his  own   convictions  of  the 
inutility,  if  not  the  evib,  of  the  monastic 
establishments,  betrayed  him  into  measures 
which  even  now  have  the  appearance  of 
harshness,  making  no  distinction  between 
well-conducted  houses  and  those  which 
were  a  pest  and  a  nuisance,  nor  discrimi- 
nating between  the  virtuous  and  the  guilty, 
but  involving  all  in  one  common  ruin.  The 
personal  grants  also  that  he  obtained  out 
of  the  religious  plunder  of  course  occa- 
sioned, and  perhaps  justified,  the  imputa- 
tion that  avarice  had  a  share  in  prompting 
his  energetic  proceedinj^.    And  yet,  while 
doubting  his  motives  m  reference  to  these 
acts  of  severity,  it  would  be  unjust  not  to 
advert  to  that  conduct  which  seems  to 
result  from  the  real  feeling  of  his  nature — 
his  tenderness  towards  Sir  Thomas  More. 
He  was  one  of  those  who  urgently  pressed 
the  king  to  exclude  the  name  of  Sir  Thomas 
from  the  bill  of  attainder  in  connection 
with  the  '  Holy  Maid  of  Kent,'  and  he  it 
was  who  sent  the  comforting  message  to 
the  fallen  chancellor,  that  he    had  suc- 
ceeded.   In  the  examinations  which  took 
place  as  to  the  oath  of  supremacy  and  ma- 
trimony, in  which  Cromwell  was  a  neces- 
■azy  actor  as  the  king's  secretary,  he  exerted 


CBOMWELL 

himself  to  save  Sir  Thomas,  who  in  several 
letters  speaks  of  him  in  terma  of  gratitude. 
{Singe/s  Boper,  114^-158.) 

After  holding  the  office  of  master  of  tiie 
Rolls  for  somewhat  less  than  two  yeara^  he 
resigned  it  on  July  2,  1536,  for  the  moie 
elevated  one  of  keeper  of  the  privy  aeil 
(Rymery  xiv.  571),  and  on  the  rai  of  the 
same  month  he  was  raised  to  the  jpeenge 
by  the  title  of  Baron  Cromwell  of  Okehia 
in  the  county  of  Rutland.    This  creatioB 
was  no  doubt  made  to  give  greater  weight 
to  a  higher  dignity  which  was  reserved  fat 
him.    The  king  having  thrown  off  his  obe- 
dience to  the  pope,  and  assumed  the  rab 
in  all  ecclesiastiad  matters,  required  a  »- 
presentative  to  conduct  the  buamees  which 
thus  devolved  upon  him.    To  this  duly  h» 
appointed  Cromwell  on  July  18,  witii  the 
title  of  vicar-general  and   vicegerent  k 
which  character  he  sat  in  synods  and  con- 
vocations above  the  whole  prelacy  of  the 
kingdom — a  position  which  a  layman  oookL 
scarcely  be  deemed  competent  to  filL  Erea 
in  parliament  precedence  was  allotted  t» 
him,  not  only  above  all  peers,  but  above  the 
great  officers  of  the  crown. 

It  is  curious  that,  though  Cromwell  wm 
never  admitted  into  holy  orders,  tiie  hqr 
in  this  verjr  year,  as  if  for  the  purposeoi 
investing  him  with  some  ecclesiastical  cha- 
racter, presented  him  with  the  mrebend  of 
Blewbuiy.  in  the   church  of  SaliBharfi 
and  in  tne  following  with  the  deaiMj    ^ 
of  Wells   {Bymer,  xiv.    660;    Le  Ikt^    : 
36) — ^preferments  which  he  held  tiD  hk  f 
death.  ' 

The  proceedings  which  he  took  in  Ihi  f 
quality  of  vicar-general  belong  more  to  thi  p 
history  oftbeChurchthan  to  this  biogrqikgi   ; 
Suffice  it  to  say  that,  steering  wiMlvher  ^ 
tween  the  conflicting  opinions  of  the  10%^ 
who,  while  he  repudiated  the  pope's  n*   ,. 
thority,  retained  the  principal  pomta  of  At    ^_ 
old    religion,  Cromwell   cuscouraged  At 
obnoxious  practices  of  popery,  as  uie  wor- 
ship of  ima«;es,  &c.,  and  served  the  caBi» 
of  the    Reformation  most  effectiially  If    1 
directing  the  Lord^s  Prayer,  ti^e  Cree^  na    ^ 
the  Commandments  to  be  ta^ht  to  childnn 
in  their  mother-tongue,  and  by  ordering  a    ^ 
Bible  in  English  to  l^  placed  in  all  churchai    ^ 
for  theparishioners  to  read  at  their  ]^6a-    ' 
sure.  To  prevent  the  j^ublication  of  compt    ^ 
copies  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  a  patent  nu 
afterwards  granted  to  him  which  prold-    ' 
bited  all  persons  from  printing  an  fhidiah 
edition  except  those  who  were  depat«lby 
him.    To  him  also  b  to  be  attributed  tbe 
useful  introduction  into  each  parish  of  %■    i 
renster  of  births,  marriages,  and  deathiL       \ 

The  rapid  elevation  of  a  man  of  so  ohteow   \ 
an  origin  naturally  disgusted  the  noHwL  \ 
his  efforts  in  suppressing  the  m 
and  in  promulgating  the  king^ 
and  the  new   tenetiy  cveated 


GBOMWELL 

anst  bim  hy  a  lazge  portion  of  the 
rgj ;  And  the  eztrayagance  with  which 
I  pfoduce  of  the  confiscated  abhejs  was 
Bted,  together  with  the  demands  which 
was  in  consequence  compelled  to  make 
both  clergy  and  kitj  to  supply  the  defi- 
DCT  in  the  king's  cofiers,  rendered  him 
omect  of  odium  in  the  eyes  of  ail  but 
\  long,  whoy  benefiting  by  his  ezertionSi 
nedated  his  seal  and  capacity,  and  esti- 
ted  them  at  a  higher  value  from  his 
olnte  defiance  of  the  unpopolaiity  that 
lowed  him.  He  was  accordingly  re- 
rded  with  munificent  grants  of  manors 
I  lands  which  had  belon^^ed  to  the  dis- 
f ed  houses,  a  list  of  which  is  given  in 
gdale;  and  additional  disnities  were 
Ssued  upon  him,  among  wnich  was  the 
ee  of  chief  justice  of  the  forests  beyond 
)  Trent 

With  these  continued  proofs  of  the  royal 
vaXf  he  might  still  have  disregarded  the 
arts  of  his  enemies,  had  he  not  in  his 
dety  to  support  his  position  taken  a  step 
ddh  alienated  the  affections  of  his  only 
end.    The  king's  avowed  adherence  to 
B  ancient  doctrines  of  the  Church  had 
eooraged  those  who    continued  to   be 
ached  to  them ;  they  were  gradually  ob- 
mng  an  ascendency  m  the  royal  councils, 
1  the  advocates  of  the  reformed  tenets 
re  oonsequenUy  placed   in   a  difiicult 
anma.    Cromwell  could  not  but  see  the 
iger  that  hung  over  him,  and,  deeming 
t  his  party  would  resume  its  power  if  it 
1  the  support  of  a  Protestant  queen,  he 
ommeDded,in  an  evU  hour  to  himself 
Princess  Anne  of  Cleves  as  the  new 
bier  of   the  royal  bed.    The    disgust 
91  by  the  king  to  this  lady  from  his 
;  introduction  to  her  is  well  known,  and 
mweU  soon  became  the  victim  of  his 
ntmcnt.    He  did  not,  however,  imme- 
ely  betray  his  purpose,  but,  on  the  con- 
f ,  heaped  upon  the  devoted  statesman 
ler  honours.    The  marriage  with  Anne 
leves  was  celebrated  on  January  6, 1540,  ! 
on  April  17  Cromwell  was  created  Earl  ; 
lesex,  which  was  immediately  followed  | 
his  admission  into  the  order  of  the  i 
^,  and  his  appointment  to  the  office  , 
id  high  chamberlain  of  England.  I 

womd  almost  seem  that  Cromwell 
nosed  to  this  high  pinnacle  of  greats  ' 
for  the  mere  purpose  of  gratifying  the  i 
icious  malice  of  the  tyrant,  for  within 
months  after  his  elevation  to  the  earl-  1 
he  was  suddenly  arrested  at  the  coun-  ! 
table   on  June  10,  on  charges  which 
k  have  been  for  some  time  in  prepara-  | 
The  principal  crime  alleged  against 
waa  heresy  and  the  encoiirafement  of 
lies,  and  this  was  embellisned  with 
igHfTTin  of  having  spoken  heinous  words 
nit  the  king  two  years  before.     In 
T  thai  he  might  not  have  an  oppor- 


CROWDEB 


209 


tunity  of  answering,  a  bill  of  attainder  was 
hurried  through  the  parliament,  in  pur- 
suance of  which  he  was  beheaded  on  Tower 
HiU  on  July  28. 

Whatever  were  the  faults  attached  to 
Cromweirs  character,  no  one  had  less  cause 
to  comnlain  of  them  than  King  Henry. 
Zealously  devoted  from  his  first  mtroduc- 
tion  at  court  to  the  royal  interests,  disre- 
garding public  obloquy  in  his  eflTorts  to 
promote  them,  and  evidencinff  by  all  his 
acts  the  most  sincere  affection  for  his 
master,  his  death  by  that  master's  hand 
adds  a  deeper  shade  to  the  aversion  with 
which  the  whole  of  Henry's  career  after 
the  death  of  Wolsey  must  ever  be  re- 
garded. 

ArchlHshop  Cranmer,  the  only  one  of 
Cromwell's  adherents  who  had  the  courage 
to  come  forward  in  his  defence,  wrote  a 
letter  to  the  king,  which  in  its  exposition 
of  the  claims  the  fallen  favourite  had  on 
the  royal  mercy  would  have  staggered  a 
less  obdurate  heart;  but  both  Uiat  and  the 
humble  and  affecting  letter  of  Cromwell 
himself,  thoup;h  it  moved  the  king  to  tears, 
were  unavaihng. 

It  would  seem,  however,  that  when  it 
was  too  late  the  capricious  king  regretted 
the  haste  with  whicn  he  had  sacrificed  his 
active  minister,  and  there  is  an  evident 
proof  of  his  *  compunctious  visitings '  in  his 
patent,  dated  on  the  18th  of  thefollowing 
December,  granting  to  Cromwell*s  son 
Gregory  the  barony  which  his  father  had 
held.  This  barony  survived  through  seven 
venerations.  In  1687  it  and  the  Irish  earl- 
dom of  Ardglass,  which  had  been  granted 
to  the  fourth  baron,  became  extinct 

The  Protector  Oliver  Cromwell  was  a 
descendant  from  Thomas  Cromwell's  sister, 
who  married  one  Williams,  and  whose  son 
Sir  Richard  Williams,  one  of  King  Henry's 
privy  chamber,  and  afterwards  constable 
of  Berkeley  Castle,  assumed  the  surname  of 
Cromwell,  and  was  the  great  grandfather 
of  Oliver.  (Herbert's  Henry  VIII, ;  Barfm-' 
age,  ii.  370 ;   Weever,  605.) 

CBOWDEB,  RiCHABD  Budden,  son  of 
William  Crowder,  Esq.,  of  Montague  Place, 
was  bom  in  London  about  1795,  was  edu- 
cated at  Eton,  and  Trinity  College,  Cam- 
bridge, and,  enterinff  the  Middle  Temple, 
was  called  to  the  bar  in  May  1821.  On 
the  Western  Circuit  he  got  into  good  prac- 
tice as  well  as  in  London,  and  in  l)oth 
displayed  great  power  and  ability.  He 
obtained  a  silk  gown  in  1837,  and  was 
appointed  recorder  of  Bristol  in  1840. 
For  a  short  time  he  was  in  parliament, 
being  elected  member  for  Liskeard  in  1840, 
but  was  not  so  eminent  as  a  senator  as  he 
was  as  a  barrister.  In  the  latter  character 
he  was  very  effective  with  the  jury  and 
the  court,  by  his  sound  common  sense,  and 
his  forcible,  if  not  eloquent,  oratory.    He, 


210 


CULEWORTH 


held  the  posts  of  counsel  of  the  Admiralty 
and  judge  advocate  of  the  fleet  at  the  time 
of  his  promotion  to  the  bench.  That  event 
occurred  in  March  1854;  when  he  was 
selected  to  s^plj  &  vacancy  in  the  Com- 
mon Fleas.  There  he  continued  for  nearly 
six  years,  distinguished  bv  his  honourable 
and  manly  bearing  and  his  courtesy  and 
urbanity.  He  died  unmarried  on  Decem- 
ber 5, 1869. 

CTFLEWOBTH,  WiLLiAK  de,  in  11  Henry 
in.  was  engaged  in  fixing  the  tallage  for 
the  counties  of  Cambridge  and  Hertford. 
(Hot.  Clous,  ii.  176,  180.)  This  employ- 
ment, in  connection  with  nis  future  position 
on  the  bench,  makes  it  very  probable  that 
he  was  regularly  engaged  in  forensic  occu- 
pations. From  Easter  1236,  20  Henry 
In.,  to  Hilary  1242,  he  was  one  of  the 
justiders  at  Westminster,  fines  bein^  re- 
gularly acknowledged  before  him  ]  with  a 
salary  of  20/.  per  annum. 

OrnQH,  John,  or  CM)]CTV  (Abchbishop 
OF  DriBLiir),  a  monk  of  Evesham,  and 
then  a  canon  of  St.  Paul's,  was  one  of  the 
chaplains  of  Henry  H.,  who  employed  him 
in  several  important  embassies.  In  1164 
he  was  sent  to  the  emperor  on  the  subject 
of  the  anti-pope,  and  by  his  long  stay  there 
caused  consiaerable  uneasiness  to  Pope 
Alexander  and  the  adherents  of  Becket. 
A^ain,  in  1166,  he  was  one  of  the  three 
mmisters  despatched  to  Home,  where  they 
succeeded,  not  only  in  obtaining  the  ap- 

S ointment  of  two  cardinals  to  hear  and  to 
etermine  the  dispute  with  Becket,  but 
also  in  bringing  oack  to  the  king  the 
letters  which  Becket  had  addressed  to  the 
pope,  and  which  any  other  person  had 
wntten  in  his  favour. 

In  1169  and  the  five  following  years 
his  name  appears  as  one  of  the  itinerant 
justices  into  several  counties,  and  it  seems 


BALISOK 

probable  that  he  held  a  reroonmble  office 
m  the  Exchequer,  as  in  1170  he  had  the 
custody  of  the  bishoprics  of  Hereford  and 
Bath,  then  vacant;  and  in  1180  William 
Malduit,  tiie  chamberlain,  and  he  were 
employed  to  convey  the  tzeasaiT  from 
Northampton  to  Nottingham.  (MadoXjU 
93,  &c.,  289.) 

When  the  council  of  Windsor,  in  1179, 
divided  the  kingdom  into  four  parts  for 
judicial  purposes,  he  was  one  of  the  six 
justiciers  who  were  not  only  appointed  to 
act  in  the  northern  counties,  but  were  also 
specially  constituted  to  hear  the  complaiiiti 
of  the  people  in  the  Curia  Reffia.  Bis 
services  were  not  long  unrewaided.  In 
1182  he  was  consecrated  Archbishop  of 
Dublin.  Before  this  ceremony  was  per- 
!  formed  he  received  priest's  orders  mm 
i  the  pope,  which,  it  would  seem,  neither 
his  canonry  nor  his  chaplaincy  requiied. 
There  are,  indeed,  several  instances  <h  per- 
sons holding  higher  rank  in  the  Chnreh 
without  bemg  priests.  He  founded  St 
Patrick's  Churcn  in  Dublin,  and  in  118$ 
he  presided  at  a  provincial  synod,  for  tht 
better  reflation  of  the  manners^  and  di^ 
cipHne  of  the  Irish  clergy.  He  died  aboot 
1213.  {Brady's  Engl(md,27^',  Lord L^ 
ton:  Leland's  Ireland,  i.  188,  195;  Halm- 
shed,  vi.  43.) 

CTTBSOH,  Robert,  became  a  reader  of 
Lincoln's  Inn  in  autumn  1529,  and  a 
second  time  in  Lent  1537.  On  the  ao- 
cession  of  King  Edward  VI.  in  1547  bf 
was  promoted  to  the  bench  as  seoooi 
baron  of  the  Exchequer,  and  his  soooesHr 
in  that  office  was  appointed  on  May  6, 156(1 

CXTSEBUOOE,  Baldwin  db,  had  propotf 
in  Berkshire,  and  was  one  of  the  jostieti 
itinerant  employed  in  9  Richard  L,  ll97-^ 
to  fix  the  tallage  in  that  county.  (Mtistf 
i.  705.) 


D 


DAIVILL,  John  de,  or  D'ATEVILL,  was 
one  of  the  justices  itinerant  appointed  in  10 
Hennr  HI.,  1226,  for  the  county  of  West- 
moreland. He  was  the  son  of  Robert 
Daivill,  a  baron  of  Yorkshire  and  Not- 
tingham, and  had  joined  in  the  rebellion 
against  King  John,  whereupon  his  lands 
were  seized  into  the  king's  hands.  Dug- 
dale,  in  his  ^Baronage '  (i.  593),  states  that 
they  were  again  forfeited  for  some  offence 
in  38  Henry  UL,  but  being  restored  to 
favour,  he  was  appointed  justice  of  the 
forests  beyond  Tr^t  in  41  Henry  HI.,  and 
was  afterwards  constituted  governor  of  the 
castlee  of  York  and  Scarborough.  In  the 
contest  between  the  long  and  his  barons  he 


joined  the  latter,  and  was  summoned  tote 
parliament  they  held  after  the  battle  of 
Ijewes.  He  even  continued  the  cooteit 
after  the  royal  victory  at  Evesham,  aad, 
suffering  another  defeat  at  ChesterfieUf 
fled  to  tiie  isle  of  Axholme  in  Linoolnihire. 
He,  however,  purchased  his  peace  in  ^ 
Henry  HI.,  and  was  again  restored  to  Ui 
possessions. 

He  married  Maude,  the  widow  of  Jamei 
de  Aldithley.  (Eot.  Chus.  L  248,  Stf^  3. 
128, 151.) 

DALI80V,  WiLLiAic  WU^amjyAkm' 
zon,  who  came  over  with  tluf  CloiiqMin 
was  the  founder  of  thia  fiunl^.  Tib  M 
who  wrote  himself  DtliaoB,  s  dhic*  # 


DALLAS 

^cendant  in  the  eighth  generation,  wad  of 
Laugrhton  in  Lincolnshire,  which,  near  two 
centuries  afterwards,  gave  the  title  to  the 
baronetcy  granted  in  1611  to  Sir  Roger 
Dabson,  but  which  failed  in  1645.  §ir 
Roger  was  the  mndsou  of  George,  the 
elder  brother  of  Judge  William,  and  they 
were  the  children  of  William  Dalison, 
i^heriff  and  escheator  of  his  native  county, 
hr  a  daughter  of  George  Wastneys,  Esq., 
of  Iladdon  in  Nottinghamshire. 

William  was  educated  at  Cambridge,  and, 
f'ntering  at  Gray's  Inn,  was  caUed  to  the 
bar  in  1537,  and  was  reader  in  1548  and 
Io52.  In  the  October  of  the  latter  year  the 
«orioty  presented  him  with  5/.  and  a  pair  of 
:rloTes  on  his  leaving  them  to  assume  the 
dtfcne  of  the  coif  {Ihigdale*$  Ong,  137, 
'J03);  and  on  November  2,  1555,  he  was 
made  Serjeant  to  King  Philip  and  Queen 
Mary.  In  April  15^  he  was  elected 
representative  of  the  county  of  Lincoln, 
and  was  appointed  a  justice  oi  the  Common 
Pleas  in  tne  county  palatine  of  Lancaster. 

He  was  constituted  a  judge  of  the 
Qoeen^s  Bench  about  Hilary  Term  1566, 
being  mentioned,  not  only  in  f)yer*s  Reports 
in  that  and  subsequent  terms,  but  also  in 
a  commission  of  the  same  and  the  succeed- 
ing Tear,  amon^  the  proceedings  preserved 
in  the  ^  Bf^  de  Secretis '  (4  Report  Puh. 
Rtc.^  App.  u.  255),  and  was  then  knighted,    i 

On  Queen  £lizabefh*s  accession  his  pa-  i 
tent  was  renewed,  but  he  survived  o^  < 
till  the  18th  of  January  following,  ne  ■ 
was  buried  in  Lincoln  Cathedral  under  i 
an  altar  tomb  with  his  portrait  thereon. ! 
Bv  his  wife  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Robert 
I)ighton,  Esq.,  of  Sturton  Parva  in  Ldn-  i 
cdnshire,  he  left  four  sons  and  five  I 
dau^ters. 

His  learning  as  a  lawyer  was  in  high  , 
estimation.  Ilis  reading  on  the  statute  I 
:)  Henry  VIIL,  entitled  '  That  wrongful  j 
disseisin  is  no  descent  in  law,'  is  quotea  by  | 
Dver  (219)  ;  and  his  Reports  in  conjunction 
^th  Serjeant  Bendlowes  are  a  valuable  ; 
Kctifd  of  the  cases  of  the  time.  j 

DALLAS,  Robert,  was  the  son  of  a  gen-  ! 
tleman  of  the  same  namer  living  at  Ken-  | 
■ngtoo  in  Middlesex,  and  his  mother  was  j 
Elizabeth,  daughter  of  the  Rev.  James  j 
Smith,  minister  of  Kilbemey  in  .^rshire. 
He  became  a  member  of  Lincoln's  Lm,  and 
trained  himself  to  public  speaking  at  the 
debating  societv  hela  at  Coachmakers'  Hall, 
aecofding  to  tne  common  practice  of  the 
time.    This  was  of  considerable  advantage 
to  him  when  he  was  called  to  the  bar,  and 
enabled  him  to  produce  his  aivuments  with 
much  more  ease  to  himself  and  with  greater 
effect  to  the  court,  in  which  he  soon  ac- 
qmred  considerable  practice.    In  January 
I79r(  he  was  engaged  in  the  defence  of 
Loid  George  Gordon.    He  next  appears 
as  one  of  the  counsel  for  Mr,  Hastings,  the 


DALLAS 


211 


,  trial  of  whose  impeachment  lasted  seven 
3rears,  from  1788  to  1795,  and  highly  dis- 
tinguished himself  by  his  exertions,  and  by 
his  polished  addresses  to  the  lords.  Natu- 
rally disgusted  with  the  inveteracy  of 
Burke  against  his  client,  he  gave  the 
relentless  prosecutor  no  credit  for  patriotic 
feelings,  but,  attributing  his  attacks  to  the 
innate  malignity  of  his  nature,  composed 
this  bitter  epigram : — 

Oft  have  we  wonder'd  that  on  Irish  i^round 
No  poisonous  reptile  has  e*er  vet  been  found : 
Reveal*dthe  secret  stands  of  Nature's  work-» 
She  sav*d  her  venom  to  produce  her  Burke. 

In  17d5  Mr.  Dallas  received  a  ailk  gown ; 
and  through  all  the  succeeding  years  till  he 
was  raised  to  the  bench  the  latter  volumes 
of  the  State  Trials  record  his  efforts  either 
for  the  defence  or  the  prosecution.  Among 
these  his  speech  on  the  motion  for  a  new 
trial  in  the  case  of  General  Picton  was 
separately  published.  In  the  meantime  he 
had  obtamed  a  seat  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, where  he  represented  St.  Michael's, 
Cornwall,  in  180^,  and  afterwards  the 
Scotch  boroughs  of  Kirkaldy,  &c.  In  1804 
he  was  promoted  to  the  chief  justiceship  of 
Chester,  and  presided  there  till  Ibid, 
when  on  May  4  he  was  appointed  to  the 
office  of  soucitor-general  and  knighted. 
Six  months  afterwsids  he  was  raised  to  the 
bench  of  the  Common  Pleas,  on  November  5, 
1813,  and  on  the  same  dav  in  1818  he  was 

Promoted  to  the  headship  of  that  court, 
'here  he  presided  for  five  years  with  ac- 
knowledged ability  and  universal  respect 

A  curious  question  having  been  raised  in 
1823,  whether  the  Lord  Lieutenant  t>f  Ire- 
land had  the  same  power  to  confer  knight- 
hood after  the  Union  which  he  undoubtedly 
possessed  before  that  measure  had  passed,  a 
meeting  of  the  judges  was  held  in  June  at 
Chief  Justice  Dsolas's  to  consider  the 
point,  when  they  were  of  opinion  unani- 
mously that  the  Act  of  Union  did  not 
deprive  him  of  his  former  privilege.  Ix 
was  a  matter  of  some  speculation  how  the 
right  should  have  remamed  undisputed  for 
above  twenty  years,  during  which,  it  had 
been  frequently  exercised,  and  only  now 
be  impugned ;  and  it  was  suspected  that  the 
doubt  was  invented  for  the  purpose  of 
mortifying  Lady  Morgan,  who  had  offended 
the  ministers  by  the  freedom  of  her  writings, 
and  whose  husband  had  received  an  Irish 
knighthood.  (Lady  Morgans  Memoirs^  iL 
172.) 

At  this  time  his  health  began  to  break, 
and  he  soon  found  he  could  uo  longer 
undergo  the  fatigues  of  his  office.  He 
therefore  resigned  his  seat  at  the  end 
of  1823,  and  lived  little  more  than  one 
vear  longer,  dying  on  December  25,  1824. 
lie  left  several  children  by  his  wife,  Char- 
lotte, daughter  of  Lieut-Col.  Alexander 
Jardine. 

P2 


212 


DAMMABTIN 


DAXXABTIV,  Majtaserius  db,  was  one 
of  the  justices  itinerant  named  by  Dugdale 
under  the  year  1170,  but  who  were  rather 
commissioners  to  enquire  into  the  abuses  of 
the  sherifis.  Some  of  the  fiftmilj  of  Dam- 
martins  were  settled  in  Surrey,  and  some 
in  Norfolk. 

DAMPISB,  Henbt,  descended  from  the 
Le  Dampierres,  anciently  Counts  of  Flan- 
ders, was  the  son  of  the  Key.  Thomas  Dam- 
pier,  a  native  of  Somersetshire,  who  from 
Deing  one  of  the  masters  at  Eton  College 
was  raised  to  the  deanery  of  Durham,  and, 
having  married  twice,  was  most  fortunate  in 
his  family.  Thomas,  the  elder  of  his  two 
sons  by  his  first  wife,  Anne  Hayes,  became 
successively  Bishop  of  Rochester  (1802) 
and  Ely  (1808) ;  and  John,  the  younger, 
held  a*  canonry  in  the  latter  cathedral. 
Henry,  his  only  son  by  his  second  wife, 
Frances  Walker,  was  bom  on  December 
21, 1758,  at  Eton,  and,  having  received  his 
early  education  there,  was  elected  to£ing|s 
College,  Cambridge,  in  1776.  He  took  his 
degree  of  B.A.  in  1781,  and  of  M.A.  in 
1784 ;  in  the  interim  gaining  the  members' 
prizes  both  in  1782  and  1783.  Preferring 
the  lefl:al  to  the  clerical  profession,  for 
which  he  was  at  first  intended,  he  entered 
the  Middle  Temple  in  1781,  and  was  called 
to  the  bar  in  the  customary  routine.  Dur- 
ing the  next  thirty  years  he  pursued  the 
rugged  paths  of  the  law,  admired  and 
esteemed  for  his  intelligence  as  an  acute 
counsel,  and  for  his  obliging  disposition  and 
his  classical  as  well  as  legal  learning,  made 
more  attractive  by  the  brilliancy  of  his 
conversation  and  lus  wit.  At  last  he  was 
appointed  a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench  on 
June  23^  1813,  when  he  was  knighted. 
His  judicial  career  was  doomed  to  be 
shorter  than  any  who  had  lately  preceded 
him.  Ere  he  had  graced  the  bench  for  two 
years  and  a  half,  he  died  on  February  3, 
1816.  Few  have  left  a  name  so  universally 
respected. 

He  married  in  1700  Martha,  daughter  of 
the  venerable  John  Law,  archdeacon  of 
Rochester.  She  and  five  of  their  children 
survived  him,  one  of  whom,  John  Lucius 
Dampier,  was  recorder  of  Portsmouth,  and 
became  vice-warden  of  the  Stannaries  in 
Cornwall. 

DAKA8TEB,  John.  In  Dugdale's  list  of 
the  governors  of  Lincoln's  Inn  the  name 
of  Jonn  Danaster  occurs  five  times  from  21 
to  31  Henry  VIU.,  1620-39,  and  in  the 
last  year  he  is  called  *Baro  Scacc'  In 
the  ^Chronica  Series,'  however,  the  name  is 
not  inserted  among  the  barons;  but  in  a 
list  kindly  supplied  by  Mr.  Adlington,  an 
officer  of  the  Exchequer,  John  Banester 
appears  in  Michaelmas  Term  1538  as  third 
bttion,  who  IB  also  omitted  in  Dugdale's  list. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  lliat  the  same  indi* 
Tidual  IB  intended  in  both  caseB^  and  the 


DANBY 

preference  must  be  given  to  Dugdale' 
account,  not  only  because  the  name  c 
Danaster  is  so  often  repeated,  for  it  appeal 
that  he  was  also  a  reader  at  Lincoln^s  In: 
in  1530  and  in  1535,  but  also  because  h 
is  specially  mentioned  with  the  titie  aa  on 
of  the  commissioners  for  reoeiyinff  the  in 
dictment  against  Henry  Pole,  Lord  Monti 
cute,  on  l^vember  29, 1539,  preserved  i 
the  'Baga  de  Secretis.'  He  died  befbf 
Easter  1540.  {Dugdale's  Grig.  251,  350 
3  ItqHni  Pub.  Hec.,  App.  ii.  256,  258 
Manning  and  Bray's  Surrey ,  iiL  224.') 

DAVBY,  RoBEBT,  of  a  Yorkshire  uunily 
in  1441  is  mentioned  as  an  advocate  in  i 
case  before  the  privy  coundL  The  Yen 
Books  introduce  his  name  as  early  as  1431 
and  he  was  called  serieant  on  February  14 
1443,  21  Henry  VI.,  being  appointed  Qneol 
the  king's  Serjeants  soon  atterwards.  He 
was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Commoc 
Pleas  on  June  28, 1452,  30  Henry  VL,  and 
held  his  place  during  the  remainder  of  the 
reiffn. 

u  he  be  the  Robert  Danby  mentioned  in 
the  ^  Paston  Letters '  (i,  ^),  he  was  evidently 
an  adherent  to  the  i  orlost  party.  If  soi 
we  can  well  understand  why  on  May  11, 
1461,  immediately  after  the  accession  d 
Edward  IV.,  he  was  made  chief  justice  d 
the  Court  of  Common  Pleas.  Dugdale  ii 
in  error  when  he  introduces  Sir  Aichaid 
Choke  as  chief  justice  in  1  Edward  DL 
four  montiis  after  the  appointment  oi 
Danby.  The  Year  Books  plainly  |noT» 
that  throughout  the  next  ten  years  botk 
Danby  and  Choke  were  in  the  court  to* 
gether,  the  former  described  as  chief  jm- 
tice,  and  the  latter  as  justice  only. 

He  was  still  chief  justice  on  the  reston- 
tion  of  Henry  VI.,  who  continued  him  at 
the  head  of  the  court  during  the  six  montihi 
of  his  renewed  reign.  On  the  retain  cT 
Edward  IV.  in  1471  he  was  not  re-«^ 
pointed;  but  whether  the  change  aroit 
from  his  death  or  removal  we  are  not 
informed. 

In  Holinshed's  Chronicles  (uL  299)  nndfir 
this  year  is  an  account  or  the  curious 
means  adopted  by  Sir  William  Hankes- 
ford,  knight  (meaning  Hankford).  one  of 
the  chief  justices,  to  rid  himself  of  life, 
by  directing  his  keeper  to  shoot  any  penoa 
whom  he  found  in  the  park  at  nig^t,  and 
who  would  not  stand  when  call^  unoo, 
and  then  placing  himself  in  the  way  oi  the 
fatal  shot.  That  this  could  not  apply  U 
Sir  William  Hankford  is  evident  fiom  thi 
fact  that  he  had  been  dead  for  nearly  fiflg 
years.  'Wliether  it  be  true  at  all,  or  tlM 
mistake  is  only  in  the  name,  cannot  tun 
be  determined ;  but  the  only  chief  hnliei 
who  disappears  at  this  time  is  Sir  fiolM 
Danby,  and  to  him  not  onlr  ia  tkft  haff 
character  ^ven  by  HoHnahea  in  fctov  o 
the  misgoided  man  eqnaify  affliOiUi^  iMJ 


DAJXIEL 

le  perplexities  of  the  time  afford  a  more 
robable  reason  for  the  tragic  catastrophe. 
That  Sir  Robert  was  an  excellent  judge 
eTidenoed  by  the  ffreat  deference  with 
hich  he  was  treated  by  the  other  judges 
id  by  the  connsel  in  the  Year  Books,  and 
f  ue  frequent  reference  made  to  his 
pinions. 

SAnSL^  WrLUAXy  was  a  younger  son 
r  the  anaent  family  of  Daniels  of  Over- 
abley  in  Cheehire.  The  name  was  oxiffi- 
lUy  D'AnyerSy  and  is  to  be  found  in  tne 
at  of  those  who  entered  England  with  the 
loiiqueror.  He  was  entered  at  Gray's  Inn 
1 1556,  and  became  reader  there  in  1679, 
od  treasurer  in  1580  and  1587. 
In  1584  he  was  admitted  deputy  recorder 
f  London  to  Serjeant  Fleetwoode,  and 
da  name  appears  in  Coke's  Reports  in 
iiluy  1591.    When  about  to  be  advanced 

0  the  degree  of  seijeant-at-law  in  1594  his 
utme  was  struck  out  of  the  list  ujpon  an  in- 
bimation  to  his  prejudice  relative  to  one 
Jacket,  but  was  restored  at  the  request  of 
Lord  Bnrieigh,  who  contradicted  the  re- 
porty  and  t^tified  to  his  being  ^a  vearle 
bonest,  learned,  and  discreat  man.'  On 
Febroary  8,  1004,  he  was  constituted  a 
judge  of  the  Common  Pleas,  as  one  of  the 
two  new  judges  King  James  had  deter- 
niiied  to  add  to  the  judicial  staff.  (Egerton 
Bycrs^  388.)  There  is  no  record  of  his 
ngument  in  the  great  case  of  the  post-nati, 
ttt  he  joined  the  majority  in  the  affirma- 
ire  view  of  the  question.  (State  Trials, 
.  576.)    He  died  in  1610. 

BAVVeSS,  Robbbt.  The  founder  of 
lis  family  in  England  was  Roland  D'An- 
STS,  who  accompanied  the  Conqueror  on 
is  invasion,  and  whose  descendants,  by 
rants  and  marriages,  acquired  considerable 
roperty  in  Berkshire  and  Oxfordshire. 
;oiDert  was  the  eldest  son  of  John  Dan  vers, 
r  Cothorp  in  the  latter  county,  by  his  first 
ife  Alice,  daughter  of  Williajin  Yemey,  of 
ijfield.  He  became  one  of  the  governors 
i  Lincoln's  Inn  in  1428,  6  Henry  VI. 

1  1433  he  was  implicated  in  an  erasure 
hich  had  been  made  in  an  act  of  council 
T.  166),  but  was  exonerated  from  all 
lame  on  that  account  bv  a  special  warrant 
nder  the  privy  seal.    The  record  does  not 

ri  the  particulars ;  but  it  seems  pro- 
that  tney  were  in  some  way  con- 
wted  with  the  dty  of  Liondon,  of  which 
e  was  about  this  time  common  seijeant. 
[e  was  advanced  to  the  recordership  in 
142,  and  was  called  Serjeant  on  February 
1^  1443.  In  1444  he' was  one  of  the  kin^  s 
ojeanta,  and  in  1445  was  member  for  the 
[tvof  London. 

In  Joly  1450  Jack  Cade,  on  taking  up 
is  head-qnarters  in  London,  forced  Robert 
)tBveti,  the  recorder,  to  be  the  head  of  a 
omndtikm  of  oyer  and  terminer,  at  which 
sveial  Boblenien  and  gentlemen  were  tried 


DAVENPOBT 


213 


for  high  treason,  and  some  of  them  executed. 
That  his  condoot  while  acting  in  this  capa- 
city was  not  diroleasing  to  the  government 
appears  by  his  oeing  named  on  a  commis- 
sion into  Kent,  issued  on  August  1,  to  try 
the  adherents  of  Cade,  and  by  his  being 
raised  to  the  bench  as  a  judse  of  the  Com- 
mon Pleas  on  August  14.  He  continued  to 
sit  there  till  the  deposition  of  King  Henry 
VL ;  and,  being  re-appointed  by  JBdward 
IV.,  he  passed  tne  remainder  of  his  life  in 
the  quiet  performance  of  his  judicial  func- 
tions. He  died  in  1467,  being  described  as 
a  knight  in  the  inquisition  then  taken.  (  Cal. 
iv.  341.)  He  and  his  vrife  Agnes  were 
buried  in  the  church  of  St.  Bartholomew, 
in  Smithfield.  By  her,  who  was  daughter 
of  Richard  Quatremains,  of  Rycot  in  Ox- 
fordshire (or,  according  to  Stow,  of  Sir 
Richard  Belabor),  he  left  no  male  heirs. 

The  baronetcy  of  Danvers  and  the  earl- 
dom of  Danby  were  granted  to  descendants 
from  Sir  Roblert's  brother  Richard,  but  are 
both  now  extinct. 

DAHYSBS,  Willi AK,  was  half-brother  to 
the  above  Robert,  being  one  of  the  sons  of 
John  Danvers,  of  Cothorp  in  Oxfordshire, 
by  his  second  vrife,  Joan,  daughter  of  Wil- 
liam Brulv,  of  Waterstock  in  the  same 
county.  There  must  have  been  a  consider- 
able differense  between  the  ages  of  the  two, 
because  William's  career  as  an  advocate,  in 
the  Year  Books,  does  not  commence  till 
1475,  seven  or  ei^ht  years  after  his  brother's 
death.  He  attamed  the  degree  of  serjeant- 
at-law  soon  after  the  accession  of  Henry 
VIL,  and  on  February  5,  1488,  he  was 
raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Common  Pleas. 
Fines  appear  to  have  been  acknowledged 
before  him  as  late  as  February  1504.  (2>u^- 
dale's  Orig,  47.) 

He  married  Anne,  daughter  and  heir  of 
John  Perry,  Es^.,  of  Chamberhouse  in 
Berkshire ;  and  his  descendants  were  settled 
at  Upton  in  Warwickshire. 

DABKALL,  John,  on  February  26, 1544, 
was  appointed  ingrosser  of  the  Great  Roll 
of  the  JSxchequer,  otherwise  called  derk  of 
the  Pipe ;  on  May  6,  1648,  he  was  con- 
stitutea  fourth  baron  of  that  court,  and 
he  retained  his  seat  till  his  death,  on  No- 
vember 28,  1549.  Beyond  this  there  is  no 
account  of  him. 

DAVSHCE8TEB,  Philip  de.  In  11  Ilenr}' 
U.,  1165,  a  charter  between  the  abbots  of 
St.  Albans  and  Westminster  was  executed 
at  the  Exchequer,  'assidentibus  justiciis 
regis,'  the  last  of  whom  is  *•  Philippo  de 
Davencestriee '  (Daventry),  without  any 
designation  of  the  office  he  held.  (Madox^ 
i.  44)  He  was  sheriff  of  Cambridge  and 
Huntingdon  for  three  years,  from  13 
Henry  II. 

DAVSHPOBT,  HuKPHBET,  the  second 
son  of  William  Davenport,  of  an  ancient 
and  genteel  family  settled  at  Bromhall  in 


214 


DE  OBEY 


Cheshire;  by  Margaret,  daughter  of  Sir 
Bichard  Ashton,  of  Middleton  in  Lanca- 
shire, was  bom  at  Chester  about  1666,  and 
after  entering  Balliol  College  went  to  Gray  *s 
Inn,  where  he  was  called  to  the  bar  on  No- 
yember  21, 1690,  and  in  Lent  1613  became 
reader  to  this  society.  He  was  elected 
member  for  Brackle^  m  1688,  and  made  an 
ineifectual  effort  to  introduce  a  measure  of 
Church  reform.  {UEweSj  438.)  In  June 
1623  he  took  the  degree  of  the  coif;  and, 
haying  been  knighted  by  King  James,  he 
was  created  king's  sexjeant,  snortly  after 
King  Charles's  accession,  on  May  9, 1626. 
He  was  raised  to  the  bench  on  February  2, 
1630,  as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas, 
and  had  not  sat  there  a  year  before  he  was 
called  upon  to  fill  the  office  of  lord  chief 
baron,  to  which  he  was  nominated  on 
January  10, 1631.  (Rymer,  adx.  133,  264 ; 
JF.  Jones's  JReports,  230.) 

In  the  case  of  ship-money  he  gaye  his 
opinion  assuming  the  kin^  power  to  im- 
pose it^  but  acouitting  Hampden  on  a 
technical  point,  that  the  writ  was  not  good 
in  law.  The  majority  of  the  judges  haying 
decided  against  Hampden,  it  became  the 
duty  of  the  lord  chief  baron  to  deliyer  the 
judgment,  which  afterwards,  in  the  Long 
Parliament,  was  declared  to  be  yoid.  His 
equivocal  opinion  in  fayour  of  Hampden  did 
not  avail  to  prevent  that  parliament  from 
condemning  the  support  he  nad  ^yen  to  the 
king's  illegal  impositions.  Articles  of  im- 
peachment against  him  were  accordingly 
carried  up  to  the  House  of  Lords  on  July  6, 
1641,  and  he  was  ordered  to  p^ve  10,000/. 
bail  for  his  appearance.  It  is  probable  that  he 
then  withdrew  himself  altogether  from  the 
duties  of  his  office,  for  on  Januanr  26, 1644, 
the  king  appointed  Sir  Eichard  Lane  his 
successor.  It  is  curious,  however,  that 
Sir  Humphrey's  patent  of  revocation  is 
not  dated  till  January  11  in  the  following 
year. 

The  date  of  his  death  is  not  given.  Fuller 
(i.  188)  says  he  *had  the  reputation  of  a 
studied  lawyer  and  upright  person ; '  and 
A.  AVood  (iii.  182)  states  that '  he  was  ac- 
counted one  of  the  oracles  of  the  law.' 

DE  GBET,  William  (Lojld  Walsikg- 
HAM).  The  root  of  this  family  can  be 
traced  to  the  twelfth  century,  and  that 
branch  of  it  to  which  the  judge  belonged 
possessed,  with  other  large  estates,  the 
manor  of  Merton  in  Norfolk  for  about  four 
hundred  years  before  he  came  into  the 
world.  llis  father  was  Thomas  De  Grey, 
who  represented  that  county  in  parliament ; 
and  his  mother  was  Elizabeth,  daughter  of 
William  Wyndham,  of  Felbrigge.  William 
was  their  third  son,  and  was  h^mat  Merton 
on  July  7,  1719.  After  receiving  his  edu- 
cation at  Christ's  CoUege,  Cambridge,  he 
entered  the  Middle  Temj^e,  and  was  called 
to  the  bar  in  1742.    He  was  made  king's  I 


DELVES 

counsel  to  Geor^  H.  in  1768,  and  in  Sep- 
tember 1761  solicitor-general  to  the  queen 
of  George  HI.  In  the  latter  year  he  was 
elected  member  of  parliament  for  Newport 
in  Cornwall,  and  m  December  1763  was 
appointed  solicitor  to  the  king.  In  August 
1760  he  became  attorney-general,  and  wa«i 
knighted.  He  was  also  comptroller  of  the 
first-fruits  and  tenths. 

He  filled  the  office  of  attorney-general 
£or  nearly  fiye  years,  and  in  the  parliament 
following  his  appointment  had  the  honour 
of  being  elected  by  three  different  consti- 
tuencies— at  first  for  Newport  and  Tam- 
worth,  selecting  the  former;    and  after- 
wards, in  January  1770,  for  the  university 
of  Cambridge,    tn  that  parliament  he  con- 
tended against  the  legality  of  Mr.  Wilkes's 
return  for  Middlesex }  and  on  all  other  oc- 
casions strenuously  supported  the  measores 
of  Lord  North's  ministiT.    On  a  motion  to 
abridge  the  power  of  the  attomey-genenl 
in  fihng  ex  officio  informations,  he  boldly 
defend^   himself^  and   proved  that  the 
power  was   not  only  constitutional,  bat, 
when  discreetly  exercised,  ess^itiaily  necet-     i 
sary.  He  conducted  the  proceedings  agiinst     ^ 
Wilkes,  when  he  surrendered  in  17^  after 
his  conviction,  on  the  question  of  his  out- 
lawry; in  the  various  discusdons  previous 
to  his  sentence ;  and  in  the  writ  of  enor 
before  the  House  of  Lords,  by  whom  the 
conviction  and  sentence  were  confirmed. 
Though  sharing  of  course  the  impopulant^ 
with  which  all  the  opponents  of  tnat  deios- 
gogue  were  visited,  Sir  WiUiam  De  Grey 
does  not  seem  to  have  excited  any  special 
animosity,  but  to  have  been  regarded  a» 
merely  doing  his  duty  as  an  officer  of  the 
crown. 

On  January  25, 1771,  he  was  appointed 
lord  chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleis. 
After  presiding  over  his  court  for  neariy 
ten  years,  the  iailure  of  his  healUi  oUiged 
him  to  resien  in  June  1780.  In  udmow- 
ledgment  of  his  services,  the  king  in  the 
following  October  called  him  up  to  the 
House  of  Peers  by  the  title  of  Lard  Wal- 
singham.  He  enjoyed  his  new  honours  for 
little  more  than  six  months,  dying  on  May  9, 
1781,  when  he  was  buried  at  Merton. 

He  was  a  most  accomplished  lawyer,  and 
of  the  most  extxaordinaiy  power  of  memory. 
'  I  have  seen  him,*  says  Lord  £ldon, '  come 
into  court  with  both  hands  wrapped  up  in 
flannel  (from  gout).  He  could  not  take  a 
note,  and  had  no  one  to  do  so  for  him.  I 
have  known  him  try  a  cause  which  lasted 
nine  or  ten  hours,  and  then,  from  memory, 
sum  up  all  the  evidence  vnth  the  gieat^ 
correctness.'     (TictsSj  i.  113.) 

He  married  Mary,  daughter  of  William 
Cowper,  Esq.,  M.P.  for  Hertford,  and  first 
cousin  of  the  poet ;  and  the  title  la  still  ^- 
joyed  by  his  descendants. 

DELVES,  John  de,  was  the  aon  of  Richard 


DENE 

de  Delrefi,  of  Delves  Hall,  near  Uttoxeter, 
in  StaffordBhire,  who  was  conatable  of 
Heleiffh  Hall,  in  that  county.  At  the  battle 
of  Poictiera,  in  1356,  the  Lora  Audley,  with 
his  four  esquires,  of  whom  John  de  Delves 
was  one,  performed  such  acts  of  valour  that 
Prince  Eoward  granted  to  him,  on  the  field, 
*  ^me  hundred  markes  of  jerelj  reuenewes/ 
which  the  generous  lord  immediately  re- 
signed to  his  four  squires,  saying  that  they 
had  *•  alwayes  serued  me  truely,  and  specially 
this  day;  that  honour  that  I  haue  is  by 
their  v&Lyantnesse/  And  each  of  them  was 
allowed  to  add  a  part  of  their  lord's  arms  to 
Jus  own. 

John  de  Delves  was  soon  afterwards 
knighted,  and  retained  in  the  service  of 
theBlack  Prince.  In  216  Edward  HI.  he 
is  called  his  '  valettua,'  in  an  order  to  the 
sherifi  of  London  to  supply  him  with  as 
many  bows  and  arrows  as  the  prince  should 
leqnire;  and  he  was  entrusted  with  the 
wardship  of  the  Duchess  of  Brittany. 

However  natural  it  was  that  the  royal 
goodwill  should  be  extended  to  him,  it 
seems  strange  that  a  place  on  the  judicial 
bench  should  be  selected  as  arewarafor  his 
military  services,  since  there  is  no  evidence 
that  he  had  been  ever  previously  connected 
with  the  law.  Yet  so  it  was.  and  on  Fe- 
bruaij  3,  1364,  38  Edward  III.,  he  was 
constituted  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas. 
There  is  evidence,  however,  that  he  ac- 
companied the  Black  Prince  to  Gascony  two 
ip<ynthf  afterwards,  so  that  he  did  not  de- 
vote himself  much  to  his  legal  avocation. 
Fines,  however,  appear  to  have  been  levied 
bdbore  him  till  the  middle  of  the  following 
year.  Aa  his  name  was  not  afterwards  in- 
snted  among  the  judges  who  received  their 
salaries,  he  piobablv  then  retired  from  the 
bench.  He  was  lucky  enouffh,  at  this  time, 
to  announce  to  the  king  the  birth  of  his 
msdaon  Edward,  the  son  of  the  Prince  of 
Wales^  for  which  he  had  a  grant  of  40^  a 
jmt,     (Co/.  Hot.  Pat,  180.) 

fie  lived  till  1369,  and  was  buried  at 
Audley  in  Staffordshire.  By  his  wife  Isa* 
bellAy  daughter  of  Philip  de  Malpas,  he 
left  a  daugnter,  Joan,  the  widow  of  Henry 
de  Kymes,  and  bequeathed  to  her  most  of 
his  manors;  but  he  was  eventually  suc- 
ceeded in  his  estates  by  hia  brother  Henry, 
one  of  whose  descendants,  Thomas  Delves, 
of  Dodington,  obtained  a  baronetcy,  which 
10  now  extinct  (Froissart,  i.  197,  205; 
DwfdMs  Orig.  45 ;  Cal.  Inq.  p.  m.  ii.  296.) 

SXVX,  Hbrbt  (Archbishop  op  Canter- 
bubt),  although  holding  three  sees  succes- 
sively, wore  the  episcopal  mitre  for  little 
more  than  five  years.  Ilis  public  career  is 
equally  short,  and  little  is  preserved  of  his 
pnrate  history.  His  orinn  is  not  recorded, 
except  that  he  was  a  Welshman,  which 
might  perhaps  operate  as  a  recommendation 
to  Henry  VH.    He  was  bom  about  1450, 


DENHAM 


215 


and  the  place  of  his  education  is  claimed 
by  both  Oxford  and  Cambridge.  He  be- 
came in  1461  prior  of  Llanthony  Secundus, 
near  Gloucester,  a  cell  to  that  in  Monmouth- 
shire, but  afterwards,  in  1481,  made  the 
principal  house.  In  1494  he  was  const!* 
tuted  Chancellor  of  Ireland,  when  his  ser- 
vices in  turning  away  the  impostor  Perkin 
Warbeck  from  the  Irish  shores  secured  the. 
royal  favour,  and  he  was  not  only  rewarded 
by  being  made  deputy  and  jiisticiary  of 
that  kingdom  in  1496,  but  also  Bishop  of 
Bangor.  In  this  see  he  restored  the  rights 
of  the  church,  and  re^niined  several  valuable 
properties,  and  in  March  1500  he  was 
translated  to  the  more  important  diocese  of 
Salisbury.  Six  months  a!nerwards,  on  Oc- 
tober 13,  he  was  invested  with  the  custody 
of  the  Great  Seal  with  the  title  of  lord 
keeper,  and  in  the  following  January  he 
was  consecrated  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 
The  pope  soon  after  appointed  him  his  legate 
in  Ent^Iand ;  and  before  the  end  of  the  year 
he  solemnised  the  nuptials  of  Prince  Arthur 
with  Catherine  of  Arragon,  and  was  en- 
gaged in  negotiating  the  treatv  of  marriage 
between  the  King  of  Scots  and  the  Princesa 
Margaret,  No  reason  being  assigned  for 
his  early  resignation  of  the  custody  of  the 
Great  Seal  on  July  27,  1502,  it  may  pro- 
bably be  attributed  to  the  failure  of  hia 
health,  as  he  survived  his  retirement  only 
half  a  year.  He  died  at  Lambeth,  on  Fe- 
bruary 15,  1502-S;  and  his  remains  were 
deposited  in  Canterbury  Cathedral.  (^God' 
win,  132,  352,  625 ;  Rymer,  xii.  523,  642, 
793 ;  Arch.  Journal,  xviiL  256-267.) 

BEVE,  Ralph  de,  one  of  the  twelve  in- 
quisitors against  the  sheriffs  in  1170,  who 
are  called  justices  itinerant  by  Dugdale,  was 
of  a  Sussex  family,  in  which  county  he  had 
considerable  property.  He  settled  some 
canons  of  the  Prsemonstratensian  order  at 
Ottham  in  Sussex.  (Madox,  i.  576,  ii  78; 
Monasi.  vi.  911.) 

DEHHAX,  John,  in  the  memoir  of  his 
son  Sir  John  Denham,  the  poet,  is  described 
as  of  Little  Horsley  in  Essex.  He  was  a 
member  first  of  Fumivars  Inn,  and  then  of 
Lincoln^s  Inn,  and,  having  been  called  to 
the  bar  in  1587,  was  chosen  a  reader  of 
that  society  twenty  years  afterwards. 

Eton  College  employed  him  as  their; 
counsel,  and  made  hun  their  steward.  On 
June  5,  1609,  having  been  first  called  Ser- 
jeant, he  was  appointed  lord  chief  baron  of 
the  Irish  Exchequer,  and  knighted.  From 
this  office  he  was  advanced  within  three 
vears  to  that  of  lord  chief  justice  of  the 
king's  Bench,  in  the  same  country.  This 
he  held  for  five  years,  and  then  exchanged 
it  on  Mav  2,  1617,  for  a  seat  in  the  English 
Court  ot  Exchequer.  How  well  he  ner* 
formed  his  duties  in  Ireland  may  be  judged 
from  the  address  of  Lord  Chancellor  Bacon 
(^W&rks,  viL  264)  to  his  successor.  Sir  Wil- 


216 


DENISON 


Ham  Jonefly  who  is  recommended  to  imitate 
'  the  care  and  affection  to  the  commonwealth 
of  Ireland,  and  the  prudent  and  politic  ad- 
ministration of  Sir  John  Denham.'  He 
was  so  ffood  an  *  administrator  of  the  re- 
venue' there,  as  Bacon  calls  him,  that  he 
set  up  the  customs,  which,  bringing  first 
only  500/.,  were  let  before  his  death  for 
54,000/.  per  annum.     {Ibid,  316,  note.) 

In  the  proceedings  against  his  eminent 
eulogist,  three  years  afterwards,  he  had  the 
unpleasant  duty  of  delivering  the  message 
of  the  lords  to  the  fallen  chancellor,  re- 
quiring a  special  answer  to  the  charges 
against  him.  (Pari,  Hist,  i.  1239.)  In 
the  case  of  ship-money  he  joined  the  other 
judgjBS  for  the  sake  of  conformity  in  the 
opinion  they  gave  to  the  king  in  uvour  of 
its  legality ;  but  on  the  hearing  of  the  case 
against  Hampden  he  was  absent  during 
four  days  of  tne  argiunent,  and,  being  sick 
and  weak,  gave  a  short  written  judgment 
on  May  28,  1638,  in  opposition  to  the  king's 
claim.  (State  Trials,  lu,  1201.J)  He  lived 
only  seven  months  after  the  unf()rtunate  de- 
cision of  the  majority,  and  dying  on  January 
6,  1639.  was  buried  at  Egham  in  Surrey, 
where  tnere  is  a  monument  to  him  and  his 
two  wives.  The  first  of  these  was  Cidle, 
the  widow  of  Richard  Kellefet,  Esq. ;  and 
the  second  Eleanor,  the  daughter  of  Sir 
Garrett  Moore,  first  Viscount  Drogheda. 

The  judge  built  the  mansion  called  '  The 
Place '  at  Egham ;  but  his  estate  was  wasted 
in  gambling  by  his  only  son,  John  Denham, 
equally  celebrated  as  the  author  of  ^  Coop- 
er's Hill '  and  other  poems,  and  as  a  loyal 
adherent  of  King  Charles  through  all  his 
adversities.  He  was  rewarded  on  the  Resto- 
ration with  the  post  of  surveyor-general 
and  the  knighthood  of  the  Bath,  and  died 
in  1668.  (Atibrey,  ii.  320;  Brit,  Biography, 
X,  453.) 

DEKISOH,  Thomas,  was  the  younger  of 
two  sons  of  Mr.  Joseph  Denison,  an  opulent 
merchant  at  Leeds,  the  elder  of  whom  was 
the  grandfather  of  the  Right  Honourable 
John  Evelyn  Denison,  speaker  of  the  House 
of  Commons  since  1857.  He  was  bom  in 
1699,  and  received  his  legal  education  at 
the  Inner  Temple,  where  he  was  called  to 
the  bar.  His  merits  as  a  lawyer  soon  pro- 
cured him  a  considerable  practice,  and, 
without  having  filled  any  of  the  minor 
offices  of  the  profession,  he  was  made  a 
judge  of  the  King's  Bench  in  December 
1741.  He  was  knighted  in  November 
1745,  when  he  joined  in  the  loyal  address 
to  the  king  on  the  rebellion.  After  ad- 
ministering justice  in  that  court  for  more 
than  twenty-three  years,  his  health  and  his 
sight  failing  him,  £e  resigned  on  February 
14, 1765. 

He  sat  under  three  successive  chief  jus- 
tices—Sir  William  Lee,  Sir  Dudley  Ryder, 
and  Lord  Mansfield ;  the  latter  of  whom 


DENMAN 

had  so  high  an  opinion  of  his  learnings  and- 
so  great  an  affection  for  him,  that  when  he 
died  on  the  8th  of  the  following  Septwn- 
ber,  he  wrote  fhe  beautiful  and  duuracteriitie 
epitaph  on  his  monument  in  the  church  of 
Harewood  in  Yorkshire,  where  he  lies  near 
Lord  Chief  Justice  Gascoigne. 

He  married  Anne,  daughter  of  Robert 
Smithson,  Esq.,  but  left  no  issue. 

DEHKAV,   Thomas    (Lord   Denxait), 
than  whom  no  chief  justice  of  England 
since  the  death  of  the  Earl  of  Mansfield 
has   been    regarded    with   more  jpersonal 
esteem  and  affection,  and  none  smoe  the 
days  of  Lord  Chief  Justice  Holt  have  left 
a  diaracter  of  bolder  independence  or  matt 
fearless   and   uncompromising    patriotiflBy 
was  bom  on  Februaiy  23,  1779^  at  fail 
father's   house  in  Queen   Street,  Goldeii 
Square,  which  in  honour  of  the  infant  tha 
brought  into  the  world  has  lately  assumed 
the  name  of  Denman  Street.     Ite  was  the 
only  son  of  Dr.  Thomas  Denman,  the  moK 
emment  physician  of  his  time  in  his  par- 
ticular branch  of  science,  and  of  his  wife 
Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Alexander  Brodie, 
Esq.,  a  descendant  from  the  ancient  family 
of  Brodie,  of  Brodie  in  Morayshire.    Tfaa 
family  from  which  he  sprang  was  ori^attf    : 
settled  in  Nottinghamshire,  some  tune  i    j 
East  Retford,  and  more  lately  at  Bevei^-    \ 
cotes,  but  Dr.  Denman's  father  removed  to    ■ 
Bakewell  in  Derbyshire,  where  for  mii^    \ 
years  he  practised  as  a  surgeon.    The  jodgt 
therefore  is  another  instance,  of  which  theia    \ 
are  so  many  in  this  reign,  of  the  lesal  ben^    ; 
being  supplied  by  men  of  medical  lineage. 

At  three  years  he  commenced  his  bcEoqI 
education  under  that  amiable  and  excellest 
woman  Mrs.  Barbauld,  then  resident  at  Pil-  : 
grave  in  Norfolk,  and  to  her  system  of  is- 
struction  during  the  two  years  he  was  under 
her  tuition  the  judge  was  accustomed  to 
attribute  the  retentive  memory  and  wfaife- 
ever  grace  and  facility  of  diction  he  after- 
wards attained. 

After  leaving  Mrs.  Barbauld's,  he  was 
placed  for  a  short  time  imder  the  Rev.  Dr* 
Thompson  at  Kensington,  whence  he  pio- 
ceeded  when  seven  years  old  to  Eton.    £Bs 
industry  and  application  during  the  yean 
that  he  remained  there  are  evidenced  lif 
the  stores  of  classical  literature  which  re- 
mained in  his  memory,  and  b^  the  deliglit 
which  he  took  in  them,  and  his  readiness  in 
quoting  them;    and  his  social  character 
among  his  schoolfellows  may  be  estimated 
by  the  many  lasting  friendships  which  be 
formed  there.    To  the  last  period  of  hift 
life  he  retained  that  affection  for  the  noUs 
establishment  with  which  those  who  hftfs 
been  educated  within  its  walls  inyaniklf 
regard  it.    Before  proceeding  to  tihi  Ufr* 
yersity  he  spent  one  or  two  JMH  M  ft 
pupil  with  his  maternal  UNkb  ibi^Btr* 
Peter  Brodie  (the  father  of  lib 


DENHAN 

the  eminent  conTeyancer,  and  Sir  Benjamin 
firodie  the  great  surgeon,  hia  fellow  pupils^, 
onder  whom  he  added  largely  to  the  classi- 
cal and  historical  knowlec^gpe  which  he  had 
laid  in  at  Eton. 

From  1796  to  1800  he  spent  at  St  John's 
Colle^,  Cambridge,  and  took  his  degree  of 
B.A.  in  the  latter  year,  and  that  of  M.A.  in 
1803,  without  aimmg  at  a  place  on  the  list 
of  university  honours,  as  ne  had  a  great 
distaste  to  mathematical  studies,  and  de- 
voted himself  entirely  to  his  favourite 
classics. 

He  then  entered  Lincoln's  Inn,  and 
placed  himself  as  a  pupil  under  the  great 
conveyancer  Charles  Butler,  and  the  emi- 
nent pleader  Mr.  Tidd,  the  initiator  into 
lend  mysteries  of  so  many  remarkable  men. 
After  due  preparation,  he  practised  for  a 
short  time  as  a  spedal  pleaaer  until  1806, 
when  he  was  called  to  the  bar,  and  joined 
the  Midland  Circuit  and  Lincoln  Sessions. 
He  had  two  vears  before  married  Theodosia 
Ann,  the  eldest  daughter  of  the  Rev. 
Richard  V^evers,  rector  of  Saxby  in  Lei- 
cestershire. 

While  making  the  slow  progress  which 
is  so  much  the  fate  of  junior  barristers,  he 
employed  some  part  of  his  leisure  in  writing 
critiques  on  the  classical  literature  of  the 
day  for  the  'Monthly  Review,'  then  the 
leftding  whig  journal,  until  it  was  super- 
ceded by  the  advances  of  its  Edinburgh 
competitor.  But  he  gradually  ffot  the  ear 
of  the  court,  and  so  early  as  1800  by  his 
ludd,  elaborate,  and  successful  argument  on 
the  right  application  of  the  rule  in  Shelley's 
case,  in  opposition  to  so  able  an  opponent 
as  3ir.  Copley  (afterwards  Lord  Lynanurst), 
proved  that  he  had  not  sat  at  the  feet  of 
the  great  conveyancing  Gamaliel  in  vain. 
(11  Etutj  548.)  But  the  event  to  which  he 
attributed  his  ultimate  success,  and  which 
recommended  him  to  the  first  honours  he 
received,  was  his  employment  on  the  trials 
of  the  Luddites  in  1817,  when  he  was  en- 
gaged for  the  defence  of  the  prisoners  ar- 
raiflned  at'Derby. 

In  1818  Mr.  Denman  obtained  his  first 
•Pat  in  parliament  as  representative  of 
Wareham  in  Dorsetshire.  He  soon  em- 
barked on  the  stormy  sea  of  politics,  and 
distinguished  himself  by  the  boldness  with 
which  he  attacked  abuses  and  pronounced 
opinions  to  which  he  adhered  through  life,  | 
and  in  particular  by  advocating  the  neoes-  : 
sity  of  an  amelioration  of  the  criminal  law. 
In'  this   his  first  year  he  had  obtained  a 

Eisition  of  considerable  importance  in  the 
oose  fd  Commons,  and  had  established  a 
reputation  which  was  soon  to  be  extended 
tliiooghout  the  country. 

The  old  king  George  IH.  died  on  January 
29,  1820,  and  the  Frince  of/ Wales,  who 
had  held  the  regency  of  the  kingdom  for 
the  aine  previous  years, '  heavily  in  clouds ' 


DENMAK 


217 


commenced  his  actual  reign  of  George  IV* 
A  conspiracy,  widely  spread  among  the 
lower  orders  of  the  people,  had  been  orga- 
nised to  overturn  tne  government  of  ue 
country  j  ust  before  his  accession,  and  within 
a  month  after  it  a  plan  was  concerted  for 
the  commencement  of  the  outbreak  bv  the 
murder  of  all  the  ministers  at  a  cabinet 
dinner  at  Lord  Harrowby's.  The  plot  was 
discovered  only  just  in  time.  On  the  very 
da^  of  its  intended  execution  the  body  of 
traitors  were  arrested  in  the  midst  of  tneir 
preparations,  and  their  conviction  and  exe- 
cution soon  followed.  The  agitation  arising 
firom  what  was  called  the  Cato  Street  con- 
spiracy had  scarcely  subsided  before  the 
public  were  excited  by  the  prospect  of  an 
investigation  of  a  very  difiisrent  nature,  but 
threatening  equally  perilous  consequences. 
In  the  meantime  Mr.  Denman  had  at  the 
general  election  of  that  year  been  returned 
for  Nottingham. 

Queen  Caroline,  who  was  living  apart 
from  her  husband  in  foreign  lancbs,  nad 
intimated  her  intention  of  cominfi;  to  Eng- 
land to  claim  the  rights  and  privileges  due 
to  her  new  rank,  which  it  was  known  that 
the  king  intended  to  resist,  as  he  had  already 
excluded  her  name  from  the  usual  prayers 
in  the  Liturgy.  One  of  the  first  acts  of 
her  progress  towards  England  was  to  ap- 
point A&.  Brougham  her  attorney-general 
and  Mr.  Denman  her  solicitor-general. 
Numerous  negotiations  took  place  between 
the  government  and  her  law  officers,  in 
order  to  avert  the  inconveniences  which 
threatened  to  follow  her  arrival.  But  all 
endeavours  of  accommodation  failing,  her 
majesty  entered  London  on  June  7,  amidst 
the  triumphant  acclamations  of  the  people, 
and  the  ^niole  town,  partly  from  sympathy 
and  partly  from  force  and  fear,  was  illumi- 
nated in  the  evening. 

The  cause  of  this  popular  feeling  was  not 
80  much  a  conviction  of  the  queen's  inno- 
cence, for  of  that  the  majori^  knew  little  * 
and  cared  less,  as  a  disgust  at  the  indi^ties 
offered  to  a  female,  and  an  admiration  of 
the  spirit  she  exhibited  in  hastening  to  face 
her  accusers,  together  with  the  growing 
unpopularity  of  the  king,  much  increased 
by  the  knowledge  of  the  grounds  of  recri- 
mination which  the  queen,  even  if  the 
charges  against  her  were  true,  could  justly 
bring  against  him.  Meetings  of  arbitrators, 
motions  in  parliament,  were  alike  ineffectual 
to  produce  an  arrangement,  the  interesting 
protocols  and  debates  in  which  will  be 
round  in  Hansard  and  the  ^Annual  Register ' 
for  the  year.  In  all  these  proceedings  Mr. 
Denman  of  course  took  a  prominent  part, 
and  in  the  new  House  of  Commons  he 
spoke  with  so  much  indignation,  boldness, 
and  force  that  he  drew  from  the  mouth  of 
a  member  a  question  to  which  the  spirit  of 
prophecy  might  be  attributed.     Mr.  R. 


218  DENMAN  DENMAN 

Martin  aaked  her  majesty's  solicitor-general  Common  Council,  and  would  naturally  have- 
'  if  by  any  train  of  fortuitous  events  he  ,  fallen  to  their  senior  pleader,  Mr.  BaUand^ 
should  at  some  future  period  find  himself  j  who  was  a  deserved  favourite  in  the  dtj. 
devoted  to  Vie  bench  of  tiiis  country  (and,  as  |  But  the  queen*s  party  in  the  council  deter- 
all  things  were  in  the  hands  of  Providence,  I  mined  to  testifj^  their  admiration  of  the 
such  an  event  was  by  no  means  unlikely),  |  exertions  made  m  her  defence  by  Mr.  Den- 
how  he  would  like  to  have  hurled  against '.  man,  on  whom  in  the  previoua  year  theT 
his  judicial  dignity  any  former  opinion  '  had  conferred  the  freedom  of  the  citjr,  ani 
which  he  might  have  professed  in  that  elected  him  to  the  office  by  a  maiority  of 
house  or  elsewhere  P  *    Mr.  Denman  was  ,  131  over  119  for  Mr.  Bolland,  who  some 


certainly  prophetic  in  the  dignified  answer 
that  he  gave  to  this  impertinence.   He  said 


vears  after  was  appointed  a  baron  of  tlie 
Exchequer. 


that  ^  he  did  not  fear  that  any  opinion  he  In  this  new  character  Mr.  Denman  dis- 
had  delivered  or  should  deliver  in  that  ,  appointed  his  opponents,  who  gave  liim 
house  would  ever  rise  up  in  judgment  I  credit  for  more  eloquence  than  law,  bv  ez- 
against  him,  nor  should  he  desert  those  i  hibiting  those  judicial  powers  which  are 
opinions  in  any  situation  in  which  he  might  most  admirable  while  presiding  over  a 
be  placed.'  '  criminal    court — ^patience,    firmness,  aod 

llie  '  Green  Bag '  containing  the  dirty  ,  humanity ;  and  by  the  sweetneas  of  his 
details  was  brought  in  and  referred  to  a  '  disposition,  joined  with  the  natural  digmtr 
secret  committee,  upon  whose  report  the  '  of  his  character,  he  gained  the  affectkn 
Bill  of  Pains  and  Penalties  was  introduced  and  respect  even  of  those  who  differed 
into  the  House  of  Lords  on  July  5,  the  ob-  i  most  from  him  in  politics.  These  feelings 
ject  of  which  was  to  deprive  the  ^ueen  of  j  found  utterancein  the  various  addresses  the^ 
her  title  and  to  dissolve  the  marriage  be-  presented  to  him  upon  every  occasionof  lus 
tween  her  and  the  king.  The  second  read-  ;  advancement. 

ing  was  put  olf  till  August  17.  Nearly  the  '  He  retired  from  parliament  from  1820  to 
whole  talent  of  the  bar  was  engaged,  and  .  18:^0,  when  on  the  general  election  conse* 
of  the  eleven  counsel  who  appeared^  six  on  quent  on  the  accession  of  William  lY.  lie 
one  side  and  five  on  the  other,  no  less  than  i  was  again  elected  for  Nottingham,  vlueh 
ten  were  afterwards  elevated  to  high  legal  he  continued  to  represent  till  his  elevatioa 
distinction.    Only  one  of  the  advocates  for    to  the  bench. 

the  queen — ^namely,  Sir  Nicolas  Tindal — re-  ,  On  the  death  of  the  queen  in  1821  lie  of 
ceived  his  judicial  promotion  while  George    course  lost  the  precedence  which  his  office 


IV.  remained  on  the  throne,  and  though 
the  two  principal  advocates  received  legal 
rank  dunng  the  rei^,  it  was  not  granted 
till  near  the  end  of  it,  and  then  with  the 


of  her  solicitor-eeneral  gave  him  in  tbe 
courts,  and  was  obliged  to  retire  behind  the 
bar ;  and  it  was  not  till  seven  years  after- 
wards, in  1828,  that  he  received  a  silk 


greatest  reluctance  and  difficulty.  With  so  i  gown.  From  that  time  hia  promotion  was 
much  displeasure  did  the  king  regard  Mr.  j  rapid.  William  IV.  in  1830  succeeded  to 
Denman  for  the  bitter  terms  in  which  he  j  the  crown,  and  on  tbe  accession  of  tlie 
had  alluded  to  the  grounds  of  recrimination  |  whig  ministry,  scorning  to  remember  the 
which  the  king  had  afibrded,  that  he  was  |  personal  attack  which  Mr.  Denman  in  his 


zeal  had  uttered  a^idnst  him  on  the  queens 
trial,  sanctioned  his  appoiatment  as  atto^ 
ney-general  on  November  26,  and  knighted 
him.    He  had  not  filled  the  office  of  atkv- 


ney-general  quite  two  years  when  Loid 
Tenterden  died,  and  Sir  Thomas  was  with- 


omitted  from  the  batch  of  king's  counsel 
created  on  the  accession  of  the  liberal- 
'  minded  Lord  Lyndhurst  to  the  chancellor- 
ship, and  it  was  only  by  his  bold  remon- 
strance that  the  DuKe  of  Wellington  was 
enabled  to  remove  the  injustice. 

During  the  progress  ot  the  trial  the  ex-  I  out  a  moment's  hesitation  appointed,  on 
citement  of  the  people  was  unbounded.  ,  November  4,  1832,  his  successor  as  loid 
They  wholly  discredited  the  evidence  ad-  chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench, 
duced  against  her  majesty,  declaring  that  For  nearly  eighteen  years  he  graced  that 
the  witnesses  were  suliomea,  and  when  the  \  seat  with  the  highest  commendation  from 
ministers  were  obliged  to  abandon  the  bill  his  brother  judges,  the  bar,  and  tbe  paUic. 
the  delight  of  the  populace  almost  amounted  Without  pretending  to  the  deep  black-letter 
to  frenzy.  In  the  queen's  popularitv  the  \  learning  of  some  of  his  colleagues,  he  had 
advocates  of  her  innocence,  who  had  shown  i  laid  up  a  sufficient  store  of  legal  knowledge 
such  fearless  gallantry  in  her  defence,  of  to  meet  everv  requirement,  and  being 
course  largely  participated.  deeply  imbued   with    the  principles  on 

The  popular  efifervescence  had  not  sub-  which  the  law  is  founded,  knew  weU  bov 
sided  when  Sir  John  Sylvester,  the  recorder  to  apply  them  in  the  justice  he  admiiiit- 
of  London,  died  and  Mr.  Knowles  was    tered.    He  maintained  on  the  bench  ttie 


appointed  his  successor  in  1822,  leaving  a 
vacancy  in  his  former  place  (k  common 
Serjeant.     This  was  in  the  gift  of  the 


same  independence,  and  erhilntod  i^ 
same  courage,  as  distingniahwd  Um  it  Ae 
bar,  and  in  the  famout  am  cC  StocUth 


BENMAN 

T.  HanMrd  did  not  hesitate  boldly  to  sup- 
port the  rights  and  liberties  of  the  subject 
in  opposition  to  the  assumed  privileges  of 
parliament,  and  the  threats  of  the  House  of 
Commons.  No  judge  ever  showed  more 
unaffected  dignity  in  his  demeanour,  more 
kindness  and  courtesy  to  all  who  were  in 
communication  with  mm,  more  patience  and 
discrimination  in  investigating  the  rights  of 
the  parties  before  him,  or  more  firmness 
and  perspicuity  in  delivering  his  judgments. 

In  March  18*34  he  was  created  a  peer  by 
the  title  of  Baron  Denman  of  Dovedale  in 
Derbyshire,  and  ventured  to  break  through 
the  custom  of  chief  justices  attending  par- 
liament in  their  judicial  robtt,  by  cJways 
sitting  in  his  ordinary  dress.  Lord  D<ni- 
man  was  called  upon,  in  consequence  of  the 
illness  of  Lord  Cfottenham  the  chancellor, 
to  preside  aa  lord  high  steward  when  the 
Eni  of  Cardigan  was  indicted  for  shooting 
Captain  Tuckett  in  a  duel,  who  was  ac- 
quitted from  the  omission  of  the  prosecution 
to  prove  the  identity  of  the  man  wounded 
with  the  man  named  in  the  indictment. 

At  the  age  of  seventy  Lord  Denman^s 
health  began  to  fail,  and  alter  several 
months^  suffering  he  felt  that  he  could  no 
longer  perform  the  duties  of  his  office  with 
tatisAu^tion  to  himself  or  with  benefit  to 
the  public.  He  therefore  sent  in  his  resig- 
nation at  the  end  of  Hilary  Term  1860,  and 
Lord  Campbell,  who  was  onl^  two  years 
his  junior,  was  appointed  in  his  place.  In 
no  instance  of  a  judge's  retirement  was  so 
much  regret  expressed.  Not  only  from  the 
citizens  of  London,  who  looked  upon  them- 
selves aa  in  some  sort  the  founders  of  his 
fortune,  and  who  had  placed  his  portrait  on 
the  walls  of  their  council  chamber,  but 
from  the  whole  bar,  and  specially  from  the 
members  of  his  owu  (the  Midland)  circuit, 
from  the  grand  juries  of  Lincolnshire, 
Nottinghamshire,  Derbyshire,  Leicester- 
ihire,  Warwickshire,  K^t  (conveying  the 
•antiments  of  admiration  and  regret  of  the 
leading  gentry  of  those  counties)^  was  he 
gxmtified  by  receiving  the  most  affectionate 
addreases.  The  solicitors  gave  a  permanent  i 
teitimonv  of  their  participation  in  these  | 
feelings  by  placing  his  bust  in  their  hall  in  , 
Chancery  Lrfme ;  and  the  poet-laureate  of ; 
the  Home  Circuit,  Sir  Josepn  Amould,  since  i 
a  jnd^  at  Bombay,  embodied  them  in  a  \ 
b^utiful  copy  of  verses  describing  in 
elegant  and  pathetic  lines  the  various 
excellences  by  which  he  was  distinguished, 
md  their  loss  in  being  deprived  of  his 
aample. 

The  sympathy  thus  shown  in  this  country 
otended  even  to  America^  and  was  com- 
■nnicated  in  an  elegant  letter  from  Mr. 
Everett,  who  had  been  ambassador  here. 
Bat  the  highest  gratification  experienced 
ky  Lord  Dniman  was  in  receiving  the  un- 
oampled  compliment  from  his  colleagues 


DENNY 


21» 


in  the  court  in  which  he  pre^ded  of  a 
valuable  inkstand,  in  a  beautiful  classical 
design,  accompanied  by  a  letter  the  lan- 
guage of  which  must  have  been  even  more 
precious  than  the  gift.  His  four  brethren 
say,  ^  We  do  desire  to  bear  uncere  and  con- 
siderate testimony  to  the  leading  good  sense 
and  ability,  the  industry  and  uprightness, 
the  candour,  patience,  dignity,  and  good 
temper  with  which  you  have  adorned  tho 
bench  on  which  we  have  had  the  hap- 
piness to  sit  as  your  assistants.  But  we 
are  bound  to  add  to  this  our  ffiatitude  for 
the  uniform  kindness  which  individually  we 
have  experienced  at  your  hands,  the  hearty 
acceptance  which  you  have  ever  given  to^ 
such  assistance  as  it  was  our  duty  and  in 
our  power  to  afford  you,  and  the  delightful 
friendliness,  without  change  or  diminution 
at  any  time,  which  has  shed  a  peculiar 
charm  on  our  private  intercourse.  By  these 
we  have  been  made,  we  trust,  more  useful 
servants  to  the  public,  as  we  are  sure  we 
have  been  enabled  to  enjoy  our  few  leisure 
hours  more  ^rfectly.'  The  letter  bears 
the  subscription  of  the  respected  names  of 
Sir  John  Patteson,  Sir  John  Coleridge,  Sir 
WilUam  Wightman^  and  Sir  WiUiam  Erie. 

Throughout  his  life  he  preserved  his  en- 
joyment of  every  branch  of  literature  and 
science ;  and,  though  he  did  not  publish  any 
work  with  Ins  name,  he  contributed  many 
elegant  translations  to  Bland*s  ^  Greek  An- 
thology,' besides  often  relaxing  himself  in 
pl^ul  dalliance  witii  the  Muses. 

He  lived  nearly  i^ve  years  after  his  resig- 
nation, spending  most  of  his  time  at  Stony 
Middleton,  near  Bakewell,  which  he  had 
inherited  from  his  father,  in  those  acts  of 
charity  and  kindness  which  endeared  him 
to  his  fellow-creatures,  and  in^  contempla- 
tions which  prepared  him  for  his  end.  His 
death  occurred  on  September  22, 1854,  at 
Stoke  Albsuy,  near  Eoddngham.  He  left 
a  large  familv. 

DSHHT,  Edmuvd,  or  Edwabd,  from 
being  a  clerk  of  the  Exchequer,  was  raised 
in  1604  to  the  office  of  king's  remem- 
brancer, and  on  May  6,  1613,  6  Henry 
Vni.,  to  that  of  fourth  baron,  in  which  he 
continued  till  his  death  in  1620.  He  was 
buried  in  the  church  of  St  Benet,  Paul's 
Wharf,  Lond(HL  He  is  described  as  of 
Cheshunt  in  Hertfordshire,  and  was  the 
son  of  Thomas  Denny  and  Agnes  his  wife. 
He  had  three  wives :  the  first  was  Margaret, 
daughter  of  Balph  Leigh,  Esq.,  of  Stock- 
well,  Surrey,  M.P.  for  the  coun^;  the 
second  was  Mary,  daughter  and  heir  of 
Robert  Troutbeck,  Esq.,  of  Bridge-Traf- 
ford,    Cheshire;    and    the    third    Jane, 

daughter  of .    By  his  second  wife  only 

he  had  issue.  Bendes  several  daughters, 
one  of  whom,  Joyce,  was  the  mother  of  the 
celebrated  Sir  rrancis  Walsingham,  and 
the  maternal   ancestor  of   the  Viscoants 


220 


DENTON 


Falkland,  lie  had  two  sons,  tbe  younger  of 
whom  was  Sir  Anthony,  the  king^s  remem- 
brancer, and  gentleman  of  the  king's 
privy  cnamber.  His  ffrandson  was  created 
Baron  Denny  and  Earl  of  Norwich,  both  of 
which  titles  have  become  extinct.  The 
family  is  now  represented  by  a  baronetcy, 
created  in  1782. 

DEKTOH,  Alexakdeb,  was  the  nephew  of 
€ir  Edmmid  Denton,  a  biux)net,  whose  title  is 
now  extinct,  and  the  son  of  another  Alexan- 
der Denton,  of  Hillesden,  near  Buckingham. 

In  1704  he  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the 
Middle  Temple,  and  in  February  of  the 
next  year  he  was  committed  to  the  custody 
of  the  sexjeant-atparms  by  the  House  of 
Commons  for  pleading  for  the  plaintiffs  in 
the  Aylesbury  case.  {State  Trials,  xiv.  809.) 
In  1708  and  1714  he  was  elected  member 
of  narliament  for  Buckingham.  Taking  a 
hign  rank  in  his  profession,  he  was  on  June 
26, 1722,  appointed  a  judge  of  the  Common 
Pleas,  and  ai'ter  filling  it  with  respectability 
for  eighteen  years^  he  died  on  March  22, 
1740,  nolding  at  his  death  the  office  also  of 
chancellor  to  the  Prince  of  Wales. 

He  married  a  lady  with  a  fortune  of 
20,000/.,  named  Bond,  but  left  no  issue. 

DEKTTM,  William  de,  of  a  family  esta- 
blished in  Durham,  was  the  son  of  Kobert 
de  Denum.  Both  he  and  his  elder  brother 
John  were  Serjeants,  and  are  probably  the 
persons  who  are  generally  called  J.  and  W. 
Devom  in  the  Year  Books  of  Edward  II. 
and  III.  William,  in  the  early  part  of  the 
Teign  of  the  latter  monarch,  was  frequently 
employed  in  conducting  the  negotiations 
witn  Scotland.  In  1329  he  was  one  of  the 
Itinerant  judges  into  Nottinghamshire,  and 
in  1331  was  constituted  king's  serjeant. 
On  September  24,  1332,  he  was  made 
a  baron  of  the  Exchequer;  and  a  little 
later  in  the  same  year  Dugdale  introduces 
him  among  the  justices  of  the  King's 
Bench,  on  the  authoribr  of  a  liberate. 
But  it  is  most  probable  that  this  document 
was  nothing  more  than  the  order  for  his 
salary  as  a  baron,  the  titles  not  being 
always  clearly  distinguished.  No  entry 
occurs  relative  to  him  after  this  date,  so 
that  it  is  not  unlikely  that  he  retired  from 
the  bench  when  he  succeeded  to  the  manor 
of  Herd  wick-j  uxta-Hesilden,  and  other  large 
family  estates,  on  the  death  of  his  brother. 

He  died  in  1360,  leaving  his  wife,  Isa- 
bella, and  four  daughters.  {Surtees^s  Dur- 
ham, i.  61,  192 ;  N,  Fcedera,  ii.  704-^49 ; 
Abb.  Hot.  Oriff,  ii.  91,  261.) 

DEBBT,  WiLLiAif ,  was  a  clergyman,  and 
no  doubt  a  clerk  in  the  Exchequer.  On 
February  8,  1435,  13  Henry  VL,  he  was 
nominated  third  baron,  and  on  June  16, 
1436,  was  raised  to  the  second  seat  in  the 
court.  He  died  in  1438.  (Acta  Privy 
CmmcU,  iy.  295.) 

DE8FSVCSB,  Hugh  le,  was,  there  is  no 


DESPENGEB 

doubt,  the  descendant  of  one  who  had  been 
the  steward  of  the  king,  and  who  was,  in 
the  language  of  the  time,  called  Diapensa* 
tor,  or  le  Despencer,  which  title  became  a 
surname  of  the  family.  Dugdale  calls  Hugh 
a  grandson  of  another  Hugh,  and  the  son 
of  Thomas  (Baronage^  i.  3§9) ;  while  Col- 
lins makes  nim  the  son  of  Geoffiey,  and 
grandson  of  Thurstan.  (Peerage^  iv.  496.) 
If  the  former,  Dugdale  leaves  us  in  donht 
as  to  his  actual  ancestors ;  but  if  the  lattoy 
his  succession  from  the  steward  of  Henry  L 
is  clearly  shown. 

That  Hugh  le  Despencer,  however,  was  of 
the  baroniiu  family  of  that  name  is  mS^* 
cientlyprovedbyhis  accompanying  Richard, 
King  of  the  Eomans,  to  Germany,  in  1257 
{Rymer,  i.  355),  and  by  his  being  selected 
as  one  of  the  twelve  commissioners  on  the 

gart  of  the  barons  at  the  parliament  d 
Oxford  in  1258,  when  Hugn  Bigot  wbs 
nominated  chief  justiciary  by  them.  In  44 
Henry  IIL  he  went  as  a  justice  itinerant 
into  three  counties,  and  on  the  retirement 
of  Hugh  Bigot  at  the  latter  end  of  thst 
year  he  was  appointed  by  the  barons  to 
succeed  him.  Although  the  king,  in  the 
following  July,  on  resuming  his  authority, 
placed  FhiHp  Basset  in  the  office  of  chief 
justiciary,  Hiigh  le  Despencer  continued  to 
act  in  the  same  capaci^  on  the  part  of  the 
barons  ti]l  April  1262,  when,  an  accom- 
modation taking  place,  Philip  Basset  seenu 
to  have  been  established  in  the  office,  as  he 
certainly  performed  its  functions  during  the 
king*s  absence  in  Guienne  in  that  year. 
{Excerpt,  e  Rot.  Fin,  ii.  385,  &c) 

On  a  pretended  reconciliation  between 
the  king  and  the  barons  in  1263  Hxa^  le 
Despencer  was  again  appointed  chief  justi- 
ciary. Early  in  the  next  year  the  baron^ 
war  again  broke  out,  and  the  Earl  of  Lei- 
cester having  secured  the  citizens  of  Lonf 
don  on  his  side,  Hugh  le  Despencer,  at  the 
head  of  their  associated  bands,  destroyed 
the  houses  of  Philip  Basset  and  the  loyanit 
nobility,  imprisoned  the  judges,  and  left  the 
Jews,  after  enriching  himself  with  the  laSf 
som  of  some  of  tlie  most  wealthy,  to  the 
tender  mercies  of  the  mob.  (Lingard^  iiL  135.) 

In  the  battle  of  Lewes,  iought  on  Mav  14, 
1264,  the  chief  justiciary  distinguished  him- 
self on  the  barons*  side,  and  after  the  kingfi 
defeat  no  less  than  six  castles  were  placed 
under  Hugh's  government,  with  a  grant  of 
1000  marks  for  his  support  in  his  office* 
{Rymer,  ii.  445.) 

Li  Leland*s  '  Collectanea '  (ii.  378)  theie 
is  a  statement  that  he  afterwards  quarrelled 
with  the  Earl  of  Leicester ;  and  it  is  some- 
what curious  that  in  three  records  quoted 
by  Brady  (i.  650-1),  dated  in  Uif  aad 
June  1265,  the  title  '  Justidariiu 'it  added 
to  the  earrs  name.  This  bean  the  qnpMV* 
ance  of  the  retirement  of  Hu^  $  bnt  m  ift 
the  following  August  be  was  ua  ana  ivttk 


DEVON 

liat  nobleman,  the  difference  could  not 
lATe  been  of  long  continuance.  The  finn- 
ie»  of  his  friend^p  was  shown  at  the  battle 
>f  Evesham  on  August  4,- 1266,  when,  re- 
\ising  to  quit  the  field  before  it  began, 
Jiough  urged  by  the  earl  to  do  so,  he  and 
LeioeBter  were  slain  together. 

As  a  soldier  he  seems  to  hare  been  ya- 
litnt  and  bold ;  but  the  few  facts  that  are 
recorded  of  him  in  his  capacity  of  chief 
jufltioe  of  the  kingdom  are  marked  with  the 
liolence  and  rapacity  of  the  times. 

He  married  Alyna,  or  Aliva,  the  daughter 
md  heir  of  Philip  Basset,  of  Wicombe, 
who,  after  his  death,  became  the  wife  of 
Roger  Bigot,  Earl  of  Norfolk.  By  her  he 
left  a  son  and  a  daughter,  the  latter  of 
irhom  married  Huffh  de  Courtney,  father 
of  Hugh,  first  Earl  of  Deyon.  The  son, 
Hugb,  was  created  Earl  of  Winchester  in 
1322;  but  being  beheaded  in  1326,  his 
honours  became  forfeited.  His  grandson, 
howeyer,  was  summoned  to  parliament  by 
Edward  III. ;  but  his  successor  (who  had 
been  created  Earl  of  Gloucester  in  1397) 
was  beheaded  in  1400,  and  the  honours 
were  again  forfeited.  This  attainder  being 
reyersed  in  1461,  the  barony  was  restored 
to  his  granddaughter  Elizabeth,  the  wife  of 
Edwaid  Neyill,  and,  after  falling  seyeral 
times  into  abeyance,  still  surriyes  in  the 
present  Baroness  le  Despencer. 

DEYOV,  Earl  of.    See  H.  db  Coubte- 


DIGOES 


221 


B'ETVOOUBT,  EoMinn>,the  son  and  heir 
of  John,  who  was  lineally  descended  from 
Walter  D'Eyncourt,  who  came  oyer  with 
the  Conqueror,  and  was  royally  rewarded 
with  many  lordships  in  the  counties  of 
York,  Northampton,  Nottingham,  Derby, 
and  Lincoln,  at  his  father's  death,  m 
1257,  was  a  minor,  and  when  he  attained 
his  majority  seryed  the  king  in  his  wars  in 
Wales,  in  Gascony,  and  in  Scotland.  He 
was  summoned  to  parliament  in  27  Ed- 
ward I.  {Baronage^  l  388),  and  subscribed 
the  letter  to  the  pope  by  the  title  of  '  Do- 
miaos  de  Thuiverton.'  In  1305  he  was 
^>pointed  one  of  the  justices  of  trailbaston 
for  Lincoln  and  nine  other  coimties,  and 
throughout  the  following  reign  he  still  con- 
tinued to  act  as  a  judge.  (Pari  W.^  ii.  759.) 

He  died  in  1327,  1  Edward  lU.  His 
lands  and  title  deyolyed  by  royal  licence  on 
his  nephew  William,  the  son  of  his  brother 
John.  On  the  death  of  the  thirteenth  baron, 
m  1422,  the  barony  fell  into  abeyance,  and 
nitimately    became    forfeited.      (Nicola£$ 

%ROp«M.) 

]|IO0B8,^  DiTDLET,  whose  pedigree,  pre- 
pttad  by  himself,  commences  in  the  reign 
of  Heor^  HI.,  was  the  grandson  of  Leo- 
Btid  Digges,  'insignem  mathematicum,' 
Hid  the  son  of  Thomas,  'mathematicum 
JMJfnriswmum,'  by  Anne,  the  daughter  of 
9b  Warham  de  Sentleger.    Both  of  these 


fnrogenitors,  so  eminent  for  their  mathema-» 
tical  studies,  were  resident  at  Digges  Court, 
Barham,  in  Kent,  where  Sir  Dudley  was 
bom  in  1583.  He  was  entered  a  ^ntleman 
conunoner  of  Uniyersity  College  m  Oxford^ 
where  he  took  the  de^pree  of  B.A.  in  1601, 
and,  in  the  multitudmous  distribution  of 
honours  by  King  James,  he  was  knighted 
soon  after  the  accession. 

He  was  member  for  Tewkesbury  from 
1604  to  1611.  Part  of  this  time  he  spent 
abroad;  and  in  1611  he  is  mentioned  a» 
'  busy  with  the  discoyery  of  the  north-west 
passage,'  and  in  1614  as  'moying  eyery 
stone  to  obtain  employment.'  {Ctd,  Si, 
Papers  [16111,  06,  225.)  He  was  subse- 
quently emmoyed  on  a  mission  to  th& 
Hague.  Wnether  he  then  held  any  office 
at  court  is  uncertain ;  but  he  probably  did 
so  in  October  1615,  when  he  deposed,  on 
the  trial  of  Weston  for  the  muroer  of  Sir 
Thomas  Oyerbury.  that  the  knight  had 
imparted  to  him  nis  readiness  to  be  em* 
ployed  in  an  embassy  to  Russia,  to  which 
the  king  had  appointed  him.  He  was  cer* 
tainly  a  gentleman  of  the  king's  priyy 
chamber  in  1618,  for  he  is  so  described  in 
a  conmiission  of  that  date  appointing  him 
'ambassador  to  the  great  dulce  and  lord 
of  all  Russia,  to  treat  concerning  a  loan 
from  the  king  to  the  duke. '  Of  this  y  oyage. 
in  which  John  Tradescant  accompaniea 
him  as  a  naturalist,  there  is  a  MS.  account 
preseryed  in  the  Ashmolean  Museum. 
{Notes  and  Queries,  1st  S.  iii.  392.) 

In  the  parliament  of  1621,  so  fatal  to 
Lord  Chancellor  Bacon,  Sir  Dudley  sat 
again  for  Tewkesbury,  and  was  one  of  the 
conmiittee  that  brought  forward  the  charged 
against  the  noble  delinquent.  Though  ne 
seems  to  haye  taken  altogether  a  moderate 
and  conciliatory  part,  the  king  thought 
otherwise,  for,  though  not  included  among 
the  '  ill-tempered  spirits  *  mentioned  in  Ym 
proclamation  on  the  dissolution,  whom  he 
committed  to  the  Tower,  Sir  Dudley  and  a 
few  others  were  punished  by  beinff  sent 
into  Ireland  on  a  friyolous  commission. 
They  were  dismissed  from  their  penal  em- 
ployment in  February  1623,  receiying  each 
thirty  shillings  a  day  for  124  days  from 
October  26,  when  they  entered  on  their 
commission.     (Peil  Records,  266.) 

Archbishop  Abbot,  in  his  narratiye,  says 
that  Sir  Dudley  had  been  '  a  great  seryant' 
of  the  Duke  of  Buckingham,  who,  he  pre* 
sumes,  lost  his  friendship  for  some  un- 
worthy carriage  offered  to  him ;  and  also 
alludes  to  Sir  Dudley  being  committed  to 
the  Fleet,  and  kept  there  for  seyen  or  eight 
weeks,  without  any  known  reason  for  nis 
imprisonment.  (JRushworth,  i.  450.)  It  is 
apparent  that  these  two  persons  bore  great 
illwill  towards  each  other,  for  Sir  Dudley,  in 
the  second  parliament  of  Charles  I.  (1626), 
was  one  of  the  most  actiye  managers  oC 


222 


DIGGES 


the  impeachment  against  the  duke.  In 
the  conference  with  the  Lords,  haying 
made  some  allusion  to  the  plaister  admi- 
nistered to  the  late  king,  Buckingham  en- 
deavoured to  fasten  upon  him  expressions 
which  were  little  less  than  treason  to  the 
present  king,  and  thereupon  obtained  his 
committal  to  the  Tower.  There  was  evi- 
dently a  wilful  misrepresentation  of  the 
words  used,  and  on  the  murmured  resent- 
ment of  the  Commons,  Sir  Dudley  was 
released,  after  three  days*  detention.  (  White- 
iocke,  6.)  In  the  next  year  he  suffered  an- 
other imprisonment  in  the  Ileet,  for  some 

*  unfitting  words'  at  the  council  table.  {CaL 
St  Papers  [1627],  2, 64.) 

In  Charles's  third  parliament  (1628)  Sir 
Dudley  was  returned  for  the  county  of 
Kent,  and  took  a  prominent  part  in  for- 
warding the  Petition  of  Right,  being  ap- 
pointed to  open  the  conference  with  the 
Peers  on  the  subject  The  lord  president  in 
reporting  to  the  house  describes  him  as 

*  a  man  of  volubility  and  elegance  of  speech.' 

This  parliament  was  angnly  dissolved  in 
March  1629,  and  the  next  was  not  called 
until  eleven  years  afterwards.  In  the  in- 
terim, Sir  Julius  Ca3sar  being  a  very  old 
man,  the  reversion  of  his  office  of  master  of 
the  lloUs  had  been  granted  to  Sir  Hum- 
phrey May,  an  old  officer  and  constant  sup- 
porter of  the  court,  but  he  dying  in  four- 
teen months,  the  reversion  in  the  following 
November  (1630)  was  g^ven  to  Sir  Dudley 
Digges,  who,  though  a  strenuous  advocate 
for  the  liberty  of  the  subject,  had,  since 
the  death  of  his  enemy  the  duke,  shown  no 
deposition  to  oppose  government  measures, 
ana  had  probably  resumed  his  connection 
vrith  the  court.  On  obtaining  this  grant 
he  entered  himself  as  a  member  of  the  so- 
ciety of  Gray's  Inn,  and,  honoris  causd,  was 
immediately  made  a  bencher.  He  had  to 
wait  for  nearly  five  years  and  a  half  before 
Sir  Julius  Caesar  died ;  but  in  the  mean- 
time he  was  admitted  one  of  the  masters  in 
Chancery  on  January  22, 1631.  He  thus 
had  a  slight  opportunity  of  acquiring  some 
professional  knowledge ;  for  neither  ne  nor 
Sir  Humphrey  May,  having  never  studied 
any  branch  of  law,  could  from  their  legal 
experience  found  any  claim  to  the  judicial 
seat  On  Sir  Juliuses  death  on  April  18, 
1636,  Sir  Dudley  immediately  acceded  to 
the  office;  but oi  his  proceedings  in  it,  dur- 
ing the  three  years  of  his  possession,  there 
is  no  account. 

He  died  on  March  18,  1630,  and  was 
buried  at  Chilham,  the  manor  and  castie  of 
which  he  acquired  by  his  marriage  with 
Mary,  one  of  the  daughters  and  co-heirs  of 
Sir  Thomas  Kem^ye,  of  Ollantigh  in  the  next 
parish.  He  was  intelligent,  eloquent,  and 
ready  as  a  public  man,  and  pious,  amiable, 
and  ffenerous  in  bis  private  life.  He  pub- 
iiahed '  A  Defence  of  Trade '  during  his  life, 


DODD 

and  was  the  author  of '  The  Compleat  Am* 
bassador,'  printed  after  his  death.  The 
fiemiily  was  famous  for  literature ;  his  bro- 
ther lieonard  was  an  accompliahed  poet, 
and  is  connected  with  the  memory  of 
Shakspeare  by  his  commendatory  versei^ 
which  have  been  often  reprinted ;  and  his 
third  son  Dudley  was  also  a  good  poet  and 
linguist  His  grandson,  Sir  Maurice  Digger 
received  a  baronetcy  in  1666,  which  beoune 
extinct  within  the  year.  {AtA.  Oxon,  iL  634 ; 
Fasti,  i.  290 ;  Hasted,  vii.  265.) 

DIGHTOH.  William  de.  In  48  EdwBid 
HI.,  when  ne  had  letters  of  protectun 
granted  to  him  to  accompany  the  Duke  of 
Brittany  abroad,  he  is  called  clericus,  md 
is  described  as  'alias  dictus  WiUielfflOf 
Marmoyn.'  In  the  previous  year  his  ninML 
as  canon  of  St.  Paul's,  London,  is  attiebet 
to  the  treaty  with  the  King  of  PortogiL 
{Neio  FiBdera,  iii.  986,  1010.) 

He  was  made  keeper  of  the  privy  seal  ia 
the  early  part  of  the  reign  of  Bichard  IL; 
and  when  the  king  dismissed  Richazd  le 
Scrope  from  his  second  chanoeUoiahip^  oa 
July  11,  1382,  Dighton  was  jomed  witk 
Hugh  de  Segrave  and  John  de  Waltham  ia 
the  custody  of  the  Great  Seal,  until  a  naw 
chancellor  was  appointed,  and  they  held  it 
for  ten  weeks.  He  is  not  mentioned  later 
than  the  ninth  year  of  the  reign,  when  ke 
is  still  called  canon  of  St  Paul's.  iBMrner^ 
vii.  520.) 

DIXOH,  Nicholas,  was  in  holy  ofda% 
and  held  the  church  of  Cheshunt  in  Hert- 
fordshire for  thirty  years  from  1418.  H« 
was  then  clerk  of  the  Pipe,  and  soon  afkff 
became  sub-treasurer  of  the  Excheaner.  Hii 
next  elevation  was  to  the  bench  of  tliateoat 
on  January  26,  1423,  1  Henry  VL  (AOt 
Privy  Coundlj  iii.  22/)  He  is  mentioned  ai 
late  as  19  Henry  VI.  in  a  deed  relatuwti^ 
property  granted  to  Eichard,  Duke  of  YadL 
\lbid,  y.  136.)  His  retirement  from  (kt 
court  must  have  been  previous  to  22  Haaiy 
VI.,  as  his  name  does  not  appear  amoBg 
those  to  whom  the  usual  robes  were  tliea 
assigned  {Orig.  99) ;  but  he  lived  till  Oeto- 
ber  30, 1448,  27  Henry  VL 

He  was  buried  in  the  church  at  Cheshuo^ 
which,  together  vdth  a  chancel  defeated 
to  the  Virgin,  was  erected  by  him;  and 
his  epitaph  celebrates  both  his  justice  and 
his  charity.  (Fullers  Herts,  i.  438 ;  Chmmef, 
302.) 

DODD,  Samttel,  was  descended  from  a 
Cheshire  family,  and  was  the  son  of  R>^ 
Dod,  who  describes  himself '  Civis  et  PelBo 
Londini.'    He  was  bom  about  1652.    The 
Inner  Temple  was  his  school  of  law,  where 
he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1679,  and  ad- 
mitted to  the  bench  in  1700.     Ha  nm 
counsel  for  Dr.  Sacheverell  in  the  ilModgai 
impeachment  affainst   him  in  iniO^  mA 
pleaded  so  manmlly  and  ablj  thai  hb  ok^ 
tained  a  great  amount  of  popokn^ 


DODEBIDaE 

the  high  chuich  pftrty.     {State  Trials,  zv. 
213,  &c.) 
On  the  aoeesdon  of  George  I.  he  was  ap- 

Sainted  the  lord  chief  baron  on  Noyember 
^2j  1714,  and  knighted.  He  occupied  his 
seat  barely  seyenteen  months,  dying  on 
April  14, 1716,  when  he  was  buried  in  the 
Temple  Church.  He  left  a  manuscript  yo- 
lame  of  Reports,  which  is  preserved  among 
the  Hargraye  Collection  in  the  British 
Mu^um. 

By  his  wife  Elizabeth,  sister  and  coheir 
of  Sir  Robert  Croke,  of  Chequers,  Bucks, 
he  had  two  sons,  who  both  died  without 
issue. 

DODSRIDOS,  John,  according  to  the  more 
receiyed  opinion,  was  the  son  of  Richard 
Doderidge,  an  eminent  merchant  at  Barn- 
staple, and  Joan  Badcock,  of  South  Moulton, 
and  was  bom  at  Barnstaple  in  1555.  He 
entered  Exeter  College,  Oxford,  and,  having 
taken  the  degree  of  B.A.,  became  a  member 
of  the  Middle  Temple.  At  both  his  studies 
were  so  successful  that  Fuller  says  '  it  was 
hard  to  say  whether  he  was  better  artist, 
divine,  civil  or  common  lawyer.'  Among 
his  other  pursuits,  history  was  a  favourite 
one,  and  he  joined  the  learned  men  who 
formed  the  nucleus  of  the  Society  of  Anti- 
quaries, then  meeting  at  the  Heralds'  Col- 
lege in  Derby  House.  (HeUq.  Spdman,  69.) 
In  15U3  and  1602  he  was  selected  by  his  inn 
to  deliver  lectures  at  New  Inn.  The  sub- 
ject of  the  last  course  was  '  Advowsons  and 
Church  livings,'  published  after  his  death 
under  the  title  oi '  A  Compleat  Parson.'  In 
the  following  year  he  was  appointed  Lent 
reader  to  his  ovm  society;  and  on  January 
^  1604,  he  was  called  to  the  de^free  of  the 
ooif^  being  at  the  same  time  nommated  Ser- 
jeant to  Henry,  Prince  of  Wales.  Nine 
months  after,  on  October  28,  he  was  ap- 
pointed solicitor-general,  being  at  this  time 
representative  in  parliament  for  Horsham  in 
Soflsex. 

After  filling  the  office  of  solicitor-general 
nearly  three  years,  during  which  he  argued 
the  famous  case  of  the  post-nati  {State 
Trials,  ii.  566),  he  was  induced  on  June  25, 
1607,  to  resign  it,  and  become  ^ncipal  Ser- 
jeant to  the  king,  in  order  thatJBacon  might 
be  put  into  his  place.  For  this  accommo- 
dation he  was  knighted  on  July  5,  vrith  a 
promise  of  the  first  seat  that  should  become 
vacant  in  the  Court  of  Kind's  Bench.  This 
did  not  occur  for  the  next  five  years,  when, 
on  November  25^  1612,  he  received  his 
patent  (Qroke^  Jac,) ;  and  in  that  court  he 
eoDtinued  dunng  the  remainder  of  his  life. 

When  the  practice  of  privately  interro- 
Bting  the  judges  was  adopted.  Bacon 
(Works,  xii.  125)  tells  the  king  'that  he 
bad  foimd  Judge  Doderidge  very  ready  to 
give  opinion  in  secret,'  a  course  in  which  it 
is  lamentable  to  think  that  most  of  his  col- 
laagoea  ooncuned.    When  King  James  was 


DODERIDGE 


223 


negotiating  for  his  son's  marriage  vrith  the 
Spanish  princess,  and  was  desirous  of  show- 
ing some  leniency  to  the  Catholics,  W^ter 
Yonge  {Diary y  69)  reports  that  ^  Judge 
Doderidge  saith  he  thought  they  [the 
judges]  should  find  out  a  way  by  law  to 
dispense  with  the  statute  against  recu- 
sancy.' This  spirit  of  accommodating  their 
opinions  to  the  royal  wishes  was  fiirther 
shown  when  the  judges  refused  to  admit 
Hampden  and  others  to  bail  for  refusing  to 
subscribe  to  the  late  loan.  On  their  being 
called  before  the  House  of  Lords  m  April 
1628  to  assign  the  reasons  for  their  judg- 
ment. Judge  Doderidge,  though  he  at- 
tempted to  justify  the  decision,  seemed  to 
acknowledge  the^  had  committed  a  mistake, 
by  thus  apologetically  concluding :  '  Omnia 
habere  in  memoria,  et  in  nullo  errare,  di- 
vinum  potius  est  <^uam  humanum.'  {Pari 
Hist.  ii.  291.)  This  speech  exhibits  some- 
what of  the  drivelling  of  an  old  and  failing 
man ;  but  in  it  he  says,  *  God  knoweth  I 
have  endeavoured  always  to  keep  a  good 
conscience,'  an  assertion  which  is  bome  out 
by  the  ^neral  tenor  of  his  life.  He  had 
the  habit  of  shutting  his  eyes  while  sitting 
on  the  bench,  for  the  purpose  of  concen- 
trating his  attention  on  the  argument,  with- 
out being  distracted  by  surroimding  objects, 
and  was  thence  jocularly  called  the  Sleeping 
Judge. 

He  survived  his  appearance  in  the  House 
of  Lords  only  five  months,  dying  on  Sep- 
tember 13, 1*628,  at  Forsters,  near  Egham, 
in  Surrey,  and  was  buried  in  the  Lady 
chapel  in  Exeter  Cathedral,  where  there  is 
a  stately  monument  erected  to  his  and  his 
wife's  memory. 

Croke,  in  recording  his  death,  describes 
him  as  '  man  of  great  knowledge,  as  well  in 
common  law  as  in  other  humane  sciences, 
and  divinity'  {Croke,  Car,  127^,  and  Fuller 
(i.  282)  says  of  him, '  His  soul  consisted  of 
two  essentials,  ability  and  integrity,  hold- 
ing the  scale  of  justice  with  so  steady  a 
hand  that  neither  love  nor  lucre,  fear  or 
flattery,  could  bow  him  on  either  side.' 
But  it  must  be   acknowledged   that    in 
several  instances  be  betrayed  tiiat  subeervi- 
I  ence  to  the  ruling  powers  for  which  the 
i  judicial  bench  was  then  remarkable.    He 
composed  a  variety  of  works,   legal  and 
!  antiquarian,  none  of  which  were  published 
,  in  his  lifetime,  and  some  of  whicn  still  re- 
I  main  in  manuscript. 

He  married  three  wives,  but  outlived 
I  them  all.  His  first  wife  was  a  daughter 
'^  of —  Germin ;  his  second  was  a  daughter 
j  of— Cullum,  of  Canon's  Leigh  in  Devon- 
{  shire ;  and  the  third  was  Dorothy,  daughter 
of  Sir  Amias  Bampfield,  of  North  Molton^ 
,  and  widow  of  Edward  Hancock,  of  Combe 
I  Martin,  Esq.  By  the  two  former  he  had 
I  no  issue,  and  by  the  latter  only  one  son, 
-  who  died  before  him.    He  was  succeeded 


224 


DOLBEN 


in  his  property  by  his  brother,  Pentecost 
Doderioge,  of  Barnstaple,  whose  son  became 
recorder  of  that  town,  and  edited  one  of 
his  uncle's  tracts  concerning  Parliament/ 
{Athen,  Oxon.  iL  426.) 

DOLBEH,  William,  of  an  ancient  and  re- 
spectable Denbighshire  family,  was  the  son 
of  John,  Archbishop  of  York,  and  brother  of 
Gilbert,  the  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  in 
Ireland  from  1700  to  1719,  who  was  created 
a  baronet  by  Queen  Anne. 

He  pursued  his  legal  studies  at  the  Inner 
Tempk,  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1653,  and 
was  elected  a  bencher  in  1672,  and  autumn 
reader  in  1677.  His  legal  merits  probably 
procured  him  a  royal  recommendation  for 
the  recordership  of  the  city  of  London,  to 
which  he  was  elected  on  February  8, 1676, 
and  knighted.  He  held  the  place  till  he 
was  adyanced  to  the  bench,  when  the  cor- 
poration yoted  him  a  piece  of  plate  '  as  a 
foying  remembrance.' 

In  1677  he  was  the  first-named  Serjeant, 
and  was  immediately  made  one  of  the  king's 
Serjeants.  On  October  23,  1678,  he  was 
constituted  a  jud^e  of  the  King's  Bench; 
and  it  was  his  misfortune  to  sit  under  Sir 
William  Scroggs  as  chie^  and  to  be  present 
at  all  the  trials  arising  out  of  the  Popish 
Plot,  in  tiie  existence  of  which,  as  far  as  it 
appears,  he  had  a  firm  belief.  But  he  saw 
and  fairly  pointed  out  the  inconsisten- 
cies and  improbabilities  of  the  evidence 
against  Sir  Thomas  Gascoigne,  which  re- 
sulted in  an  acquittal ;  and  at  the  trial  of 
Sir  Thomas  Stapleton  at  York  for  hiffh 
treason  he  summed  up  fayourably  for  the 

firisoner,  who  was  thereupon  acquitted. 
State  Trials,  vi.  1321,  yii.  064,  yiii.  326, 
623.)  Being  found  to  be  too  independent, 
and  suspected  of  not  siding  with  the  crown 
in  its  attempt  against  the  charter  of  the 
city  of  London,  he  was,  according  to  the 
yicious  practice  of  the  time,  suddenly  super- 
seded on  April  20,  1683,  just  betore  the 
j  udgment  against  the  dty  was  pronounced. 
Whether  he  returned  to  the  oar  is  un- 
certain. 

At  the  Revolution  Sir  William  Dolben 
was  replaced  in  his  former  seat  on  March 
11,  1689.  On  the  20th  of  the  following 
month,  in  delivering  a  charge  to  the  grand 
jury  in  the  Kind's  ^nch.  Narcissus  Luttrell 
says  that  *he  mveiphed  mightily  against 
the  corruption  of  juries  the  last  seven  years, 
and  gave  in  charge  the  laws  against  Pa- 
pists.^ The  same  diarist  records  (i.  600, 
627,  ii.  263,  260,  262)  that  on  a  similar 
occasion  m  1001  he  directed  the  grand  jury 
*  to  enquire  into  malecontents  to  the  govfem- 
ment,  such  as  disturbed  the  peace  of  the 
kingdom  by  dispersing  seditious  and  false 
news.'  lie  died  on  January  26,  1694, 
seized  with  an  apoplectic  fit  while  going 
into  court,  and  was  buried  in  the  Temple 
Church. 


DORMER 

D0HCA8TSB,  JoHN  DS,  in  28Edwaid  L 
was  a  commissioner  of  array  in  Yorkahixe. 
He  was  summoned  to  attend  the  oa«-> 
mony  of  the  coronation  of  Edward  XL,  ud 
also  was  included  in  the  list  of  jod^  and 
others  called  to  assist  at  the  pariianienta 
from  the  first  year  of  that  reign.  In  1810 
he  was  appointed  a  judge  of  assize  for  the 
northern  counties,  and  he  ia  named  is 
various  judicial  commissions  during  the* 
next  seven  years. 

On  June  6, 1319,  he  was  raised  to  tiw 
bench  of  the  Common  Pleas ;  but  the  fines 
levied  before  him  in  that  court  do  not  ex- 
tend beyond  the  next  year,  and  he  was  not 
summoned  to  parliament  after  the  eiriy 
part  of  the  fourteenth  year.  He  was  pR>* 
oably  at  that  time  removed  from  the  coox^ 
although  he  was  named  in  a  spedal  eooK 
mission  for  trying  some  forest  ofienoes  n 
his  own  county  two  years  afterwards. 

He  was  alive  in  6  Edward  HI.,  iihm    , 
the  king  confirmed  certain  grants  wldck 
had  been  made  to  him  and  his  wife  A]id%     ^ 
and  their  heirs,  by  the  Earl  of  Somj.     "^ 
Cl'arl.   Writs,  i.  345,  ii.  p.  ii,  781 :  M. 
Rot.  Grig.  ii.  62, 66.)  ^ 

DOSXEB,  Robert,  a  descendant  of  the-    ■ 
BucMnghainshire  family  of  that  namSyS     • 
branch  of  which  was  ennobled  by  James  I, 
with  the  title  of  Lord  Dormer  of  Wensv    : 
which  has  flourished  ever  since,  was  ny  j— 
grandson  of  Sir  Fleetwood  Dormer,  and  tip     \ 
second  son  of  John  Dormer,  of  Ley  Giangs     L 
and  Purston,  a  barrister,  by  Katherioe,     ^ 
daughter  of  Thomas  Woodward,  of  Itipplft     ^ 
in  Worcestershire.    To  his  elder  InotMr 
John,  Charles  U.   in    1661    presented  a 
baronetcy,  which  became  extinct  in  1796u 
Robert  was   bom  in  1640,  and,  harinf 
entered  Lincoln's  Inn,  was  OBiUed  to  tM 
bar  in  1676.    He  is  mentioned  as  inaior 
counsel  for  the  crown  in  several  tnak  in 
1680,  and  was  soon  afterwards  constitntei 
chancellor  of  Durham. 

In  1698  he  represented  Aylesbuiy,  ia 
1701  the  county  of  Bucks,  and  in  iTtt 
Northallerton.  In  the  great  question! of 
Ashby  and  White  he  opposed  the  asnmied 
privilege  of  the  House  of  Commons,  whidi 
would  have  prevented  an  elector  from  pn>- 
ceeding  at  common  law  for  the  injuiy  he 
sustained  by  the  'returning  officer  refusing 
his  vote,  bn  January  8,  1706,  he  was 
made  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas,  and 
sat  there  nearly  one-and-twen^  1^^^}  ^ 
his  death  on  September  18,  1726. 

His  seat  was  at  Arle  Court,  near  Chd- 
tenham.  His  marriage  with  Mary,  daughter 
of  Sir  Richard  Blake,  of  London,  prodoeed 
him  four  daughters  only,  one  of  when 
married  Lord  Fortescue  of  Credan«  aad 
another  John  Parkhurst,  of  Cateabj  la 
Northamptonshire,  the  father  of  the  anAor 
of  the  Oreek  Lexicon  to  the  New  Taili* 
ment  (Atkynt'$  Okmeatmk  174;  &  Md^ 


TiL  967,  1188;  Fktrt.  IRtt.  vi.  267;  Lard 
Haynnrnd,   1260,   1420;    LuUreU,  tI.  15; 
GaU.  Mag.  Ixx.  615.) 
D0X8XT,  £abl  of.    SeiOsvuvp. 
DOUBBIDGS,  or  DOUnBBIOOS,  WiL- 
lAhMy  was  appointed  a  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer on  May  12, 1380, 12  Richard  U., 
having  previoualy  held  the  office  of  auditor 
of  the  jEIxchequer,  in  which  he  waa  paid 
6«.  8c/.  a  day  for  going  to  Lostwithiel  to 
audit  the  accounts  of  Cornwall  and  Deyon. 
It   seems   nrobable    that  he  died  in  17 
Richard   II.     {Ctd,  JRot.  Pat.  115,  117; 
Dmm'9  Issues  Exch.  223,  236.) 

IWYEB,  JoHsr  DE.  and  his  companions, 
made  the  assize  of  the  king's  demesnes  in 
Warwickshire  and  Leicestershire  in  20 
HeniT  IL,  1174,  as  the  justices  errant 
for  those  counties.  (Madox,  i.  125.)  He 
was  the  son  of  William  de  Dover,  and 
nephew  of  Hugh  de  Dover,  Lord  of  Chil- 
ham  in  Kent,  to  whom  his  son  Fulbert  de 
Dover  eventually  became  heir.  (Madox, 
L  97,  125,  262,  630 ;  Ard^,  Cantuma,  iv. 
214.)  The  family  became  extinct  in  the 
leign  of  Edwud  I. 

DXAYTOH,  Nicholas    de,  an    ecclesi- 
astic, was  probably  the  son  or  nephew  of 
the  already  mentioned  Thomas  de  Brayton, 
who  was  sometimes  called  de  Dravton,  to 
whom  the  Great  Seal  of  Edward  III.  was 
occasionally  entrusted  in  the  absence  of  the 
chancellor.    On  December  1, 1363,  he  was 
appointed  custos  of  the  scholars  supported 
ihr  the  royal  bounty  at  the  Aula  Regis  in 
dambridge  {N,  Fadera,  iii.  717) ;   and  a 
few  years  afterwards  he  was  a  disciple  of 
John  Wickliffe,  and  had  the  greater  ex- 
oommunication  fulminated  against  him  by 
SudbiuT,  Bishop  of  London,  for  promul- 
luting  among  the  people  errors  against  the 
articles  of  the  Catholic  faith ;  and  whom 
the  king,  on  March  20,  1370,  authorised 
that    prelate  to  incarcerate  until  he  re- 
nounced his  heresies.     (Ibid.  880.)    How 
he  purged  himself  does  not  appear ;  but  it 
is  by  no  means  surpiiaing  that  he  should 
have  been  raised  to  the  bench  of  the  £jc- 
chequer  on  November  14, 1376,  60  Edward 
in.,  and  been  continued  there  in  the  fol- 
lowing June,  on  the  accession  of  Richard 
IL,  aince  the  authority  of  John  of  Gaunt,  i 
Doke  of  Lancaster,  who  partook  of  the  I 
same    opinions,  was   paramount    at  both  ! 
the^  dates.  | 

HBATTOV.    See  T.  de  Braytox.  I 

DB0E8,  HroH  de,  was  appointed  one  of  | 
the  two  coroners  of  Wiltshire  in  7  Henry 
IIL,  and  it  was  no  doubt  in  that  character 
that  two  years  afterwards  his  name  was 
added  to  the  list  of  justices  itinerant  for 
that  county.  In  10  Henry  HI,  1226,  he 
was  one  of  thoee  appointed  to  take  an 
amize  at  Devizes  as  to  the  last  presenta- 
tion of  the  church  of  Harrendon,  and  to 
collect  the  quinzime  of  the  county.    He 


DROKENESFORD 


225 


was  still  aUve  in  20  Henry  III.,  when  he 
assessed  the  tallage  there.  (HaC.  Clans,  i. 
560,  u.  76, 136,  140,  146.) 

DBOCK)  is  the  last  witness  in  a  charter  of 
William  II.  granting  the  church  of  And- 
over  to  the  monks  of  St.  Flcnrentius,  and 
is  there  described  with  the  words  'qui 
custodiebat  sigillum;'  Galdric  was  chan- 
cellor at  the  time,  being  the  second  wit- 
ness to  it ;  so  that  it  is  (ufficult  to  explain 
the  nature  of  the  office  held  bv  Drogo, 
unless,  if  the  '  sigillum '  mentioned  was  the 
royal  seal,  he  was  merely  the  officer  atten- 
dant on  the  chancellor,  whose  dutv  it  was 
to  cany  it.  This  is  the  less  imlikely,  from 
the  fact  that  no  previous  evidence  exists  of 
any  such  appointment  as  keeper  of  the  seal, 
either  independent  of  or  in  connection  with 
the  chancellor,  and  from  his  position  at  the 
end  of  the  list  of  witnesses.  The  charter 
has  no  date,  but  was  probably  granted  in  or 
soon  after  1093.     (Mmuut.  vi.  992.) 

DBOKEKSSFOSD.  JoHN  DE  (BisHOP  OF 
Bath  a5d  Wells),  was  keeper  of  the 
king^s  wardrobe,  and  on  the  chancellor's 
resignation  on  August  12, 1302, 30  Edward 
I.,  the  Great  Seu  was  placed,  as  was  the 
usual  custom,  under  his  care  in  the  ward" 
robe,  but  with  no  power  to  use  it,  and 
eleven  days  after  it  was  given  to  Adam  de 
Osgodby,  the  master  of  the  Rolls. 

Ue  possessed  the  manor  of  Eston  Crok, 
in  the  forest  of  Chute,  and  had  a  licenct? 
to  impark  his  wood  of  Ilorsley  there  and 
eighty  acres  in  addition.  He  had  als<^ 
grants  from  the  king  amounting  to  260 
acres  in  Wolneraere  and  Windsor  forest jj. 
(CaL  Hot.  Pat.  65,  62.) 

He  evidently  had  previously  filled  some 
office  in  the  Treasury  or  the  Exchequer,  as  ho 
is  mentioned  in  1296  as  the  locum  tenens  of  the 
treasurer,  an  office  to  which  he  was  again 
appointed  in  1306,  in  which  year  he  is  also 
described  as  pleading  for  the  king  in  a  suit 
relative  to  the  manor  of  Woodhull  in  Bed- 
fordshire. He  retained  the  office  of  keeper 
of  the  wardrobe  till  the  end  of  that  reign, 
when  it  would  appear  that  in  1  Edward  II. 
he  exchanged  it  with  John  de  Benstede  for 
the  office  of  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer. 
{Madox,  i.  72,  325,  ii.  71, 324 ;  Abb.  Plaa't. 
2o6,  293.) 

Ilis  ecclesiastical  preferment  consisted  at 
this  time  of  a  canonnr  in  the  cathedral  of 
AVells,  and  he  was  sLbo  a  chaplain  to  the 
pope ;  but  in  the  next  vear  he  was  elected 
Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells,  and  was  con- 
secrated on  November  9,  1309.  King  Ed- 
ward II.  entrusted  him  with  the  care  of 
the  kingdom  when  he  went  into  France  in 
1312,  but  he  afterwards  joined  the  partisans 
of  the  queen  against  her  husband. 

The  nineteen  years  of  his  rule  were 
continually  disturbed  by  contests  with  the 
canons  of  his  church.  He  died  at  Dogmers- 
field  in  1329,  and  was  interred  in  the  chapel 


226 


DUKET 


of  St  Catherine  in  bis  own  cathedral. 
(Godwin,  375.) 

DUKST,  RiCHASDy  was    probably^  the 
son  of  Nicholas  Duket,    chamberlain  of 
London  in  the  xeign  of  Richard  L  {Madoxj 
i.  776.)    He  held  an  office  in  the  court,  his 
name  frequently  appearing  on  grants  in 
5  to  8  John.    (jRoe.  OatM.  L  4-730    In  the 
latter  year,  being  then    called  'clericus 
noster/  he  received  a  grant  of  an  annual 
pension  of  five  marks  out  of  the  abbey  of 
Whitby.   (/Wa.83.)   In  6  and  7  Henry  IIL 
he  was  sheriff  of  ^e  counties  of  Norfolk 
and  Suffolk.    In  1225  he  was  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  commissioned  to  several 
counties,  and  while  performing  this  duty 
in  Norfolk  and  Suffolk  he  was  summoned 
to  the  king  to  undertake  an  embassy  to  the 
court  of  IU>me,  whither  he  proceeded  with 
Philip  de  Hadham.  In  the  next  year  and  till 
17  H^nry  lU.  he  was  still  employed  as  a 
justice  itinerant,  and  from  the  numerous 
commissions  in  which  his  name  thus  occurs 
through  so  many  jears,  and  the  position 
which  he  occupies  m  them,  it  is  not  impro- 
bable that  he  was  at  this  time  one  of  the  re- 
gular justiciers  at  Westminster.  His  death 
occurred  about  1245,  when  his  son  Hugh 
did  homage  for  his  lands  in  Lincolnshire. 
(lUd,  77,  ii.  68,  78,  103,  141,  151,  213  j 
Orig,  104;  Excerpt,  e  lU.  Fin.  i.  446.) 

DITBEDENT,  Walter,  is  only  known 

♦  as  a  resident  in  Buckinghamshire,  and  as 

acting  as  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  for 

that  county  in  9  Henry  UI.    (JRot,  Claw, 

i.  375,  ii.  77.) 

DTTBEIC,  John,  was  appointed  one  of  the 
barons  of  the  Exchequer  m  1449,  27  Henry 
VL,  and  remained  in  his  seat  till  the 
restoration  of  that  monarch  in  1470,  but 
does  not  appear  to  have  been  reappomted 
on  the  return  of  Edward  in  the  following 
year.  He  died  between  that  date  and 
1476,  when  his  widow,  Elizabeth,  made 
her  will,  bv  which  it  appears  that  they 
left  a  son  Thomas  and  two  daughters,  and 
that  he  possessed  property  at  VVenaover 
in  Bucks,  and  also  in  the  counties  of  North- 
ampton, Bedford,  and  Huntingdon.  He 
was  buried  in  the  church  of  St.  Bartho- 
lomew in  Smithfield.     {Test,  Vetus,  342.) 

DTEB,  James,  was  bom  at  Roundhill  m 
Somersetshire  about  the  year  1512.  His 
fether,  Richard  Dyer,  of  Wincalton,  was  of 
an  honourable  family,  which  produced  in  a 
senior  branch  Sir  Edward  Dyer,  the  author 
of  several  poems,  and  an  especial  fiEtvourite 
of  Queen  Elizabeth,  who  conferred  on 
him  the  chancellorship  of  the  Garter.  His 
mother's  name  was  Walton.  He  is  said  to 
have  been  educated  at  Broadgate's  Hall, 
Oxford,  on  the  site  of  which  Pembroke 
College  was  afterwards  founded,  and  went 
from  thence,  first,  to  New  Inn,  and  then  to 
the  Middle  Temple.  He  must  have  been 
called  to  the  bar  before  the  year  1537,  as 


DTEB 

he  is  then  first  motioned  aa  an  advocate 
in  his  own  Reports. 

On  May  19,  1552,  he  received  his  writ 
to  ti^e  upon  himself  the  degree  of  the  &M 
in  tiie  following  Micha/elmas  Term;  and 
in  the  interval^  aoooiding  to  a  common 
custom  of  the  time,  he  was  appointed 
autumn  reader  to  his  society.  The '  Statute 
of  Wills'  was  the  subject  of  his  reading. 
He  was  admitted  to  the  degree  of  the  coif 
on  October  17, 1552,  and  the  ceremony  was 
remarkable  as  the  ^t  recorded  instance  of 
a  motto  being  inscribed  on  the  rings  jfn- 
sented,  that  Mlopted  on  this  occamon  being 
'  Plebs  sine  leffe  ruit'  (Dyer,  11.)  But  it 
appears,  thou^  not  recorded,  that  it  was  an 
ancient  practice,  and  instances  occur  in  the 
reigns  of  Henry  VIL  and  VIIL  (See  Sib 
John  FiNErx  and  Snt  Edwakd  Moktaou.) 
Within  a  month  he  was  nominated  one  of 
the  king's  Serjeants,  and  in  March  1553  he 
was  returned  member  for  Cambridgeshire, 
and  elected  speaker  of  the  last  parHament 
of  Edward's  reign.  His  next  honour  was 
the  recordership  of  Cambridge,  and  he  was 
soon  after  knignted.  On  May  8,  1557,  he 
was  constituted  a  judge  of  the  Gommoa 
Pleas.  Another  patent,  dated  Apiil  28, 
1558,  appointed  hmi  a  judge  of  the  King's 
Bench  during  pleasure — a  temporary  ap- 
pointment, without  removing  him  from 
the  Common  Pleas,  made  for  the  sole  pur- 
pose of  his  keeping  the  essoign  of  Easter 
Term,  instead  of  Justice  Francis  Moigan, 
who  was  too  ill  to  perform  the  dutv.  A 
question  was  mooted  whether  Dyei^s  first 
patent  was  not  renderod  void  by  this  new 
patent;  and,  as  this  was  decided  in  the 
affirmative  (Dyer,  143,  158),  it  is  nune 
than  probable  that  Judge  Dyer  was  at  once 
restored  bv  a  new  patent  to  the  Commoo 
Pleas.  This  view  is  strengthened  by  the 
facts  that  a  fine  was  levied  before  lum  in 
Trinitjr  Term  following  (Orig.  48),  and 
that  on  the  accession  of  Queen  Elixabedi 
in  November  his  patent  was  for  that  court 

Queen  Mary's  death  took  place  in  the 
middle  of  Michaelmas  Term,  and  the  new 
patents  to  all  the  then  existing  judges  were 
issued  on  the  following  day.  But  before 
the  commencement  of  the  next  term  the 
two  chief  justices,  who  were  Catholics, 
were  removed  to  a  lower  grade,  and  Judge 
Dyer  was  promoted  to  the  head  of  the 
Common  Pleas  on  January  22, 1559.  Hers 
he  presided  till  his  death,  on  March  24, 
158^,  a  period  of  more  than  twenty-three 
years,  durinfif  which  the  law  was  admi- 
nistered in  nis  court  and  on  the  clrcait 
with  such  efficiency,  firmness,  and  patience 
as  not  only  to  secure  the  confidence  and 
admiration  of  his  contemporaries,  but  also 
to  fix  a  gloxy  round  his  name  which  three 
centuries  have  failed  to  dim.  His  judicial 
manner  is  thus  described  b^  George  Whet- 
stone, who  sung  his  praises  in  a  long  lament, 


DYER 

'which,  written  when  flattery  would  he 
unprofitable,  is  more  yaluahle  than  any 
«pitaph : — 

Settled  to  heare,  bat  very  ilowe  to  speake. 
Till  either  part.  At  laige^  his  minde  did  br«ake. 

And  when  be  spake^  he  was  in  speeche  repoft*d ; 
His  ercs  did  search  the  simple  sutor^s  harte ; 
To  pat  by  bribes  hii  hinds  were  ever  closde. 
His  processe  jost,  he  took  the  poore  man's 

parte; 
He  ml*d  by  lawe  and  listned  not  to  arte ; 
Thcfle  foes  to  trath,, — ^love,  hate,  and  private  f^dne. 
With  moat  oorrnpt,  his  conscience  would  not 
staine. 

The  friendleis  wight,  which  did  offend  through 
need. 
He  evermore  with  mercy  did  respect ; 
The  prowdcr  thiefe,  that  did  his  trespasse  feede, 
Throogh  trnste  in  friendes,  with  scooige  of 

lawe  he  checkt ; 
For  by  the  lanlt,  not  friendes  he  did  direct. 
Thus  he.  with  grace,  the  poore  man*s  love  did 

drawe. 
And  by  sharpe  meanes  did  keepe  the  prowde  in 


DYVE 


227 


This  last  point  of  Im  character  was  per- 
liaps  soirgested  by  the  energy  he  displayed 
at  the  Warwick  assizes  in  1574  in  support- 
ing a  poor  widow  against  the  oppression  of 
a  rich  knight  of  that  county,  wnoee  illegal 
proceedings  were  assisted  by  the  bench  of 
magistrates  there :  the  particulars  of  which 
are  related  in  the  life  or  the  judge  prefixed 
to  hia  Reports,  edited  by  John  Vaillant, 
Esq. :  tcmther  with  his  reply  to  the  articles 
exhibited  against  him  to  the  privy  council 
hy  the  an^  msffistrates,  whose  punith- 
ment  or  dismissal  of  the  complaint  does 
not  appear,  but  is  alluded  to  by  Lord  Chief 
Justice  Sir  Edward  Montagu  in  Wmyn- 
ham*s  case  in  1618.  (StaU  TriaU/u.lOSO.) 
The  judge  continued  to  be  an  ornament  to 
the  Denoi  for  nearly  eight  years  afterwards. 
He  was  buried  in  the  parish  church  of  Great 
i:;toiighton  in  Huntmgdonshire.  under  a 
handsome  monumentsSll  existing. 

His  KeportSy  which  extend  from  4  Henry 
VnL  to  the  period  of  his  death,  are  re- 
markable for  tneir  conciseness  and  accuracy. 
They  were  first  published  in  French  three 
years  after  he  died,  and  several  editions  have 
iinoe  issued  from  the  press.  That  of  1688 
was  illustrated  bv  marginal  notes  and  re- 
liaeDoeB  by  Chief  Justice  Trebv ;  and  that 
of  17&4y  the  edition  now  used,  is  an  £n- 
gfish  translation  by  John  Vaillant,  Esq., 
with  vainable  additions  of  modem  cases, 
and  preceded  bv  a  life  of  the  author. 
He  manied  iLargaret,  the  daughter  of  Sir 


Maurice  a  Barrow,  of  Hampshire,  and  widow 
of  Sir  Thomas  Elvot,  the  celebrated  author 
of  the  *  Boke  of  the  Govenour,'  but  left  no 
children ;  and  on  his  death  his  mansion  in 
Charterhouse  churchyard  and  his  estate  at 
Great  Stoughton  descended  to  Sir  Richard 
Dyer,  bis  great-nephew,  whose  gprandson 
Ludovick  was  created  a  baronet  m  1627, 
but  the  title  became  extinct  at  his  death. 
(Whetdone'sFbem;  VmUaWsLife;  Athen. 
Oxon.  I  480.) 

DTXOCX,  AiTDBEW,  descended  from  a 
branch  of  the  fiunily  of  Sir  John  Dvmodc, 
who  acquired  the  manor  of  Scrivelsby  in 
Lincolnshire  in  tiia  reign  of  Edward  ill., 
and  held  it  by  the  service  of  being  the 
king's  champion  at  the  coronation,  was  con* 
stituted  solicitor-general  in  1486, 1  Henry 
Vn. ;  but,  as  his  name  is  never  mentioned 
in  tbe  Year  Books,  his  duties  were  proba- 
bly confined  to  the  advocacy  of  the  Jong's 
I  interests  in  the  Excheauer.  To  the  second 
j  barony  in  that  court  he  was  preferred  on 
May  2, 1496, 11  Henry  VII.,  andfiUed  the 
seat  till  the  16th  year  of  that  reign. 

He  married  Elizabeth,  daughter  and  one 
of  the  coheirs  of  Sir  Peter  Ardem.  (  CaL  St, 
Papers  [1609],  190.) 

DYYE,  William  db,  sometimes  called 
Dyne,  is  mentioned  by  Dugdale  as  a  justice 
of  the  Kinff*s  Bench  in  1321-2,  on  the 
authority  of  a  passage  from  Leland*s '  Col* 
lectanea '  (i.  p.  iL  275)  ;  but,  referring  to  it, 
we  find  that  Geoffrey  de  Say  and  William 
de  DynCf  '  justiciarii  regis,'  are  stated  by 
Gervas  of  Canterbury  to  have  been  sent 
into  Kent  to  enquire  '  de  fautoribus  Bade- 
lesmer.'  Now  the  term  Musticiarius 
regis '  was  at  that  time  applied,  not  only 
to  the  judges  of  the  two  benches  and  the 
justices  of  assize,  but  also  to  any^  others 
who  were  appointed  on  a  special  judicial 
commission ;  and  it  is  not  improbable  that 
such  a  commission,  although  no  record  of 
it  has  yet  appeared,  may  have  been  issued 
to  those  two  gentlemen  to  try  the  adherents 
of  Bartholomew  de  Badlesmere,  who  was 
executed  for  treason  in  that  year.  Though 
there  ii  nothing  whatever  to  show  that 
William  de  Dyve,  or  Dyne,  was  connected 
with  the  courts  at  Westminster,  it  has 
been  deemed  right,  on  Dugdale's  authority, 
to  introduce  his  name. 

There  were  two  families  of  that  name, 
one  settled  in  Northampton,  and  the  other 
lords  of  the  manors  ot   DockHngton  and 
I  Dadington  in  Oxfordshire. 


228 


E 


EBBOICIB,  SiEPHSV  DE  (Evreux),  was 
appointed  by^  a  mandate  of  4  Henry  III. 
(icot,  Clatts.  i.  437),  with  three  others,  one 
of  the  justices  to  deliver  the  gaols  of  Here- 

iord  oi  all  the  prisoners  therein  detained. 
!t  is  evident,  however,  that  he  was  only 
included  in  this  commission  on  account  of 
his  bein^  a  knight  residing  in  that  county,  j 
where  his  principal  seat  was  the  castle  of  i 
LenhalL    (jRot,  Chart.  166.)    For  his  lands 
at  Badelingham  he  was  accustomed  to  pay 
annually  thirty-two  gallons  of  honey  to  the 
castle  of  Hereford,  a  charge  from  which  he 
was  for  ever  released  in  17  John.     (Hot,  \ 
Oaus.  ii.  188.)    He  died  in  12  Henry  III. ' 
{Excerpt  e  Rot.  Fin.  i.  168.) 

EDEVE8T0WS,  Henbt  de,  so  called  from  \ 
a  place  of  that  name  in  the  county  of  Not-  I 
tingham,  now  Edwinstowe,  where  he  had 
possessions   (Col.   Inquis.  p.  m.    ii.  102), 
was  a  clerk  in  the  Chancery  in  18  Edward 
II.,  1325,  and  in  4  and  6  Edward  UI.  he 
acted  as  clerk  of  the  parliament.     {Rot. 
Pari.  i.  420/ii.  62,  68.)    In  the  latter  year 
and  on  several  occasions  the  Great  Seal  was 
placed  in  the  custody  of  the  master  of  the  i 
Kolls,  in  the   absence   of  the  chancellor,  ! 
under  the  seals  of  two  of  the  clerks,  of 
whom   Henry    de    Edenestowe  was  one 
(Hardy's  Catal);  and  in  20  Edward  III., 
1346,  he  is  named  for  a  loan  to  the  king  of ; 
100/.     (N.  Fwdera,  m.  G9.)  ' 

SDEHHAX,  Gboffrey  de,  had  property 
in  Lincolnshire,  where  there  is  a  parish  of 
that  name.  He  was  made  a  jud^  of  the 
King's  Bench  on  January  18, 1331,  4  Ed- 
ward ni.,  and  is  last  mentioned,  Tv-ith 
Thomas  de  Longevillers,  as  possessing  the 
manor  of  Aykle  in  Lincolnshire  in  16 
Edward  III.  {Abb.  Rot.  Grig.  ii.  110, 
138 ;  Rot.  Pari.  ii.  446 :  Cal.  Inquis.  p.  m. 
ii.  106.) 

EDIKOTOH,  William  de  CBisnop  op 
WiircHEsraR),  was  bom  at  Edington,  a  ' 
parish  in  Wiltshire,  where,  when  he  be-  j 
came  Bishop  of  Winchester,  he  built  a  : 
church  and  founded  a  large  chantry-  for  I 
a  dean  and  twelve  ministers.  (Monak.  vi.  ! 
535.) 

He  was  educated  at  Oxford,   and  was  ; 
presented  in  1336  to  the  living  of  Cheriton  ' 
in  Hampshire,  and  also  had  a  canonry  in 
Salisbury  Cathedral.  *       ' 

In  1341  he  was  receiver  of  the  ninth 
granted  by  parliament  (X.  Pondera,  ii. 
1164),  and  in  1343  he  was  keeper  of  the  ! 
king's  wardrobe.  On  April  10,  1344,  he  ' 
was  appointed  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer, 
from  which  he  was  raised,  at  the  end  of 
two  years,  to   the  high  and  responsible 


office  of  treasurer.  (Cal.  Rat.  PnL  147, 
164.)  This  he  held  for  no  less  than  ten 
vears,  and  then  only  exchanged  it  for  the 
bigher  post  of  chancellor. 

On  the  death  of  Adam  de  Orlton  he  wy 
placed  in  the  vacant  see  of  Winchester,  hj 
papal  provision  in  his  favour  dated  De- 
cember 9,  1346 ;  but  he  was  wise  enough 
to  renounce  the  ^ne*s  nomination  as  pre- 
judicial to  the  rignts  of  the  crown;  lod 
the  king,  *  of  his  special  favour,  and  not 
by  virtue  of  the  said  bulls,'  accepted  his 
fealty,  and  restored  the  temponuitieB  to 
him  on  the  16th  of  the  following  Fehrairv. 
(Cal.  Rot.  Pat.  163 ;  N.  Fcedera,  iiL  89,64, 
09 ;  Devon's  Isstie  Roll,  160.) 

His  treasurcrship  was  illustrated  by  the 
unfortunate  introduction  of  two  new  cdm, 
called  a  groat  and  a  half-gioat,  the  reil 
worth  of  which  was  so  much  less  this 
their  nominal  value  as  to  produce  a  cat- 
responding  increase  in  the  price  of  aE 
articles  of  consumption  throughout  th» 
kingdom. 

On  the  institution  of  the  order  of  th6  - 
Garter  in  134«0  Edward  constituted  hot  ^ 
the  prelate  of  it,  perpetuating  the  dignity  ■ 
in  his  successors  ot  the  see  of  Winchester.  \ 
In  1366  he  was  left  one  of  the  custodea  of 
the  kingdom  in  the  absence  of  the  king  on 
his  renewed  invasion  of  France. 

The  Great  Seal  was  placed  in  his  hindfl» 
with  the  title  of  chancellor,  on  November 
27,  1366,  30  Edward  III.,  and  he  letaiMd 
it  ifor  more  than  six  years,  during  which  ha 
preserved  the  roval  favour  without  looif 
the  confidence  of  the  people.  HewBi^i* 
the  record  savs,  '  grateiuUv  absolved'  fini 
its  duties  on  t'ebniary  19, 1363. 

lie  s^r^'ived  little  more  than  three  yeok 
still  continuing  high  in  the  confidence  of 
his  sovereign.  Shortly  before  his  death  As 
monks  of  Canterbury  elected  him  aidi- 
bishop,  on  the  decease  of  Simon  Isfip; 
but  ne  refused  the  proffered  dignitj, 
humorously  saying  that,  though  Canter^ 
hvay  was  the  higher  rack,  Winchester  yfU 
the  better  manger. 

He  died  on  October  7,  1366,  and  mi 
buried  at  Edington.     (Godwin,  2^6.) 

EOEBTOK,  Thomas  (Barok  Ellbbhtb^ 
Viscount  Brackley),  whose  surname  wit 
assumed  from  a  manor    in    Cheshire  m 
called,  possessed  by  his  father's  anceston 
when    Domesday    Book    was    compik^   ' 
was   the    natural    son    of    Sir    BichBt  || 
Egerton,  of  Ridley  in  the  same  oonil 
by  a  young  woman  named  Alice  SpidR 

He  was  bom  in  1540|  and  aboot  ] 
was  admitted  a  commcmer  at 


EGEBTON  BQJEBTON  229 

College,  Oxford,  where  be  remained  for  and  his  son  Sir  Robert  CedL  Fuller  says 
ihree  years.  He  then  entered  Lincoln's  (L  186)  that  'all  Christendom  afforded 
[nn,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1572.  ,  not  a  person  which  carried  more  gravity  in 
le  became  governor  in  1580,  Lent  his  countenance  and  behaviour,  ....  so 
eader  in  1582,  and  treasurer  in  1587. !  much  that  many  have  gone  to  the  Chancery 
le  pracdsed  principally  io  the  Court  of  on  purpose  truly  to  see  his  venerable  garb 
Jhancery,  and.  was  raised  to  the  office  of  (happy  they  who  had  no  other  busii^ess), 
olicitor-ffeneral  on  June  28,  1581.  It  is  and  were  highly  pleased  with  so  acceptable 
elated  that  this  appointment  arose  from  a  spectacle ;  adidmg  that  *  his  outward  case 
he  admiration  of^  Queen  Elizabeth  on  ;  was  nothing  in  comparison  with  his  inward 
learing  him  argue  in  a  cause  against  the  abilities,  quick  wit,  solid  judgment,  ready 
rown,  when  she  is  said  to  have  exclaimed,  utterance.  He  still  retained  the  place  (^ 
In  my  troth,  he  shall  never  plead  against  master  of  the  RoUs,  and  executed  during 
le  again.'     {Life  of  HffertoHy  S.)  |  the  rest  of    the  reign  the  whole    busi- 

During  the  intervids  of  his  laborious  ness  of  the  Court  of  Chancery  in  his  double 
vocations  his  chief  relaxation  was  in  capacity.  The  intrigues  of  the  lawyers 
he  sports  of  the  field,  and  several  noble  who  aspired  to  the  second  place  were 
lients  gave  him  licence  to  '  hunt  and  kill  *  '  counteracted  by  his  influence  with  the 
a  their  parks  and  manors.  queen,  and  her  conviction  that  he  needed 

Egerton  held  the  office  of  solicitor-  ;  no  assbtance. 
reneral  for  the  space  of  eleven  years,  till '  In  the  foolish  Smeute  ndsed  by  the  Earl 
le  became  attorney-general  on  June  2,  of  Essex  in  February  1000,  so  fiettal  to 
.502,  and  so  remained  for  nearly  two  himself,  the  grave  lora  keeper  was  placed 
rears.  During  this  long  period  of  office  ,  in  a  position  of  some  danger.  On  the 
le  was  of  course  engaged  in  all  the  pro-  |  aueen*8  bein^  informed  of  the  earFs  se- 
ecntions  for  high  treason  and  offences  I  ditious  meeting  in  Essex  House,  she  sent 
igainst  the  state.  His  name  appears  in  the  lord  keeper  there,  accompanied  by 
hoae  against  Campion  and  otners  in  the  lord  chief  justice  and  other  lords  of 
15S1,   against   Abingdon    and   others   in  ,  the  council,  '  to  understand  the  cause  of  this 


15S0,  against  Secretary  Davison  in  1587, 
igainst  Philip  Earl  of  Arundel  and 
igainst   Sir   Richard  Knightly    in   1589, 


their  assembly,  and  to  let  them  know  that 
if  they  had  any  particular  cause  of  grief 
against  any  persons  whatever,  it  should  be 


ind  against  Sir  John  Perrotin  1502.  (^SUUe  '  heard,  and  tney  should  have  justice/  On 
Trials,  i.  1051-1322.)  If  these  criminal  >  being  admitted  they  found  the  courtyard 
proceedings  were  to  be  judged  according  to  |  crowded  with  armed  men,  who,  after  the 
the  present  enlightened  views  with  regard  j  lord  keeper  had  delivered  the  queen's  mes- 
to  the  administration  of  the  law,  not  one  :  sage,  cned  out,  '  Kill  them !  ^  Cast  the 
of  the  persons  engaged  in  them  would  Great  Seal  out  of  the  window ! '  &c.  The 
escape  condemnation.  But  this  would  be  earl,  under  pretence  of  conferring  privately 
palpably  imjust.  With  whatever  abhor-  .  with  them,  took  the  lords  into  his  back 
rence  the  iniquitous  principles  on  which  |  chamber,  and,  telling  them  that  he  was 
thiise  trials  were  conducted  may  be  now  going  to  the  lord  mayor  and  sheriffs  of 
regarded,  the  only  fair  enquiry  which  can  .  London,  and  would  be  l>ack  in  half  an  hour, 
he  raised  vrith  respect  to  the  advocates  em-  I  left  them  under  lock  and  key,  ^  guarded  by 
ployed  in  them  is  whether  they  exceeded  '  Sir  John  Davis  and  others  with  musket- 
their  duty  according  to  the  practice  which  shot.*  There  they  were  detained  from  ten 
then  prevailed.  Looking  through  the  He-  ,  o'clock  in  the  morning  till  four  in  the 
porta  from  this  point  of  view,  Egerton  must  afternoon,  when  Sir  Ferdinando  Gorges, 
receive  a  full  acquittal  from  all  imputation  who  had  joined  Essex  iu  his  progress 
of  harshness  towards  the  prisoners.  through  the  city,  and  found  that  he  re- 

in 15d3  the  office  of^  chamberlain  of  i  ceived  no  encouragement,  hastened  back 
Chester  was  conferred  upon  him,  and  soon  and  released  thenL  Considering  how  much 
after  he  was  knighted.  By  this  title  he  ,  the  earl  was  indebted  to  Egerton,  who  had 
▼as  promoted  to  the  mastership  of  the  always  acted  as  a  sincere  and  considerate 
BoUs  on  April  10,  1504.  So  active  and  |  friend,  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  his  allegation 
efficient  did  ne  prove  himself  in  this  office  i  that  he  locked  up  the  counsellors  for  their 
that  the  queen  at  once  constituted  him  '  security  against  Ids  irritated  partisans  was 
loid  keeper  on  the  death  of  Sir  John  ,  founded  in  truth  ^  but  the  Earl  of  Rutland 
PQckerinff>  delivering  the  Great  Seal  to  in  his  examination  acknowledged  that  it 
bim  cm^lBj 6, 15d6.  was  purposed  to  take  the  lord  keeper  with 

His  appomtment  arose  entirely  from  the  them  to  the  court,  which  they  intended  to 
ogh  reputation  he  had  attained  for  his  legal ;  surprise.  (State  Trials^  1340-7.) 
Eii9wleajg;e  and  integrity,and  not  only  vvith-  During  Queen  Elizabeth's  life  Egerton 
xittke  intenrenticMi  of  any  courtly  interest,  enjoyed  ner  utmost  confidence  and  favour. 
Imt  ef0ii,  it  18  said,  in  opposition  to  the  ,  She  employed  him  in  various  treaties  with 
Irishes  and  endeavours  of  Lord  Burleigh,    the  Dutch  and  the  Danes,  in  the  manage- 


230 


EGEBTON 


ment  of  which  he  showed  himself  a  good 
diplomatist;  and  she  entrusted  him  with 
great  powers  under  several  special  commis- 
sionsy  which  he  exercised  with  mildness 
and  moderation.  Within  eight  months  of 
her  death  she  paid  him  the  honourable  but 
burdensome  compliment  of  a  three  dajrs' 
Tisit  to  his  mansion  at  Harefield  in  Mid- 
dlesex, the  enormous  expense  attending 
which  may  well  account  for  her  majesty's 
subjects  dreading  such  visitations.  (Egcrton 
Pajoern,  340-7.;) 

No  sooner  did  King  James  hear  of  his 
peaceful  accession  to  the  throne  than  he 
issued  a  mandate  from  Holyrood  House, 
dated  April  5,  1603,  appointing  Egerton 
keeper  of  the  Seal  during  pleasure,  who 
met  the  king  on  his  arrival  at  Broxboume 
in  Hertfordwire,  on  May  3,  when  his  ap- 
pointment was  confirmed.  He  was  also 
continued  in  the  office  of  master  of  the 
Rolls  till  the  19th  of  the  same  month, 
Edward  Bruce,  Lord  Einloss,  being  then 
named  as  his  successor.  On  delivering  him 
the  new  Great  Seal  on  July  19  his  majesty 
created  him  Baron  of  Ellesmere  in  Shrop- 
shire, and  on  the  24th  he  was  constituted 
lord  chancellor.  He  held  this  hi^h  position 
for  nearly  fourteen  years  under  King  James, 
which,  in  addition  to  the  seven  years  under 
Elizabeth,  makes  his  term  of  service  as  the  , 
head  of  the  law  extend  to  the  lonff  period  ! 
of  twenty-one  years.  Few  have  filled  so 
prominent  a  station  with  so  much  honour 
and  so  few  enemies.  Looking  at  the  cha- 
racter of  the  two  monarchs  whom  he 
served,  he  must  have  been  endowed  with 
more  than  ordinary  wisdom,  prudence,  and 
learning,  to  sufier  no  alienation  from  the 
caprices  of  either,  and  to  preserve  such 
continued  ascendencjr  in  tneir  councils, 
without  degrading  himself  by  that  abject 
and  humiliating  flattery  to  which  they  were 
both  too  much  accustomed. 

He  was  elected  chancellor  of  Oxford  in 
1610,  and  his  presidency  lasted  till  within 
two  months  of  his  death,  when  he  resigned 
it  on  January  24,  1617. 

The  best  mode  of  judging  of  the  character 
of  an  individual  is  to  see  the  reputation 
which  he  held  Axnong  his  contemporaries 
of  various  grades.  That  of  Egerton  will 
stand  the  ordeaL  Camden  records  an 
ana^^am  on  his  name,  '  Gestat  hokorem,' 
which  would  not  have  been  discovered  if 
it  had  not  been  applicable;  Ben  Jonson 
wrote  three  epigrams  in  his  praise,  one  of 
them  the  last  time  he  sat  as  chancellor; 
and  Bishop  Hacket  describes  him  as  one 
'  qui  nihil  m  vit&  nisi  laudandum,  aut  fecit, 
aut  dixit,  aut  sensit.'  Among  the  writers 
of  the  next  generation,  Fufier  cives  the 
same  testimony ;  and  Anthony  ^o<A  says, 
'  His  memory  was  much  celebrated  by  epi- 
grams while  he  was  Hviiig,  and  after  nis 
death  aU  of  the  long  lobe  lamented  his  loss.' 


EOERTON 

Among  the  most  eminent  waa  Sir  John 
Davies,  the  poet,  statesman,  and  lawyer, 
who,  after  summing]:  up  the  characteristiQ» 
of  a  good  chancellor,  gracefully  applies 
them  to  Lord  Ellesmere.  (Preface  to  k» 
PepoHs.) 

He  is  said  to  have  been  the  first  law 
chancellor  since  the  Beformation  who  en- 
tertained a  chaplain  in  his  family.  This  wis 
Dr.  John  Williams,  who  subsequently  filkd 
the  same  office  as  his  patron,  and  fiecame 
also  Archbishop  of  York.  Another  eminent 
man.  Dr.  Donne,  afterwards  dean  of  St 
Paul's,  spent  many  years  under  Lord  £1- 
lesmere's  roof,  as  his  secretary,  and  ihen 
formed  that  secret  connection  with  his  wifr 
Anne  Moore^  the  niece  of  the  chanceUcnr's 
second  mamage,  which  had  so  fintal  sn  in- 
fluence on  his  earlier  fortunes. 

Few  of  his  judicial  decisions  are  re- 
ported; but  in  the  case  of  the  post-nad. 
Doing  the  Question  whether  persons  bom  is 
Scotland  after  the  accession  of  King  James 
to  the  throne  of  England  were  aliens  in  tha 
latter  coimtry,  and  therefore  disabled  from 
holding  lands  there,  he  delivered  an  elabo- 
rate judgment  that  they  were  entitled  to 
all  the  rights  of  natural-bom  subjects,  whidt 
by  the  king's  command  he  puUiahed  is 
1609.  Twelve  out  of  the  fourteen  jndgai 
concurring  in  his  opinion,  his  remans  os 
the  doubts  of  the  otner  two  afford  a  curiov 
specimen  of  the  extraordinary  manner  m 
which  Scripture  allusions  were  introdooed 
into  the  oratorv  of  the  period.  He  said, 
'  The  apostle  Tliomas  doubted  of  the  n- 
surrection  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  wbeo 
all  the  restbf  the  apostles  did  firmly  beleere 
it ;  but  this  his  doubting  confirmed,  in  tha 
whole  Church,  the  faitn  of  the  resuireo- 
tion.  The  two  worthy  and  learned  judges 
that  have  doubted  in  this  case,  as  the^ 
beare  his  name,  so  I  doubt  not  but  their 
doubting  hath  given  occasion  to  deare  the 
doubt  in  others,  and  so  to  confinne  in 
both  the  kingdomes,  both  for  the  present 
and  the  future,  the  truth  of  the  judgement 
in  this  case.'  He  does  not  name  ue  two 
dissentients,  and  it  is  uncertain  which  thef 
were,  as  three  of  the  judges  who  pN- 
nounced  their  opinion  were  named  Thomas 
— ^viz.,  Sir  Thomas  Fleming,  Sir  Thomas 
Walmesley,  and  Sir  Thomas  Foster,  aU  of 
the  Common  Pleas.     {State  Triah^  ii.  009.) 

Besides  the  publication  of  this  judgment, 
he  printed  no  other  work  during  hu  life; 
but  he  left  several  valuable  manuscripts. 

He  objected  strongly  to  the  Statute  of 
Wills,  pawed  in  the  re'iffn  of  Houy  VIIL, 
and  he  was  wont  to  tell  tne  following  bmrt 
story  as  an  illustration  of  its  erw: — ^A 
friar  comiuff  to  visit  a  great  mm  in-  kib 
sickness,  and  finding  him  past  memoayytook 
opportunity,  according  to  the  eaCon  of  tti 
times,  to  noake  provision  ibr  Hm  mohi  ^ 
whereof  he  was,  and,  finding  ftat  tfit 


EQEBTON 

Stan  could  onlj  speak  some  one  s^llablei 
which  was  for  the  most  part  ^^Vea"  or 
^  Naj,''  in  an  imperfect  Toice^  forthwith  took 
upon  him  to  make  his  will ;  and  demanding 
ca  him,  **  WiU  you  giro  such  a  piece  of  land 
to  our  house  to  pray  for  your  soul?"  the 
d^g  man  sounded  **  Yea.''  Then  he  asked 
hmi,  **  Will  you  give  such  land  to  the  main- 
tenance of  lights  to  our  Lady  P''  The  sound 
was  affain  ^  Yea."  Whereupon  he  boldly 
adEed  mm  many  such  questions.  The  son 
and  hdr  standing  by,  and  hearing  his  land 


ELIOT 


231 


a  cudgel,  and  beat  this  fiiar  out  of  the 
chamlwr?"  The  sick  man's  answer  was 
again  '*  Yea,"  which  the  son  quickly  per- 
formed, and  saved  unto  himself  his  father's 
lands.'    {ArchaoiogiOj  zzv.  384.^ 

In  the  latter  part  of  his  judicial  career 
he  was  annoyea  by  Sir  ^ward  Coke's 
attempt  to  restrain  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Court  of  Chancery,  and  by  the  proceedinj^ 
which  were  taken,  not  only  agamst  certain 
suitors  there,  but  against  the  counsel]  who 
were  engaged  in  the  causes,  and  even  the 
masters  in  Chancery  to  whom  they  were 
referred,  to  subject  tnem  to  the  penalties  of 
prvmunire,  to  which,  under  an  old  statute, 
all  persons  were  subject  who  impeached 
the  judgments  of  any  of  the  king's  courts. 
The  enauiiyfresulted  in  the  complete  tri- 
umph of  Lord  Ellesmere,  by  the  confirma- 
tion of  the  powers  of  his  court,  and  it  had 
no  little  eflfect  in  disgracing  Coke,  its  insti- 
gator. 

On  Noyember  7, 1616,  the  Idas  rewarded 
his  long  serrices  by  adyandng  him  in  the 
peerage  to  the  title  of  discount  Bxftckley, 
which  the  wits  of  Westminster  Hall,  who 
objected  .to  his  interference  with  the  judg- 
ments of  the  common  law  courts,  conyerted 
into  Viscount  Break-law.  He  had  in 
1613,  and  several  times  since,  requested 
the  king  to  allow  him  to  retire  from  his 
arduous  post,  the  duties  of  which  he  felt 
were  too  neav^  for  his  increasing  age  and 
infbmities.  Sickness  at  last  compelled  him 
to  press  his  resignation,  and  the  Close  Roll 
leoorda  that  on  March  3, 1617,  being  ill  at 
his  residence,  York  House,  he  was  visited 
by  the  king  himselfl  who  then  freed  him 
from  the  custody  of  the  Great  Seal,  but 
limited  his  retirement  to  two  years.  Within 
two  weeks  from  this  time,  however,  his 
earthly  career  was  closed.  He  died  on 
March  15,  and  his  body  beinff  removed  to 
Doddleston  in  Cheshire,  was  tkexe  buried. 

The  king,  who  mpem  to  have  regarded 
him  with  great  affection,  is  said  to  have 
parted  from  him  with  tears  of  ^titude 
and  respect,  and  to  have  signified  his  inten- 
tioo  to  raise  him  to  an  earldom.  Though 
deadi  nreyented  the  chancellor  ftom  receiy- 
jBg  this  last  mask  of  his  sovermgn's  favour, 


litUe  more  than  two  months  elapsed  before 
his  migeety  nroved  his  sincerity  by  creating 
the  heir  iiarl  of  Bridgewater  m  Somerset- 
shire on  May  27,  1617.  This  title  was 
changed  into  a  dukedom  in  1720,  but  both 
have  since  become  extinct.  The  earldom, 
however,  was  revived  in  1840  in  the  grand- 
nephew  of  the  last  duke. 

The  chancellor  was  thrice  married,  but 
had  issue  by  his  first  wife  only.  She  was 
Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Thomas  KavenscrofL 
Esq.,  of  Bretton  in  Flintshire.  His  second 
wife  was  Elisabeth,  sister  to  Sir  George 
More,  knight,  of  Losely  Farm,  Surrey, 
lieutenant  of  the  Tower,  and  widow,  first 
of  Richard  Polstead,  Esq.,  of  Abury  in  the 
same  county,  and  then  of  Sir  John  W  olley, 
knight,  chancellor  of  the  order  of  the 
Garter.  His  tiiird  wife  was  Alice,  daughter 
of  Sir  John  Snencer,  of  Althorpe,  knight, 
and  widow  oi  Ferdinando,  fifth  Earl  of 
Derby. 

XLDOV,  Eabl  of.     See  J.  Soott. 

SLXBIVB  was  a  monk  in  the  priory  of 
Cogges  in  Oxfordshire,  of  which  he  became 
prior  in  1227.  From  that  he  was  promoted 
to  the  abbacy  of  the  monastery  of  Pershore 
in  Worcestershire  on  March  19,  1251,  35 
Henry  III.  In  August  of  that  year  he  was 
appointed  the  king's  eecheator  on  this  side 
Trent,  and  continued  in  that  office  till  1255 
(Excerpt,  e  IM.  JVw.ii.  112-220),  in  which 
year  he  was  employed  by  the  king  on  a 
financial  commission  into  Wales,  where  he 
was  most  honourably  received  by  Llewellyn 
and  his  nobles.     (Leiand's  ColL  I  243.^ 

In  1257-8  he  is  inserted  in  Maaox's 
list  of  barons  of  tiie  Exchequer  (ii.  319), 
on  the  authority  of  the  memoranda  of  that 
year ;  but  he  is  not  mentioned  afterwards 
m  that  court  He  retired  from  the  abbacy 
of  Pershore  on  October  24, 1262,  having 
previously  ^pranted  to  it  his  manor  'de 
HauekesburL'  (Monad,  ii.  412,  418,  vi. 
1003.) 

ELIOT,  KicHARi),  was  allied  to  the  an- 
cient family  of  that  name  first  seated  in 
Devonshire  and  afterwards  in  Cornwall,  a 
member  of  which  was  raised  to  the  peerage 
in  1784  as  Baron  Eliot  of  St  Germains, 
whose  son  was  created  Earl  of  St.  Germains 
in  1815.  Richard  was  an  advocate  of  the 
Middle  Temple  in  8  Henry  VIL  In  1503 
he  took  the  degree  of  the  coif,  and  in  1506 
he  was  appointed  one  of  the  king's  Serjeants. 
On  April  26,  1513,  he  was  raised  to  the 
bench  of  the  Conunon  Pleas,  and  exercised 
his  judicial  duties  there  tiU  1522.  By  his 
will  he  directed  his  body  to  be  buried  in 
the  cathedral  of  Salisbury.  (Oriff,  47, 113, 
215.) 

ELIOT,  WnjJAK.  was  named  master  of 
the  Rolls,  in  conjunction  with  Robert 
Morton,  on  November  13, 1485,  to  hold  for 
life  and  for  the  life  of  the  survivor.  There  is 
no  evidence  of  his  exercising  the  duti«&  ol 


232 


ELLENBOBOUGH 


the  office,  nor  of  his  retainiDff  it,  after  hu 
partner  was  consecrated  Bidiop  of  Wor- 
cester in  February  1487.  On  the  contrary, 
David  William  is  mentioned  in  the  office 
on  the  22nd  of  that  month,  and  William 
Eliot  as  acting  as  a  simple  master  in  Chan- 
coiy,  being  named  in  that  character  as  a 
receiver  of  petitions  in  parliament  from  the 
fourth  to  tne  eleventh  year  of  the  reign. 
(Hot.  JPtirl.  vi.  346,  409, 441,  468.) 

ELLEHBOBOTTGH,  LoBD.  See  £.  Law. 
£LL£8M£KE,  LoBD.  See  T.  Egebtok. 
£LL£8W0BTH,  Simoh  ds,  had  a  grant 
in  11  Edward  1.  from  Simon  de  Torp  of 
lands  in  Torveston,  Bucks,  with  the  ad- 
Towson  of  the  church  there.  (Abb,  JPlacit. 
206.)  He  was  not  a  regular  justice  itine- 
rant, but  merely  for  pleas  of  the  forest,  in 
which  he  is  mentioned  as  actinp:  in  1202 
for  the  county  of  Essex.  In  23  Edward  I. 
the  custody  of  the  religious  houses  belong- 
ing to  France  in  the  counties  of  Northamp- 
ton, I^utlandf  Cambridge,  and  Huntingdon 
was  committed  to  him,  and  in  the  next 
year  he  was  joined  with  the  chief  justice  of 
the  forests  in  a  commission  to  rent  out  the 
wastes  of  the  forests  beyond  the  Trent. 
(Abb.  Rot.  Oriff.  i.  01,  94.)  In  21  Edward 
I.  he  was  one  of  the  sureties  for  the  ap- 
pearance of  William  de  Luda,  Bishop  of 
Ely,  on  a  complaint  made  against  him  by 
the  Archbishop  of  Dublin  (JRot.  Pari.  i. 
112);  and  on  Ellesworth's  death,  in  26 
Edward  I.,  the  bishop  returned  the  obliga- 
tion by  becoming  security  for  the  payment 
of  his  debts  to  the  crown.  (MadoXy  li.  44.) 
ELLIS,  William,  son  of  Thomas,  thrice 
mayor  and  once  M.  P.  for  Norwich,  was  a 
member  of  Lincoln^s  Inn,  where  he  became 
a  reader  in  Lent  1602.  He  was  made  a 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  in  1623,  being  so 
named  in  the  list  of  the  judges,  &c.,  who 
were  assessed  to  the  subsidy  m  November 
of  that  year.  He  continued  on  the  bench 
till  1630. 

He  was  lord  of  the  manor  of  Attlebridge 
in  Norfolk,  where  his  son  William,  whom 
he  had  bv  Elizabeth  his  wife,  lies  buried. 
(Bhmejieldts  Xorwich,  ii.  199 ;  Oriff.  260.) 

ELLIS,  William.   Noble,  in  his  <  House 
of  Cromweir  (i.  437),  states  that  the  Wil- 
liam Ellis  who  was  solicitor-general  to  the 
protector  became  judjfe  of  the   Common 
Pleas  under  Charles  II.;  and,  notwithstand-  | 
ing  the  apparent  improbability  that  one  i 
who  had  neld  so  prominent  a*  ministerial  j 
office  under  the  Commonwealth  should  be  I 
selected  to  fill  a  judicial  one  under  the 
monarchy,  there   seems   little    reason  to  ' 
doubt  that  the  solicitor  and  the  judge  were  | 
one  and  the  same  IndividuaL  Tiie  appoint- 
ment  as  solicitor  is  dated  1664,  and  the  ! 
judge  was  chosen  bencher  of  Gray's  Inn  in 
that  year;  he  was  a  member  of  the  parlia- 
ments of  1040  and  1654  for  Boston,  and  in 
those  of  1656  and  1650  for  Grantham,  the  . 


,     EUiIS 

first  beinff  the  place  that  the  judge  repre- 
sented  atterwaras  in  1670.  and  the  lift 
being  the  place  of  hit  fatner'a  xeaideiiee: 
facts  sufficient  to  support  the  identity. 

The  family  of  EUis,  or  Ellys,  is  said  to 
have  been  originally  Welsh,  bat  afterwards 
to  have  settled  in  Lincolnshire.  ^  Sir  Wil- 
liam Ellis,  an  ancestor  of  the  judge,  vii 
an  eminent  lawyer  in  the  reign  of  Queoi 
Elizabeth,  and  from  him  descended  Thomai 
Ellis  of  Grantham,   who  had  two  soo^ 
Thomas  and  William.    The  former  ww 
made  a  baronet  in  1660  for  his  loyiltf 
during  the  rebellion,  but  the  title  bocami 
extinct  in  1742;  the  latter  aided  with  tlis 
opponents  to  the  crown  and  was  the  futnxa 
juoge.     (  Wottons  Baronet,  iii.  90.) 

William  Ellb  was  bom  about  160^  and 
was  sent  for  his  education  to  Caius  GoUm 
Cambridge,  where  he  took  his  degrees  oi 
\  B.A.  and  M.A.  in  1632  and  1636.  Ad- 
mitted into  Gray*s  Inn,  he  was  called  to 
the  bar  in  1634.  The  town  of  Boston  n- 
turned  him  to  the  Long  Parliament  is 
I  1640,  where  he  sul>scribed  the  SolemB 
League  and  Covenant ;  but,  in  conseqousoa 
of  voting  *  that  the  king's  answers  to  ths 
propositions  of  both  houses  were  a  ground 
for  peace,'  be  was  one  of  those  excluded 
from  the  house  bv  Pride's  Purge,  in  De- 
cember 1648.  WLitelocke  states  (p.  405) 
that  he  was  re-admitted  in  the  foUowiiig 
June,  and  accordingly  he  is  found  amoog 
the  Eump  who  resumed  their  sittings  on 
the  dissolution  of  Protector  Hichard  s  go- 
vernment in  1650.  (Pari.  Hid.  il  611, 
iii.  1248, 1647.) 

In  the  meantime,  however,  he  had  ae- 
cepted  office  under  Cromwell,  being  ap» 
pomted  solicitor-general  to  his  highness  qd 
May  24,  1654,  the  functions  of  which  bs 
continued  to  perform  under  Protector 
Richard.  In  the  parliament  of  1654  he  wis 
returned  for  Boston,  and  in  those  of  1656 
and  1660  for  Grantham,  having  m  the  in- 
terim received  a  baronetcy  from  the  pn>* 
tector.  In  Kichard's  parliament  he  showed 
great  activity,  but  all  his  speeches,  as  re* 
ported  by  Burton,  were  in  a  sober  and 
accommodating  spirit.  Having  from  the 
beginning  been  an  adherent  to  the  top- 
porters  of  the  Commonwealth,  he  wai 
opposed  in  his  attempt  to  be  re-elected  it 
Grantham  to  the  Healing  Parliament  of 
1660.  Probably  his  brother  s  loyalty,  added 
to  his  own  insignificance,  preserved  him 
from  censure  or  even  notice  at  the  Kestoisr 
tion.  (Pari.  Hid.  iii.  1430, 1480,  1533,  if. 
4,  1081.) 

Losing  his  title  and  his  place  on  the. 
king's  arrival,  he  fell  back  into  the  l^|^ 
ranks,  and  pursued  hia  profeasion  with  WiK 
much  succetfs  that,  after  having  been dwMj 
reader  of  his  inn  in  1663,  he  wis  cdM- 
Serjeant  in  1669,  and  made  one  of  HmU^A 
Serjeants  in  1671,  when  he  was  Ip^ghtaL 


ELY 

He  WAS  MDpointed  a  judge  of  the  Common 
Pleas  on  December  18, 1672,  but  in  October 
1676  he  was  lemoved  firom  his  place  for 
eome  political  reason  not  stated,  out  pro- 
l>ablj  for  the  mere  purpose  of  pving  his 
seat  to  ScroggSy  whom  the  minister  Lord 
Danbj  &voured.  His  dismissal  was  evi- 
dently not  caused  by  any  reflection  on  his 
character,  for  he  was  replaced  in  less  than 
three  years,  when  Danby^s  influence  had 
ceased.  In  the  intenral  he  again  entered 
parliament,  being  chosen  in  1679  by  his 
old  constituents  at  Boston,  while  his 
nephew.  Sir  William,  was  selected  for 
Orantham.  These  elections  may  have  been 
the  cause  of  his  being  recalled  to  the  bench 
on  the  1st  of  the  next  May,  when  he  was 
also  allowed  to  resume  his  former  prece- 
dency. He  died  at  his  chambers  in  Ser- 
jeants' Inn,  Fleet  Street,  on  December  3, 
1680,  leaving  no  issue.  (Sir  T,  Haumond^ 
217,  251,  407.) 

ELY,  Nicholas  db  (Bishop  op  Wis- 
chesteb),  was  appointed  archdeacon  of  Ely 
about  1240,  a3  Henry  III.,  and  on  October 
18,  1200,  the  barons  placed  the  Great  Seal 
in  his  hands.  He  kept  it  only  till  the  5th 
<»f  the  following  July,  when  King  Henry 
transferred  it  into  the  hands  of  Walter  de 
Merton,  but  by  a  separate  patent  specially 
recommended  Nicholas  for  his  good  service. 

In  the  following  year  the  king  appointed 
him  his  treasurer ;  and  on  July  12,  1203, 
the  Great  Seal  was  again  entrusted  to  him, 
with  the  title  of  chancellor.  On  the  king^s 
going  abroad  soon  afterwards,  the  Seal  re- 
mained in  his  possession,  with  a  prohibi- 
tion, however,  from  affixing  it  to  any  in- 
strument which  was  not  attested  by  Hugh 
le  Dtfspencer,  the  chief  justiciary.  In  the 
coarse  of  the  next  year  he  resigned  the  office 
of  chancellor,  and  resumed  that  of  treasurer. 
<  Madojr,  iL  319.) 

In  September  1266  ho  was  elected  Bishop 
of  Worcester^  from  which  see  he  was  on 
Pehmary  24,  1267,  translated  to  Win- 
chester, over  which  diocese  he  presided 
about  twelve  vears,  and  died  on  February 
12,  1280,  at  Waverley  in  Surrey,  where 
hid  body  was  buried,  his  heart  being  sent 
for  interment  at  Winchester.  (Godwin,  222, 
201 ;  Le  3>w,  73,  &c. ;  Hapin,  iii.  142.) 

ELT,  Ralph  db,  was  according  to  Madox 
<ii.  31  d^  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  in  24 
and  27  Henry  IIL,  but  there  is  no  other 
notice  of  his  name. 

ELT,  William  of,  a  canon  of  the 
church  of  Lincoln,  was  the  king*s  treasurer 
during  the  whole  of  the  reign  of  John  and 
part  <M  that  of  Henry  HI.  He  is  mentioned 
in  that  character  as  one  of  the  justiciers 
before  whom  fines  were  acknowledged  in 
10  John,  1208,  and  Dugdale  recoras  his 
dea£h  in  S  Henry  IH,  1223,  calling  him 
then  An^lise  Thesaurarius.  (Itol.  Chart,  49.) 

JOIftADnt,  Waexsb,  is  first  mentioned 


ENGLEFIELD 


23S 


in  19  Henry  HI.,  1235,  when,  being  then 
custos  of  the  honor  of  Richmond,  he  was 
directed  to  deliver  it  up  to  Alexander 
Bacon.  (Maehx,  i.  335.)  In  1240  he  was 
one  of  the  justices  itinerant  for  the  northern 
counties,  before  whom  a  fine  was  levied  at 
York.  At  this  time  he  had  the  custody  of 
the  king^s  manors,  and  failing  to  account 
for  the  proceeds  in  29  Henry  UL,  his  per- 
son was  attached,  and  he  was  called  upon 
to  appear  before  the  barons  of  the  Ex- 
chequer. (Madox^  ii.  243.)  On  his  death, 
in  1253,  he  was  still  indebted  to  the  crown, 
as  the  king  then  granted  his  brother,  James 
Engaine,  permission  to  pay  the  balance  due 
into  the  Exchequer,  by  half-yearly  instal- 
ments of  100  shillings  each.  (Excerpt,  e 
Rot.  Fin.  u.  166.) 

EKGLEPELD,  Alan  de,  called  so  from 
the  place  of  that  name  in  Berkshire,  of 
whicn  he  was  the  parson,  was  added  to  the 
commission  of  the  justices  itinerant  for  that 
county  in  9  Henry  III.  He  was  at  the 
same  time  coroner  for  Staffordshire,  and 
possessed  property,  not  only  in  both  these 
counties,  but  also  in  Oxfordshire  and  Buck- 
inghamshire, all  of  which  were  seized  into 
King  John^s  hands,  but  restored  to  him  on 
returning  to  his  allegiance  in  1  Henry  IH. 
(Rot.  Claus.  i.  300 ;  ii.  76,  124.) 

ENOLEPIELD,  W^illiam  de,  probably 
the  nephew  of  the  above,  was  snerifF  of 
Devonsnire  in  36  Henry  III.,  1251,  and  the 
two  following  years.  (madoXf  i.  597,  ii.  193.) 
In  1255  and  the  two  following  years  he  was 
one  of  the  justices  itinerant  who  visited  se- 
veral counties,  and  again  in  1260.  About  that 
time  it  seems  probable  that  he  was  made  a 
justicier  at  Westminster,  for  the  Kotulus 
de  Finibus  (Excerpt.  iL  335)  contains  an 
entry  of  an  amercement  imposed  by  him. 
From  46  to  50  Henry  III.  he  was  employed 
in  a  judicial  character.    (Ibid.  ii.  422-445.) 

He  derived  his  name  from  the  town  oi 
Englefield  in  Berkshire,  where  it  is  said  his 
family  had  propeiiy  above  two  hundred 
years  before  the  Conquest.  He  was  the 
son  of  John  Englefield,  of  that  place,  and 
was  succeeded  by  his  own  son  John,  one  of 
whose  descendants  is  the  subject  of  the 
next  article. 

EKOLEPIELD,  Thomas.  In  regular  de- 
scent from  the  above  Williaui  came  Sir 
Thomas  Englefield,  justice  of  Chester,  and 
twice  speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
who  died  about  1514.  leaving  by  his  wife 
Margery,  daughter  of  Sir  Richard  Danvers, 
of  Prescot,  a  large  family.  His  second  son 
was  Thomas  the  judge,  who  on  the  death 
of  his  elder  brother  without  issue  suc- 
ceeded to  the  inheritance,  having  previously 
entered  the  Middle  Temple,  where  he  was 
reader  in  1520. 

In  1519  he  was  sheriff  of  Berkshire  and 
Oxfordshire.  In  1521  he  was  called  to  the 
degree  of  the  coif,  and  on  December  ^ 


234 


ERDINGTON 


1528,  he  was  advanced  to  be  king's  seijeant, 
at  the  same  time  receiving  a  grant  of  100/. 
a  year  for  life. 

From  the  Year  Books  it  appears  that 
he  sat  as  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  in 
Michaelmas  1626,  18  Heniy  VUL,  being 
knighted  at  the  same  time.  He  pexformea 
the  functions  of  his  office  till  his  death, 
which  took  place  on  September  28, 1537. 
To  his  judicial  duties  were  added  those  of 
master  of  the  kin^*s  wards,  which  he  held 
in  conjunction  with  Sir  William  Paulet 
He  was  buried  at  Enfflefield,  where  there 
is  a  brass  memorial  of  nim  in  his  robes,  and 
of  his  wife  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Sir 
Bobert  Throgmorton,  of  Coughton,  War- 
wickshire. 

His  eldest  son  Francis  lost  the  paternal 
estate  by  attainder  for  high  treason  in  35 
Elizabeth.  His  second  son  John,  seated  at 
Wootton  Basset,  was  the  father  of  another 
Francis,  created  a  baronet  in  1612 — a  title 
which  expired  in  1822.  (  Wottan's  Baronet, 
i.  254 ;  Dugdale's  OHg.  47,  215  j  Kal  of 
JSxch,  i.  cxxzix.) 

XEDIHOTOK,  Giles  de,  was  the  son  of 
Thomas  de  Erdington,  of  an  opulent  family 
seated  at  Erdington,  near  Aston,  ,in  War- 
wickshire, who  was  honourably  and  fre- 
(luenthr  emploved  hj  King  John,  and  died 
in  2  Henry  III.  His  mother  was  Roesia, 
the  widow  of  Adam  de  Cokefield.  Giles 
was  evidently  a  minor  when  his  father 
died,  and  so  continued  for  the  twelve  follow- 
ing years,  for  it  was  not  till  April  12, 1230, 
14  Henry  HI.,  that  he  obtained  permission 
from  the  kine  to  pay  his  father^s  debts  by 
instalments  of  100  shillings  a  year.  (Ex- 
cerpt, e  Hot,  Fin,  i.  195.)  Though  there 
are  no  reports  of  the  period,  it  may  be  pre- 
sumed that  he  practised  in  the  courts  of 
Westminster.  He  was  made  a  judge  be- 
fore August  1251,  35  Henijr  HI.,  the  first 
date  of  a  payment  for  an  assize  to  be  taken 
before  him,  and  when  he  held  pleas  for  the 
city  of  London.  He  retained  nis  place  on 
the  bench  till  December  1267,  soon  after 
which  he  died.  (Ihid.  ii.  113-464 :  Abb. 
Fiacit.  137.) 

Although  Dugdale,  in  his  *  Origines  Juri- 
diciales'  (21),  calls  him  a  canon  of  St. 
Paul's,  he  makes  him  in  the  '  Barom^ '  (ii. 
112)  father  of  Henry,  who  succeed^  to  his 
estates,  and  whose  son,  also  Henry^  was 
summoned  to  parliament  in  9  Edwaxd  III., 
but  not  afterwards. 

ESLE,  William,  is  the  lineal  descendant 
of  a  very  ancient  family  of  that  name,  settled 
in  Somersetshire,  from  the  time  of  our 
earliest  kings,  several  members  of  which 
have  rendered  themselves  eminent  for  their 
services  to  the  country.  He  is  the  son  of 
the  Rev.  Christcmer  Erie,  of  Gillin^ham  in 
Dorsetshire,  and  was  bom  at  Fifshead- 
Magdalen  in  its  neighbourhood  in  1793. 
After   going  through  Winchester  School 


ERNLE 

he  entered  New  Colle^  Oxford,  where  h» 
took  his  degree  in  civil  law  in  1818.    In 
November  of  the  next  year  he  was  called  to 
the  bar  by  the  society  of  the  Middle  Tem^ 
and  joined  the  Western  Ciienit.    He  alio 
purcnased  the  situation  of  one  of  the  counsel 
of  the  palace  court,  in  which  he  acquired 
those  habits  of  business  which  are  or  sloif 
attainment  in  the  superior  courts,     ffia 
erudition  as  a  lawyer  and  his  attainmenti 
as  a  scholar  soon  insured  him  such  fiill 
employment  on  the  circuit  and  in  Wert- 
minster  Hall  that  he  was  made  king's  coon- 
sel  in  1834. 

The  city  of  Oxford  returned  him  as  timr 
representative  in  parliament  in  1837.  and, 
though  his  support  was  given  to  the  Jibeiu 
party  in  the  house,  the  conservative  prime 
minister.  Sir  Robert  Peel,  regarding  hii 
merits  only,  did  not  hesitate  to  appoint  hiia 
a  judge  of  the  Commons  Pleas  on  November 
6, 1844,  whereupon  he  was  knighted.  He 
sat  in  that  court  nearlv  two  years,  and  ia 
October  1846  was  transferred  to  the  Queen's 
Bench.  For  little  less  than  thirteen  yetii 
he  remained  in  this  seat,  when  he  wis 
promoted  on  June  24,  1869,  to  take  tlie 
vacant  place  of  chief  justice  of  the  CommoD 
Pleas,  m  which  high  position  the  urbsnitf 
of  his  manner  added  force  and  effect  to 
the  unquestioned  impartiality  of  lus  de- 
cisions. 

These  qualities  were  eloquently  recog- 
nised bv  the  attorney-general  in  nis  to- 
well  address  on  the  chief  justice's  retire- 
ment from  the  bench  on  November  2^ 
1806,  after  a  mdicial  life  of  twenty-two 
years.  He  still  gives  his  services  at  the 
privy  council. 

He  married  the  daughter  of  the  Rer. 
David  Williams,  warden  of  New  College 
and  prebendary  of  Winchester. 

EBXYV,   OR  ABXTV,   Wnxuic,  poe- 
sessed  property  at  Osgodby  in  linoob- 
shire.    In  2  Richard  IL  he  was  tnasnrer 
of  Cahiis,  and  in  3  Heniy  IV.,  1402,  he  » 
mentioned  as  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer. 
Neither  the  date  of  his  appointment  nor  of 
his  death  is  recorded ;  but  he  was  the  an- 
cestor of  a  knightly  family  which  long 
flourished  in  the  county.    (Devon'i  Im» 
Exch,  211 ;  Co/.  Inguis,  p.  m.  iiL  199.)^ 

EEKLE,  JoHi7,  whose  name  was  derived 
from  a  family  which  had  flooiished  at 
Ernie,  a 'manor  near  Chichester  in  Suseez^ 
before  the  reign  of  Edward  L.-wns  the 
second  son  of  John  Ernie,  of  Ernie,  and 
Agnes,  daughter  and  heir  of  Simon  fiest^ 
who  brought  him  her  mother's  inheritnoa 
of  the  manor  of  Etchilhamjpton  in  Wilt- 
shire. He  was  made  soliator-genml  ni 
1607;  and  in  1500,  a  few  days  altar  te 
accession  of  Heniy  VIII.*  he 
to  the  attoxney-generalfliiip^ 
cupied  till  he  was  xaiaed  to  iSbm 
of  the  Court  of  Commoa  Plaa%  on 


EBSKINE 

27, 1519,  whereapon  he  received  the  honour 
of  knighthood.  He  did  not  enjoy  his  pre- 
eidencjr  much  ahove  two  yean,  his  death 
ooeamn^  in  1521.  He  was  huried  at  Ernie, 
where  hia  remains  lie  under  a  monument 
still  existinff.  He  had  two  wives :  the  first 
was  Anne,  daughter  of  Constantine  Daiel, 
Esq.,  of  CoUinhoume.  Wilts ;  and  the  se- 
cond was  Margaret,  aaughter  of  Edmund 
Dawtiy,  Esq. 

From  his  second  son,  John,  descended 
Sir  John  Ernie,  knight,  chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer  to  Charles  XL ;  and  also  Walter 
Ernie,  of  Etchilhampton,  who  in  1660  was 
cnated  a  baronet — a  title  which  became 
extinct  in  1787. 

BEIIIHE,  Thomas  (I^rd  EBssnrE). 
Tliat  only  one  short  year  of  judicial  life 
should  have  distinguisned  an  advocate  who 
retained  for  the  long  sj^ace  of  twenty-eight 
yesn  the  most  prominent  place  at  the 
British  bar  would  natundly  excite  sur- 
prise, were  it  not  for  the  recollection  that 
the  party  to  which  he  was  attached  was 
during  that  period  wholly  deprived  of  the 
power  of  selecting  the  law  officers  of  the 
crown,  except  ^for  an  equally  short  interval 
at  the  beginning  of  his  career,  when  he  was 
too  young  and  inexperienced  to  expect  pro- 
motion. Such  was  the  position  of  the  Hon. 
Thomas  Erskine  in  1806, when  he  was  raised 
per  milUtm  to  the  highest  office  of  judicial 
digni^ ;  although  without  a  single  inter- 
ruption from  his  very  first  entrance  into 
the  forensic  arena  in  1778,  his  progress  had 
been  one  continued  march  of  triumph. 

This  eminent  advocate  was  the  youngest 
of  three  sons  of  Henry  David,  "Et^  of 
Boehan,  by  Agnes,  daughter  of  Sir  James 
Steuart,  Bart,  the  eldest  of  whom  suc- 
ceeded to  his  father's  title,  and  the  two 
others,  Henir  and  Thomas,  became  equally 
distbguishea  for  their  extraordinaiy  talents, 
the  former  being  twice  lord  advocate  of 
SeollaDd,  in  1783  and  1806,  and  the  latter 
earning  honours  in  England  which  are  now 
to  be  recorded. 

Thomas  Erskine  was  bom  at  Edinburgh 
on  January  21,  1750,  and  received  his  edu- 
cation at  the  High  School  of  Edinburgh 
and  the  university  of  St.  Andrews,  the 
very  restricted  income  of  the  earl  his  father 
forbidding  an^  other  advantage.  In  1764 
he  left  his  native  country  as  a  midshipman 
in  the '  Tartar,'  and  during  the  four  years  he 
rematxied  at  sea  he  visited  America  and  the 
West  Indies.  He  retired  from  the  service 
in  1768,  and  entering  the  army  as  an  en- 
sign in  the  Royals  or  First  Kegiment  of 
Foot,  attained  his  lieutenancy  in  April 
177a  While  yet  an  ensign,  in  1770,  and 
when  little  more  than  twenty  years  of  a^. 
he  married  France^  daughter  of  Daniel 
Moose,  Esq.,  M.P.  for  Marlow,  and  spent 
the  next  two  yeaiB  with  his  regiment  at 
Minoteay   dsToting   his  leisure  hours  to 


ERSKINE 


235 


English  literature  with  so  much  avidity  that 
there  was  scarely  a  passage  in  Shakspeare^ 
Milton,  Dryden,  or  Pope  which  he  could 
not  recite  trom  memory.  He  used  to  re« 
late  that  while  in  Minorca  he  not  only  read 
prayers  to  the  regiment,  but  also  composed 
and  preached  two  sermons. 

Returning  to  England  in  1772,  his  agree- 
able manners  and  pleasant  vivacity  soon 
procured  him  access  to  the  society  of  the 
metropolis,  among  the  distinguished  mem- 
bers of  which  are  the  names  of  Mrs.  Mon- 
tagu, Jeremy  Bentham,  Dr.  Johnson,  Bos- 
well,  Cradock,  and  Sheridan.  He  also 
commenced  authorship  in  a  pamj^hlet  '  On 
the  Prevailing  Abuses  in  the  ^British  Army,' 
which  had  a  considerable  circulation.  After 
serving  in  the  army  for  seven  years,  he  saw 
too  palpably  that  without  interest  that 
profession  would  not  secure  a  provision  for 
his*increasing  family,  and  he  could  not  but 
feel  that  his  talents  were  more  likely  to  be 
productive  in  a  wider  field  for  their  exer- 
cise. Resolving,  therefore,  to  enter  the 
legal  profession,  he  sold  his  lieutenancy,  and 
was  admitted  a  member  of  Lincoln  s  Inn 
in  1775.  His  next  step  was  to  be  matri- 
culated at  one  of  the  universities  in  order 
that  by  taking  his  deme  his  time  of  legal 
probation  should  be  shortened  from  five  to 
three  years.  With  this  object  he  entered 
Trinity  College,  Cambridge,  on  January  13, 
1776,  as  a  nobleman's  son,  which  entitled 
him  to  a  Master  of  Arts  degree  in  two 
years  without  examination.  This  did  not 
prevent  him  from  striving  for  and  obtain- 
ing the  colle^  prize  for  English  declama- 
tion, the  harbinger  of  his  future  fame.  His 
decree  was  conferred  in  June  1778,  and  on 
July  3  he  was  called  to  the  bar. 

During  the  interval  between  his  matri- 
culation and  his  call  he  kept  his  terms 
both  at  Cambridge  and  Lincoln's  Inn,  di- 
viding his  time  between  literary  and  legal 
studies.  For  the  latter  purpose  he  placed 
himself  under  the  instruction  of  Sir  Francis 
BuUer,  and  afterwards  of  Sir  George  WoocL 
both  subsequently  raised  to  the  bench ;  ana 
by  steady  application  gained  that  know- 
ledge of  the  principles  of  the  law,  and  that 
mastery  of  the  intricacies  of  special  plead- 
ing, so  necessary  for  his  future  success. 
He  also  attended  a  debating  society  in  order 
to  obtain  fluency  and  confidence,  and  to  ac- 
custom himself  to  the  sound  of  his  own 
voice.  His  circumstances  were  so  strait- 
ened during  this  f]«riod  that  he  himself  ac- 
knowledged, and  indeed  vaunted,  that  his 
family  were  usuaUy  feed  on  cow-beef  and 
tripe,  and  that  when  he  was  called  to  the 
bar  he  was  almost  reduced  to  his  last  shil- 
ling. But  his  sanguine  disposition  and  his 
courageous  self-reliance  supported  him 
through  all  his  difficulties. 

No  sooner  was  he  called  to  the  bar  than 
there  was  a  propitious  change  m  \^  6x- 


236 


£RSKIN£ 


cunistances.  From  being  almost  pemiiless 
ho  became  suddenly  afHuent,  and  tbouffh 
a  perfect  novice  in  Westminster  Ilall,  ne 
was  at  once  recognised  as  one  of  its  brightest 
ornaments.  One  happy  accident  followed 
by  another  gave  him  the  fortunate  oppor- 
tunity. Happening  to  dine  in  company 
with  Captain  Bailliei  against  whom  a  rule 
to  show  caiise  in  the  following  Michaelmas 
Term  why  a  criminal  information  should 
not  be  filed  for  a  libel  on  the  officers  of 
Gi'cenwich  Hospital  had  been  recently  ob- 
tained, Erskine,  in  ignorance  that  the  can- 
tain  was  present,  expressed  himself  freely 
on  the  doomed  pampnlet,  which  was  then 
tlie  general  subject  of  conversation.  He 
spoke  with  so  much  warmth  and  indigna- 
tion against  the  tyranny  and  abuses  im- 
puted to  Lord  Sandwicfi,  first  lord  of  the 
Admiralty,  and  the  officers  of  the  hospital, 
that  the  captain,  enquiring  who  he  was, 
determined  to  employ  him  as  his  advocate. 
Erskine  had  not  then  taken  his  seat  in 
court,  and  his  first  retainer  and  first  brief 
was  as  counsel  for  the  defence  of  Captain 
Baillie.  But  still,  as  he  was  the  last  of  five 
barristers  retained  on  that  side,  ho  could 
not  expect  to  have  any  opportunity  of  dis- 
tinguishing himself;  but  again  fortune 
favoured  him.  His  four  seniors  expended 
^o  much  time  in  their  arguments,  and  Mr. 
Hargrave  was  obliged  by  illness  so  often 
to  interrupt  his  address,  that  at  the  close 
of  it  Lord  Mansfield  adjourned  the  court. 
Erskine  therefore  had  to  commence  the 
proceedings  on  the  next  morning,  and  in 
a  speech  as  powerful  and  efiective  as  was 
<evor  heard  in  court  he  exposed  and  stig- 
matised the  practices  of  Xiord  Sandwich 
and  the  officers  of  the  hospital,  with  so 
much  eloquent  invective  that  the  rule  was 
dismissed,  and  Erskine  was  triumphant. 
The  effect  of  this  brilliant  oration  was  so 
great  that  retainers  flowed  in  upon  him 
from  all  quarters,  and  from  that  time  for- 
ward there  was  scarcely  a  cause  or  a  trial 
of  importance  in  which  he  was  not  engaged. 
Tliis  first  appearance  occurred  on  November 
'2><,  1778,  and  as  a  consequence  of  his  suc- 
cess he  was  employed  in  the  following 
January  to  defend  Lord  Keppel,  on  the 
charges  brought  against  him  by  Sir  Hugh 
Pallisser.  The  tiial  lasted  thirteen  days, 
and,  though  from  the  restricted  privileges 
of  a  counsel  at  a  court-martial  he  was  not 
allowed  to  examine  witnesses  nor  to  make 
n  speech  in  defence,  he  suggested  the  ques- 
tions to  be  put,  and  composed  the  address 
which  Jjord  Keppel  was  to  deliver.  To 
the  excellence  ot  that  address  his  noble 
client  attributed  his  triumphant  and  unani- 
mous acquittal,  testifying  his  gratitude  by 
the  noble  present  of  lOOSl. 

Though  acquiring  in  less  than  a  year  the 
lead  over  many  an  elderly  aspirant,  his 
sacceas  was  productive  of  no  jealousy  or 


EBSKISE 

illwill.  His  manners  were  bo  plftiudiy 
and  his  bearing  so  unpretendixijg  that  1m 
soon  became  a  universal  favourite,  and  Ida 
competitors  willingly  submitted  to  the  la- 
periority  of  his  genius.  His  business  be- 
came so  extensive  that  he  found  it  neeee- 
sary  to  refuse  to  hold  junior  briefe,  and  ho 
accordingly  received  a  patent  of  precedeiui 
in  May  1783,  before  he  had  been  five  yean 
at  the  bar. 

The  coaUtion  ministiy,  of  which  his  whig 
friends  formed  a  part,  had  in  the  previou 
March  come  into  power,  and,  being  natunlhr 
desirous  of  the  assistance  of  one  so  man 
famed  for  his  eloquence,  procured  his  elee- 
tion  for  Portsmouth  in  the  following  No- 
vember.   He  made  his  first  speech  on  the     _ 
introduction  of  Mr.  Fox*8  India  hill,  and 
continued   to   support  it  in   its   progreii 
through  the  house.    When  the  rejectka     - 
of  that  bill  by  the  Lords  caused  tne  dii* 
missal  of  his  mends  from  the  govemmentf 
he  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  vexatiou 
attempts  in  the  remainder  of  the  sessiai 
to  oust  Mr.  Pitt,  the  new  minister.    TIu 
natural   consequence  was  that,  with  tiM 
dissolution  of  that  parliament  in  Mud 
1784,    Erskine  was  made  one  of  'Fox*! 
Mar^Ts,'  and  his  senatorial  life  suffered  m 
interruption  of  more  than  six  years.   Li 
truth,  he  had  somewhat  disappointed  puUie 
expectation.    His  eloquence  was  less  suited 
to  the  senate  than  to    the  forum;  aad| 
though  he  made  some  effective  addresflOi 
lie  was  considered  to  have  been  cowed  lij 
the  superior   powers  of  Mr.  Pitt,  against 
whom  ne  was  mdiscreetly  put  in  colluLoD. 

During  this  interval  he  devoted  himself 
to  his  profession,  in  the  pursuit  of  whid 
he  increased  his  fame  and  fortune.    Beaidei 
his  command  of  business  in  Westminster 
Hall  and  on  the  Home  Circuit,  he  wai 
called  by  special  retainer  to  prosecute  or 
defend   very  many    important    causes  it 
other  parts  of  the  kingd!om.    Among  thoN 
of  a  more  public  nature  was  his  defenoe 
of  Dr.   Shipley,  the  dean  of  St.   Asa^ 
for  publishm^'  a  tract  by   Sir   Wilhim 
Jones,  when,  in  a  contest  with  his  former 
master,  Mr.  Justice  Buller,  he  boldly  in- 
sisted on  the  verdict  of  the  jury  being  taken 
in  the  very  words  they  used,  and  altar- 
wards,  in  a  speech  which  Charles  Fox  de- 
clared to  be  the  finest  piece  of  reasoning  in 
the  English   language,  contended  for  the 
power  and  right  of  the  jury  to  determine 
whether  the  publication  complained  of  was 
or  was  not  a  libel.    Though  the  judgmaat 
was  afterwards  arrested,  the  judses  decided 
against  him  on  this  Question ;  but  bis  ar- 
gument was  the  deatn-blow  to  their  doe- 
trine,  and  led  to  the  enactment  of  Mr.  Fo^a 
libel  bill  in  1702,  which  fuUy  eeteUdhti 
the  right  of  juries  to  pre  a  genmi  Todkt 
on  the  whole  matter  in  iaaue.    At  lUa  tfaM 
Mr.  Erskine  hadregained  hia  matbk 


ERSKINE 


237 


BBOt  for  bis  old  boionfrli,  and  had  the    and  the  sale  of  his  portnut  and  bust  was 
■cdsfiution  of  aeconding  Mr.  Fox's  motion    excesuve. 


m  bringing  in  the  bilL  At  this  time  also 
b»  waa  attorney-general  to  the  Prince  of 
HValea,  who  on  the  formation  of  his  esta- 
hfidiment  bad  nominated  him  to  that  office. 
/Another  triumph  in  libel  cases  was  in  his 


For  the  next  twelve  years  he  preserved 
his  undisputed  ascendency  in  the  conrt.^, 
and  was  engaged  for  the  plaintifls  or  defen- 
dants in  almost  every  cause.  In  state  trials 
the  defence  was  generally  entrusted  to  him 


immitable  defence  of  Stockdale,  prosecuted    as  the  advocate  of  liberty  of  speech,  and  re- 


lor  pobliahing  Lean's  pamphlet  against 
the  managers  on  Hastings'  tnal,  when  his 
finable  aigoment  for  free  discussion,  and 
bia  impreflsive  introduction  of  the  celeln«ted 
Slnstiation  of  the  Indian  chiei^  produced 
10  oitbusiastic  an  effect  on  the  auditoiy, 
sod  induced  the  juiy,  even  before  the  libel 
lull  was  passed,  to  acquit  the  defendant. 
When  the  French  Revolution  electrified 


suited  most  frequently  m  verdicts  of  ac- 
auittal.  In  parliament  he  was  always 
found  on  the  liberal  side,  supporting  Mr. 
Fox,  and  joining  him  in  his  temporar}' 
secession  from  the  house.  He  published  a 
pamphlet  entitled  '  A  View  of  the  Causes 
and  Consequences  of  the  present  War  with 
France/  or  which  no  less  than  thirty-seven 
editions  were  called  for.    In  it  he  made  a 


the  world,  a  schism  arose  among  the  whigs,  violent  attack  on  Mr.  IHtt,  against  whom 
many  of  whom,  led  by  Burke,  supported  |  he  had  a  strong  animosity,  arising,  perhaps, 
goveniment  in  its  efforts  to  counteract  the  !  from  his  consciousness  of  Ifailuro  in  competi- 
iqpread  of  revolutionaiy  principles  in  this  tion  with  the  minister  in  the  senate.  0:i 
eoontiT.  The  Prince  or  Wales  took  the  i  Pitt*s  resignation  in  1801,  Mr.  Addin^on 
alann  with  this  section,  but  Erskine,  though  I  offered  Enkine  the  attorney-generalship, 
Ms  royal  highness*s  attorney-general,  and  ,  which  from  a  doubt  of  the  prince's  approval 
deagned  for  the  same  office  to  the  crown  he  declined.  He  however  supportea  that 
had  the  regpency  been  established,  had  the  administration  till  it  was  superseded  in 
•pint  and  independence  to  join  the  other  1804  by  the  return  of  Mr.  Iitt,  but  ho 
section,  led  by  Fox,  to  whom  throughout  his  ;  seldom  addressed  the  house.  In  the  follow- 


ing year  the  prince  revived  the  office  of 
chancellor  to  the  duchy  of  Cornwall,  and 
gave  it  to  Mr.  Erskine ;  and  on  the  renewal 
of  the  war  he  for  a  time  resumed  his  old 
profession  by  becoming  colonel  of  the  I^w 
Association,  a  corps  of  volunteers  which  was 


lak  he  zealously  adhered.  Happening  then 
to  be  retained  for  the  defendant  in  the 
prosecution  of  Paine's  'Rights  of  Man,* 
attempts  were  made  to  induce  him  to  refuse 
the  bnef ;  and  on  his  firm  ivfusal  to  do  so, 
upon  the  principle  that  he  was  bound  by 

professional  etiquette  to  defend  any  man  .  familiarly  called  *  The  Devil's  Own.'  It  is 
Kffwhom  be  was  retained,  he  received  a  ;  curious  that  it  should  have  fallen  to  hU 
message  from  the  prince,  unwillingly  re-  |  lot  soon  after  to  contend  for  the  right  of 
<pK8ting  him  to  resign  his  office,  which  he  .  volunteers  to  resign,  when  the  government 
accordingly  did  in  februaiy  1703.  .  wished  to  deprive  them  of  that  power ;  but. 

This  episode  of  unpopularity  was  of  short    as  Ui^ual,  he  was  triumphant,   the  judges 
duration.     In  the  next  year  he  rose  to  the    unanimously  deciding  that  the  ser\'ice  was 

Sbest  pitch  of  public  admiration  by  the    entirely  voluntar}'. 
le  stand  he  made  against  the  doctrine  of  i      On  5lr.  Pitt's  death  in  1800  the  whigs, 
constructive  treason  in  his  defence  of  Hardy,  '  after  an  exile  from  court  of  more  than 
Home  Tooke,  and  Thelwall,  severally  in-    twenty  years,  were  allowed  a  temporarj' 
Acted  for  high  treason   as   members  of  \  taste  of  the  sweets  of  office,  and  Erskine 

was  certain  to  be  a  partaker.  He  would 
have  preferred  to  preside  over  a  common 
law  court,  conversant  as  he  was  with  its 


lodeties  professing  parliamentary  reform, 
lut  charged  with  conspiring  to  subvert  the 
existing  law^ai  and  constitution,  and  thus 


compassing  the  king*s  death.  The  trial  of  rules  and  practice ;  but  the  existing  chiefs. 
Hardy  lasted  eight  days,  that  of  Home  ,  Lord  Ellenborough  and  Sir  James  Mans- 
Tooke  six  da^s,  and  that  of  Thelwall  four  ^  field,  wisely  resisting  the  temptation  of  the 


days,  in  all  eighteen  days,  and  each  resulted 
ia  an  acquittal,  produced  principally  by  the 
wondrous  exertions,  the  powerful  reason- 
ing, the.  eloquence,  and  the  tact  of  their 
advocate.  Tnis  triumph  was  hailed  by  the 
general  public  as  the  preservation  of  the 
eoDstitution  from  the  perils  that  would  have 
environed  it  if  the  subjects  were  liable  to 
tnch  proceedings.  No  further  attempt  has 
been  since  made  to  impute  treason  by  con- 
stroction  or  inference.  The  applause  which 
Enkine  received  could  scarcely  be  ex- 
ceeded ;  boooiirs  flowed  in  to  him  from  all 
qaaiten  in  the  fireedom  of  corporations. 


Great  Seal,  its  possession  was  given  to  him 
on  Febniary  7,  i>SOO,  as  lord  high  chancell«  ir 
of  Great  Britaan,  and  he  was  at  the  sniii<' 
time  raised  to  the  peerage  by  the  title  ot* 
Lord  Erskine  of  Kestormel  Castle  in  Corn- 
wall, a  designation  with  which  the  l*riiic«' 
of  Wales  complimented  him.  as  it  had  been 
the  nncient  residence  of  the  Dukes  of  Corn- 
wall. AVith  whatever  feelings  of  ])ride  lu» 
went  in  state  from  his  house  in  Lincohi's 
Inn  Fields  to  take  the  oaths,  or  miiy  havo 
welcomed  these  rewards  for  his  long  public 
services  in  the  cause  of  liberty,  far  greater 
must  have  been  his  gratification  at  the 


t238 


EBSKINE 


recognition  of  his  priyate  worth  and  per- 
gonal character  in  the  unprecedented  address 
of  congratulation  which  was  unanimously 
Toted  to  him  by  the  whole  bar  of  £ngland. 
That  body  mignt  well  regret  his  retirement 
from  its  ranks,  for  never  had  thej,  and 
never  could  they  expect  to  have^  a  leader 
whose  hilarity  of  spirits,  whose  bvely  wit, 
and  whose  uniform  kindness,  added  to  such 
extraordinary  powers,  could  secure  at  once 
their  affection  and  respect. 

Though  litUe  acquainted  with  the  rules 
of  equity  or  the  practice  of  his  new  court, 
he  had  the  wisdom  to  avail  himself  of  the 
advice  of  more  experienced  men ;  and  by 
his  natural  quickness  of  perception,  his  dis- 
cretion and  caution,  he  passed  through  his 
fourteen  months  of  trial  m  so  satisfactory  a 
manner  that  only  one  of  his  decrees  was 
appealed  against,  and  that  one,  arising  out 
oi  Mr.  Thellusson*s  extraordinary  will,  was 
Affirmed.  In  the  trial  of  Lord  Melville, 
Xiord  Erskine  presided  as  chancellor,  and 
acted  with  that  dignity,  firmness,  and  im- 
partiality that  excited  universal  admiration. 
As  a  peer  of  parliament  he  of  course  sup- 
portea  the  measures  introduced  by  hisparty, 
and  had  the  satisfaction  to  announce  the 
royal  assent  to  the  bill  for  the  abolition  of 
slavery.  In  the  summer  the  death  of  his 
friend  Mr.  Fox  was  a  source  of  sincere 
lamentation  to  him^  which  was  followed 
in  the  following  spring  by  the  dissolution 
of  the  ministry,  occasioned  by  the  refusal  of 
Oeorge  HI,  to  sanction  a  bill  allowing 
Boman  Catholics  to  hold  commissions  in 
the  army.  Though  himself  adverse  to  the 
measure*,  he  shared  in  the  dismissal,  and 
gave  up  the  Great  Seal  on  April  7,  1807. 

In  the  fifteen  years  during  which  he 
survived  his  loss  of  ofiice  he  very  rarely 
took  a  prominent  part  in  the  politics  of  the 
day;  but  on  some  occasions  he  exhibited 
the  same  command  of  argument  and  ora- 
torical power  which  had  formerly  distin- 
guished him.  When  the  kind's  permanent 
illness  necesatated  a  regency  m  1810,  Lord 
Erskine  opposed  the  restrictions  on  his  patron 
the  Prince  of  Wales,  who,  in  1815,  tnough 
he  had  deserted  his  old  whig  connections, 
complimented  his  former  chancellor  with 
the  green  ribbon  of  the  order  of  the  Thistie. 

Lord  Erskine  now  amused  himself  ns  a 
man  of  the  world,  mixine  in  all  gay  so- 
cieties, and  bein^  acceptable  to  all  by  his 
liveliness  and  wit.  His  harv-moU  and  his 
vers  de  socUU  at  this  time  and  while  at  the 
bar  would  fill  a  ^od-sized  volume,  and 
]VIr.  Townsend  in  his  agreeable  memoir  has 
made  a  happy  selection  of  them.  He  i^gain 
ventured  his  fame  by  becoming  an  author 
on  a  more  extended  scale,  and  published  a 
romance  called  'Armata,'  being  a  clever 
allegory,  in  the  manner  of  Sir  Thomas 
More*s  'Utopia'  and  Dean  Swift's  'Voy- 
age to  Laputa,'  on  the  politics  of  England 


EBSKINE 

and  the  customs  and  maimers  of  LoodoB 
life.  It  had  a  temporary  popularitj  tad 
passed  through  several  editiona,  Irat  fnoL 
the  want  of  interest  in  the  story  it  is  now 
almost  forffotten. 

When  the  popular  tumults  and  diiooD" 
tent  in  1817  led  to  the  introductioii  CKf  i^ 
strictive  measures.  Lord  Erskine  appeind 
again  in  the  political  world,  and  contended 
against  them  with  all  his  ancient  yigomii 
He  stood  boldly  and  prominentlj  fbrwiid 
also  in  1820  in  defence  of  Queen  Caroline^  el- 
though  by  so  doing  he  opposed  his  old  patna 
and  mend.  But,  deeming  the  queen  m 
innocent  and  injured  woman,  he  cast  Sfoy 
personal  consideration  aride,  and  throogk- 
out  the  investigation  battled  on  her  wr^ 
and  when  the  Bill  of  Pains  and  Penattiei 
was  withdrawn,  he  sounded  its  knell  in  fh 
last  speech  he  made  in  parliament  By  tUi 
independent  conduct  his  favour  witn  Ai 
people,  by  whom  he  was  almost  foigotft^ 
was  revived,  and  was  exhibited  in  vnaj 
shape.  His  likeness  was  a  treasoie  QBh 
versally  sought,  addresses  and  moniapd 
freedoms  were  showered^  upon  him,  sol 
public  dinners  were  given  to  do  him  ho- 
nour. One,  on  which  he  most  prided  him- 
self, was  that  at  Edinburgh,  which  he  U 
not  visited  since  his  departure  from  it  n  • 
midshipman  in  1764,  a  period  of  fif^-sefoi 
years.  In  1822  he  published  a  *I«ttertD 
Lord  Liverpool '  in  support  of  the  canie  of 
the  Greeks,  proving  tnat  his  love  of  fies* 
dom  was  unaoated ;  and  another  pamphbt 
on  agricultural  distress,  his  advocs^  of 
increased  protection  in  which  is  stroMf 
opposed  to  the  principle  of  firee  trade  tfiit 
now  prevails.  His  career  was  now  dnw* 
ing  to  its  close.  In  the  autumn  of  1888^ 
as  he  was  proceeding  by  sea  to  pay  a  viflt 
to  his  brother  the  ^rl  of  Buchan  at  Btj- 
burgh  Abbey,  he  was  suddenly  attacM 
with  inflammation  in  the  chest.  On  landlr 
ing  he  went  direct  to  Ammonddl, 
Ecunbunrh,  where  the  widow  o\ 
brother  Henry  resided,  and  where  the  EmI 
of  Buchan  joined  him.  There  he  breslhed 
his  last  on  November  17,  1823,  and  his 
remains  lie  in  the  family  burying-plsoe  sfc 
Uphall  in  the  county  of  linlithgow. 

In  the  eloquent  words  of  Lord  Broughtm. 
Mf  there  be  yet  among  us  the  power  of 
freely  discussing  the  acts  of  our  ruleii;  if 
there  be  yet  the  privilege  of  meeting;  ftr 
the  promotion   of  needful  reforms;  if  hi 
who  desires  wholesome  changes  in  ouroon- 
stitution  be  still  recognised  as  a  pstiioly 
and  not  doomed  to  die  tne  death  of  a  tndto^ 
let  us  acknowledge  with  gratitude  that  to 
this  great  man,  under  heaven,  we  owe  fidi 
felicity  of  the  times.'    The  courtesj  of  U 
manners,  the  cheerfulness  of  his  dispiMitii 
the  geniality  of  his  wit,  his  ' genevNii 
pulses  and  nonourable  feeling%*  aaft  ' 
wonderful  power  of  his  eluqoMOi^  1 


1 


JSBSKISE 

4ilnio6t  as  viTidly  among  the  few  who  now 
mizriTe  as  they  impnsBsed  those  who  at  his 
death  erected  a  statute  to  his  memoiy  in 
lincoln's  Inn  HalL  Against  merits  such 
as  these  the  only  fiEuling  that  is  suggested 
is  a  charge  of  egotism  and  vanity,  with  too 
great  a  tendency  to  introduce  himself  and 
the  incidents  of  his  life  upon  all  occasions. 
Let  those  who  laugh  at  him  on  that  accoimt 
adc  themselves  whether^if  they  had  founded 
their  fortunes  in  the  same  surprising  man- 
ner, they  could  have  altogether  abstained 
from  seli-^lorification. 

Of  the  incidents  of  his  private  life  there 
are  few  records.  If  they  were  mixed  with 
some  frailties,  we  may  ssk,  What  mortal  is 
exempt  from  them  P  Whatever  they  were, 
they  may  be  designated  bv  the  words  of 
that  rigorous  moralist,  Lora  Kenyon,  *  blots 
in  the  sun.'  The  great  fortune  which  he 
must  have  acquired  by  his  forensic  suc- 
cess he  lost  by  unfortunate  speculations  in 
Transatlantic  funds,  and  by  the  purchase  of 
an  estate  in  Sussex,  which  produced  no- 
thing but  brooms  ;  so  that  at  last  he  was 
obliged  to  part  with  his  beautiful  seat  at 
Ilampstead,  and  live  upon  the  retiring  al- 
lowance of  chancellor. 

He  lost  his  first  wife,  after  a  union  of 
thirty-five  years,  in  December  1806,  just 
before  his  attaining  the  peerage.  His  se- 
cond wife  was  Miss  Mary  Buck.  By  both 
he  left  issue.  Thomas,  one  of  his  sons  by 
the  first  wife,  having  acquired  judicial  ho- 
noursy  is  next  to  be  noticed.  (Lives,  by 
Jiotcoe.  Townaauly  and  Lord  Campbell:  Lord 
Bnmgkams  Sidorical  Sketches ;  &c  &c) 

KttaKiHH,  TH0]CAS,the  fourth  son  of  the 
above  celebrated  advocate  by  his  first  wife, 
Frances,  the  daughter  of  Daniel  Moore, 
Esq.,  was  bom  on  March  12,  1768,  at  No.  | 
10  i^erjeants'  Inn,  Fleet  Street,  then  the 
abode  of  his  father.  He  was  educated  at 
Harrow  under  Dr.  Drury  and  Dr.  Butler  his 
snceessor.  His  career  at  school  was  inter- 
rupted by  his  father's  elevation  to  the  office 
of  lord  chancellor,  whose  inauguration  he  was 
summoned  to  attend,  and  who  gave  him  the 
•ecietarvship  of  presentations,  the  duties  of 
which  aH  not  require  any  great  experience. 
At  the  same  time  he  was  entered  at  Trinitv 
College,  Cambridge,  and  in  1811  as  apeer^ 
son  graduated  as  M.A.,  without  residence 
or  examination.  In  1807  he  became  a 
member  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  commencing  his 
stody  of  the  law  as  a  pupil  of  the  emment 
special  pleader  Joseph  Uhitty,  Esq.,  and 
acquired  such  a  mastery  of  the  science  that 
in  1810  he  began  practice  in  the  same 
branch  on  his  own  account.  After  a  suc- 
cessful pursuit  of  it  for  three  years,  Mr. 
Erskine  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1813.  He 
at  fint  joined  the  Home  Circuit,  and  after- 
wards availed  himself  of  the  privilege  of 
changing  it  once,  by  attaching  himself  to 
the  Western  Circuit 


EESKINE 


239 


Taking  no  active  part  in  political  con* 
troversy,  and  more  mtent  on  the  steady 
performance  of  his  duties  than  in  the  pur- 
suit of  public  distinction,  he  progressed 
slowly  but  surely,  till  he  acquired  such  a 

C*tion  as  to  entitle  him  to  claim  the 
our  of  a  nlk  gown.  He  was  appointed 
a  king's  counsel  in  1827,  and  speedily 
acquired  a  place,  if  not  among  the  first 
leaders  of  the  common  law  bar,  yet  one  of 
considerable  distinction  on  his  own  cir- 
cuit His  speeches  as  a  leading  advocate 
were  not  so  much  characterised  by  fluency 
or  coniousness  of  language,  or  by  strong 
appeals  to  the  feelings,  as  by  great  clear- 
ness of  statement,  and,  accormng  to  the 
subject  of  the  case,  placing  it  on  a  high 
moral  ground,  or  treating  it  with  dry 
humour  and  epigrammatic  force.  He  pos- 
sessed a  power  which  in  those  days,  iinien 
verdicts  were  more  often  won  or  lost  on 
technical  grounds  than  now,  was  of  infinite 
importance, — he  saw  perfectly  the  points  of 
attack  and  defence ;  and  no  one  was  more 
acute  in  detecting  a  latent  non-suit  in  his 
opponent's  pleadings.  When  Serjeant 
Wilde  found  on  consultation  that  there 
was  a  weak  point  in  his  case,  he  would 
commonlv  asK,  '  Whom  have  we  against 
us  ? '  and  if  the  answer  was  '  Mr.  ErSdne,' 
would  shake  his  head  and  say.  'Then  we 
may  be  pretty  sure  this  blot  wiU  be  hit' 

When  the  new  Court  of  Bankruptcy, 
established  by  stat  1  and  2  WilL  IV.,  c 
5Qf  received  tiie  royal  assent  on  October  20, 
1831,  Mr.  Erskine  was  selected  as  the 
chief  of  the  four  judges  who  were  thereby 
appointed  as  a  Court  of  Review.  Though 
the  junior  of  his  three  colleagues,  he  soon 
by  the  unfeigned  simplicity  of  his  maimer 
and  attractive  cordiality  overcame  any 
jealousy  that  might  have  existed  among 
them ;  and  by  the  clearness  of  his  intellect, 
the  soundness  of  his  judgment,  his  great 
industrv,  impartiality,  and  care,  amply 
justified  the  appointment.  He  presioed 
over  this  court  for  eight  years,  assisting 
also  in  hearing  appeals  before  the  judidid 
committee  of  the  privy  council,  and  in 
the  early  period  of  itis  existence  aiding 
greatly  in  shaping  its  proceedings  into  that 
course  which  has  graauidly  raised  it  to  so 
pre-eminent  a  ramc  among  the  judicial 
tribunals  of  the  country.  So  efiective  were 
his  services  considered  that  he  was  appointed 
a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  January 
9,  1839 ;  and  for  nearly  four  years  he  held 
both  offices  together,  not  residing  his 
chief  justiceship  of  the  Court  of  Review  in 
Bankruptcy  till  November  1842. 

He  accompanied  Mr.  Justice  Coleridge 
on  the  Nortnem  Circuit  in  the  spring  of 
1840,  when  the  delinquents  among  the 
Chartists  were  to  be  tried ;  and  it  is  to  the 
credit  of  these  two  judges  that  the  manner 
in  which  they  disposed  of  these  political 


240 


ESCUfilS 


trials  contributed  not  a  little  to  the  settle- 
ment of  distiirbed  minds,  and  to  disabuse 
ill-informed  persons  of  the  prejudices  they 
had  entertained  against  the  tribunals  of  the 
country.  The  effect  -was  that  the  judges 
were  not  merely  the  objects  of  general 
admiration,  but  that  their  conduct  was 
most  highly  applauded  by  those  papen 
(especially  the  '  r^orthem  Star,'  of  which 
Feargus  O'Connor  was  the  editor)  which 
were  supposed  to  guide  and  to  express  the 
feelings  of  the  lower  orders. 

Mr.  Justice  Erskine's  judicial  career  was 
short.  Amid  the  performance  of  his  duties 
he  was  seized  with  a  sudden  chill,  which 
produced  a  severe  attack  of  influenza  and 
congestion  of  the  luncs,  which  resulted 
in  the  rupture  of  a  blood-vessel  and  tuber- 
cular disease  in  the  lungs,  producing  such  a 
state  of  bodily  incapaci^  as  to  render  him 
totally  unfit  to  discharge  the  functions  of 
his  office,  requiring  as  they  did  the  active 
employment  of  the  voice.  Under  this  com- 
pulsion he  reluctantly  retired  from  the 
bench  in  November  1844,  and  many  were 
the  testimonials  he  received  from  his  dis- 
tinguished contemporaries  of  the  value  of 
those  services  they  were  about  to  lose. 

The  retired  judge  was  long  in  a  dangerous 
state,  and  it  was  nearly  ten  years  before  the 
bleeding  from  the  lungs  entirely  ceased; 
and  the  continuance  of  his  life  for  twenty 
years  after  his  first  seizure  was  little  less 
than  a  miracle.  He  died  at  Bournemouth, 
on  November  9, 1864.  By  his  wife  Hen- 
rietta Eliza,  daughter  of  Henry  Trail,  of 
Dairsie  in  Fifeshire,  he  had  a  lar^e  family, 
of  whom  only  four  were  living  at  his  death. 

ESCTJBIS,  Matthew  dk,  was  one  of  the 
five  justices  errant  appointed  by  Richard 
de  Luci  to  impose  the  assize  in  the  county 
of  Hants  in  20  Henry  II.,  1174.  (Mado.v, 
i.  125.)    He  is  not  otherwise  noticed. 

ESFEC,  Walter,  was  a  powerful  baron 
in  the  north,  his  principal  estate  being 
Ilelmsley,  or  Ilamlake,  in  Yorkshire,  and 
having  also  large  possessions  in  Northum- 
berland and  several  other  counties.  The 
loss  of  his  only  son  Walter,  by  a  fall  from 
his  horse,  is  said  to  have  induced  him  to 
devote  a  great  part  of  his  estate  to  the  ser- 
vice of  God.  He  and  his  wife  Adelina 
founded  a  priory  of  Augustin  canons  at 
Kirkham  in  Yorkshire,  to  the  honour  of 
the  Holy  Trinity,  in  1121,  endowing  it  with 
seven  churches,  and  other  lands  to  the 
amount  of  1100  marks  per  annum.  He 
also  founded  the  abbey  ot  Rievaulx  in  the 
same  coimty,  for  Cistercian  monks,  in  1131, 
dedicating  it  to  the  Virgin  Mary ;  and  the 
abbey  of  Warden  in  Bedfordshire,  in  1135, 
for  the  same  order,  vdth  endowments  of 
like  munificence. 

He  was  justice  of  the  forest  for  Yorkshire 
in  the  reign  of  Henry  I. ;  and  he  and  Eus- 
tace Fitz-John,  another  northern  baron. 


were  Justices  itinerant  in  that  county,  ane 
also  m  Northumberland^  Cumbexlan^  «nc 
the  bishopric  of  Durham.  The  praoH 
period  of  their  appointment  is  nncertui, 
out  they  both  fined  to  be  relieved  from 
being  judges  of  Yorkshire  in  31  Hennr  L 
(Af(j^.  Hot,)  They  had  certainly  acted  « 
justiciers  in  the  two  preceding  yeti^  dur- 
ing which  they  were  excused,  as  the  judges 
then  usually  were,  ttcfm  the  payment  of 
Danegeld  and  other  impositions. 

In  the  early  part  oi  the  reign  of  King 
Stephen,  Walter  Espec  appears  in  the  cha- 
racter of  an  experienced  warrior,  heading 
his  countrymen  against  the  ferocious  inra- 
sions  of  the  Scots.  Animated  byde^Mor, 
under  the  barbarities  which  they  witnened, 
the  northern  barons  summoned  their  ndgii- 
hours  and  dependants,  who  put  themamt 
under  the  command  of  Walter  Emc  and 
William  of  Albemarle,  and  marched  t» 
Northallerton.  There  tiiey  placed  a  aflitt 
pix  containing  the  consecrated  host  on  tha 
top  of  a  tall  mast,  with  the  banners  of  thdr 
patron  saints,  to  ser^-e  as  a  rallying  noint; 
and  from  this  sacred  ensign  the  oattla 
which  followed,  and  which  was  fought  oo 
August  22, 1138,  received  the  name  of  tha 
Battle  of  the  Standard.  From  the  foot  of 
this  standard  Walter  Espec  haiangaed  hia 
associates,  and  then,  by  giving  his  handta 
William  of  Albemarle,  and  exdaiming  inA 
a  loud  voice,  ^  I  pledge  thee  my  troth  either 
to  conquer  or  to  die,'  he  kindled  sudi  en* 
thusiasm  among  his  hearers  that  the  oath 
was  repeated  by  every  chieftain  around 
him.  The  result  of  the  battle  was  the  en- 
tire  overthrow  of  the  invaders,  with  the 
loss  of  12,000  men. 

He  died  in  1153,  and  was  buried  in  hit 
own  monaster}'  of  Eievaulx.  To  his  piety 
and  bravery  may  be  added  that  he  im 
equally  distinguished  for  wit,  modestr, 
sincerity,  and  loyalty,  and  (not  to  onut 
what  was  a  great  recommendation  in  thoea 
days)  was  of  high  and  commanding  sta- 
ture. 

Leaving  no  issue  by  his  wife  Adelina, 
his  property  descended  on  his  three  sisters, 
from  one  of  whom,  Adeline,  the  wife  of 
Peter  de  Boos,  the  Duke  of  Rutland  and 
liOrd  de  Roos  are  descended. 

ESSEBT,  Jordan  be  (Ashby),  waathi 
grandson  of  another  Jordan,  and  had  con* 
siderable  possessions  in  the  county  of  Liii' 
coin.  Others  were  subsequently  conferred 
upon  him  by  King  John  for  his  adherenoa 
to  the  royal  cause.  (Hot,  Chw,  L  S9L 
290.)  In  7  Henry  HI.  he  was  appd&tet 
bv  the  Archbishop  of  York  to  appear  iSor 
him  before  the  barons  of  the  ExchaqiHr 
relative  to  the  debt  due  by  his  piodmaaWT 
to  the  crown  {Ibid,  335),  horn  wUek  H 
may  be  inferred  that  he  was  an  adltailph 
the  court.  He  was  selected  as  OM  of  1 
justices  itinerant  far  lancolniUila  itf 


EUSTACE 


241 


leufj  m.,  1225,  lieiiig  at  that  time  ccm- 
tMe  of  Lincoln  Castle.   (Ibid,  ii.  68,  77.^ 

XnEBT,  BoBBRT  SB,  sometimes  called 
jlssebnxne,  appears  in  the  acknowledgment 
f  a  fine  in  27  Heniy  HI.,  1243.  In  1221 
.  Robert  de  Esselnr  -was  appointed  with 
IVUliam  Basset  to  aeliTer  the  gaol  at  Roell 
a  Leicestershire  {Xickols,  679),  and  Robert 
nd  Thomas  de  Esflebum,  in  10  Henry  III., 
rere  attorned  by  William  de  FeraiiiB  in  a 
lit  he  bad  against  Walter  de  Widerill. 
Rid.  Clous.  iL  153.)  His  proper^  was 
rtnate  in  the  counties  of  Leicester,  North- 
mpton,  and  Nottingham.  (Ibid.  i.  253, 
5S,iL25 ;  Abb.  FlacU.  09.) 

B8SZ,  Hexbt  de,  whose  grandfather, 
Iwene,  at  the  time  of  the  general  survey 
ns  lend  of  Rachley  in  Enex,  and  of  no 
BSB  than  flftr-fonr  other  lordships  in  that 
oontjy  besides  others  in  SafTolk  and  Hunt- 
Bgdonshire,  was  the  inheritor  of  this  pro- 
lOt^  after  the  death  of  Robert  lus  father. 

B[e  was  in  tp^t  favour  with  Henry  II., 
ad  held  the  nigh  office  of  constable.  Ifis 
leas  as  a  justice  itinerant  in  many  counties 
n  recorded  on  the  roUs  of  that  Idng  from 
.166  to  1158.    (Pipe  jRoiU,  SI,  7S,  ic) 

He  was  likewise  sheriff  or  former  of  the 
Mxmtiea  of  Bedford  and  Buckingham. 

His  prosperiW,  however,  was  not  of  long 
xntinnance.     Li   the   war   which   King 
Soiy  waged  with  the  Welsh  in  1 157,  his 
irmy,  fSiUing  into  an  ambush  at  Coleshull 
nAintshire,  was  tiirown  into  confusion, 
md  the  long  himself  placed  in  great  danger. 
Deary  de    Essex,  who   bore   tiie   king*s 
rtudardy  instead  of  hastening  to  his  assis- 
tince,  was  seized  with  a  sudden  panic,  and, 
exclaiming  that  the  king  was  dead,  threw 
my  his  banner  and  fled  from  the  field.  The  I 
idog  with  much  difficulty  rallied  the  troops,  | 
lod,  though  his  armj  suffered  seyerely, 
orerlooked  the  dereliction  of  his  officer, 
utkiiig  allowance  probably  for  the  terror 
of  the   moment,    and   remembering   his 
fonner  services.    The  subsemient  conduct 
tad  bravery  of  Henry  de  £8sex  in  the 
vir  of  Toulouse,  in  1169,  justified  his 
urereign^s  lenienc\',  and  tended  to  wipe 
<nt  the  stain  from  Essex's  character.    Tne 
diignice  would  probably  have  been  entirely 
fiirgotten  but  for  a  quarrel  which  he  had 
h  years  afterwards  with  Robert  de  Mont- 
brt|  who,  publicly  charg^g  him  with  the 
kct.  and  offering  to  prove  it  in  mortal  com- 
it  the  king  had  no  choice  but  to  consent 
»  the  trial.    The  duel  accordingly  took 
Isce  on  April  18, 11C3,  at  an  island  near 
eadin;?,    and    terminated  in  the  defeat  | 
'  Essex.     The  '  Chronicle  of  Bracelonda '  . 
iO,  130)  says  that,  being  believed  to  be  | 
«d.  the  king,  on  the  petition  of  his  re-  \ 
tions,  permitted  his  body  to  be  taken  to  ! 
le  neighbouring  abbey  for  interment,  and  | 
iat  there  he  recovered,  and  took  the  hnbit  '■ 
'  the  order.   This  account  is  stated  to  have 


.'  been  narrated  by  himself  to  the  abbot  of 
St.  Edmunds,  on  his  visit  to  the  abbey  of 
Reading  about  the  year  1100 ;  so  that  he 
I  had  then  been  thirtv-three  years  in  the 
'  cloister,  where,  Fuller  quaintly  ol^er^'es, 
'between  shame  and  sanctity  he  blushed 
out  the  remainder  of  his  life.' 

By  his  defeat  the  whole  of  his  large 
possessions  were  confiscated,  and  several 
records  show  that  they  remained  in  the 
king's  hands  for  many  years  afterwards. 

Before  his  disgrace'  he  gave  the  church  of 
Walde  to  the  nuns  of  Clerkenwell,  and 
his  lordship  of  little  Fraincham  to  the 
Knights  Templars.  Dugdale  states  that  he 
had  two  sons,  Henry  and  Hugh,  and  that 
his  widow,  Alice,  a  sister  of  Alburio  de  Vere, 
afterwards  married  Roger  Fitz-Richard, 
lord  of  Warkworth  in  Northumberland, 
and  of  Clavering  in  Essex.  (BaroiuMe,  i. 
403 ;  Bradv,  302 ;  Lord  LytteUon,  ii.  73, 
70,  224 ;  LeUmd,  iii.  410.) 

EB8SX,  Earls  or.  See  G.  db  Mandsvil  ; 
G.  Fite-Peteb  ;  IL  Bourohisb  ;  T.  Crom- 
well. 

1V8TA0E  (Bishop  of  Elt),  of  whose 
parentage  and  early  life  no  memorial  re- 
mains, was  not  improbably  one  of  the 
clerks  in  Chancery.  The  appointment  to 
accompany  the  king  into  Normandy,  for 
the  purpose  of  conducting  such  business  of 
the  Ureat  Seal  as  miffht  De  required  while 
he  was  abroad,  would  be  the  natural  result 
of  his  official  position  ;  and  the  deanery  of 
Salisbuiy,  which  he  held  in  11^,  with  the 
addition  of  the  archdeaconry  of  Richmond, 
which  was  conferred  upon  him  in  the 
following  year  (Le  Xeve,  202,  324),  would 
probably  bo  the  recompense  to  which  he 
would  be  entitled  from  his  standing  in  the 
court 

Hoveden  calls  him  'sigillifer'  and  'vice- 
chancellor  ; '  but  in  the  charters  which  he 
authenticated,  the  first  of  which  is  dated 
April  7,  1196,  0  Richard  I.  (New  Foedera, 
i.   05),  he  simply  uses  the  terms  'tunc 

Srentis,*  or  '  tunc  agentis  vices  cancellarii.' 
e  was  raised  to  the  bishopric  of  Ely  on 
August  0,  1107,  but  was  not  consecrated 
till  the  8th  of  March  following.  There  is 
no  positive  evidence  of  the  actual  time 
when  he  received  the  Cireat  Seal  as  chan- 
cellor, but  he  probably  was  appointed  to 
office  before  his  consecration  as  bishop. 

Succeeding  Longchanip  thus  both  in  his 
ecclesiastical  and  his  civil  honours,  Eus- 
tace's name  as  chancellor  appears  in  a 
charter  dated  Auprust  22,  11 08,  'apud 
liupem  Auree  ValL'  (iZV/wirr,  i.  07),  and 
he  was  officially  present  when  a  tine  was 
levied  at  Westminster  in  the  following 
year.  (Himter's  Preface,)  Kinjr  Kichard's 
death  occurred  on  April  0,  11J)0,  when 
Eustace's  duties  ceased,  King  John  select- 
ing his  successor  from  among  his  own  ad- 
herents. 

R 


242 


EVKRDCN 


That  John,  however,  appreciated  his 
abilities  and  judgment  is  proved  by  his 
beinff  sent  in  120^  with  Huoert  de  Burgh 
to  the  court  of  France,  to  demand  from 
King  Philip  a  safe-conduct  on  his  sove- 
reign's appearance  there  to  answer  the 
chorffe  made  against  him  of  having  mur- 
dered his  nephew,  Prince  Arthur.  The 
ambassadors  were  told  that  their  king 
might  come  in  peace,  but  that  his  return 
would  depend  on  the  result  of  the  trial,  a 
decision  which  John  was  not  so  foolhardy 
as  to  risk. 

In  the  subsequent  troubles  of  that  reign 
he  was  called  upon  to  take  a  prominent 
and  courageous  part  Appointea  in  1207, 
in  conjunction  with  the  Bishops  of  London 
and  Worcester,  to  convey  tne  papal  re- 
monstrance, they  appeared  before  the  king, 
and  demanded  of  nim  the  restoration  of 
Stephen,  the  elected  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury. The  nardened  monarches  sngry 
and  contemptuous  refusal  was  followed  oy 
the  bishops  pronouncing  the  solemn  inter- 
dict, which  deprived  the  kingdom  for  so 
manv  years  of  tne  rites  of  reli^on.  Warned 
by  the  long's  threats,  the  bishops  retired 
secretly  from  the  kingdom,  and  inl  the  fol- 
lowing year,  by  the  pope's  directions,  ful- 
minated the  sentence  of  excommunication 
against  the  royal  person.  They  remained 
in  voluntary  exOe  till  the  year  1212,  when, 
the  king  having  found  it  necessary  to  ob- 
tain absolution  from  the  pontifi^  they  ven- 
tured to  return ;  and  in  the  charter  of  sub- 
mission afterwards  executed  a  pecuniary 
compensation  was  made  to  them  for  their 
losses. 

During  the  short  remainder  of  his  life 
Eustace  was  reconciled  to  his  sovereign, 
and  was  one  of  his  sureties  to  the  barons 
for  the  redress  of  their  grievances.  He  did 
not  live  to  witness  the  grant  of  Magna 
Charta,  but  died  at  Reading  on  February  3, 
1214,  and  was  buried  in  his  own  cathe- 
dral. 

He  is  described  as  well  skilled  in  both 
sacred  and  profane  learning,  and  as  a  pious 
and  discreet  prelate.  To  his  churcn  he 
was  a  considerable  benefactor,  and  built 
the  Gralilee  at  the  west  end  of  it  from  its 
foundation.  ( Godtcitif  254  ;  AiiffL  Sac,  i. 
633;  Madox',  i.  29,  77 ;  Bapin,  ii.  429.) 

EVSSDOK,  Silvester  de  (Bishop  of 
Carlisle),  as  one  of  the  king's  chaplains, 
appears  as  a  witness  to  charters  granted  in 
7  and  9  John.  He  had  about  that  time 
presentations  to  the  churches  of  Bulewell, 
Fremesfeld,  and  Tatham  in  succession.  In 
all  these  he  is  called  by  his  Christian  name 
alone,  and  may  possibly,  therefore,  not  be 
the  person  who  afterwards  became  bishop. 
In  8  Henry  m.,  1224,  however,  Silvester 
de  Everdon  ia  expressly  mentioned  as  a 
demandant  of  a  virgate  of  lands,  which 
he  daimed  as  belonging  to  his  church  of 


EVERDON 

Everdon  in  Xorthamptonahiie,  and  it 
probably  on  acquiring  tiiis  preferment  that 
ne  assumed  the  name.  In  the  £ollowiiig 
year  he  was  evidently  engaged  in  the  long's 
service  in  the  same  way  as  the  derla  of 
the  Exchequer  or  Treasury  firequently  werCf 
and  is  called  '  clericns  noster.'  (Sat,  CEmi 
i.  631,  ii.  63,  63.^ 

It  was  no  douot  in  this  character  thitke 
had  the  custody  of  the  Great  Seal  when  the 
king,  on  May  5, 1242,  confided  to  the  Attk^ 
bishop  of  York  the  government  of  the  Idag' 
dom  during  his  absence  in  Oascony,  Soos 
after  the  Bishop  of  Chichester^a  death  ^ 
T.  Hardy  says  on  November  14, 1244)  li 
was  appointed  either  chancellor  or  hoBftt, 
and  is  stated  to  have  been  one  most  em* 
ning  in  the  custom  of  the  Chancery.  Ii 
Auffust  1246  he  received  the  bishoprie  of 
Carlisle,  and  in  November  was  suooaedid 
in  the  Chancery  by  John  ManseL  InUSl 
and  1252  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinennt  ii 
the  counties  of  York,  Nottinghanii  Dedbji 
Warwick,  and  Leicester. 

When  the  bishops  and  nobles  in  lS5t 
went  to  the  king  with  the  conditions  iDOi 
which  they  granted  the  aid  he  deronafa, 
and  the  former  were  sharply  reminded  tkt 
their  elevation  was  effected  bv  the  toy 
causes  of  which  they  complained,  Hatthsv 
Paris  relates  that  to  Silvester  de  Evoto 
he  addressed  himself  thus:  'And  fiM% 
Silvester  of  Carlisle,  who,  so  long  HeUvf 
the  Chancery,  wast  the  littie  clerk  of  ar 
clerks,  it  is  well  known  to  all  how  I  a^ 
vanced  thee  to  be  a  bishop,  before  moj 
reverend  persons  and  able  divines.' 

He  was  killed  by  a  fall  from  his  hoBH 
on  May  13, 1254 

EVXSDOK,  John  de,  was  an  offios  if 
the  Exchequer,  and,  like  his  fellows,  W 
of  the   clerical  profession.    He  was  n* 
pointed  in  30  Edward  L  to  superintend  tti 
levying  of  the  fifteenth  in  the  countiei  d 
Oxford  and  Berks.  In  1  Edward  IL  he  M 
constituted  a  baron  of  the  EbccheQiur  • 
November  28, 1307.   While  he  hcdd  a  aatf 
on  that  bendi  he  frequently  acted  as  m 
assessor  of  the  taxes  chaijj^  on  the  d^ 
of  London,  and  as  a  justice  of  OTor  mm 
terminer  in  various  counties  for  the  tiU 
of  offences  connected  with  the  revenue  wA 
its  collection.  He  continued  in  his  place  iltci 
1322  or  1323.    In  4  Edward  IL  he  ^^ 
dean  of  the  free  chapel  of  St  FMer  m  ' 
Wolverhampton,  and  was  certified  aa  M 
of  that  toWship  in  the  ninth  year.   Hat< 
held  the  chancellorship  of  Exeter  from  ]li|r>" 
1308  till  August  1309,  and  was  aftm  a  Jr  J 
a  prebendary  of  Sarum,  which  he  ezi^nf 
for  the  deanery  of  Stl  Paul's,  Londot 
which  he  was  admitted  on  Skiptainbai 
1323.    He  died  on  January  16,  Ua& 
was  buried  in  the  church  <tf  St  Att 
St  Paul's.    (Za  A^m^  89, 188.}    * 

X?XBDOV|  WauAX  jm,  | 


1 

1 


EVESHAM 

brother  or  nephew  of  the  above  John  de 
Eyerdcm,  in  o  Edward  11.,    October  11, 
1311,  was  appointed  treasurer's   remem- 
brancer in  the  JBxchequer,  and  had  a  fee  of 
forty  marks  ^  annum  for  himself  and  his 
clerks ;  and  m  10  Edward  XL  he  had  an 
additional  grant  of  20/.  a  year,  de  dono^  for 
his  good  service,  until  the  kin^  should  pro- 
vide him  with  an  ecclesiastical  benefice 
suitable  to  his  decree.    From  that  time 
there  is  no  entry  relative  to  him  till  July 
18,  1324,  17  Edward  11.,  when  he  was 
nuaed  to  the  bench  as  a  baron,  in  which 
office  be  continued  till  the  end  of  the  reign, 
And  was  retained  in  it  on  the  accession  of 
Edward  IIL    The  date  of  his  death  is 
sot  recorded^  but  he  was  employed  in  11 
Edward  HL  to  assist  in  levying  money 
irom  tbe  clergy  of  York  for  carrying  on  the 
French  war,  and  is  named  as  receiving  a 
pension,  or  bribe,  from  the  Knights  Hos- 
pitallers so  late  as  1338.    (Madox,  ii.  267 ; 
3>ir  FcederOy  il  1005  :  HospUallers  in  Etig- 
land,  20^) 

XYS8HAM,  Thomas  de,  held  some  place 
in  one  of  the  departments  of  the  court  as 
€«rly  as  1313,  0  Edward  IL,  when  he 
accompanied  the  king  abroad.  In  1319  he 
was  appointed  one  of  the  attorneys  for 
lUgana  de  Asserio,  the  pope's  nuncio  (N, 
Fcedera,  ii.  212,  399),  and  appeared  as 
proxy  for  the  abbot  of  Evesham  in  the  | 
parliaments  of  16  and  18  Edward  IL  (Pari,  i 
Writs,  ii.  p.  ii.  828.)  I 

He  is  first  mentioned  as  a  clerk  in  the  ' 
Chancery  in  July  1328,  2  Edward  HI.,  and 
OQ  the  appointment  of  Sir  Robert  Bour- 
chier  as  chancellor  the  Great  Seal  was 
placed  in  his  hands  imder  the  seals  of  two 
of  the  other  clerks,  and  so  remained  from 
December  16,  1340,  to  the  1st  of  January 
following.  On  the  10th  of  that  month  he 
was  raised  to  the  office  of  master  of  the 
Bolls,  but  it  would  seem  that  this  was  a 
mere  temporarv  appointment,  for  he  was 
aoperseded  by  ^ohn  de  Thoresby  on  Fe- 
bruary 21,  after  only  six  weeks'  enjoyment 
of  the  place.  He  immediately  resumed  his 
duties  as  a  clerk  in  the  Chaucery  (N. 
Faedera,  ii.  745,  1172),  which  he  con- 
tinned  to  perform  during  the  remainder  of 
bit  life,  lie  died  in  1343,  possessed  of  land 
it  Weston  Underegge  in  Gloucestershire. 
Hk  London  residence  was  in  'Faytour 
I^ne.'     (CaL  Inquis.  p.  m.  ii.  108.) 

XVm,  Henbt  lb,  had  properb^  in 
Dambrid;^hire,  which  was  all  seized  into 
^  kinff's  bands  during  the  troubles  of 
King  John.  On  the  accession  of  his  suc- 
XMor  they  were  restored  to  him,  and  in 
}^  Henry  ill.  he  was  one  of  the  justices 
itiaeiant  in  that  county  and  Huntmgdon- 
Adn.    (Hot,  aaus.  i.  324,  ii.  76,  146.) 

IWZVB,  Matthew,  was  reader  in  the 
Middle  Temple  in  autumn  1591,  and  took 
iie  degree  of  aeijeant  in   Hilary  1594, 


EYBE 


MS 


when  he  was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the 
^  Exchequer,  and  his  judgments  in  that  and 
:  the  following  years  are  reported  by  Savile 
and  Coke.  His  death  or  resignation  soon 
after  occurred,  as  his  successor,  John  Savile, 
was  appointed  in  July  1598.  (Dugdale's 
Orig.  218.) 

EXistjm,  Duke  of.    See  T.  Beaupobt. 

ETKSFELB,  Henry  de,  was  appointed, 
in  21  Edward  I.,  1293,  one  of  two  justices 
to  take  assizes,  &c.,  in  Cornwall  and  nine 
other  counties,  and  was  summoned  among 
the  judges  to  parliament  till  the  twentv- 
fifth.  One  of  bis  name  was  returned  knight 
of  the  shire  for  Middlesex  in  2Q  and  28 
Edward  I.     (Prrr/.  Writs,  i.  29,  52,  72-86.) 

STBE,  GiLE8,  was  of  an  ancient  and 
distingmshed  Wiltshire  family,  which  sup- 
plied no  less  than  three,  and  perhaps  four, 
members  to  the  judicial  bench.  Their 
common  ancestor  was  Humphrey  le  Heyr, 
who  accompanied  Richard  Cceur  de  Lion 
to  the  Holy  Land.  One  of  bis  lineal  de- 
scendants, Giles  Eyre,  settled  at  Brick- 
worth  in  Whiteparish,  and  had  several 
children,  one  of  the  younger  of  whom  emi- 
grated with  Ludlow  to  Ireland,  and  was 
the  ancestor  of  Lord  Eyre,  of  Eyre  Court 
in  the  county  of  Galwav,  a  title  which  died 
with  the  grantee  in  1792.  The  eldest  son, 
named  also  Giles,  succeeded  to  Brickworth, 
aud  represented  Downton  in  the  parliament 
of  1660  and  1661.  By  his  marriage  with 
Anne,  daughter  of  Sir  Richard  Norton,  of 
Rotherfield,  Hants,  Bart.,  he  became  the 
father  of  Sir  Giles  Evre,  the  judge,  who 
was  admitted  a  member  of  Lincom  s  Inn 
in  October  1654,  and  called  to  the  bar  in 
November  1661. 

Of  his  early  life  we  have  no  further  ac- 
count except  that  he  lost  his  first  wife, 
Dorothy,  daughter  of  John  Ryves,  of  Ran- 
ston  in  Dorsetshire,  in  1677.  To  her  monu- 
ment in  Whiteparish  Church  he  attached 
an  inscription  m  anticipation  of  his  own 
death,  leaving  the  date  in  blank,  with  eight 
lines  expressmg  the  warmest  afiection  for 
her,  and  implying  the  impossibilibr  of  his 
ever  being  united  to  another.  Notwith- 
standing tbis  monogamistic  resolution,  we 
find  that  he  afterwards  married  a  second 
wife,  who  occupied  the  same  grave  with 
her  predecessor. 

In  1675  the  corporation  of  Salisbury 
presented  him  with  a  tankard  of  10/.  value 
lor  his  services  in  procuring  their  charter, 
being  then  their  deputy  recorder.  He  was 
afterwards  elected  recorder,  but  lost  his 
place  on  the  subsequent  seizure  of  the 
charters.  On  the  renewal  of  them  in  1688 
he  was  restored,  and  was  elected  represen- 
tative of  that  dtv  to  the  Convention  Par- 
liament. He  tooK  part  in  the  conference 
with  the  Lords  as  to  the  vote  of  abdication, 
and  in  all  the  debates  showed  himself  a 
hearty  supporter  of  the  new  government. 

e2 


244 


EYRE 


He  was  immediately  made  a  seijeanlL  and 
the  settlement  of  the  Court  of  King's 


on 


Bench  was  constituted  one  of  the  judges  of 
it  on  May  4, 1689,  receiving  soon  after  the 
honour  of  knighthood.  .Alter  filling  this 
seat  with  great  credit  for  six  years,  he  died 
on  June  2, 1695^  and  was  huned  in  White-* 
paxish  Church. 

The  Christian  name  of  his  second  wife 
was  Christahella ;  that  of  her  family  has 
not  heen  discovered.  She  survivea  the 
judge,  and  took  for  her  second  husband 
Lord  Glasford,  a  Scotch  Papist,  firom  whom 
she  withdrew  in  1099,  leavinor  him  a  pri- 
soner for  debt  in  the  Fleet,  wKere  he  aied 
in  November  1703.  The  judse  left  issue 
by  both  his  wives.  Some  of  the  male  re- 
presentatives of  his  family  have  had  seats 
m  parliament,  and  one  of  his  female  de- 
scendants married  Thomas  Bolton,  the 
nephew  of  Admiral  Lord  Nelson,  who  suc- 
ceeded to  that  earldom  in  ISSiS.  {Pari 
Hiit.  V.  107,  &c. ;  LuUr^  i.  629,  iv.  649.} 

ZTBE,  Samxtel,  was  the  second  cousm 
of  the  above  Sir  Giles  Eyre,  both  having 
the  same  great-grandfather.  He  was  the 
son  of  Robert  £^pe,  of  Salisbury  and  Chil- 
hampton,  and  Anne,  daughter  of  Samuel 
Aldersey,  of  Aldersey  in  Cheshire,  and  was 
bom  in  1633.  As  his  father  had  done 
before  him,  he  took  the  degree  of  barrister 
at  Lincoln's  Inn  in  June  1661.  He  pursued 
his  profession  with  considerable  success,  to 
which  the  patronage  of  the  Earl  of  Shaftes- 
bury, to  whom  he  was  reputed  to  be  the 
confidential  adviser,  in  some  measure  pro- 
bably contributed,  though  the  same  cause 
in  sll  likelihood  prevented  his  promotion 
in  CharWs  and  in  Jameses  reigns.  After 
the  revolution  he  was  created  a  serjeant  on 
April  21,  1692 ;  and  from  that  xank  was 
aovanced,  on  Februaiy  22, 1694,  to  take 
his  place,  by  the  side  of  his  cousin  Sir  Giles, 
as  a  judffe  of  the  King's  Bench. 

Shortly  after  his  appointment,  Charles 
KnoUys,  claiming  to  be  Earl  of  Banbury, 
who  had  been  indicted  for  the  murder  of 
Captain  Lawson,  his  brother-in-law,  and 
haa  pleaded  his  peerage,  brought  the  Ques- 
tion mto  the  Court  of  King's  Bench,  vniere 
judgment  was  given  in  the  defendant's 
favour  in  Trinity  Term  1694.  On  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  claim  of  peerage  nearly  four 
years  afterwards.  Chief  Justice  Holt  and  Sir 
Samuel  Eyre  were  called  before  the  House 
of  Lords  and  required  to  give  their  reasons 
for  that  iud^ent.  They  resolutely  and 
properly  declined  to  do  so,  unless  it  came 
before  the  house  on  a  writ  of  error,  and 
their  lordships,  after  threatening  the  two 
judges  with  tne  Tower  for  their  refusal  to 
answer,  found  it  expedient  to  let  the  matter 
drop.  Seven  months  after  this  incident 
Sir  Samuel  was  seized  with  the  colic,  just 
upon  finishing  the  circuit  at  Lancaster, 
wheie  he  died  on  September  12,  1698. 


EYBE 

Ss  body  was  removed  to  the  family  vault 
in  St  Tnomas's  Church,  Salisbiiry,  a  costly 
monament  to  his  mem^  being'lneeted  it 
Lancaster. 

His  wife^  Martha,  daughter  of  Frands, 
fifth  son  of  Sir  Thomas  Lucy,  of  Charleoote 
in  Warwickshire,  brought  him  a  lam 
family,  the  eldest  of  whom  was  Chief 
Justice  Sir  Robert  Eyre.  {LuttrtU^  ii.  427, 
iii.  273,  iv.  343, 428, 436 : 1  Lord  Baunumd, 
10;  8taU  Triah,  jji.  IIIQ,) 

STBS,  Robert,  the  son  and  heir  of  tbe 
above  Sir  Samuel  Eyre,  was  bom  in  1606^ 
and,  having  entered  upon  his  legal  studies 
at  Lincoln's  Inn  in  April  1683,  waa  admitted 
to  the  bar  in  Febmaiy  1689. 

Before  his  father's  death  in  1698  he  bad 
succeeded  his  cousin  Sir  Giles  in  the  re- 
cordership  of  Salisbury,  and  he  represented 
that  city  in  the  last  three  parliaments  of 
William  HI.  and  the  first  four  of  Queeo 
Anne,  from  1698  to  1710.  He  was  swoa 
queen's  counsel  in  May  1707,  and  in  Octo* 
ber  of  the  following  year  he  was  mide 
solidtor-generaL  In  March  1710  he  wy 
one  of  the  active  managers  of  the  unwitt 
impeachment  of  Br.  SachevereU,  aod  w» 
afterwards  engaged  in  the  trials  of  the 
parties  connected  with  the  SachevenO 
riots.  (LuttreU,  vi.  166,  202,  263;  6Mr 
Triahj  xv.  396,  622,  &c.) 

The  whig  ministry  by   which  he  ins 
appointed  fell  a  sacrince  to  this  prosecotioD, 
but  fortimately  for  him,  before  thebdit- 
missal,  the  death  of  Mr.   Justice  Goold 
occasioned  a  vacancy  in  the  Court  of  QtiMn*ft 
Bench,  which  he  was  appointed  to  tmrob* 
He  was  sworn  in  on  Marcn  13  and  knignnd, 
and  sat  in  that  court  during  the  remaiiidr 
of  Queen  Anne's  reign,    (jsl  the  anival  of 
George  L  he  was  appointed  chancellor  t» 
the  Prince  of  Wales.    As  in  duty  boiii4 
on  the  great  question  agitated  before  tb 
judges  in  171^  as  to  the  icing's  prero^adte 
m  regard  to  the  education  and  maniB^  of 
the  royal  fiimily,  Sir  Robert  gave  an  opmioft 
differing  from  the  majority  of  his  brethren^ 
in  favour  of  the  prince  his  client    So  sa- 
tisfactory was  his  performance  of  his  jodi* 
cial  functions,  and  so  high  his  legal  rspnta^ 
tion,  that,  notwithstanding  this  oppoeitioB 
to  the  royal  claim,  the  kmg  on  November 
16,  1723,  promoted  him  to  the  head  of  ^ 
Court  of  Exchequer  as  lord  chief  baron; 
and  eighteen  months  after,   on  May  27, 
1725,  raised  him  to  the  still  higher  dijmitj 
of  lord  chief  justice  of  the  Common  Plesi 
(Lord  Haymond,  18Q0,  1331;  State  TrM, 
XV.  1217.)    He  maintained  the  reputatioa 
he  had  earned  for  the  ten  years  that  he 
continued  to  preside  in    that  court,  hit 
whole  career  on  the  three  benches  extend- 
ing over  one-and- twenty  years. 

Sir  Robert,  however,  did  not  escape 
calnmny.  Some  infamous  and  profligate 
persons  brought  a  charge  against  him  fot 


EYRE 

riaiting  Bambridge,  the  brutal  and  corrupt 
keeper  of  the  Fleet,  when  in  prison,  and  of 
otherwise  aiding  and  abetting  him  in  his 
atrocitiea.  On  a  strict  investigation,  how- 
ever, the  committee  came  to  a  resolution 
that  it  was  a  wicked  conspiracy  to  vilify 
and  asperse  the  chief  justice,  and  that  the 
infbixDAtiQns  against  him  were  '  false,  mali- 
dous,  scandalous,  and  utterly  groundless.' 
(PtirL  Hist,  viiL  707,  &c.;  State  Trials, 
xvii.  619.) 

That  Sir  Kobert  was*  somewhat  haughty 
in  his  demeanour  may  be  inferred  from  the 
Duke  of  Wharton's  satire.  He  vows  con- 
itancy  to  his  mistress  until  the  time 

When  Tracy's  generous  soul  shall  swell  with 

pride. 
And  Eyre  his  haughtiness  shall  lay  aside. 

As  a  set-off  against  this,  there  is  evidence 
of  the  general  estimation  of  his  character 
in  the  intimacy  which  existed  between  him 
and  Godolphin,  Marlborough,  and  Walpole; 
and  of  his  kind  and  fi;enerous  disposition  a 
testimony  is  afforded  by  a  legacy  of  4001, 
bequeathed  to  his  daughter  by  an  old 
domestic,  in  grateful  acknowledgment  that 
he  owed  all  las  good  fortune  in  life  to  his 
deceased  master.  The  chief  justice  died 
<m  December  28, 1735,  and  was  buried  in 
St  Thomas's  Church,  Salisbury.  By  his 
wife,  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Edward ; 
Badge,  Esq.,  of  Warley  Place,  Essex,  he 
Jtit  a  large  family.  (Sir  R,  C,  Hoare^6 
SoM  Wiltshire:  Frustjield:  Salisbury,) 

XTXS,  James,  was  a  descendant  of  the 
<dd  Wiltshire  family  to  which  the  three 
judges  already' noticed  belonged,  but  it  is 
voeertain  of  what  branch  of  it.  His  great- 
gyandfather  was  of  the  medical  profession, 
and  died  mayor  of  Salisbury  in  1685.  His 
brother,  Dr.  Thomas  Eyre,  was  a  canon  in 
the  cathedral  of  that  city.  The  judge  was 
bora  in  1733,  and  his  father  is  described  in 
the  Lincoln's  Inn  books  as  Mr.  Chancellor 
Ejre.  HavinflT  received  his  classical  educa- 
tioQ  first  at  Winchester  and  then  at  Oxford, 
be  commenced  his  legal  studies  at  Lincoln*s 
Lm  in  November  1753,  but  two  years 
after  removed  to  Graves  Inn,  by  which 
■odety  he  was  called,  to  the  bar  in  \ 
17<^.  He  purchased  the  place  of  one  of , 
Ibe  four  cit^  pleaders  of  London,  and  was  \ 
lot  some  time  little  known  beyond  the  , 
Lord  Mayor  s  and  Sheriffs'  Courts.  In 
tbem,  however,  his  attendance  was  so 
legnlar,  his  manners  so  good,  and  his 
impearance  so  grave,  that  in  February 
IToI  he  was  appointed  deputy  recorder, 
and  in  April  1/d3  recorder  of  the  cor- 
poxatian,  oeing  then  scarcely  thirty  years 
of  age. 

In  the  December  of  that  year  he  was 
engaged  as  second  counsel  for  John  Wilkes 
in  the  action  against  Mr.  Wood  for  entering 
into  the  plaintiff*s  house,  and  seizing  his 


EYRE 


245 


papers  under  a  general  warrant  from  the 
secretary  of  state.  Though  he  acted  in 
this  case  vrith  great  energy  and  spirit,  as 
thinking  that  it  affected  the  liberty  of  the 
su^ect,  yet,  when  a  few  years  after,  in 
1770,  the  corporation,  joining  in  the  poli- 
tical distractions  excited  by  the  cnr  of 
'  Wilkes  and  Liberty,'  and  the  call  for  a 
new  parliament,  voted  a  remonstrance  to 
the  kmg,  the  recorder  would  not  attend  on 
its  presentation ;  but  on  another  address  in 
harsher  terms  being  voted,  he  boldly  pro- 
tested against  it  as  a  most  abominable  libel, 
and  again  refused  to  accompany  the  cor- 
poration to  the  palace.  This  was  the 
occasion  when  Lord  Mayor  Beckford  is 
supposed  to  have  replied  to  his  majesty  in 
the  speech  that  appears  at  the  foot  of  his 
statue  in  Guildhall,  but  the  language  of 
which  is  said  to  have  been  subsequently 
composed  by  Home  Tooke.  The  common 
council  of  course  resented  their  recorder's 
resistance,  and  voted  that  he  should  no 
more  be  advised  with  or  employed  in  the 
city  affairs,  he  '  being  deemed  \m worthy  of 
their  future  trust  and  confidence.'  But 
the  court  of  St.  James's  looked  upon  his 
conduct  in  a  different  light,  and  took  an 
early  opportunity  of  rewwding  his  loyalt}', 
by  raismg  him  to  .the  bench  of  the  Ex- 
chequer in  October  1772,  when  he  was 
knighted.  On  resigning  the  recordership  he 
received  the  thanks  of  the  Court  of  Alder- 
men for  the  many  eminent  services  he  ren- 
dered the  public,  and  vras  presented  vrith  a 
piece  of  plate  vrith  the  city  arms  engraved 
thereon,  as  a  grateful  remembrance  from 
the  court  for  his  faithful  discharge  of  his 
duties. 

After  sitting  in  the  Exchequer  as  a 
puisne  baron  for  nearly  fifteen  years,  he 
was  raised  to  the  head  of  it  on  January  26, 
1787 ;  and  when  Lord  Chancellor  Thurlow 
was  removed  in  1793,  he  was  appointed 
chief  commissioner  of  the  Great  Seal,  an 
office  which  he  lield  for  seven  months  from 
June  15  to  January  28,  in  the  following 
year.  On  retiring  from  the  Seal  he  was 
promoted  to  the  chief  justiceship  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  and  at  the  ena  of  the 
next  year  he  was  entrusted  with  the  arduous 
duty  of  presiding  at  the  memorable  trials 
of  llajdy,  Home  Tooke,  and  Thelwall  for 
constructive  high  treason.  These  trials 
lasted  eighteen  days,  and  throughout  them 
he  acted  with  the  greatest  patience  and 
impartiality,  but  in  the  opinion  ■  of  many 
vrith  too  great  forbearance  to  the  irregu- 
larities of  Home  Tooke.  In  his  summing 
up  of  the  evidence  in  the  different  cases  he 
carefully  described  the  principles  of  the 
law,  and  in  the  most  fair  and  unexception- 
able manner  explained  the  bearings  of  the 
evidence  upon  tne  charges.  The  result  was 
the  acquitted  of  all  the  prisoners ;  and  the 
same  verdict  was  given  m  1790  in  anotkvsc 


246 


FAIRFAX 


trial  before  him  of  Crossfield  and  others 
for  high  treason  in  conspiring  to  make  an 
instrument  from  which  to  shoot  a  poisoned 
arrow  at  the  king.  (State  Trials,  iv.,  t.,  vi.) 
With  an  extensive  knowledge  of  law  he 
united  the  greatest  judicial  qualities ;  and 
to  the  unbiased  integrity  of  the  judge  was 
joined  a  quickness  of  apprehension  and  a 
natural  sagacity  and  canaour  that  secured 


FALEISE 

to  him  the  respect  and  esteem  as  well  of 
his  brethren  on  the  bench  as  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  bar^  whom  he  never  intenvpted 
in  their  arguments^  and  towards  whom  he 
preserved  an  invariable  and  nnafiected 
courtesy.  He  presided  over  the  Common 
Pleas  SIX  years  and  a  half,  and  died  on  July 
6,  1799,  at  his  residence,  Ruscombe  in 
Berkshire. 


F 


FATHFAX,  Gmr,  the  third  son  of  Richard 
Fairfax,  of  an  ancient  family  seated  at 
Walton  in  Yorkshire,  by  Anastasia,  daughter 
and  co-heir  of  Jolm  Carthorpe,  received 
from  his  fjGither  the  manor  of  Steeton  in  that 
county,  where  he  afterwards  built  a  castle, 
which  continued  the  chief  residence  of  his 
posterity  till  the  beginning  of  the  last 
century,  when  the  family  removed  to  New- 
ton Kyme,  about  six  miles  distant  from  the 
castle,  which  is  now  the  principal  farm- 
house on  the  estate. 

In  1435  he  was  a  commissioner  of  array 
for  the  West  Ridinff,  and  in  1460  he  was 
joined  with  Sir  William  Plumpton  and 
others  to  enquire  concerning  the  lands  of 
Richard,  Duke  of  York,  attainted  in  the 

E receding  parliament.  (Fiumpton  Corr,  lii., 
cvi.)  fi  may  be  presumed  that  he  par- 
tidpated  in  the  mercy  shown  by  the  duke's 
son.  King  Edward,  to  his  friend  Sir  Wil- 
liam Plumpton,  for  in  Michaelmas  1463 
he  was  called  seijeant  from  Gray's  Inn 
(Y,  B,  3  Edw.  IV,  fo.  10)  ;  and  in  AprU 
1468  the  king  appointed  him  one  of  nis 
own  Serjeants.  In  the  following  year  he  is 
noticed  as  being  employed  by  Sir  William 
Plumpton,  and  as  receiving  ten  shillings  for 
his  fee,  a  sorry  honorarium  to  be  offered  to 
a  king's  seijeant.  A  few  years  afterwards, 
in  an  appeal  carried  on,  as  the  judges  sus- 
pected, by  the  maintenance  of  Sir  William, 
m  which  they  expressed  their  opinion  that 
the  men  charged  were  not  guilty,  Fairfax 
'  said  openly  att  the  barre  that  he  knew  so, 
verily  they  were  not  guilty;  that  he  would 
labor  their  deliverance  for  almes,  not  take- 
ing  a  penny;'  whereupon  Sir  William's 
agent  retained  two  other  counsel.  (  Correm, 
23,  26.) 

He  was  appointed  recorder  of  York  in 
1476  {Drake's  York,  363).  which  he  held 
about  a  year.  The  date  of  his  elevation  to 
the  bench  is  not  preserved,  but  he  is  first 
mentioned  in  the  character  of  a  judge  of 
the  King's  Bench  in  Trinity  Term  1477. 
(F.  B.  17  Edu>.  IV.  fo.  4,  b.)  On  the 
death  of  Edward  IV.,  and  again  on  the 
usurpation  of  Riehaid  IIL.  he  had  a  re- 
newal of  his  patent,  and  a  few  days  before 
Riehaid's  assmnptioQ  of  the  crown  he  was 


made  chief  justice  of  Lancaster  {Graidttf 
Edw,  V,  6^) ;  nor  did  the  termination  of  tM 
tyrant's  career  make  any  change  in  his  jndi- 
cial  position.  For  the  first  ten  years  « tha 
reign  of  Henry  VH.  he  kept  his  seat,  and 
died  in  possession  in  1495,  leaving  hehinl 
him  the  character  of  an  able  lawyer  and  a 
conscientious  judge. 

By  his  marriaf^e  with  Margaret,  daughter 
of  Sir  William  Rvther,  he  had  six  chilibav 
one  of  whom.  Sir  William,  is  the  next-mfls- 
tioned  judge.  The  viscounty  of  Fairfax  of 
Elniley  in  Ireland,  granted  in  1628  to  a 
descendant  of  William,  the  elder  brother  cf 
Sir  Guy,  became  extinct  in  1772.  {Bkf. 
Peeragcy  iii.  249.) 

FAIBFAZ,  William,  the  eldest  son  of 
the  above  Sir  Guy  Fairfax,  pursued  lui 
father's  mrofession,  and  probably  in  the  saaia 
school,  Oray's  Inn.  He  was  elected  i»* 
corder  of  York  in  1489  (DroA^  368^,  and 
was  engaged  as  counsel  for  Sir  RolMt 
Plumpton  in  1400  {Corresp.  101,  210),  aal 
in  November  1504  he  was  called  to  ^ 
degree  of  the  coif.  Soon  after  the  acceeoioi 
of  Henry  Vni.  he  was  made  a  judge  of  tha 
Common  Pleas,  the  first  fine  levi^  befof 
him  being  in  Easter  Term,  1  Heniy  ¥IIL, 
April  1509.  He  died  about  the  same  aeaaoa 
in  1514. 

By  his  wife,  Elizabeth,  one  of  the  thna 
daughters  of  Sir  Robert  Manners,  asoeator 
of  the  Duke  of  Rutland,  he  had  an  onlf 
son,  William,  whose  grandson  Thomas  in» 
created  Baron  Fairfax  of  Cameron  in  Soot* 
land  by  Charles  L  in  1627.  The  parlia- 
mentaiy  general  who  defeated  that  unfor^ 
tunate  monarch  at  Naseby  in  1645  was  t]i» 
third  lord.  Bryan,  the  eighth  baron,  real- 
dent  in  America,  proved  his  title  in  di0 
House  of  Lords,  May  6, 1800;  but  hiade* 
scendants  have  not  claimed  it.  (fiiog,  Fm^ 
agcy  iii.  249 ;  Notes  and  Queries,  lat  S.  ]X» 
156.) 

FALEISE,  WiLLiAic  DE,  held  a  hidi  ail 
responsible  office  in  the  Treasmj  ot  Sqf* 
land.  The  only  year  in  which  ibhwn 
tioned  as  acting  as  a  jnstidtf  il  1 J^ 
1199,  when  a  fine  waa  levied  baftn 
(Liberat.  37,  71, 76,  99, 107 ;  mtdwh 
face.) 


FALLAN  FENKEB  247 

He  was  the  ciutos  of  the  honor  of  Chug.  i.  16,  33,  368,  447,  556,  ii.  41, 
Gloucester  for  the  first  nine  years  of  John's   47^ 

rdgn,  and  he  and  Maurice  de  Tureville  at  To  hb  judicial  duties  he  added  those  of 
a  later  period  had  the  custody  of  the  castle  an  ecclesiastic  and  held  a  canonry  in  the 
of  Winchester.  (Jfoiiicur**  ^aron.  ^»^/.  59,  '  cathedral  of  St  Paul's;  and  in  1221,  5 
66, 76.)  ,  Henry  III.,  he  was    elected    Bishop    of 

He  married  Alice,  the  daughter  of  Philip  '  London.  His  hijrh  character  may  be 
de  Linguire,  and  died  in  1232,  leaving  a  ^  estimated  by  the  following  distich,  which 
SGn,  Hias.    {Excerpi,  e  Sot.  Fin.  i.  220")       was    written    on    his    being:    elevated  in 

PALLAlTyWiLLiAii,  was  appointed  abaron    opposition  to  several  other  claimants : — 
of  the  Exchequer  in  14  Henry  VI.,  1435-6. 
{CaL  Hoi.  Pat.  278.)    There  is  a  curious 
account  of  his  removal  from  the  court. 


Omncs  hie  digni,  tu  diffnior  omnibus  ;  omnci 
Hie  plene  sapiunt,  plenius  ipse  sapia. 


Bichard  Forde,  one  of  the  remembrancers,  '•  He  still  continued  actively  to  perform  his 
in  a  petition  to  the  parliament  of  3^3  Henry  duties  at  court,  and  was  a  freo  uent  witness 
VL,  1455  (JRot.  Pari.  v.  342),  stated  that  t  to  charters  and  other  royal  documents 
Thomas  Thorpe  hanng  superseded  Forde  \  until  a  fortnight  before  his  decease.  This 
iniheofiiceofremembrancer,  would  not  re-  occurred  on  October  31,  12i^8.  He  was 
■tore  it  to  him  unless  he  was  made  third  :  buried  in  his  cathedral,  to  which  he  had 
baron  of  the  Exchequer,  and  that  Forde  ;  been  a  considerable  benefactor.  {Godwin, 
thereupon  arranged  with  Sir  William  Fal-  1 17U.) 

kn,  derk,  then  third  baron,  to  resi^  on  .  FATJKT,  Williax,  of  whom  neither  in 
receiving  from  Forde  a  bond  to  pay  him  40  '  the  Year  Books  nor  in  any  other  records  is 
BMiks;  yearly  for  life,  unless  otherwise  pro-  |  the  name  to  be  found,  is  inserted  by  Dug- 
rided  for  to  the  same  amount,  with  a  re-  dale  as  a  justice  of  the  King's  Bench  on 
maAable  condition,  however,  by  Sir  William  April  4,  133d,  12  Edward  III.,  and  II. 
FiiUan,  that  such  provision  should  not  be 
'my  benefice  havyng  cure  of  soule.'  The 
vayer  of  this  petition,  that  this  bond  should 
be  made  voio,  was  granted ;  so  that  the 

btroa  lost  both  his  place  and  pension. 
TASTOLF^  Nicholas,  was  of  Great  Yar- 

Boath  in  Norfolk,  for  which  town  ho  was 

xetumed  to  parliament  in  2  and  7  Edward 

n.    In  18  Edward  II.,  1324,  he  was  ap- 

wintid  chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench  m 

Jidand,  and  was  still  mentioned  in  that 

character  in  1327, 1  Edward  lU.    The  pa- 
tent of  his  successor  in  the  office  being  dated 

m  1333,  7  Edward  III.,  it  may  be  pre- 

lomed  that  Fastolf  enjoyed  it^till  that  time. 

If  n,  he  must  have  been  on  a  visit  to  Eng- 

hnd  when  he  was  added  to  the  commission 


Philipps  mentions  two  persons  as  his  de- 
scendants in  1084,  one  residing  at  Foston 
in  Lincolnshire,  and  the  other  at  Kings- 
thorpe  in  the  county  of  Northampton. 
{Grandeur  of  the  Law  [1084],  220,  2o2.) 

FEKCOTES,  TnoMAS  be,  of  a  Yorkshire 
family,  was  an  adherent  of  Thomas,  Earl 
of  Lancaster,  in  the  reign  of  Edward  IL, 
and  obtained  his  relcnso  from  prison  by  a 
payment  of  20/.  (Pari.  Writs,  ii.  p.'  ii. 
208.)  When  John  de  Britannia,  Earl  of 
Bichmund,  was  taken  by  the  Scots  in  10 
Edward  II.,  Thomas  de  Fencotes  was  ap- 
pointed one  of  his  attorneys  in  England; 
and  on  the  death  of  the  earl  in  8  Edward 
III.  he  still  represented  him,  and  acted  as 
custos  of  the  estate  till  the  death  of  the 
of  justices  itinerant  into  Derbvshire  in  4  !  earVs  successor,  John,  Duke  of  Brittany,  in 
Biwttd  IlL,  1330.  (PtirL  Wnts,  ii.  p.  ii.  !  the  fifteenth  vear.  (iV.  F(pdera,  ii.  88, 524, 
888;  3'.  Foidera,  ii.  700  j  SmytKg  Law  Offi-  \  1159.)  From  the  Year  Books  it  anpears 
an  of  Ireland,  97.)  ;  that  he  acted  as  an  advocate  in  Y'orkshire 

TAIFCOHBBIDOE,  Eustace  de  (Bishop  i  as  early  as  2  Edward  III.,  and  as  a  justice 
W  LoKDOir),  was  bom  in  Yorkshire,  but  ;  of  assize  in  the  seventeenth  year.    He  was 
Ui  relationship  to  the  noble  family  of  that  \  appointed  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  on 
imie  is  not  distinctly  traced.    He  appears  ;  January  14,  1348,  and  seems  to  have  re- 
klJohn,  1100,  among  the  justiciers  be-  i  signed  about  1354.    (prig.  Jurid.  45.)    He 
ionwhom  fines  were  levied  at  Westminster,  i  received  the  order  of  knighthood  when  or 
Id  this  capacity  he  regularly  acted  during  |  soon  after  he  was  raised  to  the  bench.    In 
tb  whole  of  that  and  for  the  first  three  :  24  Edward  III.  he  gave  certain  tenements 
yem  of  the  succeeding  reign.   {Oriff.  Jurid,  '  to  the  priorv  of  the  order  of  Mary  of  Mount 
42,-  Alih.  Placit.  39, 116.)   In  2  Henry  IH.  !  Carmel  to  *  enlarge  their  house  in  Fleet 
ht  was  appointed  treasurer  of  England,  a  :  Street ;  and  in  31  Edward  III.  he  and  his 
itatioa  which  he  held  for  the  remamder  of  ^  wife  Beatrice  endowed    the    convent    of 
his  life,  during  the  whole  of  which  he  was  ;  Egleston  with  the  advowson  of  the  church 
IB  the  constant  confidence  of  the  sovereigns    of  Bentham  in  Y^'orkshire.     {CaL  Inquis,  p. 
whom  he  served.    Each  of  them  employed    m.  ii.  108,  203.) 

hnnin  embasaes  to  the  court  of  France,  :      John  de  Fencotes,  a  serieant-at-law  in 
^Bff  John  in  1204,  and  King  Henry  in    40  Edward  III.,  was  probably  his  son. 
12SS  md  1225,  and  from  each  of  them  he       FEHHSS,  Edward,  was  the  son  of  John 
xeoemd  various  marks  of  favour.    (Pot,    Fenner,  of  Crawley  in  Surrey,  by  Ellen, 


248 


FERMBAUD 


the  daughter  of  Sir  William  Goring,  of 
Burton.  Dallaway  (i.  16)  traces  the  family 
for  five  generations  highe^  the  earliest  of 
which  he  calls  John  atte  Penne.  He  took 
his  legal  degrees  in  the  Middle  Temple, 
where  he  became  reader  in  autumn  1570. 
In  Michaelmas  1577  he  was  made  a  ser- 
jeant-at-law, and  on  May  26,  1590,  he  was 
constituted  one  of  the  judges  of  the  Court 
of  King's  Bench,  in  which  he  sat  for  one- 
and-twenty  years,  under  Elizabeth  and  her 
successor.  (Orig,  Jurid,  218.)  In  the 
January  before  his  appointment  he,  being 
a  justice  of  the  peace  for  Surrey,  sat  on  the 
bench  at  the  assizes  when  John  Udall  was 
brought  up  to  receive  sentence,  and  in  kind 
and  considerate  language  assisted  the  judges 
in  urging  the  prisoner  to  submit  himself  to 
her  majesty.  {State  Trials,  I  1297.)  In 
1695  an  account  was  published  of  ^  The  ar- 
raignment, judgement,  and  execution  of 
three  wytches  of  Huntingdonshire,  being 
recommended  for  matter  of  truthe  by  Mr. 
Jud^  Fenner ; '  and  the  Kegister  of  the 
Stationers'  Company  adds  to  the  entry  that 
the  judge's  note  'is  layd  up  in  the  war- 
den's cupbord.'  (Xotes  ana  Queries,  drd 
S.  i.  402.) 

He  died  on  January  23, 1611-12,  and  was 
buried  at  Hayes  in  Middlesex.  By  a 
curious  error,  liis  name  on  his  monument 
appears  as  '  Jenner '  instead  of  *  Fenner.' 

7EBMBAUD,  or  PEBNYBAUD,  NiCHO- 
ULS,  was  constable  of  Bristol  from  22  to  38 
Edward  I.  (Abb,  Rot.  Orig,  i.  82.)  In 
28  Edward  I.  he  was  appointed  to  peram- 
bulate the  forests  of  Gloucestershire  and 
the  neighbouring  counties  (VarL  WritSy  i. 
398),  and  two  years  afterwards  the  custody 
of  the  bishopric  of  Bath  and  Wells  was 
entrusted  to  him  during  its  vacancy.  (Abb, 
Hot  Orig.  1 121.) 

He  is  mentioned  with  William  Inge  as 
a  justice  taking  assizes  in  1305,  and  was 
also  appointed  a  justice  of  trailbaston  for 
Essex  and  ten  other  counties.  {X.  Fccdera, 
i.  970.)  He  po8sea<«ed  considerable  pro- 
perty at  Wingrave  and  KoUesham  in  Buck- 
inghamshire.    {Abb.  Hacit.  222,  276.) 

PEBEIBT,  Thomas  de,  was  a  clerk  of 
Thomas  Plantagenet,  Earl  of  Buckingham 
Caftorwards  Duke  of  Gloucester),  In  0 
llichard  II.  {Kal.  Exch.  ii.  12.)  It  was 
not  xmnatural,  therefore,  that  Henrj'  IV., 
on  ascending  the  throne,  should  advance 
him  to  be  a  barou  (^f  the  Exchequer  on 
October  14,  1399.  But  of  the  term  of  his 
continuance  in  the  court  there  is  no  account. 

PESTE,  RALrn  de  la,  so  called  from  a 
town  in  ^Norniandv,  was  a  resident  in  Cum- 
berland. In  17  jTohn  he  was  constable  of 
Carlisle  {Rot.  Pat.  163) ;  and  in  3  Henry 
III.,  1218,  and  several  years  afterwards,  he 
was  appointed  a  justice  itinerant  in  that 
county  and  in  Westmoreland.  (Rot.  Clous. 
IL  77, 147, 151.) 


FIENNES 

FISWEB,  Nathaniel,  was  the  Becood 
son  of  WilUam,  Lord  Say  and  Sele,  hj 
Elizabeth,  dai^hter  of  Jolm  Temple,  £iq^ 
of  Stowe  in  Buckinghamahire.     He  was 
bom  about  1608  at  Broughton  in  Oxford- 
shire, and  was  educated  at  Winchester  and 
at  Oxford,  where  he  was  admitted  in  1^ 
fellow  of  New  College,  as  founder's  kn. 
(IVoods  Aihen,  iii.  877.^     He  remained 
there  about  five  years,  ana  then  spent  soine 
time  abroad,  '  in  Geneva  and  amongst  the 
cantons  of  Switzerland,  where,'  says  Cl»> 
rendon,  '  he  improved  his  disinclination  to 
the  Church,  with  which  milk  he  had  bea 
nursed.*    From    his  travels    he   retunad 
through  Scotland  in  1639,  at  the  time  of 
the  tumults  there,  which  he  assisted  in 
fomenting.     {Clarendon,  L  325,  510.) 

In  1640  he  was  elected  a  member  of  the 
Long  Parliament  for  Banbury,  and  soon 
became  a  leader  of  the  party  called  *  root 
and  branch.'  He  stron^y  supported  tke 
bill  against  the  bishops,  imd  so  little  had 
the  consequences  been  considered  thatyio 
a  conversation  with  Clarendon,  in  aomr 
to  the  question  what  gOTemment  they 
meant  to  introduce  instead,  he  said  *  then 
would  be  time  enough  to  think  of  that' 
He  was  appointed  of  the  committee  to  at- 
tend the  kmg  on  his  journey  to  Scotland  ii 
1641.  (7&tV/.  410, 404  J  ii>,  L  90.)  When 
the  parliament  took  up  arms  in  the  foUov- 
ing  year,  Fiennes  not  only  undertook  to 
find  one  horse  and  bring  100/.  in  monqr 
as  his  subscription  towards  the  came 
{Notes  and  Queries,  1st  S.  xii.  336^,  bot 
accepted  a  commis&ion  of  colonel  of"^  their 
forces.  His  first  exploit,  the  defeated  at- 
tempt to  surprise  Worcester  {Claradm, 
iii.  234,  625),  did  not  speak  much  to  iba 
credit  either  of  his  courage  or  militan 
skill,  and  his  conduct  at  Bristol  in  1619 
confirmed  the  bad  impression  he  had  mada 
Professing  great  zeal  for  the  parliament,  ki 
had  removed  the  former  governor  on  na- 
picion  of  disaffection^  and  had  condemned 
and  executed  two  pnncipal  citizens  on  the 
charge  of  plotting  to  give  up  the  place  to 
the  kin^ ;  and  yet,  after  laymg  in  stone  oC 
ammunition  and  provisions  sufficient  to 
sustain  a  siege  of  three  months,  no  eoonez 
liad  Prince  liupert  invested  the  dty  thaa 
he  surreuderea  it  to  the  royalists,  to  the 
great  advantage  of  their  cause  in  the  weet, 
and  the  infinite  discouragement  of  the  par- 
liamentarians. 

On  the  colonelV  return  to  parliiT"*»t 
'  every  one  looked  strangely  on  him  with  a 
discontented  aspect,'  so  palpably  showiDg 
their  suspicion  of  either  treachery  or 
cowardice  that  he  felt  it  necessary  to  sbiIbi 
his  apology  openly  in  the  house,  oondalp 
ing  with  a  desire  that  hia  conduot  ai^Al 
be  examined  by  a  council  oi  war.  jMp 
relation,  being  published  byhinmlt  «M 
answered  and  expoaed  1^  Mr.  Wdkneaill 


FIENNES 

Mr,  Prpne.  ia  a  book  called  'Rome^s 
Maaterpiece,  for  the  publication  of  which 
the  writers  were  summoned  before  the 
eooDcil  to  make  g^ood  their  accusation. 
The  conseauence  was  that  Colonel  flennes 
was  called  upon  to  defend  himself,  and 
after  a  solenm  trial;  conducted  most  ably  bj 
Mr.  Piynne,  which  lasted  no  less  than  nine 
4aj^  he  was  convicted  by  the  council  of 
war,  and  condemned  to  lose  his  head.  The 
lentence,  however^  was  not  put  in  execu- 
tion; by  his  family  interest  and  conneo- 
tionS|  and  perhaj^  Dy  the  consideration  of , 
his  great  civil  ability  and  the  eminent  ser- 
vices and  zeal  he  had  previously  shown  in 
the  cause^  the  general  was  induced  to  grant 
him  a  pardon.  His  mUitarv  career,  for 
which  he  was  totally  unfittea,  thus  ended 
in  infamy,  and  he  quitted  the  kingdom  to 
cover  his  disgrace.  (Ibid  iv.  141,  343, 
611 ;  State  Trials,  iv.  186-298.) 

Returning  after  some  years'  retirement, 
)ie  resumed  his  attendance  in  parliament 
and  almost  his  former  ascendency.  He 
was  one  of  the  committee  formed  for  the 
safety  of  the  kingdom  in  January  1648; 
and  on  December  1  he  made  a  speech  in 
favour  of  receiving  the  king*s  answers  from 
the  Isle  of  Wight  as  satisfactory.  In  con- 
sequence he  was  one  of  the  first  victims  of  i 
Pnde's  Purge,  and,  after  being  imprisoned 
for  a  short  time,  was  secluded  from  the 
house.     (  Wkitelocke,  286.) 

In  the  parliament  which  Cromwell  called 
after  he  was  declared  protector  in  September 

1654,  and  which  was  dissolved  in  January 

1655,  he  was  elected  one  of  the  members 
for  Oxfordshire.  In  the  following  May 
Fiennes  was  a  commissioner  of  the  pro- 
tector's nrivy  seal,  and  on  June  15  he  was 
uipointea  lord  commissioner  of  the  Great 
oeal,  on  the  secession  of  Whitelocke  and 
Widdrington,  when  they  refused  to  carry 
into  effect  the  ordinance  concerning  the 
Chancery. 

Fiennes  is  said  to  have  been  the  author 
of  the  declaration  issued  by  Cromwell  in 
the  following  October,  vmdicating  the 
severity  with  which  he  had  treated  all  the 
royalists,  making  them  suffer  in  money  or 
in  person  for  the  plots  against  him,  whether 
they  were  implicated  in  them  or  not. 
(Harrii$  LiveSj  iii.  433-435.)  In  January 
1656  he  was  united  with  Whitelocke  and 
others  in  the  negotiation  of  the  treaty  with 
the  Swedish  ambassador.  In  the  next 
parliament  he  was  returned  for  the  uni- 
versity of  Oxford,  and  confirmed  as  com- 
missioner of  the  Great  Seal.  (  Whitelocke, 
632-649,  653.)  In  the  endeavour  to  re- 
move the  scruples  which  Cromwell  pro- 
fSoHed  to  assuming  the  title  of  king  he 
was  one  of  the  principal  speakers.  This 
attempt  being  set  aside,  he  bore  the  Seal 
at  the  solenm  ceremony  of  the  re-inaugu- 
rBdoQ  in  June  1657.      {Pari.  Hid.  iii 


FIKCH 


249 


1498, 1515.)  Under  the  new  constitution 
he  was  appointed  one  of  Cromwell's  lords, 
and  on  the  protector's  death  in  1658  as- 
sisted in  proclaiming  Richard  as  his  suc- 
cessor, ana  was  rein^ted  in  the  custody  of 
the  Great  Seal,  with  his  former  colleague 
and  fiulstrode  Whitelocke.  {Whitelocke, 
066,  675-6.^  In  the  list  of  the  members 
of  the  parUament  called  by  Richard  in 
January  1659  the  name  of  NaUianiel 
Fiennes  appears  as  member  for  Banbury 
(Pari.  Hist.  iii.  1533),  which,  as  ho  was  a 
member  of  the  *  other  house,'  either  must 
be  a  mistake,  or  some  other  person  of  the 
same  name  must  be  intended.  He  is  net 
only  mentioned  as  lord  keeper  in  Richard's 
speech  on  the  first  day,  as  about  to  address 
the  parliament  on  certain  matters  un- 
touched by  him  (Ibid.  1540),  but  is  named 
in  April  as  going  up  to  the  bar  of  the 
*  other  house  to  receive  a  declaration  from 
the  Commons.  (Whitelocke,  677.)  Soon 
after  the  dissolution  of  the  parliament  on 
April  22  Richard's  authority  coased,  and 
with  it  Fiennes'  ofiUce,  the  Long  Parlia- 
ment, which  met  again  on  May  7,  appoint- 
ing other  commissioners.    (Ibid.  678.) 

On  the  king's  return  Fiennes  retired  to 
his  country  seat  at  Newton  Tony  in  Wilt- 
shire, where  he  died  on  December  16, 1669, 
and  was  buried  in  the  church  there,  with  a 
monument  to  his  memory.  However  that 
memory  might  be  cherished  by  his  friends 
and  family,  the  only  claim  to  admiration 
by  the  public  would  be  his  imdoubted 
talent  and  eloquence,  of  which  his  pub- 
lished speeches  afford  ample  evidence ;  but 
in  regard  to  his  conduct  either  as  a  soldier 
or  civilian,  tainted  in  the  former  as  it  must 
ever  remain  with  the  suspicion  of  trea- 
chery and  the  imputation  of  cowardice, 
and  exhibiting  in  the  latter  so  many 
proofs  of  changeableness  and  timeserving, 
he  cannot  but  be  held  in  the  lowest  esti- 
mation. 

He  married  twice.  His  first  wife  was 
Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Sir  John  Eliot,  of 
Port  Eliot  in  Uomwall,  by  whom  he  nad 
a  son ;  and  his  second  was  frances,  daughter 
of  Richard  Whitehead,  Esq.,  of  Siderley, 
Hants,  by  whom  he  had  three  daughters. 
His  son  William,  bv  the  death  of  his  first 
cousin  without  male  issue,  became  third 
Viscount  Saye  and  Sele,  and  the  title 
remained  in  the  family  till  1781,  when  the 
viscounty  became  extmct,  but  the  ancient 
barony  survived  in  Thomas  Twistleton, 
descended  frq^i  the  daughter  of  the  eldest 
son  of  the  first  viscount. 

FIKCH,  John  (Loed  FrN'cn  of  Ford- 
wich).  This  family  originally  bore  the 
name  of  Herbert,  and  is  said  to  have  de- 
scended from  Henry  Fitz- Herbert,  cham- 
berlain to  Henry  I.,  and  to  have  adopted 
the  name  of  Finch  in  the  reign  of  Edward 
I.^  being  that  of  a  manor  in  Kent,  which 


250 


FINCH 


came  into  their  possesaioQ  by  a  marriage 
with  the  daughter  and  heir  of  its  lord. 
After  a  long  train  of  succeasion,  Sir 
Thomas  flnch^  in  the  reign  of  Queen 
Mary,  married  one  of  the  coheirs  of  Sir 
Thomas  Moyle,  of  Eastwell  in  Kent,  and 
on  his  death  by  shipwreck^  in  6  Elizabeth, 
he  left  three  sons.  Through  two  of  them 
his  connection  with  the  law  is  worthy  of 
remark^  for  he  had  one  son,  two  grandsons, 
one  great-grandson,  and  one  great-great- 
grandson,  ful  eminent  in  Westminster  Hall, 
besides  two  female  descendants  connected 
b^  marriage  with  lawyers  equally  illus- 
trious, oir  Thomases  second  son,  Sir 
Henry  Finch^  was  an  eminent  advocate, 
and  one  of  Bong  James*s  Serjeants,  and  by 
his  wife  Ursula,  daughter  and  heir  of  John 
Thwaites,  was  the  father  of  this  John  Finch, 
who  was  bom  on  September  17,  1584,  and 
was  admitted  of  the  society  of  Gray's  Inn  in 
February  1600.  Nearly  twelve  years  elapsed 
before  he  was  called  to  the  bar,  on  Novem- 
ber 8, 1611 ;  but  in  six  years  more,  assisted 
by  the  patronage  of  Lord  Bacon,  he  became 
a  bencher,  and  was  chosen  autumn  reader  in 
1618.  In  the  meantime  he  had  been  elected 
member  for  Canterbury  in  1614,  and  was 
chosen  recorder  of  that  city  in  1017.  The 
corporation  rejected  him  in  1620,  but  bein^ 
reinstated  by  the  direction  of  the  council 
(Cal  St.  Paj)ers  [1619],  108-148),  he  held 
that  office  till  1621.  Again  representing 
that  city  in  the  first  three  of  Charleses  par- 
liaments, he  was  chosen  speaker  of  the  last 
in  1628.  Clarendon  says  (i.  130)  that  he 
had  *  led  a  free  life  in  a  restrained  fortune, 
and  having  set  up  upon  the  stock  of  a  good 
wit  and  natural  parts,  without  the  super- 
structure of  much  knowledge  in  the  pro- 
fession by  which  he  had  to  grow,  he  was 
willing  to  use  those  weapons  in  which  he 
had  most  skill.'  The  first  effect  of  his 
endeavours  was  his  knighthood,  the  next 
his  appointment  as  king's  counsel,  and  then 
attorney-general  to  the  queen  in  1626. 
{Rymery  xviii.  633,  866.) 

In  his  address  to  the  king  on  his  being 
elected  speaker  he  showed  some  of  the  wit 
for  which  Clarendon  gave  him  credit,  and 
too  much  of  the  customary  adulation.  On 
the  difficult  subjects  which  agitated  this 
parliament  it  was  a  difficult  and  delicate 
task  to  a  man  of  Finch's  disposition  to 
avoid  doing  anything  which  might  deprive 
him  of  the  confidence  of  the  Commons,  or 
hazard  the  destruction  of  his  hopes  from  the 
king.  Through  the  first  session  ne  managed 
in  his  en[>eeches  to  the  throne  to  steer  with 
tolerable  safety ;  and  though,  towards  the 
end  of  it,  he  ran  some  risk  by  interrupting, 
'  with  tears  in  his  eyes,'  a  speaker  who  was 
about,  as  he  supposed,  to  fall  upon  the 
Duke  of  Buckingham^'  and  requesting  to 
withdraw,  he  redeemed  himself  by  bring- 
ing back  a  condliatozy  message  mm  the 


FINCH 

king.  At  the  termination,  Howeyer,  of  the 
second  sesdon  he  lost  all  credit  with  the 
house,  and  incurred  their  censure  by  hie 
conduct  After  delivering  a  message  from 
the  king,  ordering  an  adjournment,  he  re- 
fused to  read  a  remonstrance  against  ton- 
nsffe  and  poundage,  proposed  by  Sir  John 
Elliott,  and  left  the  chair.  Upon  bang 
forced  to  resume  it,  he  had  again  reooozM 
to  tears,  saving,  '  I  am  the  servant  of  tbe 
house,  but  let  not  the  reward  of  my  service 
be  my  ruin  ....  I  will  not  say  I  will 
not,  but  I  dare  not'  Sir  Peter  Haymaii,a 
kinsman  and  a  neighbour,  called  hun  '  ths 
disgrace  of  his  country,  and  a  blot  to  a 
noble  family.'  The  door  of  the  house  wtf 
locked,  the  usher  of  the  black  rod  denisd 
admittance,  and  the  speaker  was  compelled 
to  keep  his  seat  while  the  resolutions  were 
passed.  Eight  days  after  the  king  angrijjf' 
prorogued  the  parliament  {Pari,  Sid.  k 
222-402.) 

But  soon  Sir  John  was  to  act  a  mora 
prominent  part  Noy,  the  attomey-gener^ 
who  had  invented  or  revived  the  tax  ctDed 
ship-money,  died  in  the  following  Augiut, 
before  the  writ  for  the   imposition  ~" 


issued ;  the  removal  of  Sir  Kobert  Heath 
from  the  chief  justiceship  of  the  Commot 
Pleas,  without  any  dl4;ed    cause,  took 
place  [in   September ;   and   on    the  Wth 
of  October  (1634)  Rnch,  to  the  surprise 
of   all,  received   the  latter  appointment 
(Crokcy  Car.  375.)      The  writ  for  ship- 
money  being  issued  six  days  after  nitu- 
nilly  induced  the  public  to  associate  the 
removal,  the  substitution,  and  the  writ  is 
in  some  way  connected  together.    I^ 
Clarendon  (i.  127,  130)   says  that  Fmch 
*  took  up  ship-money  where  Noy  left  it, 
and,  being  a  judge,' carried  it  ud  to  thit 
pinnacle  from  whence  he  almost  broke  his 
own  neck,   having  in  his  ioumey  thither 
had  too  much  infiuence  on  his  brethren  to 
induce  them  to  concur  in  a  judgment  th«| 
had  all  cause  to  repent'  Though  he  denied 
having  known  of  the  writ  at  the  time  of 
his  appointment,  he  acknowledged  hiring 
collected  his  brethren's  opinions  on  theioh- 
ject,  and  when  the  case  of  Hamndea  came 
under  discussion  he  gave  so  absolate  an 
opinion  in  its  favour,  and  contended  so 
strenuously  against  the  arg^ument  of  his 
brother  judges,  Hutton  and  Croke,  that  he 
I  confirmed  the  general  feeling  that  he  was 
elevated  to  the  bench  for  tne  purpose  d 
carrying    through  the  obnoxious  impoetj 
and,  as  Lord  Clarendon  says,  by  the  judg* 
ment  he  delivered  he  made  it  *  much  moic 
abhorred    and    formidable'    than  befim 
{StaU  TrtaUy  iii.  1216.) 

On  his  appointment  in  the  plaos  of  Haith 
and  Sir  John  Banks  Buceeeadif  Wy  ■ 
attorney-general,  the  foUowaig  MdM 
of  bar  wit  was  dicolated  (Wmii^iS^ 
iL584):— 


rorcH 

iVoir*ff  flood  is  gone. 

The  Bank9  appear; 
Heath  is  shorn  down. 

And  Fineh  sings  here. 

le  prejudice  ftgainst  him  was  in  no  de- 
diminished  by  his  heartless  remark, 
a  Mr.  Prynne  was  brought  up  for  sen- 
9  upon  bis  second  libel : '  I  bad  thought 
Piynne  bad  no  ears,  but  methinks  he 
.  ears.'  Thus  noticed,  the  hair  was 
ed  back,  and  the  clipped  members  ex- 
dy  'upon  the  sight  whereof  the  lords 
» displeased  they  had  been  formerly  no 
d  cut  off.'  And  the  consequence  was 
tlie  nnfortonate  gentleman  was  con- 
ned to  lose  the  remainder,  which  was 
I  so  cruelly  and  closely  that  a  piece  of 
;heek  was  cut  off  with  it.  (State  Triah^ 
17,  749.) 

inch's  unpopularity  in  the  kingdom 
ied  to  advance  his  favour  with  theloDg, 
on  Lord  Coventry's  death  he  was  an- 
ted lord  keeper  on  January  28, 1640. 
ifieTy  XX.  364.)  Havinff  been  previously 
>bled  with  the  title  of  Baron  Finch,  of 
Iwich  in  Kent,  he  opened  the  parliament 
met  in  April  (eleven  years  having 
»ed  since  it  had  last  assembled)  with  a 
one  speech,  in  which,  alluding  to  the 
1  condescension  in  calling  them  toge- 
,  he  savs  that  the  king  '  is  now  pleased 
IT  by  tne  shining  beams  of  majesty,  as 
sous  did  to  Phaeton,  that  the  distance 
reen  sovereignty  and  subjection  should 
barr  you  of  that  filial  freedom  of  access 
OS  person  and  counsels.'  His  majesty, 
-ever,  felt  it  necessary  to  resume  ms 
ns  in  less  than  three  weeks,  and  hastily 
oisBed  the  assembly  on  May  5.  In  the 
intime  the  Commons  had  visited  the 
I  keeper  veith  a  vote  declaring  that  his 
luct  as  speaker  at  the  dose  of  the  last 
liament  was  a  breach  of  privilege  (ParL 
t  iiL  528,  552,  571),  and  the  offence 
)  not  forgotten  when  ^e  king  was  com- 
ied  to  smnmon  a  new  parliament  in  the 
owing  November.  Lord  Finch,  finding 
the  resolution  then  passed  by  the  Com- 
18  against  ship-money  and  those  who 
ised  it,  that  preparations  were  making 
proceeding  against  him  personally,  ap- 
d  to  the  house,  desiring  to  be  heard  m 
own  defence  before  it  came  to  a  vote ; 
,  his  request  being  granted,  he  delivered, 
December  21,  an  artful  and  ingenious 
ch  in  his  own  vindication.  But,  not- 
tstanding  his  grace  of  elocution,  the 
imons  were  not  to  be  diverted  from 
r  purpose,  a  vote  being  immediately 
ed^or  bis  accusation  before  the  Lords, 
a  demand  for  his  committaL  On  the 
wing  morning  the  message  was  deli- 
d ;  bat  bis  lordship  had  taken  advan- 
of  the  interval  to  escape,  and,  first 
ing  ihe  Great  Seal  to  the  king,  to  sail 
HoUaiid.     The   articles   against   him 


FINCH 


251 


charged  him  with  endeavouring  to  subvert 
the  fundamental  laws  of  England,  and  to 
introduce  an  arbitrary  tyrannical  govern- 
ment against  law ;  and  comprehended,  be- 
sides otners,  his  refusal  to  put  the  question 
as  speaker,  his  soliciting  the  judges'  opi- 
nions on  shij^money  wnen  cnief  justice, 
and  his  framing  and  advising  the  kings 
declaration  after  the  dissolution  of  the  last 
parliament    {Ibid,  626-008.) 

From  a  passage  in  Lord  Clarendon*s  work 
(i.  525),  orinnally  suppressed,  it  appears 
that  many  ot  the  ascendant  party  were  not 
desirous  of  urging^the  charges  against  Lord 
Finch  to  extremity;  and  their  refraining 
from  pressing  for  any  further  proceedings 
on  the  impeachment  seems  to  warrant  the 
assertion.  £^  lordship  remained  quietly 
at  the  Hague,  and  the  governing  powers 
were  content  with  receiving  from  nim  a 
composition  of  7000/.  {State  Trials,  iv.  18.) 
It  (U)es  not  appear  when  he  returned  to 
England,  but  ne  received  two  affectionate 
letters  nrom  Queen  Henrietta  Maria  in 
1040,  and  Elizabeth,  Queen  of  Bohemia, 
in  1655,  showing  their  contmued  interest 
in  him.  (Archaoloffia,  xxi.  474.)  On 
Charles  H.'s  return  to  his  throne,  Finch 
was  named  i^  the  commission  for  the  trial 
of  the  regicides  in  October  1660,  and  when 
Thomas  Hanrison  in  his  defence  asserted 
that  the  authority  under  which  he  acted 
was  not  usurped,  but  that  it  'was  done 
rather  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord,'  Lord  Finch 
interrupted  him,  and  said,  'Though  ir.y 
lords  here  have  been  pleased  to  give  you  a 
great  latitude,  this  must  not  be  suffered, 
that  you  should  run  into  these  damnable 
excursions,  to  make  God  the  author  of  this 
damnable  treason  committed.'  In  two  or 
three  of  the  other  trials  he  also  made  some 
remarks.  (State  Trials,  v.  986-1067.)  He 
was  then  in  his  seventy-seventh  year, 
which  he  did  not  live  to  complete,  dying 
on  November  20, 1660.  He  was  buried  in 
the  ancient  church  of  St.  Martin,  near  Can- 
terbury, in  which  parish  his  paternal  seat, 
called  The  Moat,  was  situate;  and  a  splendid 
monument  to  his  memory  was  erected  there 
by  his  widow. 

However  highly  Lord  Finch's  talents 
and  eloquence  may  have  been  spoken  of, 
few  have  ventured  to  bear  testimony  to  his 
independence  as  a  judge  or  his  wisdom  ns 
a  statesman ;  and  the  general  character  that 
has  with  apparent  truth  been  assigned  to 
him  is  that  of  an  imprincipled  lawyer  and 
a  timeserving  minister. 

He  was  twice  married,  first  to  Eleanore, 
daughter  of  Sir  George  Wvat,  of  Boxley  in 
Kent;  and  secondly  to  Mabella,  daughter 
of  Charles  Fotherby,  dean  of  Canterbury. 
As  he  left  only  a  daughter  (married  to  Sir 
George  Kadcliffe,  of  the  privy  council  of 
Ireland),  the  title  became  extinct  (Hasted, 
xi.  162.) 


252 


FINCH 


FIHCH,  Heneags  (Lobd  Fixch  op  Da-  - 
VENTRY,  Earl  of  Nottingham').  What- 
ever discredit  the  family  of  Fincn  sustained  , 
from  the  eouivocal  character  of  the  ahove 
John,  Lord  Pinch  of  Fordwich,  was  amply 
redeemed  in  the  person  of  his  relative,  the 
Earl  of  Nottingham,  by  the  admiration  and 
respect  he  commanded  amon^  his  contem- 
poraries, and  the  reverence  with  which  his 
name  is  ever  mentioned  in  the  present  day. 
Ho  was  great-grandson  of  Sir  Thomas 
Finch,  the  ancestor  of  Lord  Finch,  and  son 
of  Sir  Heneage  Finch,  recorder  of  London, 
by  his  first  wife,  Frances,  daughter  of  Sir 
Edmund  Bell,  of  fieaufr^  Hall,  Norfolk  (a 
descendant  of  the  lord  chief  baron  in  the 
reign  of  Elizabeth).  He  was  bom  on  De- 
cember 23, 1621,  and,  after  passing  through 
his  curriculum  at  Westminster  School,  was 
admitted  as  a  gentleman  commoner  at 
Christ  Church,  Oxford,  in  1635,  four  years 
after  his  father^s  death.  Anthony  Wood 
records  no  degree  that  he  took,  although  he 
remained  at  the  university  till  he  became  a 
member  of  the  Inner  Temple  in  1638.  He 
was  ccdled  to  the  bar  in  1645,  and  must 
have  soon  obtained  good  practice  in  the 
courts,  as  his  name  frequently  occurs  in 
Siderfin*s  Heports  during  the  Common- 
wealth as  a  leader  in  abstruse  'cases  in  the 
tipper  Bench.  That  he  was  no  friend  to 
the  republican  party  may  be  inferred  from 
his  being  selected  for  a  prominent  office 
immediately  on  the  Bestoration ;  and  it 
was  no  doubt  from  the  reputation  of  his 
loyalty  that  he  was  employed  before  the 
Protector  Richard's  parliament  in  February 
1659  for  Mr.  Street,  who  had  been  returned 
for  Worcester,  and  was  petitioned  against 
as  having  borne  arms  as  a  cavalier.  On 
this  occasion  we  have  the  first  reference  to 
the  eloauence  .for  which  he  has  been  so 
famed,  tne  opposing  counsel  acknowledging 
that  he  had  done  the  part '  not  only  of  an  ad- 
Tocate,  but  of  an  exquisite  orator.  (Burtotif 
iii.  423-434.)  From  his  persuasive  powers, 
he  acquired  the  titles  of  Mthe  silver-tongued 
lawyer  *  and  *  the  English  Cicero,'  and  from 
his  graceful  action  Uiat  of  ^the  English 
Roscius.'  Evelyn  speaks  (ii.  226)  of  his 
pleading  *  most  eloquently  for  the  merchants 
trading  to  the  Can&ries;  and  the  gossiping 
Pepys  (ii.  123,  iv.  157)  is  in  ecstasies  when 
attending  the  court,  exclaiming,  '  So  plea- 
sant a  thing  is  it  to  hear  him  plead.'  Even 
tlie  prejudiced  Burnet  (ii.  37)  is  obliged  to 
concur,  though  he  qualifies  his  praise  by 
the  depreciating  remark  that  his  eloquence 
was  ^  laboured  and  affected,'  and  that '  he 
saw  it  as  much  despised  before  he  died.' 

He  was  returned  to  the  Convention  Par- 
liament of  April  1660,  by  two  consti- 
tuencies, those  of  St.  Michael's  in  Corn- 
wall, and  of  the  city  of  Canterbury,  and, 
taking  his  seat  for  the  latter,  he  was 
actively  employed  in  all  the  steps  adopted 


FINCH 

by  the  house  to  fiacilitate  the  king*s  re- 
turn. A  week  after  that  event  he  was 
a][>pointed  solicitor-general  and  rewarded 
with  a  baronetcy.  The  trials  of  the  regi- 
cides were  conducted  wholly  by  him.  tiie 
attorney-general  taking  no  part  in  them« 
and  the  whole  proceMlings  were  carriea 
on  with  exemplaiy  fiumesa  and  judgment 
When  the  parliament  met  after  the  xeceta, 
he  brought  in  the  Hll  for  keeping  the  fast 
of  King  Charles's  martyrdom,  wmch,  after 
an  observance  of  two  centimes,  has  been 
lately  discontinued ;  and  in  a  debate  with 
reference  to  the  attempted  exaction  of  ISOL 
by  the  seipeant-at-arms  for  feea  against 
Milton,  he  is  reported  to  have  said  '  Miltoo 
was  Latin  secretary  to  Cromwell,  and  de- 
served hanging ; '  a  sentiment  which  shocks 
our  modem  ears,  and  which  has  been  ac- 
cordingly stigmatised  by  over-nice  critics, 
without  making  due  allowance  for  the 
frantic  loyalty  of  the  time,  and  withoat 
remembering  that  little  was  then  knonni 
of  the  great  bard  beyond  bis  republican 
writings  ;  his  '  Comus,'  *  L' Allegro,'  and 
'II  Penseroso,'  and  other  minor  poen^ 
having  had  a  very  limited  circulation. 

A  new  parliament  met  in  May  1661,  m 
which  Sir  Heneage  represented  the  oiii* 
versity  of  Cambridge.  Later  in  the  year 
he  became  treasurer  of  his  inn  of  court, 
and,  being  selected  as  autumn  reader,  he 
had  the  expensive  satisfaction  of  reviving 
the  splendid  festivities  which  had  been  so 
long  discontinued,  and  on  the  last  day  of 
the  feast  had  the  honour  of  entertaininji; 
the  king.  Sir  Heneage  resided,  at  this 
time  and  till  his  deam,  at  Kensington, 
in  llie  mansion  which  afterwards  became 
the  palace,  his  son  having  sold  it  to  King 
William. 

At  the  trial  of  Lord  Morley  for  mmrder, 
Sir  Heneage  summed  up  the  evidence  in  «i 
eloquent  and  impressive  speech,  which  ]» 
fullyreportedinthe*Statetriala.'  (vL77&) 
Loid  Clarendon  then  acted  as  High  steward, 
and  in  the  following  year  was  himself  ^e 
subject  of  prosecution.    During[  its  progresB 
Sir  Heneage,  as  far  as  can  be  ludjfed  pom 
the  publisned  reports,  showed  his  disap- 
proval of  the  proceedings,  and  did  what  he 
legally  could  m  behalf  of  the  feJlen  states- 
man.    (^FarL  Hist.  iv.  376,  &c.)    In  1670 
he    succeeded  to  the  office  of  attoxn^- 
general,  which  he  held  for  three  jean 
and  a  half;  and  on  the  removal  of  Lord 
Shaftesbury  from  the  chancellorship,  the 
Great   Seal  was  on    November  9,  1673. 
placed  in  his  hands,  where  it  remained 
till  his  death,  a  period  of  nine  years.    Two 
months  after  his  advancement  he  was  raised 
to  the  peerage  as  Baron  Finch  of  Daventry. 
For  two  years  he  was  distinguished  by  the 
title  of  lord  keeper  only,  but  at  the  end  of 
that  time,  on  December  19,  1675,  he  was 
constituted  lord  high  chancellori  and  in 


UNCH 

.681  he  was  farther  honoured  with  the 
nrldom  of  Nottingham.  While  he  held 
he  Seal  he  predded  as  lord  steward  on 
hree  occasions-i-in  1678^  on  the  trials  of  the 
Sari  of  Pemhroke  and  of  Lord  Comwallis, 
)oth  for  murder;  and  in  1680,  on  that  of 
iTiaoount  Stafford,  impeached  for  com^li- 
ity  in  the  Popish  Plot.  In  pronoimcmg 
lentence  on  that  unfortunate  nobleman  he 
ihows  Ids  belief  in  the  existence  of  the  plot 
bejond  all  possibilitj  of  doubting,'  and 
yrea.  carries  it  back  so  far  as  the  lire  of 
London,  exclaiming,  'Does  any  man  now 
doubt  how  London  came  to  oe  burnt  ?  * 
He,  however,  according  to  Koger  North, 
discredited  the  witnesses  brought  forward 
to  support  it,  and  pointed  out  the  incon- 
utencies  of  their  evidence.  (State  Trials, 
tI  1.310,  vii.  143,  1204 ;  North's  Examen, 
SOB.) 

Towards  the  dose  of  the  chancellor's  life 
be  suffered  greatly  from  the  gout,  and  was 
m  other  respects  so  much  afflicted  that  he 
often  sat  to  near  causes  when  in  great  pain 
md  more  fit  to  keep  his  room,  frequently 
unable  to  perform  nis  duties  in  the  House 
of  Lords,  his  place  as  speaker  was  supplied 
I7  Chief  Justice  North,  with  whom  he 
tteserved  a  cordial  Mendship.  He  died  at 
ue  age  of  dxty-one  at  his  house  in  Great 
Queen  Street,  Lincoln's  Lm  Fields,  on  De- 
onnber  18,  1682,  and  was  buried  in  the 
dinrch  of  Ravenstone  in  Bucks,  where  he 
liad  a  seat,  his  son  placing  a  splendid  mo- 
niunent  to  his  memory  over  his  remains. 

In  the  various  steps  of  his  career,  while 
psrtv  animosities  were  most  violent  and  the 
whole  kingdom  was  divided  into  factions, 
he  carried  himself  with  so  much  wisdom 
and  steadiness,  modesty  and  forbearance, 
that  he  appealed  to  be  of  no  faction  him- 
self, and  not  only  retained  the  good  opinion 
of  his  sovereign,  but  escaped  even  the 
assaults,  if  not  the  censures,  from  which  few 
were  exempt,  of  his  political  opponents. 

As  chancellor.  Lord  Nottingnam  is  de- 
scribed by  Blackstone  (iii.  55)  as  '  a  person 
of  the  {greatest  abilities  and  most  uncor- 
TQpted  integrity.  .  .  .  The  reason  and  ne- 
cessities of  mankind  arising  from  the  great 
diange  in  property  by  the  extension  of 
tnde  and  the  aoolition  of  military  tenures 
enabled  him  in  the  course  of  nine  years  to 
bufld  a  system  of  jurisprudence  and  juris- 
diction upon  wide  and  rational  foundations.' 
Boniet  (li.  C7)  calls  him  '  a  man  of  pro- 
bity, and  well  versed  in  the  laws  ...  an 
iieoirapt  judge,  and  in  his  court  he  could 
!esist  tne  strongest  applications  even  from 
&e  king  himseli,  though  he  did  it  no  where 
)lie;'  foi^tting  his  refusal  to  affix  the 
jieat  Se^  to  Lord  Danby's  pardon,  and 
fte  remark  of  the  king  on  returning  it 
tfter  he  had  himself  used  it  for  the  pur- 
nee,  '  Take  it  back,  my  lord,  I  know  not 
that  to  bestow  it  better.'    Li  the  disposal 


FINCH 


253 


of  his  ecclesiastical  patronage  he  was  so 
particular  that,  not  thinking  himself  a 
judge  of  the  merits  of  the  suitors  for  it,  he 
charged  it  upon  the  conscience  of  his  chap- 
lain (pt.  Sharp,  afterwuds  Archbishop  of 
York)  to  make  the  closest  enquiiy  and  give 
the  best  advice,  so  that  he  might  never 
bestow  any  preferment  upon  an  undeserving 
man. 

Tate,  in  the  second  part  that  he  added 
to  Drvden's  'Absalom  and  Achitophel,' 
descri(>es  him  in  encomiastic  terms  under 
the  character  of  Amri ;  and  the  Duke  of 
Wharton,  in  the  '  North  Briton '  (No.  69), 

Seaksof  him  in  terms  equally  eulogistic, 
is  character  mav  be  estimated  by  the 
reputation  which  nas  ever  since  been  at- 
tached to  his  name,  by  the  fVequent  refer- 
ences to  his  decisions  as  authority,  and  by 
the  veneration  with  which  he  is  still  re- 
garded by  those  who  practise  in  Westmin- 
ster Hall,  where  his  conmion  appellation  is 
'  The  Father  of  Equity.'  As  a  law  reformer 
too  he  must  hold  the  highest  place,  since 
to  him  we  owe  the  most  important  and 
most  useful  act  of  the  reign — the  Statute 
of  Frauds. 

He  has  been  imfortunate  in  the  con- 
temporary reporters  of  his  decisions,  of 
whom  there  were  three— namely,  William 
Nelson,  an  anonymous  author,  and  Sir 
Anthony  Keck,  the  lord  comnussioner  of 
the  Great  Seal  under  William  IH.,  none 
of  whose  publications  are  satisfactory  or  of 
much  reputation.  A  few  cases  may  oe  met 
with  occasionally  in  other  writers,  and  Lord 
Nottingham  left  a  folio  volume  in  manu- 
script of  all  the  judgments  he  pronounced, 
some  of  the  most  important  of  which  have 
been  given  to  the  world  by  Mr.  Swanston, 
the  learned  editor  of  our  own  time.  While 
attorney-general  he  superintended  the  edi- 
tion of  Sir  Henry  Hobart's  Reports  (1671). 
The  other  nubfications  in  his  name  are 
principally  nis  speeches  and  legal  argu- 
ments. 

In  his  private  life  there  is  not  one  story 
told  to  his  discredit,  ready  as  that  profligate 
age  was  to  feed  malice  and  deal  in  scandal. 
He  kept  up  the  dignity  of  his  office  with 
liberality  and  splendour,  and  was  so  far 
from  being  tainted  with  avarice  that  he 
gave  up  4000/.  a  year  out  of  his  official 
allowances.  He  patronised  largely  learn- 
ing and  learned  men.  In  the  language  of 
Bishop  Warburtou, '  he  took  into  his  notice 
and  continued  long  in  his  protection  every 
great  name  in  letters  ana  religion,  from 
Cudworth  to  Prideaux.' 

He  married  early  in  life  Elizabeth,  daughter 
of  Mr.  William  rfarvey,  who  died  sevenyears 
before  him,  having  produced  him  fourteen 
children.  His  eldest  son,  Daniel^  succeeded 
to  a  second  earldom,  that  of  Winchilsea,  a 
title  given  to  his  great-grandmother,  the 
widow  of  Sir  Moyle  Finch;  and  in  his 


254 


FINEUX 


FISHES 


descendants  the  double  earldom  of  Win-    reign,  and  for  the  first  sixteen  years  of  that 
cbilsea  and  Nottingham  still  survives.  of  Ilenry  VIIL,  he  retained  his  high  poa- 

The  chancellor's  second  son«  Heneage,  ,  tion  with  an  unblemi^ed  reputation  ooth 
also  an  eminent  lawyer  and  solicitor-general    as  a  lawyer  and  a  man. 
before  his  father's  death  till  he  was  removed       He  died  in  1525,  residing  then  in  the 
by  James  11.^  greatly  distinguished  himself   manor  of  Hawe  in  the  parish  of  Herae^ 
by  his  strenuous  actvocacy  m  the  cause  of   which  he  had  purchased ;  and  his  remaioi 
tbe  seven  bishops.    He  received  no  office  :  were  deposited  in  Canterbury  Cathednl 
or  other  reward  from  King  William,  but  !  He  is  represented  as  a  person  oj^  great  piety, 
when  Queen  Anne  came  to  the  throne  he  I  though   of   a  very  cneeHul  temper  m 
was  raised  to  the  peerage  as  Lord  Guernsey,  |  conversation.    He  was  a  consideralue  hens* 
to  which  the  earldom  of  Aylesford^  was  :  factor  to  the  Augustin  friars  and  the  Piioiy 
added  by  George  I.,  and  has  been  enjoyed  I  of  Christchurch  in  Canterbury,  and  luio  to 
ever  since  by  nis  descendants  in  regular    the  abbey  of  Faver^am:  and  it  teUsweO 
succession.    XCoUiju's    Peerage^    iii.    420;  '  of  his  character  that  Archbishop  Mortoo, 
Athen.  Oxon,  iv.  66 ;   WeUbyj  51.)  ;  who  had  opposed  him,    made    him  liii 

FnrSUX,  John,  whose  family  was  .executor,  and  that  he  was  nominated  to 
established  at  Swingfield  in  Kent^^  which  '  the  same  duty  imder  the  will  of  Heniy 
Hasted  says  was  bestowed  on  John  Fineaux    VII. 

by  Nicholas  Criol,  in  3  Richard  H.,  in  gra-  ■  The  inn  of  Chancery  now  called  New 
titude  for  saving  his  life  at  the  battle  of  Inn  is  said  to  have  belonged  to  him,  and  to 
Poictiers,  was  one  of  three  sons  of  William  have  been  let  by  him  to  the  students  that 
Pineux  of  that  place,  by  a  daughter  of  —  ;  when  they  first  removed  from  St.  Ge<u]g«*i 
Monyngs ;  and,  taking  Fuller^s  authority  Inn,  at  the  rent  of  Ql  per  annum.  {Ori§, 
that  he  was  eighty-four  years  of  age  when    Jtirid,  230.) 

he  died,  he  must  have  been  bom  about  He  was  twice  married.  His  first  wife 
1441.  Fuller  states  also  that  he  was  was  Elizabeth,  daughter  and  heir  of  1!^ 
twenty-eight  before  he  took  to  the  study  of   liam  Appulderfeld,  Esq.,  and  by  her  hehtl 


the  law,  that  he  followed  that  profession 
twenty-eight  years  before  he  was  made  a 
judge,  and  that  he  continued  a  judge  for 
twenty-eight  years.  His  legal  studies,  there- 
fore, must  have  commenced  about  the  year 
1469,  9  Edward  IV.  The  inn  of  court  to 
which  he  belonged  is  not  ascertained,  nor 
does  his  name  appear  in  the  Year  Books 
till  1485, 1  Henry  VH.,  when  ho  was  called 
serjeant-at-law;  but  David  Lloyd  states 
that  he  was  steward  of  129  manors  at  once, 
counsel  to  sixteen  noblemen,  and  that  he 
left  behind  him  twenty-three  folio  volumes 
of  notes,  and  3502  cases  he  had  managed 
himsel£  {StaU  Worthies,  81-86.)  The 
motto  he  selected  for  his  seijeant*s  ring 
(the  first  recorded  instance  of  its  use)  was, 
'Suae  quisque  fortunio  faber,'  and  one  is 
in  possession  of  a  noble  descendant  of  the 
judge. 

He  owed  his  elevation  to  the  bench  to 
his  bold  opposition  to  the  imposition 
of  the  tenth  penny.  '  Let  us  see,'  said 
he,  'before  we  pay  anything,  whether 
we  have  anything  we  can  call  our  own 
to  pay.'  The  King,  when  Archbishop 
Morton  resisted  his  advancement  as  being 
an  encouragement  of  the  factious,  more 
wisely  suggested  that  *  so  noble  a  patriot 
would  be  an  useful  courtier,  and  that  one 
who  could  do  so  well  at  the  bar  might  do 
more  at  the  bench.'  He  was  accoidingly 
made  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  on 
February  11,  1494,  and  gave  so  much 
satisfaction  in  that  court  that  in  less  than 
two  years  he  was  promoted  to  the  office  of 
chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench,onNoyem- 
ber  24^  1495.  Duing  the  remainder  of  the 


two  daughters,  the  eldest  of  whom,  Jum^ 
married  Attorney-General  John  Bopo^ 
whose  grandson  was  created  in  1610  Biroi 
Teynham.  His  second  wife  was  Eliiabetl^ 
widow  of  W^illiam  Cleere,  and  daughter  of 
Sir  John  Paston,  grandson  of  William  Pto- 
ton,  the  judge  in  the  reign  of  HennrTL 
From  his  only  son  by  her  descended  n 
only  daughter,  who  married  Sir  Job 
Smythe,  of  Ostenhanger  in  Kent,  whon 
son  Sir  Thomas  in  1628  was  created  Yw 
count  Struigford  in  Ireland,  to  which  im 
added  the  Ejiglish  title  of  Baron  Penshunt 
in  1825,  so  that  the  chief  justice  was  latvlf 
doubly  represented  in  the  House  of  Loidfc 
(Fuller,  i.  500 :  Hasted,  vi.  141,  vil  121 
ix.87,454.) 

FISHSBTFBK,  Thomas  de,  was  probiUj 
the  son  of  Ralph  de  Fissebum,  wno  in  « 
Henry  III.  paid  a  fine  of  one  himdni 
shillings  in  Northumberland  for  01111711^ 
Beatrice,  the  widow  of  William  the  Cow- 
ner.  (Excerpt,  e  Bot,  Fm.  u.  27a)  He 
was  appointed  justice  itinerant  in  21  Ed- 
ward 1.,  and  assizes  taken  before  him  11 
Cumberland  in  the  same  reign  are  xeibnei 
to  in  2  Edward  II.  (AM>.  FlacU.  307. 
300.)  He  continued  to  act  as  a  jostioe  « 
assize  until  10  Edward  II. 

FISHEB,  John,  is  said  to  be  descendsd 
from  Osbemus  Piscator,  who  held  lands  11 
Bedfordshire  in  the  time  of  Edwaid  tin 
Confessor.  The  first  time  his  name  oecmi 
is  when  he  was  made  king^s  8erjeBnt«fe4av 
in  1486.  From  that  period  tbe  Tw 
Books  frequently  mention  him  tt  n  aitiD* 
cate,  till  he  was  constituted  a  xpdgfti  4* 
Common  Heas  on  NoTember  &  fin,   H 


HTZ-AILWYN 

the  summer  preceding  he  acted  as  a  iud^e 
•on  the  drcait  at  Nottingham  and  Derby 
(VUinipton  Carr.  159,  101),  as  Serjeants 
then  commonly  did,  and  still  frequently 
do.  Fines  continued  to  be  levied  before 
him  till  the  end  of  the  reign,  and  he  re- 
ceived a  new  patent  on  the  accession  of 
Henry  VII^  but  died  in  the  next  year. 

7ITZ-AILWTH,  HEiniT.  Considerable 
^difficulty  frequently  arises  in  tracing  the 
families  to  which  individuals  who  are  solely 
designated  in  the  records  as  'filiusAluredi,* 
*filiu8  Bemardi,'  'filius  Eadulfi/  &c.,  be- 
long; because,  surnames  not  being  at  that 
period  in  general  use,  sons  were  often 
described  by  the  Christian  names  of  their 
fathersy  their  own  Christian  names  being 
in  turn  assumed  by  their  children.  Thus 
the  designation  varied  in  the  different 
generations,  until  one  of  the  family,  by  ac- 
<}iiiring  possessions,  or  honours,  or  office, 
fixed  his  own  name,  or  some  other  he  had 
assumed,  permanently  for  his  descendants. 
The  difficulty  is  materially  increased  where 
both  the  Christian  names  thus  united  were 
of  common  occurrence.  In  these  cases  two 
persons  of  different  families  not  imfire- 
quently  bore  the  same  appellation,  so  that 
much  confusion  often  occurs  in  investi- 
frating  the  facts  and  records  of  the  time,  by 
the  impossibility  to  distinguish  the  precise 
indivioual  intended. 

The  frequent  occurrence  of  names  of  this 
class  (the  prefix  *  Fitz '  being  substituted 
.for  that  of  *Filius ')  renders  these  observa- 
tions necessary,  in  order  to  account  for  the 
•doubt  that  is  sometimes  expressed  as  to 
tbeir  actual  lineage.  They  will  apply  more 
forcibly  to  others  than  to  the  mdividual 
now  to  be  noticed ;  but  their  introduction 
appeared  more  appropriate  when  the  first 
example  was  to  be  considered. 

Henry  Fitz-Ailwyn,  called  of  London 
Stone,  was  probably  a  lineal  descendant  of 
Ailwin  Child,  who  founded  the  priory  of 
Bermondsey  in  1082,  part  of  his  family 
'being  buried  there.  In  1  Richard  I.,  1189, 
he  was  appointed  mayor  of  London  by  the 
Yangf  hems  the  first  who  bore  that  title, 
and  as  sucn  he  is  particularly  mentioned  to 
have  officiated  at  the  coronation  as  chief 
butler  of  the  kingdom.  It  was  not  till  10 
John,  1208,  that  the  citizens  obtained  the 
power  of  annually  electing  a  mayor  for 
themselTea.  Their  choice  then  fell  upon 
Fitx-Ailwyn,  who  had  presided  over  them 
from  his  first  appointment,  and  whom  they 
annually  re-elected  till  his  death  in  14 
John,  1212,  so  that  he  held  the  office  for  a 
period  of  twen^-four  years. 

Ks  name  is  inserted  in  this  list  of  justi- 
ciers  becauae  he  was  one  of  those  present 
at  Westminster  in  8  John  before  wnom  a 
fine  was  acknowledged. 

Sir  Francis  Palgrave,  in  p.  cv.  of  the  In- 
ttodnetioD  to  the  <  KotoU  CurisQ  Begis,'^ye8 


FITZ-ALDELM 


255 


a  curious  deed  by  which  he  grants  a  piece 
of  land  in  Lim-Strete,  in  the  city  of  Lon- 
don, to  William  Lafaite.  The  considera- 
tion is  half  a  mark  of  silver  '  in  gersumiam,* 
and  the  annual  rent  reserved  is  twelve 
pence. 

He  died  in  1212,  14  John  (Bot.  Claus, 
i.  124,  127),  and  was  buried  in  the  prioij 
of  the  Holy  Trinity,  near  Aldgate.  By  his 
wife  Margaret,  who  survived  him,  he  had 
four  sons — Peter,  Alan,  Thomas,  and  Ri- 
chard. 

FITZ-ALAK,  Brian,  was  the  son  of  Alan 
Fitz-Brian,  a  grandson  of  Alan,  Earl  of 
Brittany  and  Richmond.  (DugiaMs  Ba- 
roil.  i.  23.)  At  the  end  of  tJohn's  reign  he 
took  part  with  the  insurgent  barons ;  but 
his  estates,  which  were  thereupon  seized, 
were  restored  soon  after  the  accession  of 
Henry  HI.  (Eot.  Claw,  i,  105,  SS8,)  From 
9  to  l5  Henry  IH.  he  performed  the  duty 
of  justice  itinerant  in  the  northern  counties. 
(Ibid.  ii.  77,  161,  213.)  From  13  to  19 
Henry  HI.  he  was  sheriff  of  Northumber- 
land and  from  21  to  23  Henry  HI.  he 
held  the  same  office  in  Yorkshire.  (FttUer^s 
Worthies.)  The  time  of  his  death  is  not 
mentionea,  but  his  son  Brian  succeeded 
him,  and  dying  without  male  issue,  the 
barony  is  in  abeyance  among  the  descend- 
ants of  his  two  daughters — Agnes,  the  wife 
of  Sir  Gilbert  Stapelton ;  and  Katherine, 
the  wife  of  John  Ix)rd  Grey  de  Rotherfield. 
{Nicolas^ 8  Synopsis.) 

FITZ-ALAH,  Thomas.  See  T.  de  Arun- 
del. 

FITZ-ALAK,  William,  of  Clun  in  Shrop- 
shire, was  the  grandson  of  Alan,  the  son  of 
Flathald,  who  received  from  William  the 
Conqueror  the  castle  of  Oswaldstre,  and 
son  of  William  of  the  same  name. 

In  1  Richard  I.,  1189,  he  was  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  into  Shropshire,  Hereford, 
Gloucester,  and  Stafford.  (Pipe  RoU,  95- 
248.)  In  the  next  year  he  became  sheriff 
of  Snropshire,  and  continued  to  hold  that 
office  through  the  remainder  of  the  rei^, 
and  for  the  first  three  years  of  that  of  Kmg 
John.  (Ftdler.)  The  manor  of  Chipping- 
Norton  in  Oxfordshire  belonged  to  him, 
for  a  fair  at  which,  and  also  at  Clun,  he 
obtained  charters  from  King  John.  (RoL 
Chart.  186.) 
'  He  died  about  15  John,  1213-14,  and  left 
two  sons,  the  younger  of  whom,  John,  by 
his  mandage  with  Isabel,  one  of  the  sisters 
and  coheirs  of  Hugh  de  Albini,  Earl  of 
Arundel,  acquired,  in  the  partition  of  the 
estates,  the  castle  of  Arundel,  which,  with 
its  appendant  earldom,  has  remained  in  the 
family  ever  since,  and  is  now  held  by  his 
lineal  descendant,  the  Duke  of  Norfolk. 

FITZ-ALDELM,  William,  or  ALDELIH, 
sometimes  also  called  de  Burgh,  was  de- 
scended from  Robert,  Earl  of  Moreton  in 
Normandy,  and  Earl  of  Cornwall  in  Eng- 


256 


PITZ-ALDELM 


land,  the  uterine  brother  ofWiUiam  the 
Conqueror.  Earl  Robert's  son  William 
succeeded  him^  and  fighting  against  Henry 
I.  was  taken  prisoner  and  confined  for  the 
rest  of  his  life,  and  cruelly  deprived  of  his 
eyes.  He  is  said  to  have  left  two  sons,  the 
elder  of  whom  was  Aldelm,  the  father  of 
the  subject  of  the  present  notice.  The 
younger  was  either  the  grandfather  or 
fatiber  of  the  celebrated  Hubert  de  Burgh. 

In  11  Henry  H.  William  Fitz-Aldelm  is 
called  one  of  the  king's  marshals,  and  in 
1177,  and  probably  before,  he  was  one  of 
the  dapifers.     (MadoXj  44-60.) 

It  was  no  doubt  in  the  latter  character 
that  he  accompanied  King  Henry  in  his 
expedition  to  Ireland  in  October  1171.  He 
was  then  sent  with  Hugh  de  Lacy  to  re- 
ceive the  allegiance  of  Roderick,  King  of 
Connaught,  and  on  the  king's  return  to 
England  in  the  next  year  the  city  of  Wex- 
ford was  committed  to  his  charge,  with 
two  lieutenants  under  him.  In  1173  Pope 
Adrian's  bull  granting  the  kingdom  of  Ire- 
land to  Henry  was  entrusted  to  the  prior 
of  Wallingfom  and  him  to  exhibit  before 
the  synod  of  bishops  at  Waterford,  and  on 
the  death  of  Ricnard  de  Clare,  Earl  of 
Pembroke,  in  1176,  the  king  appointed  him 
deputy  over  the  whole  of  that  kingdom, 
and  granted  him  the  wardship  of  Isabella, 
the  earl's  daughter  and  heir. 

His  government,  which  is  represented  as 
having  been  weak  and  negligent,  did  not 
last  above  a  year,  Prince  John  receiving  a 
grant  of  the  kingdom  at  the  parliament 
held  at  Oxford  in  May  1177,  Fitz-Aldelm 
himself  being  present  there.  The  city  of 
Wexford,  however,  was  restored  to  his 
charge,  together  with  the  province  of 
Leinster. 

Luxurious,  proud,  and  covetous,  harsh, 
unkind,  and  tyrannical  to  his  officers,  his 
unpopularity  was  heightened  by  the  disgust 
naturally  felt  by  a  brave  people  against 
one  to  whom  was  imputea  a  too  careful 
avoidance  of  personal  danger  in  the  virars 
which  ho  imaertook.  The  complaints  of 
the  Irish  deprived  him  for  some  time  of 
Henrj^'s  favour,  though  they  did  not  occa- 
sion his  removal. 

During  his  residence  in  Ireland  he 
founded  the  priory  of  St.  Thomas  the 
Martyr  at  Duolin.  Bradv  (i.  366)  states 
that  he  was  seneschal  of  Normandy,  Poic- 
tou,  and  some  other  of  the  king*s  dominions 
in  France. 

After  Henry's  death  he  held  the  office  of 
sherifi'  of  Cumberland  during  the  first  nine 
years  of  Richard's  reign,  and  in  the  first 
year  he  was  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  in 
that  county  and  in  Yorkshire,  and  in  the 
former  again  in  8  Richard  1.  {MadoXy  i. 
704,  ii.  230.) 

He  afterwards  returned  to  Ireland,  ob- 
tained a  great  part  of  the  province  of  Con- 


FITZ-BERNAKD 

naught,  and  while  engaged  in  some  cmel 
ravages  was  seized  with  an  illnesa,  of 
whiui  he  died  in  1204 

He  married  Juliana,  the   daodbter  of 
Robert  Doisnell,  and  by  her  he  haoRicharii 
de  BurgOy  sumamed  the  Great,  lord  of 
Connaught  and  Trim,  who  left  two  soiu^ 
Walter  and  William.    Walter,  bT  marry* 
ing  Maude,  the  heir  of  Hugh  ae  Lacy, 
became  Earl  of  Ulster  in  Ireland,  and  from 
him,  by  the  marriage  of  the  third  eari's  sole 
daughter  and  heir,  Elicabeth,  witli  Licnud, 
Duke  of  Clarence,  third  son  of  King  Edward 
in.,  descended  Richard,  Duke  of  Yoric,the 
father  of  King  Edward  IV.    William  was 
;  the  ancestor  of  the  present  Marquis  and 
Earl  of  Clanricarde  m  Ireland,  who  was 
created  Baron  Somerhill  in  England  in 
1826.    The  same  title,  with  that  of  Vis* 
count  Tunbridge,  was  given  to  Richaidy 
fourth  Earl  ot  Clanricarde,  in  1^4,  to 
which  was   added   the   earldom   of  8t 
Albans  in  1628 ;  but  these  became  extinct 
in  1659.    The  Irish  earldom  then  devolved 
on  a  cousin,  firom  whom  the  present  nuv* 
quis  lineally  proceeds.    The  Earl  of  Mayo 
also  derives  his  lineage  from  the  same  root 
{DugdMB  Barm,  i.693 ;  LeJamTs  Irda»i, 
i.  113,  &c. ;  Lord  Lytt^tan's  Henry  IL  IE 
85,  &c. ;  Lingard,  ii.  261.) 

FITZ-ALEXAirDSB,  NioEL,  was  one  of 
the  j  usticiers  present  in  the  Curia  Regis  in 
81  Henry  IL,  1185,  when  a  fine  was  levied 
there.  (JSunter's  Prefaced  In  the  nme 
year,  and  until  1  Richard  L,  he  was  sheriff 
of  Lincolnshire  (FuUer)y  in  which  coostj 
he  had  considerable  property.  He  save  • 
carucate  of  land  in  Bolebi  to  the  pnoiy  of 
Sempringham  in  that  county  in  pore  and 
perpetual  alms;  and  it  is  a  cunooa  &ct 
that  in  20  Henry  HI.  the  prior  was  ex- 
empted from  the  scutage  upon  it.  because 
the  heirs  of  Nigel  had  Uien  sufficient  pio- 

ferty  in  the  county  to  discharge  U. 
Madoxy  i.  672.)  In  1  Richard  L,  alio,  ha 
was  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  in  the 
counties  of  Buckingham,  Bedford,  and  lin- 
coln ;  and  by  the  roll  of  that  year  he  ap* 
pears  to  have  been  a  justicier  of  the  fbiest 
acting  in  Yorkshire.  He  died  before  9 
John,  when  his  son  Osbert  was  engaged  in 
a  suit  relative  to  lands  in  Fulebec  in  Lin- 
colnshire. 

FITZ-ALITBED,  RiCHARB,  is  only  known 
by  an  entry  on  the  Great  Roll  of  31  Heniy 
I.  In  that  recoid  it  is  stated  that  he  owed — 
i.  e.,that  he  fined — fifteen  silver  marks  thai 
he  might  sit  with  Ralph  Basset  to  hold  the 
king's  pleas  in  Buckinghamshire.  He  is 
called  pincemai  or  butler,  an  office  wlddi 
he  probably  held  under  William  de  Albini, 
the  king's  chief  butler.  (Madox.  i.  62. 
467.) 

FITZ-BEBNASD,  RoBEBT,  was  among 
the  eighteen  justices  itinerant  appointed 
at  the  council  of  Northampton,  neld  on 


FIT2>-BERNAHD 

Jaaoary  23, 1176, 22  Homy  IL,  to  distribute 
jastifie  thxougluMtt  the  kingdom.  Robert 
ritx-Benmid  was  placed  at  the  head  of 
tbe  three  to  whom  the  ooonties  of  Kent, 
Surrey,  Suasez,  Hants,  Berkai  and  Oxford 
weve  entrusted,  he  being  at  tnat  time,  and 
until  29  Heniy  IL,  sheriff  of  the  first- 
named  county. 

He  had  been  sheriff  of  Devonshire  also 
£or  six  years  from  1165.  He  died  about 
9  Richard  XL  (Madox,  i.  120-138,  199 ; 
Ftdler;  Lord  LyUeltcn,  m.  93, 186.) 

mX-BlBVAXD,  Thokas,  was  an  officer 
of  King  Henry's  household,  and  was  twice 
subjected,  in  1166  and  1169,  to  the  sen- 
tence of  excommunication  pronounced 
apunst  him  by  Becket,  for  tne  purpose 
of  annoying  the  king,  ffis  pretence  was 
that  flti-fiemard  had  usurped  the  goods 
of  the  church  of  Canterbury ;  but  the 
nope,  on  the  king's  representation  that 
rlts-Bemard  and  others  were  in  attend- 
ance on  his  person,  took  off  the  ban. 

In  1178,  24  Henry  IL,  and  the  two  fol- 
lowing years,  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant 
in  serml  counties;  and  in  1182  he  is 
named  as  one  of  the  justiders  and  barons 
before  whom  fines  were  levied  in  the  Curia 
Regis  at  Westminster.  He  was  also  justice 
of  the  forest,  and  fiom  1178  to  1184  he 
held  the  sheriffalty  of  Northamptonshire. 
(Lord  fyUMm,  ii.  434,  506,  liL  404; 
Madax,  I  133-137 ;  Htrnter's  Preface^  xxi. ; 
IWfer.) 

FUS-SKVISE,  Philip,  was  one  of  the 
JQitioes  itinerant  appointed  by  the  writ  of 
Kichard  de  Luci  to  make  the  assize  for  the 
coonty  of  Gloucester  in  20  Henry  XL,  1174. 
(Maiur,  i.  123.) 

TIXS-OKBOLD,  HxN&T,  as  one  of  the 
kinjr's  chamberlains,  had  a  seat  in  the 
Coiia  Regis,  and  is  one  of  the  three 
Mustidie  ra^'  directing  an  exchange 
€1  lands  at  Canterbury  between  the  king 
and  one  Atheliza.  In  16  and  17  Henry  U., 
1170-1,  he  was  a  justice  itinerant  into 
Kent 

There  can  be  little  doubt  that  he  was 
cither  the  son  or  brother  (nrobably  the 
fimner)  of  Warine  fltz-Gerold,  the  third 
lord  mentioned  by  Dugdale,  whom  he 
soooeeded  in  the  office  of  chamberlain. 
(Jfodftr,  i.  145,  204.) 

FXIZ-GUBSBT,  RicHABD  db,  had  a  ya- 
rietyofnamee.  He  was  first  called  Richard 
Fits-Gilbert  from  his  father,  and  after- 
wards de  Bene&cta,  from  lus  estate  of 
Benefield  in  Northamptonshire ;  de  Tun- 
bodge,  from  that  castle  in  Kent ;  and  de 
Ckve,  fr«nn  the  honor  or  earldom  of  that 
name  in  Suffolk,  all  of  which  were  included 
in  his  possessions. 

He  waa  the  son  of  Gilbert  Crispin,  Earl 
of  Brion  sid  On,  whose  fitther  Geofirey 
was  a  aatnral  son  of  Richard  L,  Duke  of 
NormaDdj,  so  that  he  waa  second  cousin 


PITZ-HENBY 


267 


to  the  Conqueror  on  his  Other's  side ;  and 
if  his  mother  was,  as  one  pedigree  asserts 
(Mannmg  and  Brav's  Surrey,  i.  xix.).  Ar- 
ietta, who  was  also  mother  of  the  Con- 
queror, he  was,  on  her  side,  that  monarch's 
half-brother. 

He  was  a  purticipator  in  the  dan^^ers  of 
the  field  of  Hastings.  His  share  m  the 
lands  distributed  among  the  Norman  ad- 
yenturers  was  not  a  niggardly  one.  At 
the  general  survey  he  was  found  to  be  pos- 
sessed (among  others)  of  thirty-eight  lord- 
ships in  Surrey,  thirty-five  in  Essex,  three 
in  Cambridgefihire,  and  ninety-five  in  Suf- 
folk, of  wmch  Clare  was  the  diie^  the 
name  of  which  his  descendants  adopted. 
He  exchanged  the  strong  castle  of  Brion  in 
Normandy,  which  he  inherited,  for  the 
town  ana  castle  of  Timbridge,  with  a  cir- 
cuit round  them,  the  extent  of  which  waa 
fixed  by  the  same  rope  by  which  his  own 
domains  at  Brion  had  been  measured,  com- 
prehending three  miles  from  every  part  of 
the  waUs. 

When  King  William  went  to  Normandy 
in  1073  he  was  left  as  joint  chief  justiciary 
of  the  kingdom  with  William  de  Warenne, 
and  during  their  rule  they  defeated  Roffer 
Fitz-Osbeme,  Earl  of  Hereford,  and  Rah>h 
de  Guader,  Earl  of  Norfolk,  who  had  headed 
a  rebellion  against  the  royal  authority. 

After  the  Conqueror's  death  he  at  first 
took  the  part  of  his  son  Robert,  but  after- 
wards adnered  to  William  Rufiis,  and  his 
successor  Henry  I.  In  the  reign  of  the 
latter  he  was  slain  in  an  ambush,  while 
marching  to  his  property  in  Cardiganshire. 

He  married  Konais,  the  daughter  of 
Walter  Giffard,  Earl  of  Buckingham,  and 
by  her  he  left  five  sons,  the  eldest  of  whom 
was  Gilbert,  who  is  generally  spoken  of  as 
de  7\mbridge,  whose  eldest  son,  Richard, 
was  created  Earl  of  Hertford,  a  title  which 
was  successively  enjoyed  (together  with 
that  of  Clare)  by  his  two  sons  Gilbert  and 
Roger  de  Clare.  Gilbert's  second  son,  Gil- 
bert, was  created  Earl  of  Pembroke  by 
King  Stephen,  and  this  title  devolved  on 
the  fjEunous  William  Mareschall  by  his 
marriage  with  this  earl's  grand-daughter. 
(Madax,  i.  32 ;  Dugdale' s  Baron.  I  206 ; 
Brady's  England,  &c.) 

FITZ-HELTOK,  William,  or  FITZ-HXLT, 
is  named  by  Dugdale  as  one  of  the  jus- 
tices itinerant  in  16  Henry  U.,  1170,  but 
who  have  been  shown  to  be  conrniissioners 
of  enquiry  into  the  conduct  of  the  sherifib. 
&c.  A  family  of  that  name  is  mentionea 
by  Madox  as  paying  seventy  shillings  for 
scutage  in  Kent ;  and  by  an  entry  on  the 
Great  Roll  of  1  Richard  I.  (232)  it  appears 
that  William  Fitz-Helte  and  William  de 
Enema  attested  the  account  of  the  sherifT 
of  that  county  for  money  laid  out  in  the 
works  of  Dover  Castle.    {Madox,  i.  630.) 

7ITZ-HEKBT,  Rai^ulph,  whose  family 


258 


FITZ-HEBBERT 


eyentually  adopted  the  name  of  fltz-Hngh, 
and  may  be  traced  back  to  Bardolph,  lord  of 
Ravensworth  in  the  time  of  William  the 
Conquerori  was  the  son  of  Henry  fltz- 
Hervey,  who  died  in  1201,  8  John.  In  17 
John,  haying  shown  symptoms  of  joining 
the  discontented  barons,  he  obtained  a  safe- 
conduct  to  go  to  the  king  to  make  his  peace, 
which  he  effected  on  the  pigment  of  a  fine 
of  fifty  marks.  (Hot.  Pat.  163.)  He  mar- 
ried Alicia,  the  daughter  and  heir  of  Adam 
de  Stayeley,  and  in  2  Henry  IIL  fined  forty 
marks  for  haying  liyery  of  the  lands  held 
by  his  father-in-law  in  caj^ite  in  York- 
shire.    (Excerpt,  e  Hot.  JF^.  l  14.) 

In  18  Heniy  III.,  1284,  he  was  appointed 
one  of  the  justices  itinerant  then  sent  into 
Cumberland. 

He  died,  not  as  Dugdale  states,  in  1262, 
but  before  January  13, 1248 ;  for  on  that 
day  a  writ  was  granted  to  Alicia,  who '  was 
the  wife  of  Rimulph  fitz-Henry.'  (Ibid, 
393.)  He  was  succeeded  by  his  son,  Henry 
Fitz-Ranulph,  from  whose  son,  Hugh  Htz- 
Henry,  the  name  of  Fitz-Hugh  was  per- 
manently adopted.  The  barony  continued 
in  male  heirs  till  1512,  since  which  time  it 
has  been  in  abeyance.    (Nicoku.) 

FITZ-HXBBSBT,  Mathew,  a  younger 
son  of  Herbert  Fitz-Herbert,  who  was 
chamberlain  to  Henry  I.,  was  attached  to 
King  John^s  court,  and  is  a  frequent  wit- 
ness to  his  charters  from  the  sixth  year  of 
his  reign.  (Itot.  Chart.  140,  &c.)  From 
12  to  17  John  he  was  sheriff  of  Sussex, 
during  part  of  which  time  he  held  the 
office  01  custos  of  the  port  of  London 
(JRot.  Clous,  i.  145) ;  and  in  18  John  the 
castle  of  Pontoise  was  deliyered  to  his 
charge.  His  seryices  and  faithful  adhe- 
rence to  his  soyereign  were  not  without 
reward :  besides  the  lands  of  William  Pont 
Arch  in  Gloucestershire,  he  received  a 
prrant  of  the  manors  of  Wufrinton  and 
Kinemesdon  in  Somersetshire;  and  he 
possessed  the  manor  of  Chedelinton  in 
the  same  county,  for  which  he  obtained 
a  market  (Hot.  Pat.  184, 194 ;  Hot  Clous. 
i.  17,  48,  363.)  He  married  Joanna, 
daughter  and  heiress  of  William  de 
Mandeville  and  Mabilia  Patric,  his  wife, 
and  by  her  right  had  the  land  of  01- 
londe  m  Normandy. 

For  the  first  thirteen  years  of  the  next 
reign  he  continued  sheriff  of  Sussex,  and 
acted  twice  as  a  justice  itinerant,  in  3  and 
11  Heniy  IH.    (JRot.  Claw.  ii.  213.) 

He  died  in  1281.  His  son  Herbert 
(called  Herbert  Fitz-Mathew)  died  in 
1245,  when  his  possessions  devolved  on 
his  next  brother,  Peter,  who  also  dying 
in  1265  was  succeeded  by  John,  the  son 
of  the  third  brother,  Mathew,  after  whom 
the  descent  is  donbtfuL  (Excerpt,  e  EoL 
Fin.  L  211,  480,  482,  iL  205.) 

mi-HIBBIBT,  AiTTHOirr,  of  Norbuxy^ 


FITZ-HRRBKRT 

a  manor  in  Derbyshire,  mnted  in  1126  bj 
William,  prior  *of  Tutoiiry,  to  Willim 
Fitz-Herbert,  was  the  sixth  and  Teimgest 
son  of  Ralph  Fitz-Herbert,  the  twelfth  kid 
by  Elizabeth,  daughter  and  sole  heir  i 
John  Marshall,  of  Upton  in  LeioestershiFB; 
and  by  the  death  of  all  his  brothen  wiA> 
out  male  issue  he  eventoally  succeeded  to 
the  paternal  estate,  as  fourteenth  loid. 

Anthony  Wood  claims  him  as  a  memlNr 
of  the  university  of  Oxford,  but  is  not  ibk 
to  say  of  what  college ;  and  the  ^laoe  of  Ui 
legal  education  is  equally  uncertain,  tiioi^ 
from  the  insertion  of  his  arms  in  the  wn- 
dow  of  Gray's  Inn  Hall,  that  society  evi- 
dently adopts  him.  It  is  more  sormiof 
that  there  should  be  any  difficiutf  ii 
tracing  the  academical  home  of  so  emi- 
nent and  learned  a  lawyer,  than  that  «j 
school  should  desire  to  be  considered  ei 
having  guided  his  studies.  Although  Ui 
name  does  not  appear  in  the  oonrti  lifl 
some  time  after  he  was  called  to  the 
degree  of  Serjeant  in  1510,  it  is  eridnt 
that  he  had  been  lon^  industrious^  en- 
ployed  in  the  composition  of  his  laborm 
work,  '  The  Grand  Abridgment,'  ccntaii4| 
an  abstract  of  the  Tear  ^oks  till  his  tim 
the  first  edition  of  which  was  paUuU 
in  1514.  In  1516  he  was  made  one  of  lli 
king's  Serjeants,  and  about  the  same  tan 
he  received  the  honour  of  knighthood.  Ift 
less  than  six  years  his  elevation  to  Ai 
bench  as  a  judge  of  the  Common 
took  place,  in  Easter  1522.  He  sat  in 
court  for  the  remainder  of  his  life,  a 
of  sixteen  years. 

Besides  his  judicial  duties,  he  had  ft^: 
quent  occupation  on  the  king's  afiaira.   HIj 
was  one  of  the  commissioners  sent  to  l»  { 
land,  and  a  visitor  of  the  monasteries;  wk  i 
during  the  latter  period  of  his  career  Hi 
name  appears  more  prominently  in  ear 
nection  with  the  pofitical  events  of  fli , 
time.    His  signature  is  the  last  bntciii#; 
the  seventeen  subscribers  to  the  artideitf; 
impeachment  afi;ainst  Cardinal  Woliey,fll 
he  was  one  of  the  commissioners  anpositil 
on  the  trials  both  of  Sir  Thomas  HofS  ■! 
Bishop  Fisher.    Notwithstanding  the  dih 
gust  which  the  conviction  of  these  tM  i 
excellent  men  imiversally  excited,  RIt*' 
Herbert*s  reputation  sustained  no  bleaJd^ ' 
the  world  knowing  that  his  being  joined  > 
the  commission  was  an  act  that  ne  oodl 
not  prevent,  and  that  his  interference  iriflt 
the  will  of  the  arbitraiy  despot  would  bMi 
been  both  useless  and  dangerous,    ffii ' 
dicial  character  had  been  raised  \if 
having  allowed  bills  for  extordoii 
Wolsey  while  in  the  hei^t  of  hit  ^ 
to  be  K>und  before  him  at  Yod^  te  « 
he  suffered  the  cardinal's  nimilBi  / 
Trialsj  i.  377-^98 ;   IToff'^  Chmu  < 
and  his  legal  repntatioD  had 
increase,  not  auy  ftom  At 


FrrZ-HERVEY 

ments  he  pronounced,  but  from  the  seven 
oaeful  and  learned  works  with  which  he 
followed  his  early  undertaking,  showing 
that  his  labours  were  not  confined  to  pro- 
fessional enquiries;  but  extended  to  subjects 
of  geneml  interest,  and  aimed  at  instructing 
idl  mankind. 

Sir  Anthony  died,  as  appears  by  his 
'epitaph  in  the  church  at  Noroury,  on  May 
27y  1538.  In  his  last  moments  it  is  saia 
that  he  enjoined  his  children,  by  a  solemn 
promise,  never  to  accept  a  grant  or  to  make 
«  purchase  of  any  of  the  abbey  lands.  He 
was  twice  married.  By  his  first  wife,  who 
was  Dorothv,  daughter  of  Sir  Henry  Wil- 
loughbv,  of  Wollaton,  Notts,  he  had  no 
isuie.  fiy  his  second  wife,  Matilda,  daughter 
and  heir  of  Kichard  Cotton,  of  Hampstall- 
Bidware  in  Staffordshire,  he  left  several 
children.  Norbury,  after  a  regular  descent 
of  more  than  seven  hundred  years,  is  still 
in  possession  of  a  lineal  representative  of 
the  fiuniW. 

The  fitz-Herberts  of  Tissington  in 
Derbyshire  are  of  a  different  but  equally 
ancient  family,  which,  however,  became 
connected  with  the  Fitz-Herberts  of  Nor- 
bury by  marriage  with  one  of  the  descen- 
dants of  the  ju^e. 

7IR-HSBVST,  Henbt,  was  probably 
the  fiither  of  Osbert,  noticed  in  the  next 
article ;  but  the  early  history  of  the  family 
is  invc^ved  in  some  obscunty.  K  so,  he 
attended  King  Richard  in  his  expedition  to 
the  Holy  Land,  and  was  much  esteemed  by 
King  John. 

In  0  Richard  I.,  HOT.  he  was  one  of  the 
jottioes  itinerant  who  nxed  the  tallage  in 
Camberland  (Madox,  i.  704) ;  and  in  10 
John,  1208,  he  was  present  as  a  justicier 
when  fines  were  acknowledged  at  Carlisle. 

King  John  confirmed  to  him  his  lands  at 
Hinton  in  Richmond,  in  Scorton,  and  other 
places ;  and  the  forest  in  Teisedale,  as  his 
ancestors  held  it,  and  authorised  him  to 
fortify  his  house  at  Cudereston. 

He  married  Alice,  the  daughter  of  Henry 
Fltx-Tvo.  When  he  died  is  uncertain,  but 
he  tnrrived  Osbert,  his  eldest  son. 

FXTZ-HSRVST,  Osbert.  Osbert  Fitz- 
HerFey'a  name  appears  as  one  of  the  jus- 
tiderB  of  the  King  s  Court  at  Westminster 
iw  a  period  of  twenty-five  years — viz.,  from 
28  Henry  IL,  1182,  till  7  John,  1205-6-in 
almost  every  year  of  which  he  was  present 
when  fines  were  levied  there  {Amur's 
JYefaee)^  and  frequently  he  performed  the 
dntiea  of  a  justice  itinerant  Joceline  de 
Biakelonda  (2d)  records  that  he  was  sub- 
aheriffof  Norfolk  and  Suffolk. 

He  waa  a  descendant  of  a  younger  son  of 
Hervey,  Duke  of  Orleans,  named  Robert, 
who  accompanied  William  the  Conqueror 
in  his  enterprise  against  England,  and  re- 
ceived part  of  the  territorial  spoil  in  reward 
fat  hia  Mfrioea.    The  name  of  Osbert*s 


FITZ^AMES 


259 


father  was  Henry,  probably  the  justicier 
last  noticed,  and  his  mother  was  Alice, 
daughter  of  Henry  Fitz-Yvo.  He  married 
Dionvsia,  daughter  of  Geoffrey  de  Ghrey, 
and  died  in  April  1206,  leaving  an  only  son 
Adam,  who  married  Juliana,  the  daughter 
of  the  justicier  John  Htz-Hugh,  and  their 
descendants  through  a  long  succession  of 
years  were  conspicuous  in  the  senate  and 
the  field.  One  of  them,  Sir  William  Hervey, 
was  created  by  James  I.  baron  of  Ross  m 
the  county  of  Wexford,  and  by  Charles  I. 
Lord  Hervey  of  Kidbroke  in  Kent,  but  on 
his  death  without  male  issue  in  1642  his 
titles  became  extinct  Another  representa- 
tive of  this  distinguished  family  was  raised 
by  Queen  Anne  to  the  peerage,  by  the  titie 
of  Lord  Hervey  of  Ickworth  in  Suffolk, 
and  by  George  I.  he  was  advanced  to  the 
earldom  of  Bristol.  The  fifth  earl  was 
created  Earl  Jennyn  and  Marquis  of  Bristol 
by  George  IV.  on  June  30,  1826.  {Brydgei 
UoUi'ns's  Peerage^  iv.  140,  &c.) 

FITZ-HUOH,  John,  was  among  the  jus- 
ticiers  before  whom  fines  were  acknow- 
ledged in  10  John,  1208.  {Hunter's  Pre- 
face.) He  was  of  a  Yorkshire  family, 
and  was  high  in  the  king's  employment, 
being  constable  of  Windsor  Castle,  in  the 
custody  of  which  he  is  noticed  through- 
out the  whole  of  the  reign,  and  in  that  of 
Henry  HI. 

In  10  and  12  John  he  held  the  sheriffalty 
of  Sussex,  and  during  the  three  following 
years  that  of  Surrey,  and  in  some  of  these 
years  was  concerned  in  the  receipt  of  the 
tallage  from  the  Jews,  and  in  the  collection 
of  the  customs  of  woad  aud  wine.  {JIadox, 
i.  12.3,  774.)  Among  the  mandates  ad- 
dressed to  him,  he  is  commanded  on  August 
1212  to  send  the  great  crown,  with  all  the 
regalia  which  he  had  in  his  custody,  to  the 
king  at  Nottingham.    {Pot.  Claus.'i.  122.) 

He  was  a  firm  adherent  to  King  John, 
and  was  present  with  him  on  the  expedition 
to  Ireland  {Ibid.  125^,  and  during  his  sub- 
sequent contests  with  the  barons.  {Wen^ 
dover,  iii.  301.) 

He  died  on  March  7,  1222,  6  Henry  IH., 
leaving  by  his  wife  a  son,  who  died  young, 
and  a  daughter  Juliana,  who  married  Adam 
Fitz-Hervev,  son  of  the  last-noticed  Osbert 
Fitz-Hervey. 

FITZ-JAME8,  John,  so  far  from  Lord 
CampbelVs  assertion  that  he  was  ^of  ob- 
scure birth'  {Chief  Just.  i.  160),  was  of 
very  good  parentage  and  ancestry.  The 
name,  in  connection  with  the  county  of 
Somerset,  is  as  old  as  the  reign  of  Edward 
ni.  {Col.  Inquis.  p. m.  ii.  163.)  His  grand- 
father is  stated  to  have  been  James  Fitz- 
James,  who  acquired  the  estate  of  Redlynch 
in  that  county,  and  considerable  other  pro- 
perty, by  his  marriage  with  Eleanor,  the 
daughter  and  heir  of  Simon  Draycott ;  and 
his  father  is  described  as  John  FitzrJam^^. 

82 


260 


Fn7rJAMES 


-whose  wife  was  Alice,  daughter  of  John 
Newburgh,  of  East  Lullworth  in  Dorset- 
shire (Oodwin,  100) ;  and  the  Draycotts 
and  Newbarghs  were  second  to  none  of  the 
gentry  of  England  in  possesions  and  high 
blood.  (Athm,  Oxon.  ii.  720 ;  Huichina's 
Dond,  ii.  387,  &c.) 

The  last-named  John  was  the  father  of 
three  sons — 1.  John ;  2.  Richard,  who  was 
Bishop  of  Rochester,  Chichester,  and  Lon- 
don in  succession ;  and  8.  Alored,  the  an- 
cestor of  the  Lewesden  branch  of  the  family. 

The  eldest  son,  John,  has  by  all  writers 
been  hitherto  considered  to  haye  been  the 
chief  justice ;  but,  on  a  full  inyestip:ation 
of  the  fiunily  records,  he  is  proved  to  be  the 
father  of  the  chief  justice,  who  therefore, 
instead  of  beinff  the  elder  brother,  was  the 
nephew  of  the  bishop. 

No  evidence  whatever  exists  of  the  place 
of  Rtz-James's  early  education,  and  Lord 
Campbell  is  silent  as  to  the  authority  on 
whicn  he  says  that  'he  made  his  fortune 
by  his  great  good  humour,  and  by  being 
at  college  with  Cardinal  Wolsey.'  If  this 
were  so,  the  cardinal  was  rather  backward 
in  his  patronage ;  for  Fitz- James's  first  pro- 
motion in  the  law  was  not  till  many  years 
after  Wolsev  had  attained  supreme  power. 
Lord  Campoell  adds,  '  It  is  said  that  Pltz- 
James,  who  was  a  Somersetshire  man,  kept 
up  an  intimacy  with  Wolsey  when  the 
latter  had  become  a  village  parson  in  that 
county,  and  that  he  was  actually  in  the 
brnwl  at  the  fair  when  his  reverence, 
having  got  drunk,  was  set  in  the  stocks  by 
SSir  Amyas  Paulet' 

It  would  have  been  more  satisfactory  to 
his  readers  if  his  lordship  had  informed 
them  where  thefiscts  he  has  thus  announced 
are  to  be  foimd.  Though  Anthony  Wood 
did  not  know  it,  Fitz-James  may  possibly 
have  been  at  Chcford;  though  Kedlynch, 
Iltz-James's  home,  is  at  least  sixteen  miles 
from  Lymington,  Wolsey's  parish,  the  inti- 
macy between  them  may  have  existed ;  and 
though  fltz-James  was  very  near  the  time 
of  his  solemn  reading  at  the  Temple,  it  is 
not  impossible  that  he  might  have  joined 
in  the  drunken  brawl;  yet  all  these  cir- 
cumstances, new  and  extraordinary  as  they 
appear,  are  of  such  interest  in  the  lives  both 
ot  the  judge  and  the  cardinal  that  a  refer- 
ence seems  necessary,  in  order  to  decide 
whether  their  original  relater  is  worthy  of 
credit  The  same  enquiry  will  be  made 
AS  to  tlie  authority  on  which  his  lordship 
states  that  Fitz-James  at  his  inn  of  court 
<  chiefly  distinguished  himself  on  gaudy 
days  by  dancing  before  the  judges,  playing 
the  part  of  the  Abbot  of  Misrule,  and  swear- 
ing strange  oaths  \  *  that '  his  agreeable  man- 
ners made  him  popular  .  .  .  although  very 
deficient  in  moots;'  and  that  'he  was  in 
deep  despair'  for  want  of  clients  till  Wolsey, 
'  his  fonner  cbnm, .  .  .  was  able  to  throw 


FITZ-JAHES 

some  business  in  hia  war  in  the  Cooit  ol 
Wards  and  Liveries.'  Whatever  m^bf 
the  source  from  whence  tbeee  cnriooi  p8^ 
ticulars  are  extracted,  the  little  dependenee 
that  should  be  placed  on  it  may  be  esti- 
mated by  the  fact  that  the  Gourt  of  Waids 
and  Liveries  was  instituted,  not  only  aftn 
the  death  of  Wolsey,  but  even  after  that  d 
Fitz-James,  ten  years  later.  ( JBUw's  Leitmf 
1st  S.  i.  176.) 

He  studied  the  law  at  the  Middle  Temple, 
where  he  sufficiently  distinguished  hiBWf 
to  be  cslled  to  the  bench  of  that  society,  to 
be  made  reader  in  lo05,  and  treasonrii 
1500.  He  was  recorder  of  Bristol  in  1610 
(Ca/.  St.  Papers  [1509],  157),  andsuooeeded 
to  the  office  of  attorney-general  on  Janvaij 
20,  1510,  more  than  three  yean  after 
Wolsey  had  become  chancellor,  and  ssfso 
or  eight  years  after  he  had  acquired  a  oom- 
plete  ascendency  over  the  king.  In  Trimtr 
Term  1521  he  was  called  to  the  degree  i 
the  coif,  and  on  the  Oth  of  the  foUowiBil 
February  was  constituted  a  puisne  judge  d 
the  King's  Bench,  and  two  oays  afterwnii 
chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer  (IhigdM 
On'ff.  215,  221),  a  foct  of  which  Ld 
Campbell  does  not  seem  to  be  awHi 
Judnn^  from  all  appearances,  he  peifunai 
the  duties  of  both  offices  at  the  same  tim 
for  which  there  were  numerous  pieosdaBfei 
from  the  reign  of  Henry  IV.,  with  tti 
slight  variation  that  in  former  instances  tti 
judgeshin  was  in  the  Common  Pleas.  A 
is  named  as  chief  baron  in  the  wil  M 
Lord  Zouche,  dated  October  1525.  (M 
Vetust.  620.)  When  he  had  occuped  ttt 
honourable  position  for  four  years  he  im 
promoted  to  the  presidency  of  the  Court/ 
King's  Bench  on  January  23,  1526>  ^••*^ 
been  in  the  meantime  serviceablyem| 
to  negotiate  a  marriage  for  L^id 
whose  previous  contract  with  Anne  Bokfi  ] 
stood  m  the  way  of  the  king's  demj 
(Linffard,  vi.  112.) 

He  sat  as  chief  justice  for  thirteen  jei^ - 
during  a  very  tr>*ing  period  of  the  rriga  Ir 
one  in  his  prominent  position.  There  CM 
be  no  douDt  that  he  participated  in  ^ 
craven  subserviency  to  the  royal  tp^ 
Yriih  which  every  one  of  his  brethren  m 
chargeable :  but,  in  expressingdisgustittti 
general  fEuling,  care  must  be  taken  nOt  t» 
visit  on  any  one  more  than  histo^  jnstite 
I^rd  Campbell  gives  no  authority  for  !■ 
assertion  that  Cardinal  Wolsey  inenni 
considerable  obloquy  by  Fitz-Jame^s  if 
pointment,  or  that  the  new  chief  ][■>* 
was  thought  to  be  'not  only  wmtngjl 
gravity  of  moral  character,  but  that  belil 
not  sufficient  professional  knoiHfldgei| 
such  a  situation.'  The  prejudice  elao  vM 
his  lordship  displays  against  tiM  flUef  '^ 
tice  renders  it  neceesarr  to  look  wlft  fli 
on  his  description  of  Fi 
in  the  three  great  events  Ib 


FTCZ^AMES 

luoes  his  name— the  disgnuse  of  Wolaey, 
the  triak  of  Sir  Thomas  More  and 
liop  Fisher. 

a  reference  to  Wolsey.  his  lordship's 
earoor  to  prove  Htx-James  guilts  of 
9  ingimtitiide  loses  all  its  potency  nom 
totu  want  of  evidence  that  the  cardinal 
.  been  his  benefiBu^r.  With  this  view, 
rever,  he  makes  the  chief  justice  the 
ive  oi|;«n  of  the  proceedings  against  the 
iinal,  chaiging  him  with  having  'joined 
the  aj  against  him  and  assisted  his 
mies  to  the  utmost,'  and  with  having 
titured  his  readiness  to  concur  in  any  pro- 
dings  bj  which  the  proud  ecclesiastic 
.  .  .  might  be  brought  to  condign 
niahment;'  and  he  further  represents 
kz-James  as  the  gugaetter  of  Judge 
Alley's  argument  to  the  cardinal  with 
!ierenoe  to  the  alienation  to  the  king  of 
e  azchiepiscopal  palace  of  York  House 
ow  Whitehall^.  Tnese  are  serious  charffes, 
d  sorelv  require  more  authentication  than 
s  lordship  has  afforded  before  they  are 
mitted  on  the  pa^  of  history.  In  addi- 
a  to  these^  Lord  Campbell  describes  the 
ofif  justice  as  the  adviser  and  dictator  of 
t  articles  adopted  in  the  House  of  Lords 
pBtX  Wolsey,  for  no  other  apparent 
•son  than  that  the  name  of  '  John  Fitz- 
imes'  appears  as  the  last  of  the  seventeen 
BnoDS  wno  subscribed  tliem.  The  sig- 
itore,  even  if  his,  is  merely  a  formal  one, 
id  the  articles  no  more  'indicate  a  pre- 
dsting  env\'  and  jealousy'  in  Fitz-James 
an  they  do  in  Sir  Thomas  More,  who 
|Ded  at  the  head  of  all.  There  was,  how- 
«r,  another  John  Fitz- James,  of  the  Middle 
smple,  who  mi^ht  have  held  some  oilice 
the  House  of  Lords. 

Lord  Campbell  next  introduces  this 
ecreant  chief  justice/  as  he  calls  him, 
one  of  the  commissioners  on  the  trial  of 
isher,  Bishop  of  Rochester,  of  which  the 
rd  chancellor  was  the  heaa,  and,  though 
e  chief  j  ustice  is  not  personally  mentioned 
anv  one  account  of  the  proceedings,  his 
tdsnip  names  him  the  spokesman  on 
cry  occasion.  Professing  to  quote  verbatim 
mi  the  '  State  Trials '  uie  answers  of  the 
art,  which  consisted  of  thirteen  persons, 
ne  of  whom  were  lawyers,  he  includes 
'Mm  the  marks  of  quotation  with  which  he 
tee  them  the  name  of  Chief  Justice  Fitz- 
unee,  instead  of  the  words  which  are 
tnaUy  used — ^viz.,  'somejof  the  judges,'  and 
he  judges  and  lawyers;'  the  word  'judges' 
identl^  applying  to  all  members  of  the 
fmmiasion.  ourely  this  mode  of  writing 
stoiT  cannot  be  defended.  His  lordship 
oola  have  shown  more  charity,  as  there 
■adeaily  as  much  likelihoocf,  if,  in  re- 
■dioff  from  the  same  report  that '  some  of 
le  jiidgea  lamented  so  grievously'  as  to 
sed  tears,  he  had  suggested  the  possibility 
lat  Fits-Jamea  was  one  of  them. 


FTTZ-JAIIBS 


261 


At  the  trial  of  Sir  Thomas  More,  Lord 
Campbell  says  that  Fitz-James*s  conduct 
was  '  not  less  atrocious,'  adding  that  '  nc» 
one  can  deny  that  he  was  an  accessory  to 
this  atrocious  murder.'  These  are  hard 
words,  but  the  guilt  must  be  divided  among 
all  those  who  sat  in  judgment  Fitz-James 
is  mentioned  once  only  in  the  report,  and 
then  an  expression  is  put  into  his  mouth 
which  mav  well  raise  something  more  than 
a  doubt  whether  he  was  satisfiea  of  the  jus- 
tice of  the  proceedings.  When  Audley,  the 
lord  chanc^lor,  who  conducted  the  trial, 
'  loath  to  have  the  burden  of  the  judgment 
to  depend  upon  himself,'  openly  asked  the 
advice  of  the  Lord  Fitz- James  whether  the 
indictment  was  sufficient  or  not,  the  chief 
justice  answered,  'My  lords  all,  by  St. 
Gillian  (that  was  ever  his  oath)  I  must 
needs  confess  that  if  the  act  of  parliament 
be  not  unlawful,  then  is  the  indictment  in 
my  conscience  not  insufficient/  thus  evading 
the  very  point  nused  by  Sir  Thomas  More, 
which  was  that  the  act  of  parliament,  beiog 
repugnant  to  the  laws  of  God,  was  in- 
sufficient to  charge  any  Christian  man. 
(Roper's  More  [Singer'],  88.)  If  he  had 
not  oeen  previously  overruled  on  that  point, 
as  the  '  it '  seems  to  infer,  he  was  no  doubt 
intimidated,  as  all  his  brethren  were,  by  the 
fear  of  the  consequences,  of  which  they  saw 
too  many  examples. 

On  the  conviction  of  Queen  Anne  Boleyn 
Lord  Campbell  pursues  the  same  course. 
He  represents  that  'the  opinion  of  the 
judges  was  asked'   whether  the  sentence 
upon  her  could  be  in  the  alternative,  to  be 
burnt  or  beheaded  at  the  king's  pleasure, 
and  he  puts  a  cruel  speech  into  Fitz- James*s 
mouth  arguing  against  its  being  in  the  dis- 
junctive, and  consequentiy  enforcing  the 
former  as  the  legal  punishment  of  a  woman 
attaint^  of  treason.  The  sole  words  in  the 
authority  quoted,  upon  which  this  supposed 
speech  is  foundtKi,  are,  *  The  judges  com- 
plained of  this  way  of  proceeding,  and  said 
such  a  disjunctive  in  a  ludgment  of  treason 
had  never  been  seen'  QSK^Se  Trials^  i.  418; 
Burners  BrformaUon,  i.  407) ;  and  Lord 
Campbell  not  only  translates  'the  judges  ' 
into  '  Fitz- James,  C.  J.,'  but  adds  within 
inverted  commas  an  argument  as  spoken  by 
him  on  the  occasion.    It  does  not  appear, 
however,  that  there  was  any  opinion  asked, 
or  any  public  discussion  on  the  subject,  but, 
:  on  the  contrary,  the  above  passage  is  merely 
a  remark  in  Judge  Spelman*s  Common- 
place Book,  and  evidently  shows  nothing 
more  than  the  judges'  private  doubts  on  the 
introduction  of  the  precedent.    Deeply  as 
all  Englishmen  must   feel   the    dresdful 
degradation  of  the  law  at  this  period,  and 
disgusted  as  they  must  be  at  the  despicable 
weakness  of  its  professors,    they   would 
deem  themselves  guilt v  of  ini ustice  similar 
to  that  which  was  then  administered  if 


262 


EITZ^AMES 


they  conyicted  any  indiyidual  on  eyidence 
concocted  as  this  is.  But  the  most  curious 
part  of  the  story  renudns  to  be  told.  The 
whole  of  the  proceedings  asunst  the  un- 
fortunate queen  are  preserved  in  the  '  Baga 
de  Secretb/  and  from  them  it  is  manifest 
that  Fitz-James  was  not  present  at  all. 
His  name  does  not  occur  in  any  one  of  the 
writs,  and  Baldwin,  the  chief  justice  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  was  the  mncipal  judge 
in  all  of  them.  (3  Heport,  i^.  liec,,  App, 
iL243.) 

Is  it  not  improbable  that  Fitz-James 
partook  of  those  faults  which  pervaded  the 
whole  bench  at  the  period  m  which  he 
flourished;  but  they  were  faults  arising 
more  from  that  awful  dread  of  majesty 
which  the  Tudors  inculcated  than  from 
any  personal  cruelty  or  delinquency.  Of 
Fitz-James  nothing  is  told  to  distinguish 
him  in  this  respect  fr^m  the  rest  of  the 
group,  and  certamly  nothing  to  justify  his 
bein^  brought  forward  as  a  special  object 
of  vituperation.  Indeed,  if  any  credit  is 
to  be  placed  on  David  Lloyd  {State  Wor- 
tMea,  114-118),  who  wrote  little  more  than 
a  century  after  the  chief  justice's  death,  he 
left  a  character  behind  him  very  different 
from  that  with  which,  two  centuries  later, 
Lord  Campbell  has  depicted  him.  This 
author  states  that  Sir  Jonn  '  was  so  fearful 
of  the  very  shadow  and  appearance  of 
corruption  that  it  cost  his  chief  clerk  his 
place  out  for  taking  a  tankard  after  a  signal 
cause  of  1600/.  a  year,  wherein  he  had 
been  serviceable,  though  not  as  a  bribe,  but 
as  a  civility.'  The  following  remarks  in 
one  of  the  additional  MSS.  (1623,  f.  64) 
in  the  British  Museum,  which  are  either 
the  foundation  of  or  extracts  from  David 
Lloyd's  sketch,  convey  also  a  pleasing 
picture :  — 

'  Two  maine  principles  y*  guide  humane 
nature  are  conscience  and  law ;  by  y*  for- 
mer we  are  obliged  in  reference  to  another 
world,  by  the  latter  in  relation  to  this. 
"What  was  law  alwaye,  was  then  a  resolu- 
tion^ Neither  to  deny,  nor  defer,  nor  sell 
justice.  When  his  cozen  urged  for  a 
Mndnesse,  '^  Come  to  my  house,  (saith  the 
judffe,)  I  will  deny  you  nothing;  come  to 
the  king's  court  and  I  must  do  you  justice."  * 

'  He  would  attend  each  circumstance  of 
an  evidence,  hearing  what  was  impertinent, 
observing  what  was  proper,  saying,  "  We 
must  have  two  soules  as  two  sieves,  one 
for  the  bran,  and  the  other  for  tiie  flowr; 
one  for  the  grosee  of  a  discourse,  and  the 
other  for  the  quintessence." ' 

Fitz-James,  however,  did  not  escape 
those  attacks  from  which  even  the  best 
judges  are  not  exempt.  Sir  K.  Torres,  the 
writer  of  a  '  slanderous  complaint  against 
him,  exhibited  to  the  king  in  a  written 
book.'  vras  condemned  to  pay  a  fine,  to 
ataaaia  the  pillory,  and  to  lose  his  ears. 


FITZ^OHN 

His  retirement  from  his  hiffli  office  on 
January  21,  1689,  arose   prooaUy  from 
bodily  infirmity ;  for  in  his  will,  which  is 
dated  in  the  previous  October,  he  describes 
himself  as  'weke   and   feble  in  bodye.' 
That  he  lived  above  two  years  afterwards 
may  be  presumed  fr^m  the  fact  that  the 
will  was  not  proved  till  May  12,   1642. 
He  was  buried  at  Bruton,  near  to  his 
manor  of  Redlynch,  and  a  fine  mommieDt 
to  his  memory  is  in  the  parish  church  there. 
His  will  contains  a  direction  that  his '  great 
book  of  Statutes  in  vellum  or  pttichmeot 
. . .  shall  remayn  to  the  bowse  [Bedlynchl 
as  an  implement  to  the  saide  howse;    and 
his  bequests  in  behalf  of  his  poor  neigk- 
bours  and  dependants  are    unmistakable 
proofs  of  his  considerate  benevolence. 

FITZ-JOEL,  Wardt,  was  one  of  theibar 
justices  itinerant  sent  in  8   Henry  III.^ 
1224,  to  Dunstable  {Bot,  Clam,  i,  631), 
whose  judgments  against  Faukes  de  Breaat& 
led  to  such  fatal  consequences  to  that  tur- 
bulent baron.    In  1226  he  went  as  justice' 
itinerant  into  Cornwall;  a  fine  was  levied 
before  him  in  Easter.    In  October  he  wt» 
sent  with  Thomas  de  Muleton  on  a  special 
commission  into  Norfolk,  to  enquire  into 
certain  robberies  committed  on  the  meN 
chants  of  Norway;  and  in  the  following 
January  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  is 
Hampshire  and  other  counties. 

FITZ-JOEV,  ThohaSj  was  a  justice 
itinerant  in  Cumberland  m  18  Henry  IE, 
1234.  He  had  a  grant  in  17  John  of  th» 
lands  of  Philip  Fitz-John,  in  Yorkshire, 
during  [pleasure,  and  in  10  Henry  lU.  vu 
one  of  tnose  appointed  to  assess  the  quin* 
zime  in  Westmoreland.  {Rot.  ClauL  i 
246,  ii.  147.)  He  may  possibly  have  been 
a  second  son  of  John  Fitz-Ueoffrey  (the 
son  of  Geofirey  Fitz-Peter,  Earl  of  Eeeex, 
by  Aveline,  his  second  wife),  who  in  the 
same  year  was  sheriff  of  Yorkshire. 
{DttgdaktB  Baron,  i.  706.) 

FITZ-JOEV,  Eustace,  appears  on  the 
Ancient  Roll  of  31  Henry  L  as  holding 
pleas  on  the  northern  circuits  established  liT 
that  king,  in  all  of  which  he  was  united 
with  Walter  Espec.  They  seem  to  hav^ 
taken  some  offence  in  Yorkshire,  inasmnck 
as  on  the  same  roll  it  is  recorded  that  they 
lined  that  they  should  not  be  any  longer 
judges  or  jurors  there.  By  the  roll  it  ia 
evident  that  he  had  held  the  office  for  it 
least  two  years. 

He  and  Pain  Fitz-John  (next  men* 
tioned)  were  the*  sons  of  John  de  Burgo, 
called  Monoculus,  from  having  lost  an  eje, 
and  the  nephews  of  Serlo  de  Burfffa.  baron 
of  Tonsburgh  in  Normandy,  and  rounder 
of  Knaresborough  Castie,  both  of  whom 
accompanied  the  Conqueror  on  his  invasioo 
of  England.  The  latter  dying  with<mt 
issue,  Eustace  succeeded  as  his  heir, 
and  thus  became  a  powerful  baron  in  the 


FTnMOHN 

Mihf  reeeiTing  Tery  luge  additiona  to 
it  inheritance  fiom  the  oounty  of  King 
(ennr,  and  hein^  appointed  governor  of 
lamDoxffh  Castle  in  Northumoerhuid.  He 
eld  a  high  plfce  in  the  confidence  and 
LTOOT  of  Uiat  Jdnpi^^  and  had  the  reputation 
f  a  wise  and  judidoos  counsellor. 

On  the  death  of  Henry,  the  uaurper 
^hen  took  from  him  the  cuetody  of 
kmhorgh  Castle,  and  on  suspicion  of  a 
WMonahle  oonespondenoe  with  David, 
Slag  of  Scotland,  seised  his  person  and 
Gipt  him  for  a  oonsiderahle  time  in  con- 
inement.  On  ohtaininff  his  release,  he 
md  with  Rohert^  Earl  of  Gloucester,  in 
nding  the  Empress  Matilda ;  making  good 
far  her  the  castle  of  Malton,  and  raising  a 
mrerful  force  from  his  own  vassals  in 
ipport  of  the  Scottish  king's  invasion, 
b  hdd  a  command  at  the  memorable 
itUe  of  the  Standard,  fought  at  North- 
Hertom  on  August  22,  1138,  when  the 
Dottish  forces  were  entirely  defeated.  He 
nst  afterwards  have  made  his  peace  with 
ing  Stephen,  for  in  1147  he  founded  the 
ibeT  of  Alnwick  in  Northumberland,  and 

1160  the  priory  of  Walton  in  York- 
dre.  In  3  Henry  H.,  1167,  he  was  slain 
L  hattle  with  the  Wdsh,  whom  the  king 
id  attacked  in  a  narrow  and  difficult  pass 
L  Flintshire. 

He  was  twice  married.  His  first  wife 
"as  Beatrix,  the  daughter  and  sole  hfeir  of 
'to  de  Yeaidf  which  name  was  afterwards 
Komed  by  Eustace's  son  William,  who 
icceeded  to  the  barony,  which  became 
itinct  in  1297  by  the  death  of  William 
a  Vescnr,  a  justice  itinerant  in  the  reign  of 
Sdwara  L,  without  heirs. 

Bu  second  wife  was  Aones,  daughter 
Old  heir  of  William  Fitz-Nigel,  baron  of 
ialton,  and  constable  of  Chester,  to  both 
if  which  he  succeeded.  By  her  he  had  a 
ion  named  Richard  Fitz-Eustace,  one  of 
whose  ^irandsonS;  Robert  Htz-Roger,  was 
a  JQstiaer  in  the  reigns  of  Richard  I.  and 
John,  and  another,  Roger  de  Laci,  was 
alio  a  justider  in  the  latter  reign.  (Madox, 
L 146,  457 ;  Monadicon,  vi.  867,  970 ;  Lord 
LfftldUm  :  Rapin ;  Niccias's  Sk/fiopsis,  664.) 

nXZ-JOHV,  Pain,  brother  of  the  above- 
■eotiuned  Eustace  Fitz-John,  was  also  a 
&TDiirite  baron  and  one  of  the  chief  coun- 
ieDon  of  King  Henry,  in  whose  household 
ke  held  the  office  of  groom  of  the  chamber 
[enhicularius).  It  was  his  du^  to  provide 
I  measure  of  wine  every  night  for  the  kinff, 
finch,  as  it  was  seldom  required  by  his 
Bigesty,  fits- John  and  the  pages  generally 
iauik.  On  one  occasion  tne  king,  being 
hinty,  called  for  his  wine,  and  it  was 
one;  hot^  instead  of  being  angry,  he  ac- 
nowledged  that  one  measure  was  too 
itde  for  both,  and  good-humouredly  di- 
BCtcd  that  the  butler  should  supply  two 
for  the  future,  one  for  nimself 


FITZ-NiaEL 


263 


and  one  for  Fits-John,    (ifopef,  De  Nugis 
Oaiaiium,  210.) 

In  the  roll  of  31  Henry  L  he  is 
mentioned  as  a  justice  itinerant  in  the 
counties  of  Gloucester,  Sti^rd,  and  North- 
ampton. Besides  his  lands  in  Oxfordshire, 
Gloucestershire,  and  Norfolk,  he  likewise 
possessed  the  whole  territory  of  Ew;ps  in 
Herefordshire.  His  castle  m  Cans,  in  34 
Henrv  L,  was  attacked  in  his  absence  by 
the  Welsh,  who  burned  it  to  the  ground, 
and  massacred  all  its  inhalntants ;  and  two 
years  afterwards,  in  1136,  he  himself  was 
slain  with  3000  of  King  Stephen's  troops 
in  a  battle  fought  with  the  same  enemy 
near  Cardigan. 

By  his  wife  Sibyll  he  had  a  son  and  two 
daughters.  Ceci&a,  the  elder  daughter, 
married  Roger,  the  son  of  Milo  of  Glou- 
cester (afterwards  Earl  of  Hereford), 
his  coadiutor  as  a  justice  itmerant;  and 
Ajgnes,  tne  younger  daughter,  married  —  de 
^lontchensy.  His  son  Robert  took  the 
name  of  Fitz-Payne,  and  his  male  descen- 
dants were  summoned  to  Parliament  until 
the  reign  of  Edward  UI.,  when  the  title 
became  in  abeyance  in  the  female  line,  and 
at  last  devolved  on  the  Earls  of  Northum- 
berland, but  became  extinct  in  1670. 
Madav,  i.  146;  N,  Fccdera,  I  10;  Lord 
Hasted;  Baronagey  L  00,  672; 


icolas. 


FITZ-JOEV,  William,  in  9  Henry  H., 
1163,  held  pleas  in  the  county  of  Hereford, 
and  in  116o  he  amerced  Samuel,  the  priest 
of  Pilton  in  Somersetshire.  (Madox,  i. 
627,  ii.  213.)  He  held  some  office  about 
the  courtj  and  when  Richard  de  Humet, 
the  chief  justiciarv  of  Normandy,  was  sent 
to  England  by  King  Heniy  in  1170  to 
arrest  Becket,  with  a  view  to  save  him 
from  the  mischief  which  he  anticipated 
from  the  sudden  absence  of  four  of  his 
knights,  William  Fitz-John  and  Hugh  de 
Gundeville  were  despatched  by  Humet  to 
Canterbury  for  the  purpose;  but  before 
their  arrival  the  archoishop's  fate  was  ac- 
complished.    (Lord  LyUeUoUf  iii.  2.) 

7ITZ-MABTIH,  WiLLiAH,  who  had  hmd 
in  Hampshire,  was  a  justider  or  baron  act- 
ing in  the  Exchequer  both  in  4  and  16 
Henry  II.,  1170.  He  is  also  one  of  the 
twelve  commissioners,  whom  Dugdale  calls 
justices  itinerant,  who  in  the  same  year 
were  sent  to  enquire  into  the  conduct  of 
the  sheriffs  in  the  several  counties  of  the 
kingdom.    (Madox,  ii.  263 ;  Pipe  JRoU,  172.) 

FITZ-KIOEL,  or  FITZ-VEALE;  William, 
is  named  among  the  commissioners  ap- 
pointed in  1170  to  examine  into  abuses  of 
the  sheriffs,  &c.,  whom  Dugdale  erroneously 
calls  justices  itinerant.  He  was  sheriff  of 
Kent  in  1184,  30  Henry  H.,  and  in  the 
certificate  returned  by  the  Bishop  of 
Chichester  for  the  aid  on  manying  the 
king's  daughter  in  12  Henry  II.,  1166,  Le 


264 


FITZ-NIGEL 


mentions  William  Fitz-Neale  as  holding 
one  knight's  fee  under  that  church. 

It  is  not  improbable  that  he  was  a  son  of 
Nigel,  Bishop  of  Ely,  and  brother  of  the 
next-mentioned  Richard  Fitz-Nigel,  Bishop 
of  London.     (Madox,  i.  215,  576;  I\dler,) 

7ITZ-HI0EL,  or  nTZ-VEALE,  Richabd 
(Bishop  of  London),  must  have  been 
bom  before  the  canon  requiring  the  celi- 
bacy of  the  clergy  was  strictly  enforced, 
because  he  seems  to  have  been  openly 
brought  forward  by  his  father  iNigel, 
Bishop  of  Ely  (who  will  be  subsequently 
mentioned),  and  acknowledged  as  his  son. 
He  was  educated  in  the  monastery  of  Ely, 
and  was  then  placed  in  the  Exchequer,  at 
the  head  of  which  his  ^Either  held  the  office 
of  treasurer. 

Brought]  up  to  the  Church,  as  most  of 
the  other  clerks  in  those  times  were 
(whence  indeed  the  derivation),  his  suc- 
cessive ecclesiastical  preferments  in  Henry's 
reign  were  canon  of  St  PauVs ;  archdea- 
con of  Ely,  1100;  and  dean  of  Lincoln, 
by  which  latter  title  he  is  described  in 
30  Henry  XL,  1184.     (Madox,  i.  215;  Le 

In  nis  early  youth  he  was  the  author  of 
a  work  callea  '  Tricolumnus,'  from  its 
being  arranged  throughout  in  three  co- 
lumns. It  was  a  tnpartite  History  of 
England  under  Henry  li. — the  first  column 
treating  of  the  transactions  of  the  Church 
of  England  and  the  rescripts  of  the  apo- 
stolicfld  see ;  the  second  of  the  remarkaole 
exploits  of  the  kinor,  which  he  says  exceed 
all  human  credibility;  and  the  third,  of 
many  affiura  both  public  and  domestic, 
and  also  of  the  court  and  its  judgments. 
{Madox,  ii.  345.) 

His  diligence  and  erudition,  and  the 
capacity  he  displayed  for  the  conduct  of 
the  public  revenue,  soon  justified  his  father 
in  recommending  him  as  his  successor  in 
the  office  of  treasurer.  He  was  accordingly 
appointed  in  1105,  but,  as  no  royal  favour 
was  in  those  days  conferred  without  an 
equivalent,  Xigel  was  obliged  to  pay  to 
the  king  four  hundred  marks  for  his  son's 
nomination.  {Ibid,  i.  44,  113.)  He  con- 
tinued in  the  office  for  the  remainder  of 
that  reign,  and  managed  the  revenue  with 
so  much  care  and  adroitness  that,  not- 
withstanding the  continual  wars  in  which 
the  countr^r  was  involved,  King  Richard 
found  on  his  father's  death  no  less  a  sum 
than  one  hundred  thousand  marks  in  the 
Exchequer. 

That  monarch's  appreciation  of  his  merits 
was  evidenced,  not  only  by  retaining  his 
valuable  services,  but  by  raising  him,  soon 
after  his  coronation,  to  the  bishopric  of 
London  on  December  31,  1180. 

Durinff  Heniy's  rei^  he  frequently  shared 
in  the  duties  of  a  justice  itinenuit,  and 
from  the  time  when  fines  were  introduced 


FITZ-08BEBNE 

into  the  court — ^namely,  about  28  Heniy  IL 
— hb  regularity  <^  attendance  is  particuaN 
ly  observable,  ror  there  is  acaioely  one  imtU 
the  end  of  that  reign  in  which  hit  nans 
does  not  appear.  So  alao  alter  Kug 
Richard's  return  from  the  Holy  Land  till  tin 
year  before  his  own  death,   (ihid.  79-S16.) 

Under  the  regency  of  William  de  Ixnip- 
champ,  Bishop  of  Ely,  he  poss^med  consider- 
able influence,  and  it  was  oy  his  interierenes 
that  Geoffirey  Plantagenet,  Archbishop  of 
York,  when  seized  and  imprisoned  by  tke 
orders  of  the  chief  justiciary,  was  liberatei 

Ho  left  a  most  valuable  legacy  to  hii 
successors  in  the  'Dialogs  de  Scaocario^* 
copies  of  which  are  preserved  both  in  tke 
Black  and  the  Red  Books  in  the  Exchequer. 
It  is  printed  by  Madox  (ii.  331-452)  at  the 
end  of  his  learned  histbry  of  that  oomt,* 
and  in  a  preliminary  dissertation  he  his 
satisfactorily  established  the  claim  of  the 
bishop  to  the  authorship,  in  opposition  to 
that  of  Gervaa  of  Tilbury,  to  whom  it  wii 
for  many  years  attributed.  It  was  composed 
in  the  23rd  or  24th  Henry  IL,  anddescrihei 
the  Exchequer,  v^ith  all  its  officers  and  their 
duties,  and  the  forms  of  proceeding  and  their 
origin ;  a  treatise  of  inestimable  value  M 
weU  to  historians  and  antiquaries  as  to 
lawyers. 

He  died  on  September  10,  1108.  One  of 
the  monks  of  Winchester  (Ar§^,  Sae,  I 
304),  in  describing  this  event,  having  derifr- 
nated  his  office  of  treasurer  by  the  woid 
*  apotecarius,'  an  author  has  £een  led  to 
commit  the  somewhat  absurd  blander  of 
making  him  the  king's  medical  adviier. 
(Godwin f  170 ;   Wendover^  iii.  30.) 

7ITZ-00EB,  Goer,  the  son  of  Ogw  the 
Dapifer  (afterwards  noticed),  was  sheriff  ef 
the  united  counties  of  Buckingham  and 
Bedford  from  33  Henry  II.  to  1  Kichaid  L 
inclusive.  In  the  next  year  he  was  midA 
sheriff  of  Hampshire^  and  filled  that  office 
also  in  5  Richard  I.  {Fnlier.)  From  7 
Richard  L,  1105^,  to  the  end  of  the  reigBf 
his  name  often  appears  as  one  of  the  juili- 
ciers  before  whom  fines  were  acknowledged 
at  Westminster,  and  in  the  first  of  thoie 
years  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  into 
Devonshire.  (Htmter  $  IVeface:  MadtkVj  I 
113,  602.) 

He  married  Amy,  one  of  the  daughtes 
and  coheirs  of  William  de  Schefi^a. 

FITZ-OSBEBKE,    WiLLiAX    (EaRL  of 
Herefobd),  was  the  son  of  Osbeme  da 
Crepon,  and  grandson  of  Herfastus,  who  wis 
the  Drotber  of  Gunuora,  first  concubine,  sil 
then  wife,  to  Richard  L,  the  third  Duke  of 
Normandy,  and  great-grandfather  of  Wil- 
liam the  Conqueror.    He  was  coiiae^Oflntlj 
connected  by  distant  relationship  with  tM 
young  prince,  and  was  brought  up  witkhte 
from  infancy.    On  bis  father**  doitk  1m  h^ 
ceeded  to  the  ofiice  of  steward  or  dtfdfer  k 
the  ducal  houaeholdi  and  wit  Oolnt  c( 


i 


FTTZ-OSBEBNE 

SMteriDa  in  Nonnandj.  He  aided  Duke 
William  in  qoeUing  evexy  dnl  commotion 
of  hie  Norman  sobjectB ;  and  in  the  invaaion 
of  Engiand  he  equipped  forty  of  the  ehipe 
at  hia  own  expense,  and  commanded  one  of 
the  three  diTiaiona  at  the  battle  of  Heatings. 

Haring  eontributed  to  the  conquest  of 
England,  he  assisted  sreatly  in  the  main- 
tenanoe  of  the  acouisition  b^  his  valour  and 
good  eonnaela.  To  his  vigilance  was  en- 
trusted the  erection  of  a  castle  at  'Winches- 
ter for  the  purpose  of  overawing  the  in- 
habitants, and  when,  in  the  vear  after  the 
Conquest,  the  kingretumed  to!Normandy,to 
him  and  to  Odo,  Bishop  of  Bayeux,  the  go- 
Temment  of  the  realm  was  committed  as 
chief  justiciaries.  The  southern  division 
was  appropriated  to  Odo,  and  the  northern 
to  Fits-Osbemey  on  whom  the  earldom 
of  Hereford  and  the  office  of  constable 
or  marshal  (magister  militum)  were  also 
conferred. 

Besides  presidinfr  over  the  Curia  Regis 
during  the  aing*8  absence,  they  idso  mana^d 
the  kmg'a  revenue ;  but  their  conduct  was 
so  arrogant  and  rapacious  that  the  indigna- 
tion of  the  English  was  roused.  The  efforts 
of  the  people,  however,  to  relieve  themselves 
"Were  so  ill-concerted  that  they  were  eamly 
subdued,  and  the  regents  were  rewarded,  in- 
atead  of  being  punished  for  their  oppression. 

In  1009  Pitz-Osbeme  assisted  nis  sove- 
reign in  the  suppression  of  various  insurrec- 
tions in  England,  and  was  employed  by  the 
king  in  aiding  Queen  Matilda  m  we  defence 
of  Normandy.  In  1072  he  proceeded  to 
Plandera  to  assist  Amulph,  the  heir  of 
Baldwin,  its  earl,  in  resisting  the  invasion 
of  the  disinherited  Robert  de  Prison,  by 
'Whom  he  was  surprised,  and  perished  through 
his  careless  security. 

To  his  zeal,  courage,  and  wisdom  King 
William  was  greatly  indebted  for  his  suc- 
eeas,  and  he  was  rewarded  accordingly. 
Besides  the  gpmt  of  the  counhr  of  Here- 
ford, he  received  the  Isle  of  Wight  and 
various  other  possessions  and  advanta^. 
But,  notwithstanding  the  rich  srifte  which 
were  lavished  on  him,  his  procUj^ty  al- 
ways left  him  in  poverty,  which  King 
William,  with  whom  he"  was  a  great 
favourite,  at  once  chided  and  supplied. 
Quarrels,  however,  would  now  and  then 
occur  between  his  sovereign  and  him.  On 
one  occasion,  being  steward  of  the  house- 
hold, he  had  set  upon  the  royal  table  the 
flesh  of  a  crane  scarcely  half-roasted,  when 
the  king  in  his  rage  aimed  a  severe  blow  at 
him,  which,  though  it  was  warded  off  by 
Endo,  another  favourite,  so  offended  fltz- 
Osbeme  that  he  resignea  his  office. 

Though  brave  and  generous  as  a  soldier, 
he  waa  severe  and  oppressive  in  his  govern- 
ment, and  was  looked  upon  as  the  pride 
of  the  Xonnana  and  the  scourge  of  the 
En^iah. 


FITZ-P£TER 


265 


He  was  twice  married.  Iffis  first  wife 
was  Adehne,  daughter  of  Roger  de  Toney, 
a  great  Norman  oaron,  stamuurd -bearer  of 
Kinff  William;  and  the  second  was  Ri- 
child,  daughter  and  heir  of  Reginald,  Earl 
of  Hainamt.  By  the  former  only  he  had 
children,  three  sons  and  two  daughters; 
but  the  family  and  titles  soon  became 
extinct.  (Duudait^B  Btmm,  i.  67 ;  WUl, 
Malmedmry,  306,  481 ;  Madox,  I  81-78 ; 
Chauncy*8  HerUj  121 ;  Turner,  &c.) 

FITZ-PSTEB,  Siifoir,  was  one  of  the 
'assidentes  justicie  regis,'  before  whom 
a  charter  or  contract  was  executed  at  the 
Exchequer  in  11  Henry  IL,  1165,  and  is 
the  first  of  four  after  whom  are  the  words 
'marescallis  regis.*  Whether,  as  Madox 
(i.  44)  seems  to  infer,  these  words  appl^  to 
all  the  four  may  perhaps  admit  of  question. 
If,  however,  he  were  not  one. of  the  mar- 
shals, it  is  clear  he  held  some  office  in  the 
court,  since  his  propertv  was  exempted  on 
that  account  from  the  banegeld  and  other 
assessments  so  early  as  2  Heury  II.  {Pip^ 
Holly  7.)  From  that  year  to  the  sixteenth 
he  was  sheriff  of  the  latter  county ;  and  as 
Geoffrey  Fitz- Peter,  the  great  justiciary  in 
the  next  reign  (whose  fetther  is  not  men- 
tioned in  Dugdale*s  '  Baronage '),  was  en- 
trusted with  the  same  sheriffalty  for  many 
succeeding  years,  it  does  not  seem  an  im- 

Erobable  conjecture  that  this  Simon  was 
is  father. 

Simon  fltz-Peter  acted  also  for  four 
years,  commencing  2  Henry  U.,  as  deputy 
to  Henrv  de  Essex,  the  sheriff  of  the  coun- 
ties of  (Buckingham  and  Bedford.  It  was 
probably  at  a  later  period  that  he  was  a 
lustice  itinerant  in  the  latter  county,  when 
nis  name  is  mentioned  in  connection  with 
the  case  of  a  certain  canon  of  Bedford,  named 
Philip  de  Brois,  who  having  been  convicted  of 
manslaughter  before  his  bishop,  was  merely 
condemned  to  make  pecuniary  compensa- 
tion to  the  relatives  of  the  deceased.  In 
the  open  court  at  Dunstable,  the  judge,  al- 
luding to  the  case,  called  him  a  murderer, 
whereupon  a  violent  altercation  ensued,  aud 
the  priest *s  irritation  drawing  from  him  ex- 
pressions of  insult  and  contempt,  the  king 
ordered  him  to  be  indicted  for  this  new 
offence.  (Linffard,  ii.  218 ;  LekmtFs  ColUct, 
iii.  424.)  This  was  one  of  the  grounds  for 
Henry's  attack  on  clerical  privileges. 

FITZ-PETEB,  Geoffkey  (Eabl  of  Es- 
sex), was  not  improbably  the  son  of  the 
above  Simon  Fitz-Peter,  for  the  reason  sug- 

I  gested  in  his  life.  Dugdale  commences 
his  history  without  any  mention  of  who  his 

j  father  was,  and,  independently  of  the  sheriff- 
alty of  Northunptonshire,  and  also  of  the 
name,  it  is    apparent  that  he  had  been 

,  brought  up  in  the  court  where  Simon  had 
also  filled  some  office. 

In  81  Henry  II.  he  was  one  of  the  jus- 

j  ticea  of  the  forest,  the  duties  of  which  he 


266 


FITZ-PETER 


continued  to  perform  till  the  death  of  Kins 
Henry  (Madox,  i.  547,  ii.  132) ;  and  in  1 
Hichard  I.  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant 
in  Tarious  counties.    {Pipe  JRoUy  36,  &c.) 

King  Richard  compelled  him  to  pay  a 
fine  for  not  joining  the  crusade  (J2tc.  jDipm. 
8),  but  at  the  same  time  showed  the  esti- 
mation in  which  he  held  him  by  appointing 
him  one  of  the  council  to  assist  Hugh  Pu- 
sar,  Bbhop  of  Durham,  and  William  de 
Longchamp,  Bishop  of  Elj,  in  the  govern- 
ment of  the  kingdom,  and  m  the  subsequent 
disputes  directing  him,  in  conjunction  with 
Walter  de  Constantiis,  the  Archbishop  of 
Rouen,  and  others,  to  act  independently 
of  the  chancellor.  About  this  time  he 
became  sheriff  of  the  united  counties  of 
Essex  andHertford, being  probably  so  named 
on  account  of  the  property  to  which  he  had 
succeeded  in  right  of  nis  wife,  Beatrice,  one 
of  the  daughters  and  co-heirs  of  William  de 
Say,  by  Beatrice,  the  sister  of  Geoffrey, 
famer  of  the  deceased  Earl  of  Essex. 

His  continued  employment  as  ajusticier 
during  Richard's  reign  is  shown  by  his  being 
present  when  fines  were  acknowledged  at 
Westminster  {Hunters  Preface) ;  and  in 
July  1108,  9  Richard  I.,  he  was  placed  in 
the  high  office  of  chief  Justiciary  of  the 
kingdom.  His  military  talents  were  imme- 
diately called  into  exercise  against  the 
Welsn,  whose  king,  Gwenwynwyn,  he  com- 
pletely defeated. 

On  Richard's  death  in  the  following  year, 
being  continued  in  his  office,  he  induced  the 
nobles  to  take  the  oath  of  fealty  to  King 
John  at  Northampton.  On  the  day  of  the 
coronation  he  was  created  Earl  of  Essex. 
His  performance  of  the  duties  of  his  office 
was  marked  with  exemplary  activity,  and 
he  exerted  himself  with  considerable  energy 
in  exacting  the  taxes  which  King  John  im- 

Eosed.  At  the  same  time  he  appears  to 
ave  joined  in  the  Ung's  amusements,  as  a 
payment  of  fiye  shillinffs  was  made  to  him 
*ad  ludum  suum/  and  to  haye  been  not 
averse  from  the  pleasures  of  the  table,  as  he 

Said  for  eating  flesh  with  the  king  on  a  &st- 
ay.  (^CoU's  DocumenU,  248,  272,  276.) 
During  the  contest  with  Rome  he  sup- 
ported his  royal  master,  but  was  compelled 
to  be  a  witness  to  the  disgraceful  document, 
dated  May  15, 1213, 14  John,  by  which  the 
crown  was  surrendered  to  the  pope.  In  a 
few  months  after  this  event  this  great  man 
terminated  his  career,  dying  on  the  second 
ide  of  the  following  Octooer.  He  was  buried 
at  the  priory  of  Shouldham  in  Norfolk, 
which  he  had  founded. 

For  twen^-eight  years  he  had  filled  a 
judicial  position,  fifteen  of  them  as  head  of 
the  law,  and  principal  minister  of  the  king- 
dom. Inyestedwith  extraordinary  power, 
the  absence  of  complaint  in  such  difficult 
times  is  a  proof  that  he  used  it  without 
harshness ;  skilftil  in  the  laws,  he  seems  to 


FITZ-BALFH 

haye  administered  them  with  finniWM^  and 
the  lengths  to  which  the  king  soon  after 
resorted  appear  to  show  that  the  royal  im- 

Setuosi^  nad  been  preyiooaly  checked  by 
is  prudence.  Mattnew  Pana  aayB  that  the 
king  hated,  but  feared,  him,  and  that  i^oa 
his  death  he  exckdmed, '  Per  Pedes  Donmii, 
nunc  prime  sum  rex  et  dominua  Anglift.' 
How  the  infatuated  monarch  naed  his  free- 
dom the  histoiy  of  the  remainder  of  hi» 
reign  affords  a  lamentable  display. 

So  large  were  the  various  grants  made  to 
him  that  when  his  son  did  homage  on  soe- 
ceeding  him,  the  sheriffii  of  no  leas  tluui 
seventeen  counties  were  commanded  to  flifs 
possession  of  the  lands  he  held  in  eaca  of 
them.     {Hot,  de  Finibue,  602.) 

By  Beatrice,  his  first  wife,  he  left  thns 
sons,  two  of  whom  succeeded  to  Us  title^ 
which  continued  in  the  family,  throudi  fe- 
male channels,  till  the  year  1646y  wnen  it 
became  extinct. 

Geoffirey  Fitz-Peter*s  second  wife  ms 
Ay  eline,  by  whom  he  had  a  son  named  Jdm, 
lord  of  the  manor  of  Berkhampstead  in 
Hertfordshire,  who  was  made  Justice  of  Ire 
land.  {Duqdale'e  Barm.  i.  703;  Wendomf 
iii.  49,  &c. ;  Boyal  Tribes  of  WaleSj  71; 
Turner's  Engl.) 

TJIZ'JJlLBU,  Gsrold,  whose  lineage  lus 
not  been  traced,  was  one  among  the  twelve 
inquisitores  in  1170,  16  Henry  XL,  whom 
Dugdale  has  mistakingly  called  justice 
itinerant. 

FITZ-SALPH,  WnxiAX,  sometime* 
written  Ranulph,  and  sometimes  Randal^ 
for  they  are  all  three  one  and  the  nine 
name,  succeeded  to  the  lordships  of  Alfre* 
ton,  Norton,  and  Mamham,  in  DerbyBhire, 
on  the  death  of  his  father,  Robert  Fit>- 
Ranulph,  who  is  supposed  by  some  to  havs 
assisted  in  the  assassination  of  Archbishop 
Becket  in  the  year  1170,  and  to  have  foimdaa 
the  priory  of  Beauchief,  in  that  oountj,  ia 
expiation  of  his  crime.  The  fact  that  be 
retired  about  that  time  from  the  sherifbl^ 
of  the  counties  of  Nottingham  and  Beibyi 
which  he  had  held  for  the  four  precediif 
years,  in  some  degree  gives  weignt  to  thu 
opinion.  His  son,  this  William,  was  then 
placed  in  that  office,  and  held  it  for  ^ 
eidbt  following  years.    {Fuller.^ 

Whether  the  father  was  piilty  or  not, 
the  son  was  certainly  not  excludea  from  the 
court,  but  continued  to  be  enn»ioyed  in 
places  of  trust  up  to  the  reign  of  King  John, 
in  20  Henry  H..  1174,  he  was,  as  t/SenSii 
Nottingham  ana  Derby,  joined  with  God- 
frey de  Luci,  one  of  the  king's Justioe^  ift 
setting  the  assize  of  those  counties ;  and  in 
the  six  next  years  he  sat  in  the  Kinpf  aConi^ 
in  which  he  seems  to  have  held  ahuiirim 
as  his  name  often  appears  thus:  'ftr  wit- 
lielmum  filium  Radam  et  aodot  anoi^'  irift^ 
out  noting  who  those  oompamioM  mtb 
During  those  years,  also,  he  want  ■■  OM  cf 


PTTZ-BANULPH 

the  justices  itmeiaiit  into  fourteen  seyeral 
eountiee.     (Madav,  L  04, 12d-ld8.} 

In  1180  he  was  appointed  dspiier  or  se- 
oflKhal  of  Normandy,  in  right  ca  which  he 
bad  the  costody  of  the  castle  of  Caen,  for 
wUch  a  Irrery  of  900L  per  annum  was 
iDowedhim.  (iiW.166.)  This  office,  which 
comprehended  that  of  juBtidarr,  he  con- 
tbofid  to  hold  firom  that  time  till  his  death 
in  1200.  When  Richard  I.  went  to  the 
Holy  Luid  he  committed  Alice,  the  Kin^  of 
Canoe's  nster,  to  the  custody  of  William 
Fttz-Ralph,  who  resolutely  refused  to  de- 
Itrer  her  up  to  her  hrother,  notwithstanding 
Ids  repeated  demands.  In  2  John  he  is 
menticmed  on  the  Norman  Roll  as  heing 
present  in  the  King's  Court  at  Caen  with 
die  other  justices  and  herons  there.  (Ibid, 
S3-ie9.) 

According  to  Dngdale's  'Baronage  '(i.  678), 
tie  had,  hy  his  wife  Agnes,  one  son,  Thomas, 
Hrho  succeeded  him  and  died  without  issue, 
ind  three  daughters,  who  thus  hecame  his 
leirs. 

FirZ-BAFULPH,  Ralph,  was  the  son  of 
the  under-named  Ranulph  Fitz-Rohert,  and 
a  descendant,  therefore,  fnm  Ranulph  de 
QlanTiUe.  (Excerpt,  e  Hot  Fm,  iL  147.) 
Du^jdale  introduces  his  name  among  the 
iusuces  itinerant  into  the  northern  coun- 
ties in  46  Henry  III.,  1262 ;  hut  it  is  ap- 
parent that  this  iter  was  only  for  pleas  of 
the  forest  He  died  ahout  April  1270.  His 
wife's  name  was  Anastasia,  and  he  had  hy 
her  three  daughters. 

7ITZ-BS0IVAIiD,  Ralph,  whs  three 
times  a  justice  itinerant — viz.,  in  14,  16, 
aadlS  Henry  ni.,  1220-1234.  From  these 
app<Hntments,  which  are  eyidently  not  re- 
fmble  to  any  local  property,  it  seems  pro- 
hsble  that  he  was  connected  with  the  courts 
of  law.  He  had  heen  a  partisan  of  the 
liirans  against  King  John,  hut  on  the  acces- 
aoo  of  Henry  III.  his  forfeiture  was  re- 
Teaedon  returning  to  his  allegiance. 

mZ-BEnnrSID,  Rogbb,  is  mentioned 

in  1176, 22  Henry  II.,  as  a  justice  itinerant, 

m  which  capacity  he  acted  occasionally  to 

the  Old  of  that  reign.    During  this  period 

lie  Tinted  no  less  than  thirteen  counties, 

n  extent  of  circuit  sufficient  of  itself  to 

>iu)w  that  he  was  a  regular  justider  in  the 

Cng  8  Court,  from  wnence  these  itinera 

^aiDsted.  But  examples  of  pleas  hefore  him 

ID  the  Exchequer  at  Westminster  are  men- 

tioDed  from  25  Henry  IL,  1179  (MadoXj 

^796),  and  fines  were  levied  hefore  him 

vkte  as  10  Richard  L 

It  was  thai  a  conunon  custom  for  some 

^  the  judges  to  he  in  personal  attendance 

^  the  ki^,  and  accordingly  his  name  is 

ittachad  to  tilie  charter,  dat^  at  Oxford  in 

Jhy  1177,  hy  which  the  gnnt  of  the  king- 

lion  of  Cork  to  Bohert  Fitz-Stephen  and 

ffilo  de  Coffan  was  confirmed,  and  he  was 

iso  one  CI  the  witnesses  to  the  will  of 


FITZ-BOBEBT 


267 


King  Henry,  dated  at  Waltham,  in  1182. 
{Lord  LytMtm,  iv.  [3],  [14].)  He  wa» 
sheriff  of  Sussex  for  eleven  years  from  23 
Henry  U.,  and  of  Berkshire  in  1  Bichard  I. 
(lyier,) 

The  estimation  in  which  he  was  held  is- 
evidenced  hy  his  heing  appointed  one  of 
the  council  to  assist  the  two  chief  justicia- 
ries who  were  left  in  the  government  of 
the  kingdom  during  King  Richard's  ahsence 
in  the  Holy  Land.    (Madox,  L  34^ 

He  married  Rohaise,  niece  of  Ranulph^ 
Earl  of  Chester,  and  widow  of  Gilbert  de 
Gant,  Earl  of  Loncoln,  by  whom  he  had  a 
son  Gilhert,  who  was  a  favourite  of  King 
John. 

FITZ-BICHABB,  William,  was  sheriff  of 
the  counties  of  Buckingham  and  Bedford 
from  16  to  25  Henry  II.  He  was  pre- 
ceded in  this  office  hy  a  Bichard  Fitz- 
Oshert,  who  probably  was  his  father. 
According  ta  the  practice  then  adopted,  he 
was  appomted,  as  sheriff,  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant  to  fix  the  assize  for  those  coun- 
ties in  20  and  23  Henry  U.  (^Madox,  i. 
124^  132.) 

^  othing  further  occurs  as  to  this  William 
Htz-Richard  during  Henry's  reign,  and  it 
is  difficult  to  ascertain  whether  focts  sub- 
sequently related  in  connection  with  the 
same  name  refer  to  the  same  individuaL 
The  Christian  names  Richard  and  William 
were  common  in  those  times,  and  scarcely 
a  roll  occurs  which  does  not  mention 
several  bearing  the  same  designation  in  dif- 
ferent and  distant  counties  who  are  evi- 
dently not  the  same  person. 

FITZ-BOBEBT,  John,  was  the  son  and 
heir  of  the  after-noticed  Robert  Fitz-Rog«r, 
lord  of  Clavering  in  Essex,  and  Wark- 
worth  in  Northumherland.  Soon  after  his 
father's  death ,  in  14  John,  he  was  appointed 
to  the  sheriffalty  of  Norfolk  and  Suffolk, 
which  he  held  for  the  next  two  years.  Ho 
then  joined  the  insurgent  barons,  and  was 
one  of  the  twenty-five  to  whom  was  en- 
trusted the  enforcement  of  Magna  Charta. 
He  obtained  restitution  of  the  possessions 
he  then  forfeited  soon  after  the  accession 
of  Henry  lU.,  and  in  subsequent  years  re- 
ceived several  marks  of  royal  favour.  He 
held  the  sheriffalty  of  Northumberland  for 
four  years,  commencing  in  9  Henry  HI., 
and  in  10  Henry  lU.  was  nominated  one  of 
the  justices  itinerant  for  Yorkshire.  There- 
is  a  writ  in  the  Exchequer  in  1238  which 
hears  the  appearance  of  his  then  acting  as  a 
haron  of  the  Exchequer. 

His  first  vnfe  was  Joane.  and  his  second 
Ada  de  Baillol,  who,  on  his  death  in  25 
Henry  HI.,  1241,  fined  two  thousand  marks 
for  the  custody  of  his  lands  and  heirs,  Hugh 
and  Roger.  The  former  of  these,  dying 
during  minority,  was  succeeded  hy  I^rer, 
whose  grandson  assumed  the  name  of  Cla- 
vering. {Dwfdale9  Baron,  L  106;  Bat,  Bat, 


268 


FITZ-ROBBRT 


136-180;   ItoL  daw.  i.  316^18,  ii.  33-! 
185 ;    Excerpt  e  JRot.   Fm.  i.  337,  342 ; 
Mados,  u.  317.) 

TITZ-BOBXST,  Fbjltp,  was  among  the 
justices  itinerant  who  fixed  the  tallt^  in 
the  county  of  Linooln  in  10  Richard  I., 
lld8-9  (MadoXj  i.  705),  being  the  only 
time  he  is  noticed  in  that  character.  The 
roll  of  the  following  year^  1  John,  contains 
a  curious  entry  of  his  paymg  a  fine  of  200/., 
and  one  hundred  bacons  and  one  hundred 
cheeses,  for  the  grant  of  the  wardship  and 
land  of  the  heir  of  Ivo  de  Munby  till  he 
was  of  age.    (Sot.  de  ObiatU,  24) 

7ITZ-B0BXST,  Ranulfh,  was  the  grand- 
son of  that  Robert  Fitz-Ralph  who  married 
the  daughter  of  Ranulph  de  Glanyille.    He 
himself  married  Berta,  the  niece  of  Ranulph 
de  Glanville,  and  succeeded  to  a  third  of 
his  property  with  the  representatiTes  of  that 
mat  man*s  two  other  daughters.    {Bat.  de 
I^hubue,  337.  360.)    In  12  John  he  accom- 
panied the  Idng  to  Ireland,  but  before  the 
end  of  the  reign  took  part  against  him  in 
the  contest  with  the  barons.     Returning, 
however^  to  his  allegiance  before  the  king  s 
death,  his  manor  of  Saxtorp  in  Norfolk,  of 
which  he  had  been  deprived,  was  restored 
to  his  possession.     Little  further  is  re- 
counted of  him,  except  that  he  twice  filled 
the  office  of  a  justice  itinerant— once  in 
10  Henry  IIL,  1226,  for  Lancashire,  and 
Another  time  in  15  Henry  lU.,  1230,  for 
Yorkshire.    His  death  occurred  before  De- 
cember 25,  1252,  37  Henry  IIL,  when  his 
son  and  heir,  Ralph  (who  has  been  men- 
tioned in  a  former  page  as  Ralph  Fitz- 
Ranulph),  did  homage  for  his  lands  in 
Norfolk,  paying  fifty  udllings  for  his  relief. 
FITZ-BOBEBT,  or  DE  WELLS,   SixON 
(Bishop  of  Chichesteb).    Many  of  the 
charters  of  the  early  part  of  the  reign  of  King 
John  are  concluded  with  the  words '  Dat  per 
manus  Simonis  Archidiaconi  Wellensis  et 
J.  de  Gray,'  both  of  whom  some  writers 
have  therefore  designated  keepers  of  the 
Seal  under  the  Chancellor  Huoert,  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury.    As  in  no  instance 
have  their  names,  or  those  of  others  who 
appear  in  the  same  manner,  any  addition 
designating  that  office,  such  as  *  vice-can- 
cellarius,'  or  ^  tunc  agens  vices  cancellarii,' 
as  in  the  reign  of  Kin?  Richard,  it  admits 
of  considerable  doubt  wnether  this  character 
is  properly  assigned  to  them)  especially  as 
in  every  case  the  persons  so  introduced  are 
known  to  have  held  some  other  office  in  the 
court    They  were  officers  of  the  treasury 
of  the  Exchequer,  where  the  Great  Seal 
was  usually  kept. 

The  first  date  on  which  these  two  names 
appear  is  September  16, 1190, 1  John ;  and 
they  continue  to  sign  tc^ther  till  June  in 
the  following  year,  after  which  Simcm  the 
archdeaoon*a  name  alone  is  a^ypended  to 
numerous  chartem  for  a  long  period,  ending 


FTTZ-BOBERT 

in  June  1204, 6  John.  (IU4.  Chart.  2&,7i- 
135.)  In  March  1203  he  was  provost  of 
Beverley^  and  in  June  1204  he  was  conse- 
crated Bishop  of  Chichester. 

Le  Neve,  in  his  list  of  archdeacons  of 

Wells,  calls  him  Simon  Fiti-Bobert  sod 

in  that  of  the  Bishops  of  Chicheater  mtro- 

duces  Simon  de  Wells  (Ze  Neoe,  43, 56), 

evidently  not  being  aware  that  the  two 

names  belonged  to  one  and  the  same  perBoo. 

Godwin  also  calls  the  bishop  Simon  de 

Wells.    That  his  actual  surname  was  fiti- 

Robert  is  proved  by  two  curious  charten 

(Hot.  Chart,  86,  88),  by  one  of  which  £og 

John,  on  February  7, 1201,  confirms  to  hin^ 

by  the  name  of '  Symoni  filio  Roberti,'  sitk- 

deacon  of  Wells,  a  grant  of  certain  lands  in 

Stawell  in  Somersetshire,  with  tiie  i^row- 

son  of  the  church  there,  which  had  been 

estreated  in  consequence  of  the  felonr  of 

Alice,  the  wife  of  Robert  de  Wattelai,  in 

killing  her  husband,  for  which  she  was  eoDr 

demned  and  burnt ;  and  by  the  other,  dated 

the  22nd  of  the  same  month,  the  king  grants 

to  him  the  land  of  Burgelay  in  the  manor 

of  Melebum,  which   the  said  Baberi  de 

Wattelai  and  Alice  his  wife  had  held  as  of 

her  inheritance,  but  which  had  been  forfeited 

by  the  same  felony  of  which  she  had  beoi 

convicted.     No  doubt,  therefore,  that  the 

Robert  of  whom  Simon  was  the  son  was 

the  murdered  man  Robert  de  Wattelai, 

and  that  the  grants  were  in  fact  a  restotir 

tion  of  the  property  which  he  would  hare 

inherited  but  for  the  crime  committed  bj 

liobert's  wife.    It  was  not  uncommon  in 

this  age  for  an  ecclesiastic  to  discard  his 

family  name,  and  adopt  that  of  the  place  of 

his  birth,  education,  or  preferment    It  is 

certain  that  this  bishop  is  generally  known 

as  Simon  de  Wells ;  out,  inasmuch  u  he 

had  not  discontinued  the  name  of  FiU- 

Robert   at  the  time  when   these  giants 

were  made,  the  assumption  of  the  new  name 

,  may  possibly,  in  this  instance,  have  heen 

.  influenced  by  the  tragical  events  recorded 

I  in  them. 

That  Bbhop  Simon  after  his  elevitioo 
continued  to  enjoy  the  royal  favour  is  shown 
by  the  king  in  January  1207  giving  him 
letters  '  ad  dominum  S.  de  Malo  Leon,'  de- 
siring all  honour  should  be  shown  to  him, 
with  letters  of  protection  during  his  ab* 
sence.  {Bat,  Pat,  68.)  In  the  coarse  of 
that  year  he  died.     {Godwin,  504.) 

FITZ-BOBXST,  Walter,  was  the  grand- 
son of  the  before-noticed  Richard  Ilti- 
Gilbert,  called  also  Benefacta,  and  son  of 
Robert,  steward  of  King  Henry  I.,  \ij  his 
wife  Maud,  the  daughter  of  Simon  die  St 
Liz,  Earl  of  Huntin^on. 

He  was  probably  very  young  at  Ui 
father*s  death,  as  no  mention  is  oiida  of 
him,  beyond  tiie  usual  aasasaniaati  4B  U^ 
property,  until  22  Heniy  IL,  117^  wki 
ne  IS  recorded  aa  ono  of  th»  Utam  jmtaaik 


FTTZ-BOBEBT 

itineniit  appointed  by  the  ooimcil  of  Korth- 
amptoa  to  ffo  into  uxe  eastern  counties  of 
England.  In  this  emplo^pnent  he  was  en- 
gagjed  for  eereral  following  jem,  during 
which  time,  and  perhaps  before  it^  he  took 
his  share  in  the  judicial  duties  of  the  Curia 
Regis.  Madox  gires  seyeral  instances  from 
that  time  till  5  Itichard  L,  1193,  in  which 
he  was  present  as  one  of  the  barons  and 
jiMtictera  there.  (3f<NiMr,lL  94-137,  il.  20.) 

His  kniffhtlj  pursuits  were  not  forgotten 
in  the  performance  of  his  civil  duties.  He 
sufmorted  William  de  Longchamp,  Bishop 
of  £ly,  the  ffOTemor  of  the  realm,  during 
King  Hichaivi's  absence  in  the  Holy  Land, 
in  ms  contest  with  John^  the  kings  bro- 
ther ;  and  in  6  Richard  I.,  1194,  he  joined 
the  expedition  into  Nonnandy. 

He  died  in  1198,  and  was  ouried  in  the 
choir  of  the  priory  of  Dunmow^  which  his 
&ther  had  founded,  and  to  which  he  him- 
self had  given  divers  churches  and  lands. 

His  two  wives  were,  first,  Maud,  daughter 
of  Ridiard  de  Lud,  the  chief  justiciary; 
and,  sec(mdly,  Margmt  de  Bohun. 

He  left  several  sons,  of  whom  Robert, 
the  eldest,  succeeded  him,  and  was  called 
Robert  Fitz- Walter.  His  prowess  as  a 
warrior  procured  for  him  the  addition  of 
*the  Valiant ;'  and,  as  leader  of  the  barons 
confederated  against  King  John,  they  styled 
him  *'  Ma»hal  of  the  Army  of  Qod  and  the 
Holy  Church.'  His  grandson  was  regularly 
summoned  to  parlifunent  in  23  Edward  1. 
To  the  title  of  baron  Fitz-Walter  an 
eaildom  of  Sussex  was  added  in  1529,  and 
other  titles ;  but  these  becoming  extinct  in 
1756,  the  barony  fell  into  abeyance  among 
the  five  daughters  of  Thomas  Mildmay, 
Esq.,  whose  wife  Mazy  was  sister  to  Ben- 
jamin, the  fourteenth  baron.  (DugdMs 
Baron,  i.  209  ;  NiroUu,) 

FITZ-BOBXST,  Walteb,  was  forester  of 
the  county  of  Huntingdon,  and  for  some 
offence  in  the  exercise  of  his  office  was  im- 
misooed  in  14  John,  and  did  not  obtain  his 
liberty  without  a  fine  of  two  palfrejs.  He 
afterwards  joined  the  barons  against  the 
king,  but  returned  to  his  duty  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  next  rei^  His  appoint- 
ment as  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  in 
Huntingdonshire  in  9  Henry  UI.  no  doubt 
arose  from  his  continuiiup  to  hold  the  above 
office.    (Hot.  Clous,  i.  1^,  &c,  ii.  75,  &c.) 

TITZ-BO0SB,  RoBEBT,  was  the  son  of 
Roger  Fitz-Richard,  a  grandson  of  the  be- 
fore-noticed Eustace  Fitz-John.  He  married 
Margaret,  the  daughter  of  William  de  Ches* 
Bey,  and  widow  of  Hugh  de  Cressi,  and 
obtaining  with  her  considerable  property  in 
Nflofolk,  he  became  sheriff  of  tnat  county 
and  of  Suffolk  in  3  Richard  I.,  and  held  the 
office  at  intervals  till  14  John.    (Ikdler.) 

In  3  Richard  I.^  1191,  he  was  present  in 
the  Curia  Regis  as  a  witness  to  a  final 
fiooeord  then  made  there;  and  in  1197  he 


FITZ-aiMON 


269 


was  a  justice  itinerant  in  Norfolk,  and  was 
present  in  the  following  year  on  the  ac- 
knowledgment of  fines  at  Norwich.  Other 
fines  were  levied  before  him  in  3  John, 
1201.     (Madaxy  704 ;  BmUet^a  Ptrface,) 

Kmf  John  granted  him  a  charter  of  con- 
firmation of  his  inheritance  of  the  castie 
and  manor  of  Warkworth  in  Northumber- 
land, of  which  county  he  held  the  sheriffalty 
from  3  to  14  John.  He  founded  the  priory 
of  Langley  in  Norfolk  about  the  end  of 
Richard^s  reign  (Mcntut,  vL  929),  and 
dying  in  14  J^m,  left  by  his  widow,  Mar- 
garet, a  son,  the  before-mentioned  John 
Fitz-Robert.  After  three  generations  the 
family  assumed  the  name  of  Clavering, 
from  a  manor  so  called  in  Essex^  whicn 
belonged  to  this  Robert  John  de  Claver- 
ing, who  was  summoned  to  parliament  by 
the  first  three  Edwards,  died  in  13^, 
leaving  only  female  issue.  (I)ugdMsBar<m. 
i.l06;JViboto.) 

FITZ-BO0XS,  WnjJAX,  was  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  appoii^ted  for  York  and 
Northumberhmd  in  3  Henr^  IIL,  1218. 
(Rot.  Clous,  i.  403.)  If,  as  it  seems  pro- 
bable, he  were  of  Lincoln,  he  married 
Agnes  de  Scotney.    (Madox,  i.  488.) 

FITZ-BOSCSLOr,  WiLLiAK,  is  introduced 
by  Dugdale  as  one  of  the  justices  itinerant 
for  Norfolk  and  Suffolk  in  9  Henry  UL, 
yet,  being  ill  at  the  time,  he  did  not  act ; 
but  on  several  occasions  he  had  been  named 
with  others  to  take  assizes  of  novel  disseisin 
in  Norfolk ;  and  in  11  Henry  HI.  he  was 
the  first  named  in  a  commission  into  that 
county  to  try  two  prisoners  of  the  Bishop 
of  Ely,  who  were  charged  with  murder,  and 
for  whom  the  bishop  had  not  a  gaol  sidfici- 
endy  secure.  (Hot.  Ckms.  L  552,  633,  665, 
ii.  72, 77,  &c)  Li  15  John  he  was  so  far  in 
the  confidence  of  the  court  as  to  be  em- 
ployed as  one  of  the  commissioners  ap- 
pointed to  enquire  into  the  losses  sustained 
Dy  the  cler^  in  the  diocese  of  Norwich ; 
and  he  obtained  a  licence  not  to  be  placed 
on  any  assize  or  jury  in  the  county,  except 
in  cases  in  which  the  king  was  conoemeid. 
(Rot.  Clam.  L  154-165.)  Before  the  end 
of  that  reign  he  either  fell  off  from  his 
allegiance,  or  was  suspected  of  intending  to 
do  so,  as  his  son  Andrew,  and  his  grand- 
daughter Alice,  were  placed  as  hostages  for 
him  in  the  custody  of  the  constable  of 
Orford  Castle,  and  he  fined  two  hundred 
marks.  On  the  accession,  however^  of 
Henry  HI.  he  procured  rail  restitution. 
(Ihid.\.2b7,^2',RoLFin.&&^.)  His  wife's 
name  was  Leda  or  Alicia. 

FITZ-SDIOK,  OsBEBT,  is  inserted  by 
Dugdale  in  his  list  of  Fines  as  a  justicier 
before  whom  one  was  levied  in  7  Richard 
I.,  October  1195  (Grig.  Jurid.  41),  but  Mr. 
Hunter  omits  his  name. 

7ITZ-8I1I0V,  RicHABD,  in  1  Henry  HL 
paid  100  shillings  for  having  seisin  of  the 


^70 


FITZ-SIMON 


lands  which  his  father,  Simon  Fitz-Hichard, 
forfeited  in  17  John,  situate  in  the  counties 
•of  Leicester,  York,  Huntingdon,  Norfolk, 
Suffolk,  and  Essex.  He  was  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  in  9  Henry  IH.  for  Essex 
and  Hertfordshire,  and  in  the  two  follow- 
ing years  was  a  commissioner  to  collect  the 
quinzime  and  to  assess  the  tallage  there, 
and  in  Camhridsre  and  Huntingdon.  He  died 
in  17  Henry  HI.  (Eat.  Claus.  i.  245-824, 
ii.  76-208 ;  Excerpt,  e  Hot.  Fin,  i.  212, 234.) 

7ITZ-8I1I0K,  TuBSTiN,  held  some  office 
in  the  Exchequer  so  early  as  4  Henry  H. 
(Pipe  BoUsy  144, 150),  and  after  the  murder 
-of  Becket  he  was  one  of  the  custodes  of  the 
archhishopric  of  Canterhury.  (Madox,  i. 
509,  631.) 

In  1173  he  was  a  justice  itinerant  for 
setting  the  assize  or  tallage  in  Gloucester- 
shire, and  having  been  selected  in  1176  as 
one  of  the  eighteen  justices  appointed  to 
administer  justice  throughout  tne  kingdom, 
his  pleas  are  recorded,  in  that  and  the  two 
following  years,  on  the  rolls,  not  only  of  the 
four  counties  at  first  appropriated  to  him, 
but  also  of  six  others.  In  1177  he  is 
mentioned  as  holding  pleas  in  the  Ex- 
chequer. (Ibid,  127 f  &c)  In  1  Richard 
I.  he  had  the  custody  of  the  castle  of 
Ludlow.     (Pipe  BoU.) 

FITZ- STEPHEN,  Ralph,  was  an  officer 
in  the  Chamber  of  the  Exchequer  from  3 
to  19  Heniy  XL,  1157-1173.  lie  possessed 
lands  in  the  counties  of  Warwick,  Leicester, 
Northampton,  and  Gloucester,  and  the  she- 
riffalty of  the  latter  county  was  entrusted  to 
him  in  conjunction  with  his  brother  William 
Fitz-Stephen  in  18  Henry  H.,  and  from 
that  time  till  1  Richard  I.  either  one  or  the 
other  occupied  the  office.  For  that  county 
also  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  in  1174, 
and  having  been  appointed  in  1176  at  the 
head  of  one  of  the  six  divisions  into  which 
the  circuits  were  then  arranged,  his  pleas 
are  recorded  in  the  rolls  of  that  and  of  the 
four  followingyears  in  twenty-four  different 
counties,     (madoxy  i.  123^137.) 

In  1182  he  was  one  of  the  king's 
chamberlains,  and  his  name  appears  as  a 
witness  to  the  king^s  will  executed  at 
Waltham  in  that  year.  (Lord  LytteUwij  iv. 
[14].)  In  1184  he  was  among  the  j  usticiers 
and  barons  before  whom  a  fine  was  levied 
in  the  King's  Court,  and  in  1187  he  was  ap- 
pointed custos  of  the  abbey  of  Glastonbury, 
and  so  remained  till  3  John.  (Madox,  i. 
635 ;  Hot,  Cancell.  195 :  Abb.  Piac.  12.^ 

He  died  in  or  before  6  John,  as  Godfrey 
de  Albini  then  paid  a  thousand  marks,  his 
fine  for  having  nis  land.     (Rot.  Clatu.  9.) 

FITZ-8TEPHEK,  WiLLiAH,  the  brother 
of  the  last-mentioned  Ralph  Fitz-Stephen, 
filled  with  him  the  office  of  sheriff  of 
Gloucester  from  18  Henry  II.,  1171,  to 
1  Richard  I,  1190.  He  was  (like  Ralph 
Fitz-Stephen)  placed  at  the  head  of  one  of 


FITZ-STEPHEN 

the  six  circuits  arranged  bv  the  eoandl  of 
Northampton  in  1176,  and  ^is  pleas  are  re- 
corded in  that  and  the  four  foUowing  years, 
not  only  in  fourteen  counti^  but  'ad 
Scaccanum'  also.  (MadoXf  L  127-139, 
211.)  His  name  liKewise  appears  as  a 
justice  itinerant  in  Shropshire  in  1  Richard 
L,  1190.     (Pipe  RoU,  96.) 

There  are  many  grounds  for  identifyinjT 
the  sheriff  and  /artider  ^«h  a  TemLk'- 
able  man  of  the  same  name  who  flourished 
at  the  same  period ;  I  mean  William  Fitz- 
Stephen,  the  author  of '  The  Life  and  Passion 
of  Archbishop  Becket,'  in  which  is  intro- 
duced the  description  of  the  dty  of  London 
printed  in  Stow's  '  Survey.' 

Several  circumstances  in  the  career  of 
the  latter  render  it  far  from  improbable 
that  he  should  have  been  selected  for  judi- 
cial employment.    He  himself  aays  that  he 
was  a  fellow-citizen  with  Becket,  one  of 
his  clerks,  and  an  inmate  of  his  £unilj; 
that,  being  by  express  invitation  called  to 
his  service  when  chancellor,  he  became  'in 
Cancellaria    ejus    dictator'    [qu.  remem- 
brancer P|,  or,  as  another  reads, 'scriba  in 
Cancellana  Anglise ; '  that  when  Becket 
pat  to  determine  causes  he  was  a  reader  d 
the    instruments,   and  upon    his  request 
sometimes  an  advocate.     (Dr,  Pegge^i  Dii" 
sertation,  S.'^    All  this  must  have  ooconed 
before  1162,  when    Becket  resigned  the 
chancellorship,  and,  from  the  expiessioDS 
used,  no  douot  can  exist  that  he  was  at 
that  time  established  in  some  office  in  the 
Chancery,  or  in  the  Exchequer,  where  tbe 
business  of  the  Chancery  was  usually  trana- 
acted.    There  is  nothing  to  show  that  be 
did    not   remain  in  his    office   after  his 
patron's  resignation  of  the  Great  Seal,  and 
it  is  certain,  from  his  own  relation,  that, 
though  he  was  present  with  the  archbiahop 
on  his  trial  at  Northampton  in  1164,  he 
escaped  being  involved  in  the  subsequent 
banishment  of  Becket's  friends,  in  conse- 
quence of  his  having  been  the  author  of  * 
rhyming  Latin  prayer,  which  he  had  once 
presented  to  the  king  in  the  chapel  of  Bm- 
hull   in   Buckinghamshire.      (Biog.  BrU' 
Lit.  363.)    The  first  two  lines  will  be  a 
sufficient  specimen  of  its  style : — 

Rex  cnnctorum  sfeculorum,  rex  ards  ctberUe; 
Rector  poli,  rector  soli,  regum  rex  idtiasime. 

That  he  was  present  at  Canterbuy,  and 
was  an  evewitness  of  Becket's  murder, 
forms  no  oDJection  to  the  presumption  that 
he  was  a  servant  of  the  court,  because  itia 
to  be  recollected  that  the  ait^bishop  waa 
then,  at  least  nominally,  reconciled  to  the 
king,  and  it  could  be  considered  no  other 
than  an  act  of  decent  respect  for  Fits- 
Stephen  to  visit  his  former  patron  on  bis 
return  from  a  long  exile.  After  the  mur- 
der had  been  accomplished  King  Heoiy 
would  naturally  be  anxious  to  duconnect 


! 


FITZ-TOBOLD 

tself  firom  its  perpetration,  by  carefully 
iding  any  act  which  might  be  conBtrued 
»  a  puiiiahment  of  those  who  had  ad- 
sd  to  the  troublesome  prelate,  inde- 
dently  of  hia  being  too  wise  a  prince  to 
rive  l>tniaAlf  of  the  services  of  a  learned 

useful  man,  who  had  never  made  him- 

peraraially  obnoxious, 
t  would  therefore  be  far  from  unlikely 
fc  a  person  so  situated  should  not  he 
iffered  with  in  his  o£Boe;  indeed,  the 
WDM  adduced  would  rather  operate  to 
mote  his  further  advancement,  as  tend- 
to  remove  the  suspicions  which  then 
tainly  attached  to  tne  king.  Accord- 
Iv,  hia  nomination  as  sheriff  of  Olouces- 
shire  in  Hie  following  year  can  excite  no 
prise,  especially  as  it  was  most  usual  in 
ae  times  for  officers  of  the  Exchequer, 
of  other  branches  of  the  court,  to  be 
mated  with  such  appointments,  and  the 
le  reasons  would  account  for  the  selec- 
a  of  such  a  man,  palpably  well  exjpe- 
loed  in  the  law,  as  one  of  the  justiciers 

1176.  That  the  termination  of  the 
iriifidty  and  the  last  acts  of  the  justicier 
th  occur  about  1190  or  1191,  the  period 
igned  for  the  death  of  the  biographer, 
I  curious   circumstantial  corroborations 

the  conjecture  thus  ventured.  Fitz- 
ephen's  Lofe  of  Becket  offers  nothing  to 
itradict  the  supposed  identity ;  but,  on 
»  contrary,  it  is  remarkable  for  being 
itten  in  a  calmer  style  than  that  of 
ber  partisans,  and  for  not  attempting 

implicate  the  king  in  ^authorising  the 
nder. 
F!ti-Stephen  had  travelled  to  France 

complete  his  education,  and  on  his  re- 
n,  his  erudition,  which  was  conspicuous 
itii  as  a  scholar  and  a  divine,  recom- 
ended  him  to  the  notice  of  Becket,  with 
hom  he  eventually  became  on  terms  of 
miliar  intercourse.  He  is  said  to  have 
ien  a  monk  of  Canterbury,  and  is  fre- 
acntiy  called  Stephanides. 

TITZ-TOBOLD.  Nicholas,  was  one  of 
lose  selected  oj  the  council  held  at 
TiDdsor  in  25  Efenry  IL,  1179,  as  a  jus- 
ce  itinerant  in  one  of  the  four  divisions 
len  estaUished  for  the  purpose  of  ad- 
usisteiing  justice  throughout  the  kingdom. 
Madox,  L  y9,  1^.)  ma  name  occurs  as 
JQfltice  itinerant  in  the  following  year, 
id  he  probably  acted  subsequently,  be- 
(ose,  among  the  pleas  of  Godfrey  de  Luci 
id  Ms  companions  in  Berkshire,  entered 
I  the  RoU  of  1  Richard  I.  (181),  there  is 

entry  which  seems  to  have  reference  to 
I  misconduct  in  office — viz.,  'Nicholas 
ius  Turoldi  redd.  Comp.  de  451,  13«.  4d, 
)  fidsa  p*Benl  plac.  Corone  et  pro  fako 
im.  de  averiia  detentis.* 
nR-WABOrSj  FuLGO,  is  mtroduced  by 
igdale  as  a  justicier  of  the  bench,  and  in 
BchxQoicle  of  William  de  Riahanger  (33) 


FITZ-WILUAM 


271 


it  is  asserted  that  William  de  Wilton  and 
Fulco  fltz-Warine, ' justidarii  regis,'  were 
slain  at  the  battle  of  Lewes,  May  14, 
1204.  There  is  no  doubt  that  both  these 
persons  met  their  death  at  that  battle,  nor 
that  the  former  was  a  justiciary ;  but  Fulco 
fltz-Warine,  who  was  a  Shropchire  hsion, 
is  never  mentioned  even  as  a  justice  itine- 
rant One  of  his  descendants,  John  Bour- 
chier,  was  created  Earl  of  Batii,  a  title 
which  became  extinct  in  1054.  The  barony 
then  fell  into  abeyance  among  the  daugh- 
ters of  the  fourth  earl. ;  {I)ugdaU$  Baron, 
i.  443;  SicolaB.) 

FITZ-WABm,  WiLLiAK,  a  younger 
brother  of  the  above-mentioned  Fulco 
Iltz-Warine,  was  in  the  early  part  of 
John^s  reign  greatlv  in  the  khiff's  favour, 
receiving  a  grant  of  the  manor  of  Dilun  in 
Herefordshire  in  0  John,  and  in  9  John 
obtaining  royal  Miteras  aeprecatorias '  to 
Gila  de  Kilpec,  urging  her  to  marry  him 
without  delay.  For  this  intercession  on 
his  behalf  he  preffonted  the  king  with  an 
entire  horse  and  a  palfrey.  {Rot,  Clam,  L 
25,  28,  '^,  Itot,de  Finibus, 375.)  On  this 
lady's  death  he  was  again  indebted  to 
royalty  for  a  wife,  Paying  a  fine  of  fifty 
marks,  in  2  Henry  III.,  for  permission  to 
many  Agnes,  one  of  the  sisters  and  coheirs 
of  John  de  WahuU,  and  widow  of  Robert 
de  Bassingeham.  He  was  at  this  time 
sheriff  of  Lincolnshire.  {Excerpt,  e  JRot. 
Fm,  i.  3,  7;  RU.  ChuB,  i.  880.)  In  9 
Henry  and  stiveral  following  years  he  was 
appointed  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  in 
many  other  counties,  in  most  of  which  he 
had  property;  and  in  Easter,  12  Henry 
III.,  nis  name  appears  upon  a  fine  levied 
before  him,  in  consequence  of  which  Dug- 
dale  has  introduced  him  among  the  regular 
justiciers  of  this  reign,  but  he  is  not  sub- 
sequently noticed  in  a  judicial  capacity. 
{Rot,  Clans,  ii.  77-213.) 

The  castle  of  Rockingham  was  entrusted 
to  him  as  constable  in  10  Henry  III.,  in 
which  year  he  sent  five  hundred  Welsh  to 
Prince  Kichard,  the  king's  broker,  in  Gha- 
cony.  {Ibid.  110, 130.)  In  18  Henry  HI. 
he  was  sheriff  of  Worcestershire,  ana  exe- 
cuted the  same  office  in  Herefordshire  in 
16  Henry  III.  and  the  two  following  years. 
During  the  rest  of  his  life  he  sustained  the 
part  of  a  loyal  knight,  assisting  his  sove- 
reign as  one  of  the  lords  of  the  Marches, 
and  attending  the  king  in  37  Henry  III.  in 
his  expedition  to  Goscony. 

He  left  an  only  daughter,  Asselina,  who 
married  Thomas  Lyttelton,  ancestor  of  the 
eminent  judge  in  the  reign  of  Edward  IV. 

FITZ-WILLIAM,  Adam,  forfeited  his 
property  in  the  county  of  Hertford  in  17 
Jolm  for  his  adherence  to  the  barons ;  but 
on  that  king*s  decease  he  returned  to  his 
allegiance,  and  was  restored  to  his  lands. 
(Rot,  Clous,  i.  229,  245,  318.)    He  appears 


272 


nrZ-WILLIAM 


in  a  judicial  character  from  9  to  21  Henry 
III.  as  a  justice  itinerant  and  one  of  the 
regular  justiciers  at  Westminster.  (Ibid. 
ii.  76,  147;  Wendover,  iv.  460;  Orig. 
Jurid,  42.)  There  are  numerous  man- 
dates addressed  to  him  from  18  to  20 
Henry  UI.  as  one  of  the  king's  escheators. 
{Excerpt,  e  Rat,  Fin,  i.  260-303.) 

FITZ-WnXIAM,  Hugh.  There  are  so 
many  persons  of  the  name  of  Hugh  Fitz- 
WilHam  who  Uyed  ahout  the  same  period 
that,  -without  a  hetter  clue  than  has  heen 
ohtained,  it  is  impossihie  to  decide  which 
was  the  justice  itinerant  so  called,  who, 
in  30  Henry  HL,  1246,  was  appointed  with 
five  others  to  visit  the  northern  counties. 
From  15  John  to  43  Henry  IH.  there  are 
four  persons  so  named  on  the  rolls,  all  in 
different  coimties,  and  with  different  wives. 
(Bat,  de  Oblatis,  471 ;  Excerpt,  e  Rat,  Fin. 
i.  132,  ii.  86,  293.) 

FITZ-WILUAX,  Robert,  was  a  knight 
of  Nottinghamshire,  who,  having  got  into 
trouhle  in  17  John,  when  ,he  was  taken 
in  arms  agiunst  the  king  in  the  castle  of 
Beauveer  (JBelvoir),  was  compelled  to  pay 
a  fine  of  sixty  marks  for  the  restoration  of 
the  royal  favour.  {Rot,  Pat,  162, 168 ;  Rot, 
de  FiMbuSj  591.)  In  9  Henry  HL  his 
name  appears  among  the  justices  itinerant 
in  Nottmgham  and  Derhy.  In  the  follow- 
ing year  the  sheriff  of  Cumherland  is  com- 
manded to  cause  a  successor  to  he  elected 
in  the  place  of  Robert  Fitz- William,  one 
of  the  coroners  of  that  county ;  and  there  is 
every  probability  that  this  was  the  same 
person,  as  in  11  Henry  lU.  Ralph  Fitz- 
Nichol  paid  100/.  for  the  custody  of  his 
lands  and  heirs,  the  sheriff  of  Nottingham 
and  Derby  being  commanded  to  give  him 
seisin  of  those  which  were  in  his  bailiwick. 
(Rot,  Cimis,  ii.  77,  119;  Excerpt,  e  Rot. 
Fin,  i.  157.) 

7ITZ-WILLIAX,  OsBERT,  in  the  last 
year  of  the  reign  of  Richard  I.,  1198-9,  was 
one  of  the  justiciers  before  whom  a  fine 
was  levied  {HwUer^s  Preface)^  but  his 
name  does  not  appear  in  any  fine  of  a  sub- 
sequent date.  lie  was,  peruaps,  therefore, 
merely  an  ofiicer  of  tne  court,  which  is 
rendered  more  probable  from  his  being 
sheriff  or  fenner  of  the  county  of  Devon 
in  3  John,  and  of  Hereford  in  8  and  9  John. 
FITZ-WILLIAM,  Otho,  from  28  Henry  ! 
n.,  1183,  to  2  Richard  I.,  1190,  was 
sheriff  of  the  united  coimties  of  Essex  and 
Hertford.  In  1194  he  acted  as  justice 
itinerant  in  the  same  counties,  and  m  that 
or  the  previous  year  he  was  one  of  the 
justiciers  before  whom  a  fine  was  levied 
at  Westminster.  {Madox,  ii.  20 ;  Hunter's 
Preface.) 

FITZ-WrLTiIA¥,  Ralph.  The  first  two 
justices  of  trailbaston  whose  names  appear 
were  Ralph  Fitz- William  and  John  de 
Barton.     Their    commission    was    dated 


FLAMBABD 

1304,  and  was  for  Yorkshire^  wbers  thej- 
both  resided,  and  of  which  mb  former  was. 
the  king's  lieutenant,      (ffemmgfcrd,  ei, 
Heame,  208.)    In  the  next  year  new  cook 
missions,  in  which  neither  of  them  weie 
named,  were  issued  for  all  the  Gounties  of 
England,  except  thoee  in  the  home  district 
(N.  Fcederoy  i.  970),  showing  thevefoie  that 
the ,  offences    which    theee    cximmiawoni 
were  intended  to  suppress  were  found  to 
be  of  a  more  serious  nature,  and  more  uni- 
versally extended,  requiring,laiger  powoa 

and  more  experienced  judgM.         

Ralph  Iltz- William  was  a  son  of  William 
Fitz-Kalph,  of  GhrimathOTp  in  Yorkdiire^ 
by  Joane,  daughter  of  Thomas  de  Grey- 
stock.  In  25  Edward  L  he  was  one  of  & 
barons  sununoned  to  join  the  king's  anm» 
in  Scotland.  He  served  with  so  mnch  ml 
and  valour  in  thoee  wars  that  he  was  con- 
stituted capitaneus  of  the  garrisons  and 
fortresses  in   Northumberlai^  lieoteDist 
of  Yorkshire,  and  lord  of  the  StLuches,  in 
which  character,  no  doubt,  the  commisnoo 
of  trailbaston  was  directed  to  hinL    In  S8 
Edward  L  he  was  present  at  the  siege  of 
Carlaverock,    and   was    engaged   in  tbs 
Scottish  wars  to  the  end  of  the  reign. 

Under  Edward  H.  he  was  employed  in 
the  same  manner,  and  was  made  govenor 
of  Berwick-upon-Tweed  and  of  Cariiik^  [ 
was  one  of  the  ordainers  to  regulate  the 
king's  household  and  ^vemmen^  and  wv 
frequently  appointed,  m  8  Edward  U,  to 
take  inquisitions  as  to  wrecks  and  othtf' 
wise.  He  died  about  November  1816,  ud 
was  buried  in  Nesham  Abbey,  DuriianL 

The  barony  of  Greystock  was  settled 
upon  him  by  his  mother's  nephew,  Jobs, 
the  last  lord  of  that  name,  upon  whan 
death,  in  1305,  he  succeeded  to  it 

By  his  wife  Maigeiy^tbe  daughter  lad 
one  of  the  coheirs  of  Huffh  de  Bdlebec^ 
and  widow  of  Nicholas  Cornet,  he  had  two 
sons — William,  who  died  in  his  fSithei'i 
lifetime,  and  Rober^  who  succeeded  hinu 
and  died  in  1317.  His  desoenduts  asfODea 
the  name  of  Oreystock,  and  held  tlie 
barony  till  1487,  when,  the  then  kvd 
dyin^  without  issue  male,  it  was,  by  tbe 
mamage  of  his  granddaughter  united  to 
that  of  Dacre  of  Gillesland  till  1869,  idiea 
it  fell  into  abeyance  among  the  natenof 
George,  the  fifth  Baron  Dacre.  (fiugieilet 
Baron,  i.  740;  Nicolas.) 

PLAXBASD,  Ranvlph  (Bibhop  of 
Durham).  This  extraordinaiy  man  wis  t 
Norman,  whose  fietther  was  an  obscme 
priest,  and  whose  mother  had  the  reputa- 
tion of  being  a  witch.  He  followea  the 
coiurt  of  the  Conqueror  into  England,  ind, 
having  entered  mto  holy  orders,  obtained 
from  that  prince  the  church  of  Godalming 
in  Surrey,  in  which  his  name  appeait  is 
Flambard.  According  to  Domesoay  Book 
(fo.  30|  51)|  he  had,  besides  one  hide  of 


YLAMBASD 


FLAMBARD 


273 


e  king's  land  in  Hie  in  Hampehiie.  three  I  which  resulted  from  these  proceedings,  say- 
nementiwhichTS^lliam  held  in  Guildford; '  ing  that  he  was  the  only  man  in  his  domi- 
longing  to  the  church  of  Oodalming.  j  nions  who  regarded  not  the  hatred  of  others 
Pter  nceiTinff  many  pluralities,  he  hecame  j  so  that  he  pleased  his  master.  His  approval 
aplain  to  Manrice,  Bishop  of  London,  j  was  manifested  during  the  remainder  of  his 
.t  left  his  service  because  that  prelate  reign  by  raising  him  to  nigh  office  in  the  state. 
fused  him  the  deaneiy  of  the  church  of  i  What  the  precise  nature  or  title  of  his 
.  FanL  j  office  was  it  is  difficult  to  determine.    Dug- 

le  probably  held  an  office  in  the  Chancery  dale  introduces  him  into  his  list  of  chief 
der  Maurice ;  and  Malmesbury's  descrip-  '  justiciaries.  The  only  historian  who  gives 
nofhimyas'inyictuscausidicus,' shows  he  him  that  title  is  Ordericus  Vi talis,  whose 
a  connected  with  the  courts.  He  is  next  words  are  '  Summus  regiarum  procurator 
ind  in  1088  and  1098  as  one  of  the  king*s  '  opum  et  iustitiarius  factus  est.'  Henry  of 
iplains  {Moiuui,  L  164, 174, 241) ;  hnd'it  i  Iluntinffdon  and  Hoger  de  Iloveden  style 
A  not  lonff  before  he  contrived  to  ingratiate  him  '  phcitator  et  exactor  totius  Angliae ; ' 
nself  with  Rufus,  and  soon  discovered  his  ,  by  the  former  of  which  titles,  Madox  says, 
ereign's  nrofuseness  and  extravagance.  '  may  be  meant  chief  justicier,  and  by  the 
iprindplea  himself,  he  did  not  hesitate  latter,  intendant  of  the  revenue,  or  treasurer. 
su^Cgeat  measures  which,  however  op-  •  lioger  de  Wendover  calls  him  by  the  names 
.'saive  to  the  people,  or  disreputable  to  ;  of  *nlacitator'  and  'procurator  regis.* 
i  crown,  would  produce  the  desired  object :  Tne  only  authority  of  any  ixnportance  who 
filling  the  royal  coffers.  By  his  insti-  |  describes  him  as  chancellor  is  Spelman ;  but 
don,  new  offences  were  created  for  the  '■  there  is  evidently  no  foundation  for  sup- 
ce  of  the  fines  which  followed  them ;  a  posing  that  he  held  that  office.  He  refers 
ioe  was  set  on  crimes  by  substituting  a  to  Malmesbuij,  who  savs  nothing  like  it ; 
cuniaij  payment  for  the  punishment;  and  to  Godwin,  whose  language  nas  been 
B  forest  laws  were  loaded  with  severe  palpably  misunderstood.  That  author,  after 
nalties ;  and  the  impost  on  the  land,  so    saymg,  from  Malmesbury,  that  Hanulph 

became  'totius  regni  procurator,*  merely 
adds  this  explanation:  'Unde  illam  om- 
nem  authoritatem  videtur  consequutus,  qua 
hodie  potiuntur  cancellarius,  thesaurarius,  et 
nescio  quot  alii.' 

The  office  of  chief  justiciary  seems 
scarcely  yet  to  have  been  completely  esta- 
blished; but,  by  whatever  title  Eanulph 
was  distinguished,  he  was  clearly  the  king's 
chief  minister.  The  oppressive  nature  of 
his  exactions  naturally  caused  frequent 
complaints  against  him,  which  being  unre- 
dressed, the  instigator  of  them  became  the 
object  of  popular  indignation,  and  narrowly 
escaped  tne  fate  that  was  prepared  for  him. 
Being  inveigled,  by  a  pretended  message 


U>lv  established  according  to  the  entries 
liomesday  Book,  was  disturbed,  and 
ndered  more  oppressive  by  a  new  survey 
the  kingdom.  Not  content  with  this, 
'  drew  down  upon  himself  the  deepest 
(lignation  of  the  clergy,  by  suggesting  to 
« inns  that  on  the  death  of  any  dignitary 
'  the  Church,  whether  bishop  or  abbot, 
le  temporalities  devolved  to  the  crown 
11  the  vacancy  was  supplied.  The  king 
9i  not  slow  in  acting  upon  this  advice ; 
^i  the  injurious  effect  on  the  ecclesiastical 
ivenaes  may  be  easily  conceived;  since 
le  pirties  to  whom  the  Church  lands  were 
itnisted  in  the  interim,  having  paid 
igelyfor  their  use,  and  knowing  now 


Kcirious  was  their  tenure,  could  not  be    from  the  Bishop  of  London,  into  a  boat  on 
cpected  to  neglect  any  means,  however  !  the  river,  he  was  forced  into  a  ship,  and 


etrimental  to  the  property,  of  making  the 
Mt  of  their  bargain. 

Himbard,  as  may  be  supposed,  obtained 
n  custody  of  several  of  these  vacant  bene- 
ee».  In  1088  the  abbey  of  Winchester,  in 
KO  the  archbisho{>ric  of  Canterbury,  and 
1 109*2  the  bishopric  of  Lincoln  and  the 
Ww"  of  Chertsey  were  severally  entrusted 
)  huQ ;  and  by  the  spoil  of  their  churches 
<ul  the  pressure  of  their  tenants,  both  rich 
id  poor,  he  did  not  fail  to  enrich  himself. 
0  thvse  modes  of  imposition  he  added 
•other  device  to  supply  the  royal  wants. 
'liSD  any  of  these  vacancies  were  at  last 
led,  he  made  a  simoniacal  contract  for 
e  king  with  the  candidate  for  the  clerical 
■Qoor,  compelling  him  to  pay  a  large  sum 
fore  he  was  instituted. 


William  looked  more  favourably  upon 
•  minister  on  account  of  tho  unnorularitv 


carried  out  to  sea.  A  storm  arising,  and 
his  intended  murderers  quarrelling  among 
themselves,  Banulph  took  advantage  of 
both,  by  working  upon  the  fear  and  grati- 
tude of  Gerold,  ike  principal  of  them,  who 
had  formerly  been  a  mariner  in  his  service, 
and  they  were  prevailed  upon  to  release 
him,  ancf  put  him  on  shore.  The  terror  and 
amazement  of  his  enemies  when,  three  days 
afterwards,  he  appeared  in  his  usual  place  at 
court  may  well  De  imagined.  Ilis  appoint- 
ment to  the  bishopric  of  Durham  immedi- 
ately followed,  in  June  1099,  three  years 
and  four  months  having  elapsed  since  the 
death  of  William  de  Carileio,  its  last  in- 
cumbent. The  king,  however,  benefiting 
by  the  lessons  his  minister  had  taugh^ 
made  him  feel  the  effect  in  his  own  person, 
by  compelling  him  to  pay  one  thousand 
ponnd.^  lor  hh  nclvnnr'rnu-nt. 


274 


FIAMBAKD 


On  the  death  of  William  Rufus,  one  of 
the  first  acts  of  Henry  was  to  satisfy  the 
clamours  of  the  people  by  imprisoning  the 
hated  Flambard  m  the  Tower  of  London, 
to  which  he  was  committed  on  August  16, 
1100.  But  even  in  this  extremity  his  good 
fortune  did  not  desert  him.  Out  of  the  al- 
lowance of  two  shillings  a  day  which  he 
received  for  his  subsistence  (eq[ual  to  thirty 
shillings  now),  with  the  additional  help  of 
hiB  friends,  he  kept  a  sumptuous  table,  and 
by  his  affability  and  his  wit  captivated  his 
keepers.  Encouraging  them  in  their  habits 
of  intemperance,  he  lulled  their  watchfid- 
ness ;  and  on  the  4th  of  the  following  Fe- 
bruary, taking  advantage  of  their  excess 
at  a  feast  he  had  provided,  he  contrived  to 
escape  by  means  of  a  rope  which  his  friends 
had  concealed  in  the  bottom  of  a  pitcher 
of  wine,  not,  however,  without  cutting 
his  ungloved  hands  to  the  bone  in  the 
adventure. 

He  succeeded  in  obtaining  shipping  to 
Normandy,  where  he  instigated  the  Duke 
Bobert  to  pursue  his  claim  to  the  English 
crown,  ana  accompanied  him  on  his  in- 
vasion. By  the  settlement  which  the  policy 
of  Henry  then  effected,  Eauulph,  on  the 
retirement  of  the  duke,  was  permitted  to 
return  to  his  bishopric,  and  obtained  a 
charter  restoring  all  its  immunities. 

From  this  time  it  does  not  appear  that 
he  interfered  further  in  politics,  though 
Dugdale,on  the  authority  ot  Matthew  Pans, 
places  him  in  the  list  of  treasurers  to 
Henry  I. 

The  completion  of  his  cathedral,  the 
erection  of  Norham  Castle,  the  fortification 
of  the  walls  of  Durham,  and  numerous  other 
works,  among  which  were  the  endowment 
of  the  college  of  Christchurch,  where  he 
had  been  dean,  and  the  foundation  of  the 
priory  of  Mottisford,  near  Lincoln,  not  only 
are  ample  proofe  of  his  miuificence,  but 
seem  sufficient  occupation  for  the  remainder 
of  his  life.  He  filled  the  see  rather  more 
than  twenty-nine  years,  and  died  on  Sep- 
tember 6, 1128. 

The  character  of  Flambard  may  be  col- 
lected from  the  incidents  of  his  life.  There 
can  be  no  doubt  that  he  was  an  able,  artful, 
and  tmcompromising  minister ;  that  he  had 
considerable  eloquence  and  ready  vrit ;  and 
that  he  was  convivial  in  his  habits  and 
generous  in  his  expenditure.  It  is  evident 
also  that  he  was  ambitious,  crafty,  prodigal, 
and  rapacious ;  but  some  abatement  should 
be  made  from  the  imfavourable  colouring 
with  which  he  is  painted  by  the  historians, 
who,  writing  near  nis  time,  and  being  mostly 
ecclesiastics,  would  look  with  a  jaundiced 
eye  on  one  whom  they  considered  to  be 
the  adviser  of  measures  oppressive  to  the 
Church.  (Godwin,  732 ;  MadoXy  I  32,  78 ; 
Wmdover ;  Maltnednuy ;  Angl  Sac, ;  Turner  ; 
Linpard.) 


FLEMIXa 

7LAVDBEV8I8,  or  LB  1I.ZMIV0,  Bl- 

CHARD,  was  one  of  the  justicien  before 
whom  fines  were  levied  at  Westminster  in 
the  last  year  of  Richard's  reign,  1198-9^  and 
the  first  three  years  of  that  of  King  John, 
1 199-1202.  In  3  John  and  the  two  foUowi^ 
years  he  held  the  sheriffalty  of  Corawi!^ 
and  was  connected  with  the  receipt  of  the 
king's  revenue  in  Devonshire.  His  propotf 
was  in  the  latter  county ;  and  he  and  Wi( 
liam  Fitz-Stephen  in  7  John  gave  two  pal- 
freys for  the  grant  of  a  market  at  Dartmouth. 
In  the  same  year  the  king,  in  conridarafiioD 
of  six  huncu^  marks  and    fsa.  palfreji^ 
granted  to  him,  and  his  four  sons  after  hun, 
the  custody  of  the  lands  in  that  county  ind 
eight  others,  and  the  wardship  and  maniiige 
of  the  heir  of  Richard  de  Greinville.  {M. 
de  Finibus,  221,  296,  362.) 

Either  he  or  his  son  Richard,  it  wooli 
appear,  was  with  the  king  in  Ir^and  in  13 
Jonn,  and  the  land  of  a  Richard  Flandrenai^ 
in  Gloucestershire,  was  given  away  hj  the 
king  in  18  John,  evidently  having  been  fiv- 
feited  in  the  rebellion.  {Rot.  Clam.  L  281, 
283.)  But  the  name  bein^  by  no  mem  , 
uncommon  at  the  time,  it  is  impossible  to 
say  that  either  of  these  is  of  the  une 
family. 

FLElEnrO,  TilOiCAS,  was  of  a  familjkog 
settled  in  Hampshire,  and  manv  of  itsmen- 
bers,  from  the  early  part  of  the  thirteenth 
century,  held  high  office  in  the  to^  of 
Southampton.    He  was  the  son  of  John 
Fleming:,  established  at  Newport  in  the  Isle 
of  Wight,  by  his  wife  Dorothy  Harris,  and 
was  bom  there  in  April  1544.   In  May  1567    { 
he  became  a  member  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  and,    ; 
having  been  called  to  the  bar  in  June  1574, 
he  arrived  at  the  bench  of  that  society  in 
1587,  and  was  elected  reader  in  Lent  1560, 
and  double  reader  in  Lent  1£^4,  on  hii  n- 
ceiving  the  degree  of  the  coif.    Before  tbi 
end  of  the  following  year  he  was  de8i{[iiitBd 
as  the  successor  of  Sir  Edward  Coke  m  the 
office  of  solicitor-general,  and  even  BMSOOy 
who  was  intriguing  for  it,  acknowledged  thil 
he  was  an  able  man  for  the  place.   la  oider 
to  hold  it,  however,  it  was  tnen  deemed  ne- 
cessary that  he  should  vacate  the  degree  of 
serj  eant,  when  he  was  replaced  as  a  govemoc 
of  Lincoln's  Inn.  (Dugdale'$  Orig.  254-2^; 
Bacon,  xvL  App.  LL.) 

He  attained  sufficient  eminence  in  his  pro- 
fession to  be  brought  forward  as  a  eandioiii 
for  the  recordership  of  London,  a  post  to 
which,  though  he  then  missed  it^  he  WM 
elected  in  1594,  but  resigned  it  in  1595  on 
being  made  solicitor-general.  (Ifatta/f 
London,  1206.)  In  1601  and  in  1601  he  wii 
returned  member  for  Soathampton;  ind* 
having  been  knighted,  was  on  6ctohar  27. 
1604,  rabed  to  the  office  of  chief  baimi<x 
the  Exchequer.  Such  was  the  reputatioa 
for  integrity  he  had  acquired  in  the  Ho«9 
of  Commons,  that  on  tiie  meeting  after  thsir 


ILEMIHQ- 

lumment  it  was  reaolred  that  notwith- 
iding  his  ekratum  to  the  oench,  he 
uld  sdll  eontmue  a  member.  (I)My*s 
Hit,  383.)  When  adyanced  on  Jane  25, 
7,  to  the  chief  joaticeahip  of  the  King's 
idL  he  Tacated  his  seat,  and  his  son  was 
!tea  for  Southampton  in  his  place. 
hie  of  the  first  duties  as  chief  baron  was 
nt  on  the  trial  of  the  gunpowder  con- 
ston^  but  he  appears  to  have  been  quite 
lent  oomnussioner.  Not  so,  however,  on 
^leat  case  of  impositions  b^  roval  au- 
ntj,  which,  so  important  in  its  ultimate 
sequence,  was  tried  in  Michaelmas  1606. 
sre,  after  expressing  something  like  in- 
nation  that  a  subject  should  presume  to 
id  that  an  act  of  the  kin^  was  '  indebite, 
latCy  et  contra  leges  Anghae  imposita,'  he 
eluded  a  long  argument  whicn,  though 
tainly  most  learned  and  ingenious,  was 
thing  but  conclusive  in  favour  of  the 
wn.  The  only  other  important  case  in 
ich  he  is  recorded  to  have  been  engaged 
hat  in  which  the  refusal  of  the  Countess 
Shrevrabury  to  answer  interrogatories  re- 
ive to  the  marriage  of  Sir  WDliam  Sej- 
ur  with  Ladv  Arabella  Stuart,  and  her 
mivance  in  their  subsequent  escape,  was 
isidered  before  the  privy  counciL  It  was 
seHminary  enquiry  as  to  this  being  an 
bnce  in  law,  ana  whether  it  was  co^isable 
the  Star  Chamber,  and  the  chief  justice^s 
sech,  in  fiivour  of  the  affirmative,  is  curious 
containing  a  recital  of  the  privileges  at- 
jied  to  the  nobility,  and  the  consequent 
ties  which  they  are  therefore  peculiarly 
lied  upon  to  perform.  (State  Triah,  ii. 
9-770.) 

After  presiding  over  the  Court  of  King's 
mch  for  six  years,  he  died  suddenly  at 
oneham  Park,  on  August  7, 1613,  and  was 
iried  in  the  church  of  that  parish,  under  a 
itelv  monument,^  on  which  he  is  repre- 
Dtea  in  his  offioal  costume,  wiUi  an  in- 
ription  that  he  had  fifteen  children,  of 
bom  eight  were  then  living,  by  his  wife, 
oiothy,  otherwise  Mary,  dausfater  of  Sir 
eoiy  Cromwell,  of  Hitchinbroke,  who 
IS  the  aunt  of  the  protector.    (Duthy's 

A  prejudiced  account  of  him  is  given  by 
nd  Campbell  (Ch.  Juttices,  i.  237).  who 
Us  him  a  '  poor  creature ; '  but  Sir  lldward 
}ke  (10  jReportty  84),  who  knew  him  some- 
hat  better,  describes  him  as  discharg^g  all 
I  places  '  with  great  judgement,  integrity, 
d  discretioD/  adding  that  '  he  weU  de- 
rved  the  good  will  of  all  that  knew  him, 
cane  he  was  of  a  sociable  and  placable 
tore  and  disposition.' 
The  male  branch  of  the  fiBunily  failed  in 
B  eailj  part  of  the  last  century,  when  the 
impahixe  property,  including  me  Stone- 
m  estate,  devolved  on  the  descendants  of 
s  g^eat  antiquary  Browne  "V^^llis^  who  had 
imed  a  daoghter  of^  the  house.    These 


FOUOT 


275 


assumed  the  name  of  flaming,  and  the  pre- 
sent possessor  long  represented  the  county 
in  parliament. 

nOWXBDZW,  Edwabd,  son  of  John 
Flowerdew,  Esq.,  of  Hetherset,  Noi^olk, 
after  being  educated  at  Cambridpie  was 
admitted  a  member  of  the  Inner  Temple 
in  1552,  appointed  leader  in  1560  and 
1577,  and  treasurer  in  1579.  {DugdaWs 
Orig.  165, 170.)  He  held  a  high  character 
as  a  lawyer,  and  was  the  confidential  ad- 
viser of  the  dean  and  chapter  of  Norwich, 
having  also  several  annmties  granted  to 
him  for  his  good  and  faithful  counsel  snd 
advice,  all  chaned  on  the  estates  odT  his 
clients.  In  1680  he  wss  called  to  the 
degree  of  the  coif,  and  was  i^pointed 
steward  or  recorder  of  Great  Yarmouth. 
In  1564  he  had  purchased  StanfieM  Hall, 
at  Windham  in  JN^orfolk,  and  taken  up  his 
residence  there,  so  that  probably  his  prin- 
cipal practice  was  in  the  country,  which 
would  account  for  the  onussion  of  his 
arguments  from  the  Reports.  On  October 
23,  1584,  he  was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the 
Exchequer  as  third  baron,  and  in  the  fol- 
lowing February  he  was  one  of  the  judges 
appointed  to  try  Dr.  Pany  for  high  treason, 
bemg  the  first  baron  of  the  Exchequer 
whose  name  appears  on  a  similar  com- 
mission. {Baaa  de  Seeretia;  Anp,  4  Heport 
Pub.  Bee.  273.)  At  the  assizes  held  at 
Exeter  on  Maich  14,  1586,  when  a  con- 
tagious and  mortal  disease  broke  out, 
which  spread  from  the  prisoners  to  many 
of  the  leading  gentlemen  of  the  county. 
Baron  Flowerdew  was  one  of  those  who 
were  seized  with  the  distemper,  of  which 
he  died  about  April  11,  and  was  buried  in 
Hetherset  Church.  His  wife  was  Eliza- 
beth, daughter  of  William  Foster,  of  Wind- 
ham ;  and  their  daughter  married  Thomas, 
the  son  of  Sir  Robert  Shelton,  knight 
(BlotnefiMs  Norfolk,  i.  721-732 ;  Ath.  Can- 
tab, ii.  5 ;   Weever,  864 ;  ffolinshed,  iv.  868.) 

FOLIOT^  HxTOH.  Dugdale  inserts  among 
the  justiciers  before  whom  fines  were  ac- 
knowledged at  Westminster  in  3  Henry 
III.,  1219,  the  name  of  H.  Abbot  of 
Ramsey,  whom  he  also  notices  as  a  jus- 
tice itinerant  in  the  same  year.  This  was 
Hugh  Foliot,  who,  f^m  iSeing  prior,  was 
elected  abbot  of  Ramsey  in  June  1210. 
(Mitred  Albey»j  154.)  l!t  seems  probable 
that  he  is  the  same  man  who  is  called 
archdeacon  of  Salop  in  a  record  dated 
January  16L  1215,  being  a  pressing  appli- 
cation by  tne  king  to  the  Bishop  of  Here- 
ford relative  to  ue  church  of  St.  David's 
in  his  behali^  in  which  he  is  desi^ated  as 
a  man  'magnie  honeetatis  et  sdentia  et 
moribus  bene  omatum.'  (Bot.  Clans,  i. 
203.)  The  archdeacon  was  ndsed  to  the 
bishopric  of  Herefcord  in  November  1219, 
whi^  would  account  for  his  no  longer 
acting  as  a  juatider ;  but  the  doubt  whether 

t2 


276 


FOLIOT 


the  abbot  and  tbe  bishop  were  identical 
arises  from  tbe  discrepancy  between  the 
dates  given  of  their  deaths,  the  abbot 
being  stated  by  Browne  Willis  to  haye 
died  in  1231,  and  the  bishop  by  Godwin 
(484)  on  July  26, 1234. 

70LI0T,  Walter,  was  settled  in  Berk- 
shire at  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  King 
John,  whom  he  accompanied  to  Irelsnd  in 
the  twelfHi  and  fourteenth  years  of  his 
reign.  (Ha.  Mistp,  178,  &c.)  In  16  John 
he  was  summoned  to  attend  with  horses 
and  arms  at  the  castle  of  Wallingford,  in 
which,  by  the  king's  order,  the  chamber 
appropriated  for  the  royal  wardrobe  was  as- 
signed for  the  accommodation  of  him  and 
his  wife  and  family.  Several  other  entries 
show  that  he  was  either  the  governor  of 
that  castle,  or  held  some  other  high  office 
in  connection  with  it,  and  with  the  county 
of  Berks.  In  3  Henry  III.  he  was  a  justice 
itinerant  into  Wiltshire,  Hamnshire,  Berk- 
shire, and  Oxfordshire,  and  siieriff  of  the 
latter  county  in  9  and  10  Henry  HI. 

He  died  about  June  1228, 12  Henry  HI., 
and  was  succeeded  by  his  son  Richard. 
(Excerpt,  e  Hot.  Fm.  i.  172,  426-443.) 

FOSD,  WnjJAX  (not  Fulford,  as  Prince 
erroneously  calls  him,  nor  in  any  msnner 
connected  with  the  Devonshire  family  of 
that  name),  was,  according  to  the  only 
authentic  mformation  that  exists  about 
him,  constituted  a  baron  of  the  Exche- 
quer in  8  Bichard  H.,  1384,  reappointed 
on  the  accession  of  Henry  IV.,  and  ceased 
to  act,  whether  from  death  or  removal, 
between  1403  and  1407,  the  entries  of  the 
intervening  years  not  having  been  found. 

FOBTS&UE,  John,  is  one  of  the  wor- 
thies of  the  county  of  Devon,  of  whom  it 
may  be  justly  proud.  In  Westminster 
Hhll  Ids  name  is  still  regarded  vsdth  re- 
verence, and  his  principal  work,  '  De  Lau- 
dibus  Legum  Anglise,  after  more  than 
three  centuries,  is  referred  to  as  the  first 
treatise  that  entered  minutely  into  the 
history  of  our  legal  institutions  and  de- 
scribed the  professional  education  and 
habits  of  the  period.  The  works  of  his 
three  predecessors,  Glanville,  Bracton,  and 
Hengham,  were  no  doubt  more  useful  to 
.the  legal  student  and  forensic  practitioner ; 
but  that  of  Fortescue  ofiered  ^eater  at- 
tractions to  general  readers  bv  its  popular 
form  and  its  historical  details;  and  the 
ccnsequence  is  that,  while  the  former  have 
become  almost  obsolete,  the  latter  is  still 
read  with  interest  by  the  curious  and 
philosophical  enquirer. 

The  family  traces  its  origin,  without  the 
loss  of  a  single  link,  to  Uie  knight  who 
bore  the  shieuL  before  William  the  Norman 
on  his  invamon  of  England,  the  assumed 
name  commemorating  the  fact.  His  son 
bir  Adam,  who  was  with  him  in  the  battle, 
liceived  as  the  reward  of  their  joint  ser- 


PORTESGUE 

vices,  among  other  lands,  the  manor  of 
Wimondeston  or  Winstone  in  the  pariah  of 
Modberry,  Devon.  King  John  ooofinned 
the  grant,  and  it  remained  in  poasesrioD  of 
the  family  till  the  reign  of  Queen  EliiaibetlL 

Two  accounts  are  given  of  the  jndga't 
actual  parentage ;  but,  discarding  that  wlddi 
makes  nim  the  son  of  Sir  Henzy  Fortsseiie, 
the  chief  justice  of  the  King^s  Bench  is 
Ireland  from  June  1426  to  Febmaiy  14S9, 
who  was  really  his  brother,  the  moat  pio- 
bable  seems  to  be  that  his  father  was  Sr 
John  Fortescue,  knighted  by  Heniy  V.  ftr 
his  prowess  in  the  French  wars,  and  made 
governor  of  Meaux,  which  he  had  helped  to 
reduce.  This  knight  was  a  second  son  of 
William  Fortescue  of  Winstone,  and  ma 
himself  seated  at  Shepham.  He  mairied 
Joan,  the  daughter  and  heir  of  HenrvNor- 
reis,  of  Norreis  in  the  parish  of  Korth- 
Huish  in  Devonshire,  by  whom  he  hid 
several  children,  the  two  elder  being  the 
above-mentioned  Sir  Henry,  the  Irish  diief 
justice,  and  Sir  John,  who  obtained  ibt 
same  rank  in  England. 

John  Fortescue  is  supposed  to  have  ben 
bom  at  Norreis,  the  estate  of  his  mother. 
The  date  of  his  birth  must  have  beenahoit 
the  close  of  the  fourteenth  century.  Ht- 
received  his  education  at  Exeter  Collegf^ 
Oxford,  and  pursued  his  legal  studies  at 
Lincolii's  Inn,  where  he  waeVgovemorof 
the  house  from  1424  to  1429.  (IhigM$ 
Orig.  257.)  In  Michaelmas  Term  of  ^ 
latter  year  he  took  the  degree  of  a  seijeaai- 
at-law,  and  from  that  time  his  argumesti 
frequently  occur  in  the  Year  Books.  Ii 
18  and  19  Henry  VI.  he  acted  as  a  jjudse- 
of  assize  on  the  Norfolk  Circuit  (JEa/.£ral 
iii.  381),  and  at  Easter  in  the  latt»  jreai^ 
1441,  he  was  named  one  of  the  kiog^i- 
Serjeants. 

So  conspicuous  were  his  merits  that  ha 
was,  without  taking  any  intermediate  atea 
raised  to  the  office  of  chief  justice  of  the 
King's  Bench  on  January  25,  1442.  Ii 
that  court  we  have  proof  frt^m  the  Yev 
Books  that  he  presided  till  Easter  Tem 
1460,  and  no  new  chief  justice  is  recorded 
until  Edward  IV.  a  few  months  afterwaidt 
seized  the  throne. 

His  salary  on  his  appointment  was  180 
marks  (VIOL)  a  year,  besides  52^  16f.  lUL 
for  a  roDe  at  Christmas,  and  3/.  Gi.  6d  fiv 
another  at  Midsummer.  In  additkm  ta^ 
this  he  received  in  the  following  Febnmy 
a  grant  for  life  of  one  dolium  of  wine  as- 
nually,  to  which  a  second  was  added  in  the 
next  year.  These  two  doUa  (tunnea)  ef 
wine  are  expressly  reserved  to  him  by  A* 
act  of  resumption  in  34  Heniy  VL  I> 
March  1447,  40^  a  year  was  gnaled  1^ 
him  beyond  his  former  allowinoeaii  (i|r 
mer,  xL  28 ;  Bat.  Pari  y.  317.) 

It  has  been  a  question  how  br  Sb  J) 
Fortescue  was  juatified  in  caDlDf  Utf 


If 


: 


i 


-  fOBTBBCUE 

he  does  in  the  title  to  his  work  '  De 
ndibua,'  CanoellBriug  Angliffi,  a  title 
ich  he  xeitexates  in  hia  retractation  of 
at  he  had  written  ajiainst  the  house  of 
Af  hy  making  the  interlocutor  in  the 
logoe  Bar  to  him,  '  Considering  that  ye 
n  the  chief  chancellor  to  the  said  late 
\gj  (SMen's  Preface.) 
Let  us  then  follow  him  in  his  career^ 
i  aee  at  what  time  he  could  have  re- 
ved  the  office  after  Easter  1460,  up  to 
ich  time  he  acted  in  the  King^s  Bench. 
rhe  fSatal  hatde  of  Northampton  was 
ight  on  July  10, 1400|  and  three  days 
bre  it  the  Chancellor  Waynflete  resigned 
)  Seals  in  the  king's  tent  on  the  Seld. 
itesene  was  clearly  not  appointed  then, 
'  the  Seals  were  in  the  custody  of  Arch- 
1m>p  Bouichier  on  the  25tn  of  that 
mtn,  when  the  king  delivered  them  to 
Knge  Neville,  Bishop  of  Exeter,  the  new 
inosllor.  A  parliament  was  held  in  the 
lowing  October,  which  was  opened  by 
at  prelate  as  Chancellor  of  England, 
krtescue  does  not  appear  in  that  parliar 
ent  in  his  usual  place  as  a  trier  ol  peti- 
ms;  but  neither  does  Prisot,  the  chief 
tsdoe  of  the  other  bench.  Of  the  four 
idges  who  were  among  the  triers  of  peti- 
ODB,  only  one,  John  A&kham,  was  of  the 
omt  of  &ing^s  Bench  (Hot.  Pari  v.  401), 
f  whom  there  is  no  eTidenee  whatever  to 
low  that  he  became  chief  justice  till  the 
ext  reign.    Neither  is  ho  named  among 

y'  idges  who  were  called  upon,  and  re- 
to  give  their  opinion  on  the  claim  of 
lie  Duke  of  York.  Henry  continued  under 
lie  control  of  his  enemies  till  February  17, 
461,  the  second  battle  of  St.  Albans,  and 
b  reign  practically  eiroired  on  March  4, 
rhen  Edward  assumed  the  throne.  At 
lie  battle  of  Towton  on  Palm  Sunday, 
Inch  29,  Fortescue  was  present,  and  when 
he  field  was  lost  fled  with  King  Henry. 
Slit  unfortunate  monarch  went  first  into 
ieotkod,  then  into  Wales,  and  afterwards 
ty  concealed  in  the  north  of  Fngland  until 
»  was  betrayed  and  taken  to  the  Tower  of 
London  in  June  1465.  There  he  remained 
a  dtnance  tiU  his  temporary  restoration  in 
Oetober  1470.  During  this  period  the 
QiMtSeal  remained  in  the  hands  of  Bishop 
VTefilk  till  June  1467,  and  then  was  trans- 
iemd  to  those  of  Bishop  Stillington,*  so 
tibil^  without  its  possession,  any  appoint- 
nat  of  Sir  John  Fortescue  would  have 
^  merely  illusory,  and  in  fact  could  only 
We  beoi  legitimately  recognised  if  made 
^ttwesD  February  17  and  March  4, 1461. 
Inning  the  six  months  of  Henry's  renewed 
!^  book  October  1470  to  April  1471,  it 
tt  certain  that  Fortescue  did  not  hold  the 
N^  as  Neyille,  then  Archbishop  of  York, 
I  txfnadj  mentimied  as  chancellor.  (i2y- 
ler,  XL  672.^  It  must  therefore  be  con- 
(uded  that  nis  title  was  a  nominal  one. 


FOBTESCUE 


277 


giyen  during  the  exile  of  Heniy,  and  that 
the  dictum  of  Chief  Justice  finch,  rather 
oddly  introduced  into  his  argument  upon 
ship>money  in  the  reign  of  Charles  L,  is  cor- 
rect, that  Fortescue  was  neyer  actual  Chan- 
cellor of  England.  {State  TruOs.  iii.  1220.) 

In  the  fint  parliament  of  ildward  IV. 
Fortescue  was  attainted  of  high  treason  as 
one  of  those  oigaged  in  the  battle  of  Tow- 
ton,  and  all  his  possessions  were  forfeited 
to  the  king,  who  granted  part  of  them  to 
Lord  Wenlock.  (BoL  Part,  v.  477,  681.) 
He  clearly  was  at  some  time  in  Scotland, 
^in^  there  probablj  with  King  Henry,  fur 
m  his  petition  to  Kmg  Edward  some  years 
afterwards  he  refers  to  the  works  he  had 
written  against  his  title  to  the  crown  '  in 
Scotland  and  elleswhere.'  {Ibid,  tI.  69.) 
About  1463  he  was  with  the  queen  and 
prince,  but  without  the  king,  'at  Seynte 
Mi^hd  in  Barroys'  (in  Lorraine),  Irom 
which  place  he  addressed  a  letter  in  De- 
cember to  the  Earl  of  Ormond,  then  in 
Portugal,  in  which  he  describes  himself, 
not  as  chancellor,  but  simply  as  one  of  the 
knights  who  were  there  with  the  ^ueen. 
They  must  all  haye  been  much  straitened 
for  the  means  of  liying,  for  he  says,  '  Wu 
buth  all  in  grete  poyerte,  but  yet  the  queue 
suste}'neth  us  in  mete  and  drinke,  so  as  we 
buth  not  in  extreme  necessite.'  He  re- 
mained in  Lorraine  for  some  time,  and  it  was 
probably  while  there  that  he  composed  his 
teamed  work  'Be  Laudibus  Leg^um  Anglia)  * 
for  the  instruction  of  the  joixo!^  prince. 

During  the  whole  of  this  time  Sir  John 
was  energetically  negotiating  for  the  re- 
storation of  King  Henry,  and  did  not  return 
with  the  queen  to  England  till  April  1471, 
after  the  battle  of  Bamet.  His  a^e  did 
not  prevent  him,  as  we  learn  from  vV ark- 
worth,  from  being  present  at  the  battle  of 
Tewkesbury  on  May  4,  1471,  where  he  was 
t^en  prisoner ;  but  it  no  doubt  exempted 
him  from  suiTering  under  the  subsequent 
execution  of  the  Lancastrians.  His  royal 
master  and  his  princely  pupil  bein^  now 
both  dead,  no  hope  could  remam  for 
the  party  to  which  he  had  been  devoted. 
Further  opposition,  Ihereforej  to  the  ruling 
powers  would  have  been  fruitless,  and  the 
d&sire  of  peace  for  the  short  remainder  of 
his  life,  and  of  obtaining  a  restoration  of 
his  property  for  his  fiumly  was  probably 
all  tnat  could  now  influence  him.  These 
feelings  no  doubt  operated  to  produce  the 
retractation,  spoken  of  by  Selden,  of  all  he 
had  previously  written  against  Edward's 
title,  and  thb  it  is  apparent  on  the  record 
was  one  of  the  causes  of  that  monarches 
reconciliation  with  him,  and  of  the  re- 
versal of  his  attainder  in  October  1473,  13 
Edward  IV.,  when  he  was  reappointed  a 
privy  coundllor. 

Efow  long  he  lived  afterwards  is  very 
uncertain.      The    only   further   recorded 


278 


FOBTESCUE 


notice  of  bim  is  in  Febroaiy  1476,  when 
he  delivered  into  the  Exchequer  an  ftssize 
that  had  been  tdcen  before  him  while  chief 
justice.  {Kal,  Exeh.  iii.  8.)  Over  his  re- 
mains, at  Ebrington  in  Gloucestershire,  is 
a  tomb  on  whidi  be  is  represented  at  rail 
lengtli  in  his  robee  as  chief  instice.  His 
seat  there  still  belongs  to  the  family. 

He  married  Isabella^  daughter  of  John 
Jamysy  1^*9  of  Philips  Norton  in  Somer- 
setshire, not,  as  several  biographers  erro- 
neously state,  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Sir 
Miles  Stapleton.  From  his  grandson  John 
descended  Sir  Hugh  Fortescue,  created  in 
1721  Lord  Clinton,  and  in  1746  Lord  For- 
tescue of  Castle  HUl,  Devon,  and  Earl 
Clinton.  In  the  latter  barony  he  was  suc- 
ceeded, under  a  special  limitation,  by  his 
half-brother  Mattnew,  whose  son  Hugh 
was  in  1780  advanced  to  the  titles  of 
Viscount  Ebrington  and  Earl  Fortescue, 
which  still  flourish.  Besides  Sir  John 
Fortescue-Aland,  already  recorded  as  Lord 
Fortescue  of  Credan  in  Ireland,  a  third 
descendant  was  created  in  1777  Earl  Cler- 
mont in  Ireland,  who  is  represented  by  the 
present  Lord  Clermont,  under  a  new  crea- 
tion, whose  handsome  edition  of  all  Sir 
John*s  works  has  recentiy  been  printed — we 
are  sorry  to  add,  for  private  circulation  only. 

FOBTESCUB,  Lewis,  was  the  third  son 
of  John  Fortescue,  of  Spurleston  in  Devon- 
shire (descended  from  William  of  Winston, 
the  elder  brother  of  Sir  John,  the  father 
of  the  eminent  chief  justice),  and  Alice, 
daughter  of  John  Cookworthy,  his  wife. 
His  legal  studies  were  completed  at  the 
Middle  Temple,  where  he  became  reader  in 
autumn  1536.  On  August  6, 1542,  he  was 
constituted  fourth  baron  of  the  Exchequer, 
but  only  sat  there  for  about  three  years. 

By  his  marriage  with  Elizalieth,  the 
daughter  and  sole  heir  of  John  Fortescue, 
£^.,  of  Fallapit  (lineally  descended  from 
Sir  Henry  Fortescue,  the  chief  justice  of 
Ireland),  ne  acquired  that  property,  which 
came  in  regular  succession  to  Sir  Edmund 
Fortescue,  who  received  a  baronetcy  in  1664, 
which  became  extinct  in  1682.  (Dugdal^s 
On)/.  216.) 

FOBTEflCITB,  LoBD.  See  J.  Fobtbscue- 
AxAim. 

70BTE8CVB,  WiLLiAK,  lineally  descen- 
ded from  the  celebrated  judge  Sir  John  For- 
tescue, was  the  son  of  Hugh  Fortescue,  of 
Buckland  Filleigh,  and  Agnes,  daughter  of 
Nicholas  Dennis,  of  Barnstaple.  He  was 
admitted  to  the  Middle  Temple  in  Sep- 
tember 1710,  but  removing  to  the  Inner 
Temple  in  November  1714,  he  was  called 
to  the  bar  by  the  latter  society  in  July  1715. 

Sir  Robert  Walpole,  when  chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer,  made  him  his  secretary,  and 
he  was  returned  to  parliament  as  member 
for  Newport  in  HampahirB  at  the  beffinning 
of  the  reign  of  Qeoige  n.,  and  aat  for  that 


FOSTER 

borough  till  1736.  He  became  attomef- 
general  to  the  Prince  of  Wales,  and  king's 
counsel  in  1730,  and  a  baron  of  the  Court 
of  Exchequer  on  Februaiy  9,  1796L  Ot 
July  7,  1788,  he  was  removed  to  the  Coo- 
mon  Pleas,  and  after  nearly  oz  yetn'  ex- 
perience on  both  these  benches  he  leoeind 
the  appointment  of  master  of  the  RoDb  oa 
November  5,  1741,  and  sat  there  till  Ids 
death  on  December  15, 1749,  when  he  ins 
buried  in  the  Rolls  Chapel. 

Though  considered  a  good  lawyer,  he  is 
better  known  for  his  intimacy  with  the 
wits  and  literary  men  of  the  time.  The 
friendship  that  existed  between  him  and 
Pope  appears  in  their  correspandenoe^  and 
he  is  reputed  to  have  fiimiuied  Ihe  poet 
with  the  famous  case  of  Stradlbg  venm 
Stiles  in  Scriblerus's  Reports.  His  motlier 
after  his  father's  death  married  Dr.  Gilbert 
Budgell,  who  by  his  first  wife  was  the 
father  of  the  unfortunate  poet  Emtieft 
Budgell.  Mr.  Fortescue  married  Muy,  the 
daughter  and  co-heir  of  Edmund  Forteeene^ 
Esq.,  of  Fallapit,  and  left  an  only  daughter. 
(CoUMs  Peerage,  v.  342 ;  Pari  Hid.  fffi. 
619 ;  Noble' 9  Grmiger,  iiL  296.) 

FOSTER,  Michael,  was  of  legal  deeoent^ 
both  his  father  and  grandfather  being  at- 
torneys in  the  town  of  Marlborongh,  widk 
the  reputation,  eminently  deserved,  ofbdof 
honest  lawyers.  He  was  bom  on  December 
16, 1689,  and  after  attending  the  free  ediool 
at  Marlborough  entered  Exeter  College, 
Oxford,  in  May  1705,  and  was  called  to  us 
bar  at  the  Middle  Temple  in  May  171S. 
In  1720  he  published  <  A  Letter  of  Adrioe 
to  Protestant  Dissenters,'  tu  which  chus  bii 
family  belonged.  Little  Imown  in  West- 
minster Hall,  he  pursued  his  profenoa 
principally  as  a  provincial  counsel,  first  ia 
nis  native  town,  and  then  at  Bnstol,  t» 
which  city  he  removed  after  his  marnage 
in  1725  with  Martha^  daughter  of  James 
Lyde,  of  Stantonwick  m  its  neighbomhood. 
In  1735  he  issued  a  learned  tract  entitled 
'  An  Examination  of  the  Sdieme  of  Choreb 
Power^  laid  down  in  the  Codex  Juris  Eode- 
siastici  An^llcani,'  which  went  through 
several  editions,  and  of  course  led  to  a  ooo- 
troversy  on  ecclesiastical  law.  In  Augnrt 
of  the  same  year  he  was  appointed  recofder 
of  Bristol,  and  took  the  aegree  of  seijeaot 
in  the  following  Easter  Term. 

In  his  character  of  recoxder  several  voy 
important  questions  came  before  bin- 
Among  others  was  the  right  of  the  dtfd. 
Bristol  to  try  capital  offences  conunittad 
within  its  jurisdiction,  and  the  legality  rf 
pressing  mariners  for  the  public  sarnei* 
The  former  arose  in  1741  in  the  caiaof  tta 
atrocious  murder  of  Sir  Dinelej  Goodvt 
by  his  brother  Captain  Gk>oden^  i^  INH 
convicted,  and  the  city  anthoritr  lUlfeili" 
blished.  The  Uitter  was  th»  Mn  of  Aki- 
ander  Broadfbot^  indictad  in  174ft  iv  tt» 


FOSTER 

nnider  of  Comeliiis  CalahaiL  who  was 
dlled  in  an  attempt  to  preia  tne  priaoner. 
)ntliiaoccaaioii  theTeooraer  deliTered  a  long 
ipmioii  in  aapport  of  the  legality  of  impresa- 
Dent,  bat  dixvcted  the  juiy  to  findBroaidfoot 
[uhr  of  mandanghter  only,  becauae  Cala- 
lan  had  acted  without  any  legal  warrant 
aUiU  Tru^  XTiL  lOOS,  xiriiL  1323.) 

On  April  22, 1746,  he  was  sworn  in  as 
i  judge  of  the  King's  Bench,  and  knighted, 
tnd  for  the  long  poiod  of  eighteen  years  he 
naintained  the  high  judicial  character  he 
lad  established  as  recorder  of  BristoL  He 
ma  equally  distinguished  for  his  learning, 
lis  integrity,  his  firmness,  and  his  inde- 
wndence.  Three  of  his  contemporaries  who 
pnctised  under  him,  and  afterwards  gained 
iminmiffft  ag  judges,  haye  giyen  testimony 
)f  his  excellence.  Lord  Chief  Justice  De 
9iey  says  of  him,  'He  may  truly  be  called 
the  Magna  Charta  of  liberty  of  persons  as 
ivdl  as  of  fortune.'  (3  JVtUon,  203.;)  Sir 
William  Blackstone  {CammaUaneSy  iy.  2) 
lUudes  to  him  as  '  a  yery  great  master  of 
the  crown  Imw;'  and  Lord  Thurlow^in  a 
letter  written  in  1758,  describes  his  spirited 
eonduct  in  the  trial  of  an  indictment  for  a 
mdaance  in  obstructing  a  common  footway 
throu^  Richmond  Park.  (Xt/«  of  Fotter^ 
8&.)  The  general  impression  of  his  dis- 
foiitian  may  be  collected  from  the  passage 
m  Churchill's '  Rosdad'  :— 

Each  judge  was  tme  and  steady  to  his  trust, 
As  lUns&ld  wise,  and  as  old  Foster  just. 

He  died  on  Noyember  7, 1763.  and  was 
bmed  in  the  church  of  Stanton  Drew. 

Besides  the  works  mentioned  aboye  be 
fsUiBhed  his  '  Report  of  the  Proceedings 
OQ  the  Commission  for  the  Trials  of  the 
Bebels  in  1746,  and  other  Crown  Cases,'  in 
vhieh  the  doctrines  of  the  criminal  law  are 
TBiy  learnedly  discussed.  It  is  a  work  of 
TBiy  high  authority,  and  two  subsequent  and 
cnkff^  editions  haye  been  issued  under  the 
mpenntending  care  of  his  nephew  Michael 
Bodson,  Esq.,  who  was  also  author  of  a  me- 
ur  of  the  judge^s  life,  from  which  much 
ks  been  extracted  in  the  present  sketch. 

TOITXB,  Thomas,  was  bom  about  1649. 
He  belonged  to  the  family  of  Foster  in 
NorthumMrland,  one  of  whom  was  gentle- 
■Bk  osher  to  Queen  Mary,  and  another, 
Sir  John  Foster,  his  second  cousin,  was 
made  a  knight  bumeret  at  Musselburgh  for 
b milour  m  defeating  the  Scots.  {Gent. 
My.  Ixxxiy.  pt  L  341.) 

u»  entered  the  Inner  Temple  in  1571, 
described  as  of  Hunsdon,  Herts,  and  became 
leader  in  autumn  1606.  He  being  one  of 
the  persons  designated  by  Queen  Elizabeth 
30  be  aeijeanta  two  months  before  her 
leathy  the  writ  was  renewed  by  King 
fames,  and  he  assumed  the  coif  in  Easter 
rem  1003,  and  was  afterwards  counsel  to 
2oeen  Anne  and  Prince  Henry. 

On  Noyember  24, 1607,  heVas  made  a 


FOSTER 


279 


judge  of  the  Conunon  Pleas,  and  sat  in  that 
court  f^r  four  years  and  a  hal^  performing 
his  duties  in  such  a  manner  as  to  acquire 
the  character  of  'a  graye  and  reyerend 
judge,  and  of  great  judgment,  constancy, 
and  integrity.'  (10  Cokes  lUports, 235.) 
He  waa  nominated  by  Thomas  Sutton  to 
be  one  of  the  first  goyemom  of  his  hos* 
pital — the  Charterhouse. 

He  died  on  May  18, 161 2,  and  was  buried 
'  at  Hunsdon  in  Hertfordshire^  under  a  mas- 
;  sive  arched  monument  of  yane^ted  marble, 
with  an  effi^  of  the  judge  m  his  robes. 
His  town  residence  was  in  St  John  Street. 
The  under-mentioned  Robert  was  one  of 
his  sons. 

FOSTJUt,  Robert,  the  youngest  son  of 
the  aboye  Sir  Thomas  foster,  was  bom 
about  1580.  Destined  for  his  father'a 
profession,  he  was  called  to  the  bar  of 
the  Inner  Temple  in  January  1610,  and  in 
autumn  1631  attained  the  post  of  reader. 
In  May  1636  he  was  created  a  seijeant, 
and  on  January  27,  1640,  was  promoted 
to  the  bench  as  a  judge  of  the  Conmion 
Pleas,  and  knighted.  He  joined  the  king 
on  his  retiring  to  Oxford,  and  that  uni- 
yendty  conferred  on  him  the  degree  of 
Doctor  of  Laws  on  January  31, 1643.  Upon 
the  execution  of  Captain  Turoin  in  1644, 
the  House  of  Commons  ordered  the  judges 
who  had  condemned  him  to  be  impeached 
of  high  treason,  and  proceedings  were  taken 
against  Serjeant  Glanyille,  who  was  in 
their  power;  but  agfunst  the  two  chief 
justices  and  Justice  Foster,  who  were  also 
concerned  in  the  trial,  no  further  measures 
were  adopted.  The  steady  adherence  of 
the  latter  to  the  royal  cause,  howeyer,  was 
not  likely  to  go  unpunished.  An  ordinance 
was  accordingly  passed  on  Noyember  24, 
1616,  disabling  him  and  four  of  his  col- 
leagues firom  h^ing  judges, '  as  though  they 
were  dead,'  and  he  was  obliged  to  purchase 
his  peace  by  compounding  for  his  estate. 
(  Wood's  Fasti,  ii.  44 ;  Rymer,  xx.  20, 380 ; 
IVhitelockey  96,  181.) 

On  the  restoration  of  Charles  H.  he  was 
immediately  restored  to  his  seat  in  the 
Common  Pleas  on  May  31,  1660,  and 
within  fiye  months,  on  October  21,  was  ad- 
yanced  to  the  chief  justiceship  of  the  King's 
Bench.  During  the  three  years  that  he 
presided  in  the  court  he  was  much  engaged 
m  the  trials  of  the  Fifth  Monarchy  men 
and  other  conspirators  against  the  state, 
and  also  of  the  Quakers  Crook,  Grey,  ana 
Bolton,  for  refusing  to  take  the  oatns  of 
allegiance  and  supremacy.  It  would  haye 
been  well  if  he  nad  confined  himself  to 
these  judicial  duties,  but  his  memory  is 
tarnished  by  his  conduct  in  Sir  Harry 
Vane's  case.  When  the  prisoner  was  con- 
yicted,  and  both  houses  of  parliament  had 
petitioned  for  his  life,  which  the  king  had 
promised,  tiie  chief  justice  is  reported  to 


280 


FOUNTAINE 


have  urged  his  execution,  saying  '  God  in- 
tended nis  mercy  only  for  the  penitent.' 

Sir  Robert's  death'  occurrea  on  October 
4f  1663,  while  on  circuit,  and  his  remains 
were  deposited  under  a  handsome  monu- 
ment in  the  church  of  Egham,  in  which 
parish  his  family  residence  was  situate,  still 
called  Great  Foster  House.  (1  Siderfinj  2, 
163 ;  State  Trials,  vi.  188.) 

F01JNTAIH£,  John.  Alternately  a  royal- 
ist and  parliamentarian,  this  lawyer  was 
commonly  called  Turncoat  Fountiune.  A 
monumental  inscription  in  the  church  of 
Salle  in  Norfolk  proves  him  to  have  been  the 
eldest  son  of  Arthur  Fountaine,  of  Balling 
in  that  county,  one  of  the  sons  of  another 
Arthur  Foimtaine,  of  Salle.  His  mother  was 
Anne,  the  daughter  and  heir  of  John  Stan- 
how,  (Pedigree  in  Heralds'  Coll.,  Norfolk,  ii, 
82.)  The  Lincoln's  Inn  books  confirm  this 
description,  and  record  his  admission  to  that 
house  on  October  30,  1622,  and  his  call  to 
the  bar  on  June  21, 1629.  A.  Wood'(JVM<i,  i. 
473,  497)  has  evidently  mistaken  for  him  a 
member  of  another  family  of  the  same  name 
settled  in  Bucks. 

When  the  civil  war  broke  out  in  1642 
John  Fountaine  showed  his  devotion  to  the 
crown  by  refusing  to  contribute  to  the  sub- 
scription-required by  the  parliament,  where- 
upon the  House  of  Commons  committed 
him  ^to  the  Gatehouse'  on  October  12, 
and  Whitelocke  in  stating  the  facts  odds, 
'  But,  afterwards,  he  and  many  others  re- 
fused, and  again  assisted  on  both  sides,  as 
they  saw  the  wind  to  blow.'  (Com.  Journ, 
ii.  804;   IVhitelocke,  6^.) 

He  was  still  in  confinement  on  December 
20.  when  his  petition  to  be  bailed  was 
retused.  (Com.  Journ.  ii.  896.)  His  dis- 
charge from  custody  was  jjrobably  CTanted 
on  condition  of  his  leaving  London,  for 
Clarendon  (86)  mentions  him  in  1645  as 
assisting  ana  counselling  Sir  John  Stawel 
in  forming  the  Association  of  the  Four 
Western  Counties,  and  calls  him  a  *  lawyer 
of  eminency,  who  had  been  imprisoned  and 
banished  liondon  for  his  declared  affection 
to  the  crown.'  He  is  said  to  have  joined 
Sir  Anthony  Astley  Cooper  in  a  project  to 
raise  a  third  army  to  force  both  parties  to 
put  an  end  to  the  civil  war.  (Locke's 
WorJcs  [1768],  iv.  234.) 

As  long  as  the  royal  cause  prospered 
Fountaine  remained  its  staunch  adherent, 
but  as  soon  as  he  considered  it  was  hope- 
less he  deserted  Oxford,  and  went  over  to 
the  enemy  under  Colonel  Rainsborougb  at 
Woodstock.  The  colonel  announced  his 
'  coming  in^'  and  his  being  then  at  Ayles- 
bury, to  the  Commons,  who,  evidently  dis- 
trusting him,  ordered  that  he  *  should  be 
sent  prisoner  to  Bristol,  and  that  Major- 
General  Skippon  should  take  care  to  keen 
him  in  safe  custody.'  (Com.  Journ.  Apru 
25,  1646;  WMtehcke^  202.)    During  the 


FOXLE 

fortnight  he  was  at  Aylesbury  he  published 
a  '  Letter  to  Dr.  Samuel  Turner  oonoeming 
the  Church  and  its  Revenues/  urging  him 
to  advise  the  king,  for  the  sake  of  peace, 
and  to  '  save  what  is  lefty'  to  oonccKle  all 
the  parliament  required,  bisons  and  Church 
lands,  and  alL  Dr.  Richard  oteuart  wrote 
an  answer  (Wood's  Aihen.  iii.  297),  in 
which  he  calls  the  writer  'an  OidTord 
Londoner,'  and  reminds  him,  in  reference  to 
his  profession  of  '  reason  and  honesty,'  of  a 
sentence  he  was  wont  to  utter,  that  '  when 
vessels  do  once  make  such  noises  as  these, 
'tis  a  shrewd  sign  they  are  empty.' 

On  his  release  he  appears  to  have  re- 
mained quiet  for  the  next  six  years,  and  so 
far  to  have  satisfied  the  parliament  as  to  be 
appointed  in  January  1652  one  of  the 
committee  of  persons,  not  members,  to  take 
into  consideration  what  inconveniences 
existed  in  the  law,  and  to  suggest  remedies. 
He  was  fully  cleared  from  his  former 
delinquency  in  March  1653,  compounding 
for  his  estate  at  480/.  (Whitelocke,  520; 
Com.  Journ.  vii.  69-268.)  He  must  have 
acquired  some  reputation  as  a  lawyer,  as  he 
was  made  a  serjeant-at-law  on  November 
27, 1658,  in  the  short  reign  of  the  Protector 
Richard. 

The  Long  Parliament,  on  its  restoration, 
selected  him  on  June  3,  1659,  for  one  of 
the  three  commissioners  of  the  Great  Sell 
for  five  months,  but  before  that  term  ex- 
pired the  Committee  of  Safety  superseded 
the  commission.  He,  however,  was  replaced 
on  January  17,  1660,  on  the  Long  Parlia- 
ment again  resuming  the  government,  snd 
with  his  colleagues  continued  in  possession 
of  the  Seal  till  its  commonwealth  emblems 
were  defaced,  and  the  Broad  Seal  of  the 
monarchy  restored.  On  the  return  of  Charles 
U.  he  resumed  his  old  political  creed,  and 
was  immediately  confirmed  in  his  degree  of 
the  coif.  (Noble,  i.  438 ;  Whitdocke,  680, 
693  ;  1  Siderjin,  3.) 

Pursuing  his  profession,  he  resided  in 
Boswell  Court,  and  survived  the  Restoration 
eleven  years.  He  died  on  June  4,  1671, 
and  was  buried  at  Salle,  the  seat  of  his 
ancestors.  His  first  wife  died  in  1642 ;  his 
second  was  Theodosia,  daughter  of  Sir 
Edward  Harrington,  Bart  By  both  he  left 
a  family,  among  the  descendants  of  whom 
were  several  eminent  churchmen. 

Richard  Baxter  (BeUquife,  pt.  3,  1871 
speaks  highly  of  his  piety,  integrity,  and 
liberality,  and  states  that  he  received  during 
the  Serjeant's  life  an  annuity  of  10^  firom  the 
time  of  his  being  silenced. 

FOXLE,  JouK  DE,  had  the  custody  of  the 
temporalities  of  the  vacant  abbey  oi  West- 
minster in  1  Edward  IL,  1307.  On  Fe- 
bruary 28, 1309,  he  was  constituted  a  baron 
of  the  Exchequer.  Besides  performing  the 
duties  of  that  court,  he  was  ft^uently 
named  in  commissions,  and  appointed  to 


FRAMFTON 

Jn  inquesto  hy  the  pariiamenty  and  called 
poD  to  aet  aa  a  jnstioe  of  aasuo  and  of 
per  and  terminer  m  the  provinces  aa  late 
1 17  Edward  IL 

He  died  in  18  Edward  XL,  poMeased  of 
mndenble  proper^  in  the  conntieB  of 
Itaita,  Berka,  and  fuckiDgham,  part  of 
'hich  waa  granted  to  him  bj  the  king. 
Be  wife'a  name  was  Constancia.    (Madox, 

31^  iL60;  JbK  WriU,  ii.  891;  Itot. 
ViHL  1.  298-345 ;  CaL  Inoma.  la.  m.  I S18 : 
M.  Or^A.  199-283.) 

nUkMPTOV,  Robert,  is  iotroduced  bj 
higdale  aa  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  in 
444,  with  no  other  authority  than  a  MS. 
elome  belonging  to  the  keeper  of  the 
rardrobe.  He  was  the  son  of  John 
^lampton,  of  Morton  in  the  county  of 
)onet,  by  Edith,  daughter  of  Sir  Matthew 
^weU,  of  Catherston,  Somersetshire.  By 
di  wife  Alicia  he  left  a  son  Robert,  but 
his  branch  is  said  to  have  failed  for  want 
if  male  issue.  (CaL  InquU,  p.  m.  iv.  100, 
J71,826.) 

TKAHCSEVILL,  WnxiAX  DE,  was  lord 
if  the  manor  of  Garboldesham  in  Norfolk, 
if  which  his  father,  also  named  William, 
lad  a  grant  from  Hufh  de  Montfort 
^vmi  8  to  11  Henry  Ul.  several  man- 
iites  are  addressed  to  him  and  other  gen- 
demen  of  the  county  to  take  assizes  as  to 
linds  claimed  by  the  Church,  and  as  to  the 
ri^  of  presentation.  In  9  Henry  UI.  he . 
waa  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  for  Norfolk 
nd  Suffolk.  {JtU,  Clous,  i.  502,  ii.  77, 83, 
157.)    He  left  a  son  William. 

HAIX,  Joror,  was  of  a  Norfolk  familv, 
ud  was  nrobablv  the  son  of  John  Frank, 
of  Norwich,  and  Alice  his  wife.  {AcU  Privy 
powcSy  iL  149.)  He  was  a  clerk  or  master 
b  Chancery  in  2  Henry  V.,  1414,  in  which 
Rign  he  was  also  clerK  of  the  parliament, 
icoeiTing  40^  a  year  as  his  salary  for  that 
tor.  {^Ibid.  V.  106.)  He  was  collated 
trcndeacon  of  Suffolk  on  November  10, 
1421  (Le  Neve,  221)  ;  and  on  October  28, 
142S)  was  constituted  keeper  of  the  Rolls 
in  ChanceiT.  During  the  absence  at 
Oikis  of  the  chancellor  John  Stafford, 
^  Hshon  of  Bath  and  Wells,  the  Oreat 
8cil  was  placed  in  his  hands  for  a  month, 
from  April  22  to  May  23, 1433.  He  held 
tile  office  of  master  of  the  Rolls  till  May 
^  1438.  By  his  will  he  bequeathed 
lOOttl  to  purchase  lands  for  the  main- 
^tnoe  of  four  fellows  of  Oriel  College, 
^Kibd,  firom  Somerset,  Dorset,  Wilts,  and 
fcTWL    {Chalmers'  Qjiford,  79.) 

nAUircXYS^  Jomr  le,  or  F&AKCIOEHA, 
I  lie  is  sometimes  called,  was  the  son  of 
bgh  le  Fraimceys.  He  was  a  servant  of 
le  crown,  and  acted  as  an  oscheator  in  the 
vth  of  England.  In  25  Ilenr^  IH.,  1241, 
iwMaBBgned-with  the  sheriff  of  Cum- 
akad  to  extend  the  lands  of  John  de 
rteri  Pontey  deceased.    Some  other  simi- 


FRAUNCEYS 


281 


;  lar  entries  occur  in  29  and  31  Henry  III. 
{Excer^.  e  Hot.  Fm.  I  349,  427,  iL  7.)  In 
27  Henry  UL  Robert  de  Veteri  Ponte 
ffave  him  the  manor  of  Mebum  in  Cum- 
berland, and  he  held  the  church  of  Cal- 
debec  in  that  county.     (Abb.  PlaeU.  120, 

1690 

He  is  introduced  by  Madox  (i.  615,  ii. 
318)  among  the  barons  of  the  Exchequer 
from  27  to  42  Henry  IIL,  1243-57.  It  is 
probable  that  for  some  short  time  he 
was  one  of  the  regular  justices,  as  assizes 
were  ordered  to  be  taken  before  him  in 
Cumberhmd  and  Norfolk,  in  July  1254, 
and  July  1255.  (Excerpt,  e  Rot.  Fin.  ii. 
192,  211.) 

He  died  in  52  Henry  UL,  when  his  pro- 
perty lay  in  the  six  counties  of  Lincoln. 
Bedford,  York,  Kent,  Westmoreland,  ana 
Cumberland. 

FEAXTKOEYS,  JoHK,  was  probably  the 
nephew  of  the  above  John  le  Fraunceys, 
but  the  various  and  discordant  circum- 
stances mentioned  in  the  entries  connected 
with  the  name  in  the  reign  of  Edward  I. 
will  give  some  idea  of  the  difficulty  in 
tracing  any  individual  to  whom  it  belonged. 

In  uie  parliament  of  18  Edward  L,  when 
Thomas  de  Weyland,  the  chief  justice,  was 
disgraced,  there  is  a  petition  from  one  John 
fVaunceys,  who  had  been  imprisoned  for  a 
year  and  a  half  in  the  Fleet  by  that  judge 
for  a  debt  which  Agnes  de  Valence  claimed 
from  him ;  and  he  was  ordered  to  be  bailed. 
In  the  same  parliament  there  ib  a  petition 
which  charges  John  Frauncies  with  a  mur- 
der, for  which  he  had  been  acquitted,  and 
a  new  trial  is  prayed  for  by  reason  of  his 
kindred  and  his  confederates  having  tried 
the  appeal.  In  35  Edward  I.  a  John 
Fraunceys  represents  that  he  was  taken 
in  the  battle  of  Kosslyn,  had  lost  his 
horses,  arms,  and  everything  he  had,  nnd 
was  detained  in  a  Scotch  prison  for  fifty- 
seven  weeks,  and  only  released  on  payment 
of  a  fine  of  forty  marks ;  and  he  therefore 
pravs  for  the  grant  of  certain  land  in  Staf- 
forclshire,  the  particulars  of  which  are 
ordered  to  be  reported  to  the  king.  And 
in  the  some  parliament  held  at  Carlisle, 
Master  John  Traunceys,  rector  of  Quel- 
dryk,  is  one  of  the  proctors  sent  by  the 
clergy  of  the  diocese  of  York.  (Rot.  Pari. 
i.  47,  49, 191-lOa) 

The  last  of  these  was  probably  the  sub- 
ject of  the  present  notice,  as  the  duty  to 
which  he  was  appointed  was  commonly 
peformed  by  some  officer  in  the  court. 
Master  John  Firaunceys  was  a  clerk  in  the 
ChanceiT,  and  on  May  12, 1310,  3  Edward 
IL,  on  the  Great  Seal  being  surrendered  by 
the  chancellor  John  de  Langton,  Bishop  of 
Chichester,  was  one  of  the  three  ]>ersons 
under  whose  seals  it  was  placed  in  the 
wardrobe,  a  proceeding  which  scarcely 
warrants  his  being  included  in  the  list  of 


282 


FRAY 


keepen.  He  was  among  the  '  dilecti 
clend '  to  whom,  with  others,  the  correc- 
tion of  the  ordinances  was  submitted  by 
the  king  in  5  Edward  U.    (Ibid.U7,) 

FBAT,  Jomr,  so  early  as  in  the  rei^  of 
Eichard  II.  held  the  manor  of  Coldnd^, 
or  Codered,  in  Hertfordshire,  for  which 
county  he  was  returned  to  parliament  in  8 
Henry  V.  (Chauncij,  67.)  In  2  Henry 
VI.,  Doing  then  recorder  of  London,  he 
was  one  of  the  commissioners  appointed 
to  enquire  into  the  treasons  oi  John 
Mortimer.  He  was  raised  to  the  bench  as 
a  baion  of  the  Exchequer  in  4  Henry  VL, 
1425  (Co/.  Hot  Fat.  273),  and  is  men- 
tioned in  that  character  on  July  15,  1428. 
(Jiot.  Pari  iy.  202,  834.)  Dugdale  does 
not  introduce  him  into  that  court  till  Fe- 
bruary 8;  1435,  but  that  is  the  date  of  his 
advancement  to  be  the  second  baron.  (Ads 
Privy  Council,  iv.  295.)  In  every  year 
after  the  seventh  year  he  was  sent  as  a 
justice  of  assize  into  Norfolk  (Ibid,  iii. 
283 ;  KaL  Exch,  iii.  381),  from  which  it 
may  be  inferred  that  he  was  a  serjeant-at- 
law.  He  sat  as  second  baron  for  twelve 
months  only,  being  raised  to  the  office  of 
chief  baron  on  February  9, 1436,  and  pre- 
sided in  the  court  for  twelve  years,  till  May 
2,  1448.  Two  years  afterwards  we  find 
him  delivering  a  silver  seal  out  of  the 
treasury  to  the  new  chancellor.  Cardinal 
Kempe,  being  described  as  '  deputatum 
Jacobi  Fenys,  militis,'  the  treasurer  of 
England.  In  the  same  year  an  act  was 
passed  (Rot,  Pari  v.  196)  for  the  resump- 
tion of  all  the  king's  grants,  from  which  was 
excepted  40/.  yeany  out  of  100  marks  given 
to  him  for  life  out  of  the  ferm  of  London 
and  Middlesex,  with  a  yearly  robe,  vesture, 
and  fumire. 

Among  his  possessions  in  Hertfordshire 
was  the  manor  of  Munden,  in  right  of  which 
he  had  the  patronage  of  Howheiny  or 
iioweney  nunnery;  which,  by  a  licepce 
in  37  Heniy  VI.,  he  transferred  to  a  chantry 
be  had  founded  in  the  church  of  the  nun- 
nery, to  be  called  the  chantry  of  St.  John 
the  Baptist  of  Roweney,  for  a  perpetual 
chaplain  to  pray  for  the  souls  of  the  founders 
and  for  the  good  estate  of  the  king,  &c., 
and  of  John  Fray.     (Monast,  iv.  342.) 

There  is  no  other  evidence  of  the  part  he 
took  in  the  contest  between  the  Hoses,  ex- 
cept that  he  made  a  loan  (perhaps  a  com- 
pulsory one)  of  200/.  to  King  Edh^ard  IV. 
in  his  first  year.  (JRot.  Pari  v.  471.)  At 
the  close  of  that  year,  1461,  he  died,  and 
was  buried  in  the  church  of  St  Bartholo- 
mew the  Little  in  London.  He  left  large 
estates  in  the  counties  of  Bedford,  Essex, 
and  Hertford,  which,  as  he  had  no  sons, 
were  divided  among  his  five  daughters. 
His  wife  A^net.  or  Annes,  one  of  the 
daughters  of  Jonn  Danvers,  of  Cothorp, 
Northamptonshire,  and  sister  of  the  judges 


FRIflKENET 

Sir  Robert  and  Sir  William  Danvers,  nr- 
vived  him  till  1478.  having  once  his  dflttl 
had  two  other  husoanda — ^vii.,  John,  Lmi 
Wenlock,  who  was  killed  in  the  field  of 
Tewkesbury  in  1471 ;  and  Sir  Jdm  Sij, 
knight,  who  also  died  before  her.  (Ci/L 
Inquis.  p.  m.  iv.  309,  390;  Afonmt, ii.  w2; 
Test,  Vetust,  297,  347.) 

TBEVnrOHAX,  Ralph  de,  held  t  n* 
nonry  of  St.  Paul's,  to  which  he  was  ap- 
pointed in  1270.  Fines  were  levied  bem 
mm  as  a  justice  of  the  Common  Fkaa 
from  3  to  6  Edward  L,  1275-8.  (IhgieUs 
Orig.  21, 44)  He  died  in  15  Edward  L, 
and  one  of  his  descendants,  residinff  at  East 
Farleigh,  was  sheriff  of  Kent  in  17  Edwaid 
n.  (i\^;.  Writs,  i.  623 ;  3  Bepmi  hk 
Pec.  App.  ii.  209 ;  Abb.  PoL  Orig.  i.  279.) 

FBEYILLS,  GsoBeE,  was  a  descendantof 
a  noble  family  of  the  fourteenth  oentuxj. 
He  was  the  second  son  ofRobert  F^ville,  of 
Little  Shelford  in  Cambridgeshire,  and  Boas 
[Peyton],  his  wife. 

Cfommencing  his  legal  studies  atBanaid^ 
Inn,  he  completed  them  at  the  Middls 
Temple,  where  he  was  twice  reader,  m  155S 
and  1559.  On  the  first  occasion  his  dutiei 
were  performed  by  the  celebrated  Edmund 
Plowden,  and  the  second  occasion  is  remazk* 
able  firom  the  fact  that  on  the  3l8t  of  tbe 
previous  January  Queen  Elizabeth  had  con- 
stituted him  third  baron  of  the  Exchequer, 
thus  affording  an  evidence  that  the  desna 
of  the  coif  was  not  yet  a  necessary  quiuifi- 
cation  for  those  who  sat  on  that  b^cL  He 
became  second  baron  on  April  28,  1664^ 
and  remained  in  that  place  till  June  1, 
1579. 

He  was  elected  recorder  of  Cambridge  in 
1553,  but  was  succ^sfully  opposed  in  1550, 
when  he  was  appointed  a  baron.  (JthoL 
Cantab,  i.  407,  li.  92.) 

FBI8KSHEY,  Walter  be,  whose  name 
was  derived  from  a  parish  so  called  in  tbe 
county  of  Lincoln,  is  mentioned  as  a  oouned 
in  the  Year  Book  of  Edward  II.,  and  in  tka 
fourth  year  of  that  reign  was  summooed, 
with  six  others,  as  an  assistant  ta  the  par- 
liament then  held.  He  was  added  to  serenl 
judicial  commissions  in  his  own  county  i& 
7,  8,  and  11  Edward  U. 

He  was  constituted  a  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer on  August  6, 1320, 14  Edward  IL| 
and,  besides  being  frequently  employed aa  a 
justice  in  the  country,  ne  was  one  ra  tfaoaa 
who  were  empowered  to  pronounce  tiM 
judgment  upon  the  Mortimers  in  10  Edwaid 
II.  On  July  9, 1323,  he  was  removedfroB 
the  Exchequer  and  appointed  a  judge  of  tija 
Common  rleas.  Remaining,  as  it  aeenusii" 
dent,  in  that  court  till  the  end  <tf  iJie  ni^ 
he  was  reappointed  to  the  same  eooias 
days  after  the  accession  of  Edwud  JHmnt 
on  January  31. 1327.  On  Mmkafibv 
ing,  however,  he  was  plaoad  fai  tti  Af^ 
Bench,  where  ho  sat  tUl  Trinity  Ibmim  m 


FULTHOHPE 


28» 


Bar,  when  the  last  notice  of  him 
^  the  Year  B^ok.    (Hn-l.  WriU,  u. 

TK,  Thoxas.  From  the  time  of 
X  the  zeoords  of  the  city  of  London 
ridence  of  the  respectabili^  and 
of  the  fiunOy  of  Erowyk.  In  that 
B  oanduit  in  Newgate  Street  was 
the  charge  of  Henry  IVowyk  and 
7  Basynges;  under  JBd^nud  I.  and 
aas  and  Koffer  were  successiyely 
hs  to  the  king,  and  Simon  was 
man.  Under  Edward  HI.  one 
issessors  of  the  sahsidy  in  Mid- 
vas  Henry  de  Frowyk,  and  an- 
the  same  name  gave  lands  for 
ort  of  four  chaplains  for  the  chantry 
lapel  of '  St  Marie  Gyhalle,  LfOn- 
a  that  re^  also  John  de  Frowyk 
r  of  St  John,  of  Jerusalem  in  Ire- 
1  chancellor  of  that  kin^om,  and 
de  Frowyk  was  a  justice  of  1»- 
and  coroner  and  clerk  of  the  King's 
)f  Merchants  In  the  reign  of 
VI.  Henry  de  Frowyk  was  an  al- 
ind  twice  lord  mayor  of  London^ 
tciary  of  the  German  merchants  in 
y  :  and  in  the  seventh  year  of 
IV.  Thomas  Frowyk  was  a  mem- 
the  parliament  then  assemhled. 
w'8  St,  Albansy  334 ;  JRot,  Pari.  I 
126, 465,  iv.  303,  y.  634 ;  Paigrave's 
tand  Friar^  140;  Cal.  Bot.  Pat. 
,285;  2)eoo»'« /Mtie J2o2^  122, 128 ; 
L  Orig.  i.  198,  ii  84,  229 ;  Mail- 
mdon,  1195.) 

itter  was  probably  the  father  of  the 
tice,  who  was  bom  at  the  manor 
lersbury  in  the  parish  of  Ealing, 
ix.  Ins  mother  was  daughter  and 
lir  John  Sturgeon,  knight 
r  states  that  the  judge  died  before 
nil  forty  years  old^  so  that  he  must 
m  bom  about  the  year  1466,  and  in 
*8  Reports  his  death  is  recorded  to 
;urred  ^in  florida  juventute  0ua.' 
as  educated  at  Cambridge,  and 
the  law  in  the  Inner  Temple, 
is  society  he  was  called  to  the  de- 
eijeant  at  the  end  of  Trinity  Term 
r.  B.  9  Hemy  VII.  fo.  23  b),  and 
led  such  eminence  in  his  practice 
preferred,  on  September  30, 1502, 
iigh  office  of  chief  justice  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  when  he  received 
»ur  of  knip^hthood.  By  a  manifest 
a  entry  m  the  Year  Books  Q5 
^11.  fo.  13)  would  seem  to  fix  nis 
I  three  years  earlier,  as  he  is  sub- 
f  mentioned  as  counsel, 
oracle  of  the  law,'  as  Fuller  calls 
sided  in  his  court  only  four  years. 
g  on  October  17, 1506,  was  buriea 
torch  of  Finchley.  His  wife's  name 
aheth ;  by  her  he  left  two  dauffh- 
ween  whom  his  estate  was  divicfod. 


Elizabeth,  the  eldest,  was  married  to  the 
after-mentioned  Sir  John  Spelman. 

FBT8T0V,  RiCHABD,  had  the  custody 
from  March  7  to  May  12, 1470,  of  the  Gbeat 
Seal  durinff  the  absence  of  the  chancellor. 
Bishop  Stillington.  He  was  at  that  time  a 
clerk  or  master  in  the  Chancery,  which 
office  he  had  held  since  1450,  and  continued 
to  hold  as  late  as  1472,  12  Edward  IV. 
(Rot.  Pari  V.  227-671,  ▼!.  3.)  During  the 
aboTe  two  months  bills  in  Chancery  were 
addressed  to  him  as  keeper,  and  not  to  the 
chancellor,  although  the  latter  still  retained 
his  office  and  received  the  Seal  back  from 
Fryston's  hands  on  May  12.  {In^rod.  Pro* 
ceedings  in  Chancery,  temp.  Ehz.  vol.  i.) 

FITLBVBir,  WnxiAX  SE,  was  no  doubt 
a  native  of  the  place  of  that  name  in  Cam- 
bridgeshire. He  held  an  office  in  the  court 
in  tne  reign  of  Edward  U.,  and  was  sent 
into  that  county  and  Huntingdonshire  to 
instmct  and  assist  the  sheriiis  in  arresting 
the  Knights  Templars.  Besides  being  em- 
ployed in  special  commissions  for  the  trial 
of  offenders,  he  was  on  June  1,  1323,  16 
Edward  H.,  constituted  a  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer, and  having  fiUed  that  office  during 
the  remainder  of  the  reign,  was  r^pointed 
on  the  accession  of  Edward  HI.  llie  latest 
occurrence  of  his  name  is  in  a  commission 
dated  May  11, 1328,  2  Edward  HL  (Pari. 
Writs,  ii.  900 ;  Hot.  Pari.  ii.  25,  208.) 

FITLCOV,  Robert,  before  whom  freouent 
assizes  were  holden  from  September  1267, 
is  not  introduced  into  Dugdale's  list  until 
May  15, 1271, 55  Henry  ifl.,  when  he  was 
appointed  a  justice  of  the  Common  Fleas. 
As  he  was  clearly  raised  to  the  bench  at  the 
former  date,  it  is  not  improbable  that  he  sat  in 
the  King's  Bench  for  the  intervening  period. 

That  he  was  continued  in  his  omce  on 
the  accession  of  Edward  I.  appears  from 
fines  being  levied  before  him  till  about 
Michaelmas  in  the  second  year  of  this  reign 
(Dugdal^s  Orig.  42),  and  he  is  mentioned  as 
a  justice  itinerant  till  15  Edward  I.,  pro- 
bahly  retaining  his  position  on  the  bench. 
(jRa.  Pari  I  4, 186;  Al^.  Placit.  202.) 

FTTLTEOBPE,  HooER  DE,  was  the  second 
son  of  Alan  de  Fulthorpe,  of  Fullhorpe, 
county  Durham,  where  the  family  had  been 
settled  for  several  generations.  He  began 
his  career  as  an  advocate  about  34  Edward 
III.,  1366,  and  was  made  a  king's  Serjeant 
in  the  tmrty-ninth  year.  In  47  Edfward 
UL  he  was  one  of  the  three  commissioners 
assigned  to  hear  and  determine  the  dispute 
between  Henry  Lord  Percy  and  William 
Douglas  respecting  the  custody  of  the 
marches  of  the  kingdom  of  En^uoid  near 
Scotland.  (Issues  Mxch.  195.)  His  eleva- 
tion to  the  bench  of  the  Common  Fleas 
took  place  in  the  following  jrear,  on  No- 
vemb^  28,  1374,  and,  having  been  re- 
appointed on  the  commencement  of  the  new 
reign,  he  was  knighted  in  1385,  and  fiiMS 


284 


FULTHORPE 


were  continued  to  be  leyied  before  him  till 
Midsummer  1387.  (LeUmd'a  Collect.  185 ; 
Duadale'a  Orig.  45.) 

In  the  following  August  he  was  sum- 
moned to  the  council  at  Nottingham  with 
the  other  judges,  where,  accordmg  to  his 
own  plea,  he  was  compelled  by  the  menaces 
of  the  Archbishop  of  York,  the  Duke  of 
Ireland,  the  Earl  of  Suffolk,  and  Sir  Robert 
Tresilian,  to  put  his  seal  to  the  questions 
and  answers  already  prepared  by  tne  latter, 
declaring  the  ordinance  of  the  last  parlia- 
ment appointing  eleven  commissioners  for 
the  regulation  of  the  kingdom  to  be  illegal, 
and  denouncing  the  promoters  of  it  to  be 
guilty  of  high  treason.  He  and  his  col- 
leagues were  impeached  for  this  act  in 
the  next  parliament,  and,  notwithstanding 
the  above  excuse,  were  sentenced  to  death, 
which,  however,  was  eventually  commuted 
to  banishment  to  Ireland  for  life,  with  for- 
feiture of  all  their  propert5\  Sir  Robert 
was  confined  to  the  city  of  Dublin,  and 
three  miles  round  it,  and  he  had  an  allow- 
ance of  40/.  a  year.  {Rot.  Pari  iii.  223-244.) 

It  is  somewhat  surprising  that  the  same 
measure  of  severity  should  be  meted  to  him 
as  to  his  colleagues,  since  it  appears  by  his 
plea  that  he  immediately  communicated  the 
act  he  had  done  under  fear  of  his  life 
to  the  Earl  of  Kent,  so  that  it  was  through 
his  means  that  the  lords,  who  were  likely 
to  be  endangered  by  this  extra-judicial  opi- 
nion, had  the  earliest  opportumty  of  secur- 
ing themselves  against  the  consequences. 
It  was  perhaps,  however,  on  this  account 
that  in  tne  same  year  an  allowance  of  40/. 
per  annum  was  made  to  his  son  William  out 
of  the  forfeited  estates  during  his  father's 
life,  and  that  two  years  afterwards  many  of 
his  father's  manors  and  lands  were  granted 
to  him  on  a  fine  of  1000  marks.  {RoU  Pat. 
iu.  245 ;  Co/.  Rot,  Pat.  219.) 

It  would  seem  that  Fulthorpe  died  in  his 
exile,  probably  in  16  Richard  II.,  1392 
(Cal.  Inquis,  p.  m.  iii.  151^,  for  his  name 
was  not  included  among  tnose  who  in  the 
twentieth  year  were  recalled  from  Ireland ; 
although  he  was  mentioned  in  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  next  parliament,  which 
reversed  the  judgment  against  the  judges, 
and  decreed  the  restoration  of  their  lands 
to  such  as  were  living  and  to  the  heirs  of 
those  who  were  dead.  Though  the  bene- 
fit of  this  reversal  was  lost  by  its  repeal  in 
the  first  year  of  Henry  IV.,  the  judge's 
forfeited  lands  were  ultimately  restored  to 
his  family,  on  the  petition  of  his  son 
William  alleging  all  these  facts  in  excuse 
for  his  father.  (Rot.  Pari.  iii.  346,  358, 
393.) 

By  his  first  wife,  Sibella,  Sir  Roger  had 
the  above-mentioned  William,  who  was 
the  father  of  the  next-noticed  Thomas  de 
Pulthorpe.  His  second  wife,  also  named 
SiheUa,  was  the  daughter  and  heir  of  Sir 


FUKNELLIS 

Robert  Salebury,  and  widow  of  Richard 
RaddifFe,  of  Ordsall,  county  Lancaster. 
{Surie^B  Durham,  iii.  126.) 

FXTLTHOBFE,  Thoicas,  was  the  grand- 
son of  the  last-mentioned  Sir  Roger  Ful- 
thorpe, and  the  son  of  Sir  William,  who 
was  the  kniffht  of  the  retinue  of  King 
Henry  IV.  who,  on  the  refusal  of  Sir  Wil- 
liam GUiscoigne,  was  assigned  for  the  nonce 
to  sit  in  judgment  on  i&chbishop  Scrope. 
the  earl  marshal,  Ralph  Hastings,  aoa 
others  in  1406.  {RU.  Pari  iii.  633.)  Xo 
evidence  exists  of  Sir  W^illiam  having 
acted  as  a  judge  on  any  other  occasion,  and 
this  was  more  a  military  execution  than  a 
judicial  trial.  His  mother  was  Isabella, 
daughter  of  Ralph,  Lord  Lumley. 

He  was  made  a  serjeant-at-law  in  3 
Henry  VI.,  and  often  acted  as  a  justice  of 
assize,  until  he  was  raised  to  the  bench  of 
the  Common  Fleas,  sbortiy  before  February 
3, 1439, 17  Henry  VI.,  when  the  first  fine 
was  acknowledged  before  him.  The  last 
fine  was  in  November  1456,  36  Henry  \1. 
{Dttgdale^s  Orig.  46.^  He  died  between 
that  date  and  May  3  m  the  following  year, 
when  his  will  was  proved.  (^Surtees  Dur- 
ham, iii.  126.) 

Amonp  the  patents  of  27  Henry  VI., 
1448-9,  IS  one  declaring  that  '  pro  salute 
sua '  he  shall  not  be  compelled  *  residere ' 
in  his  office  of  judge,  and  that  he  may  take 
cognitions  whereven  they  may  be  brought 
to  him  (Cal.  Rat.  Pat.  293)  ;  but  it  does 
not  appear  whether  this  privilegjB  ^ras 
accorded  on  account  of  a  failure  in  his 
health  or  of  some  personal  danger  which 
he  apprehended. 

FUBKELLIS,  or  FTTBITAnS.  Alan  de, 
does  not  appear  to  have  acted  as  a  judge 
previous  to  1179,  25  Henry  II.,  when  the 
Kingdom  was  divided  by  the  coimdl  held 
at  Windsor  into  four  parts,  and  certain 
wise  men  were  selected  to  administer  joA- 
tice  in  each.  He  was  one  of  the  six  who 
were  specially  appointed  to  hear  the  com- 
plaints of  the  people  in  the  Curia  Regis 
Itself,  and  different  counties  were  also  ap- 
propriated to  them  for  their  circuit 

The  roll  of  1  Richard  I.,  1189,  contains 
the  entry  of  his  death.  He  had  been 
sheriff  of  Oxfordshire  from  31  to  33  Henry 
II.,  and  Cornwall  also  firom  27  to  30 
Henry  H.  The  family,  however,  appears 
to  have  been  more  specially  connected  with 
Devonshire,  as  a  Geoffirey  ae  FumeUis  was 
sheriff  of  that  county  at  the  end  of  the 
reim  of  Henry  L  and  the  beginning  of  that 
of  Henry  II.  Alan  himself  was  joined  in 
that  sheriffalty  in  21  Henry  11.,  and  Heniy 
de  Fumellis  neld  it  during  the  last  nine 
years  of  the  reign  of  Richard  I.  (Madaxs 
Exch.  i.  94, 139,  276,  828,  ii.  220 ;  JFWfer'* 
Worthies;  Pipe  RoU,  58,  105,  106,  107, 
118,  131.) 

FTTEirELLIS;  or  PTmHAXTS,  Hbnbt  DB, 


FUBKELLIS 

LatiTe  and  probaUy  the  son  of  the  last- 
ed Alan,  was  aooording  to  Fuller 
iff  of  Berooahire  during  the  last  nine 
a  of  the  reign  of  Richard  L,  though 
linfflj  only  nnder-aheriff.  (Madox^  L 
)  £i  3  John  he  aocoonta  for  Shropehire 
he  aubetitate  <^  Geoffiey  Htz-Peter, 
,  the  ahenff  of  that  county.  (BoL 
?elL  1 21.)  There  is  little  doubt,  there- 
» that  he  held  an  office  in  the  Exche- 
r,  and  it  waa  probably  in  that  capacity 
he  was  preaent  in  1  John,  when  hia 
a  appeara  among  the  juaticiera  before 
m  a  nne  waa  admowleaged. 
UXVZLLISy  or  FUBWAXTS,  Williajc 
aa  well  as  the  two  last  members  of 
family,  was  connected  with  the  court, 
in  5  Jonn  was  one  of  the  fenners  of  the 
ixime  arising  from  merchandise  in  Enff- 
L  (Madax,  L  771.)  According  to  the 
torn  of  the  time,  he  was  likewise  of  the 
rical  profession,  and  in  the  same  year  a 
al  mandate  was  directed  to  Geoffrey 
i-Peter  to  give  him  ecclesiastical  pre- 
meat  to  the  extent  of  402.  a  3rear  as 
m  as  the  other  royal  promises  had  been 
isfied.  {Bot.  de  lAberat.  68.)  He  was 
rordingly  in  possession  of  the  living  of 


OALDRIC 


285 


Bromesffrove  at  the  time  of  his  death,  in 
1286,  "mien  the  bishops  gave  it  to  the  use 
of  the  monks  of  Worcester.  {AngL  Sacroy 
i.  489.) 

Ho  was  TOesent  at  Cambridge  in  10  and 
11  John,  1208-1210,  when  fines  were 
taken  there  before  him,  in  which  he  is 
called  a  justice  itinerant 

FTJXVXLLI8,  SiMOH  db,  was  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  for  Essex  and  Hertford  in 
1234,  18  Heniy  IIL ;  but  his  name  does 
not  again  occur  in  the  same  character. 
He  probably  was  a  connection  of  the  three 
above-named  persons,  and,  like  them,  held 
some  office  connected  with  the  courts. 

FTVOHBDEV,  WiLLiAX  de,  is  men- 
tioned as  an  advocate  in  the  Year  Books 
from  24  Edward  HI.,  and  was  made  a 
king's  Serjeant  in  the  thirty-sixth  year, 
being  also  employed  as  a  justice  of  assize 
two  years  after.  On  October  29, 1365,  39 
Edward  UI.,  he  was  raised  to  the  bench  of 
the  Common  Fleas,  and  was  advanced  to 
its  head  on  April  14. 1371.  His  successor 
was  appointed  on  October  10,  1374,  but 
whether  the  vacancy  was  occasioned  by 
the  death  or  retirement  of  f^ncheden  does 
not  appear.    {CaL  Rut.  FaL  180, 186.) 


a 


0AZB8T,  Hugh  de,  was  a  justider  ap- 
onted  by  the  great  council  held  at  Wind- 
r  in  11/9,  25  Henry  IL,  when  England 
IS  arranged  into  four  judicial  divisions. 
e  miut  have  been  held  m  some  consider- 
k  estimation,  as  he  was  one  of  the  six  to 
bom  not  only  the  northern  counties  were 

nriated,  out  who  were  also  assigned 
'  the  complaints  of  the  people  in  the 
aia  Regis.  (Madox,  i.  93, 138.) 
0ALDUC.  Duffdale  erroneously  calls 
is  chancellor  Budricus,  and  places  him 
the  reign  of  William  1.,  on  the  authority 
t  charter  granting  the  church  of  St. 
iry  of  Andover  to  the  abbey  of  St. 
otence,  at  Salmur,  in  Anjou.  This 
irter,  however,  was  evidently  granted 
William  IL,  though  the  gift  of  the 
mth  had  been  previously  made  by  the 
DQueror.  That  gift  is  recited  in  these 
ras :  '  Noscant  qui  sunt  et  fiituri  sunt, 
)d  Willielmus  rex,  qui  armis  Anglicam 
"am  »ibi  aubfugavU,  dedit  Sancto  Flo- 
tio  eccleaiam  de  Andeura,'  &c.  {Mo- 
t,  vL  992)— language  which  the  Con- 
ror  himself  never  could  have  used,  but 
ch  would  be  very  natural  in  his  son. 
the  date  ia  placed  beyond  the  possi- 
ty  of  doubt  by  the  fS&ct  that  the  first 
oeas  to  the  duoier  is  Robert  Bishop 
Lincoln,  who  was  Robert  Bloet,  not 


raised  to  the  bishopric  till  some  yeara 
i^r  the  accession  of  William  U. 

'Qaldricus  Cancellarius'  is  the  second 
witness  to  this  charter,  and  he  probably 
was  the  immediate  successor  or  Robert 
Bloet  as  chancellor,  on  his  resigning  the 
Seal  when  he  was  appointed  bishop  in 
1093 ;  because  there  is  sufficient  testimony 
that  WilUam  Giffard  was  restored  to  the 
office  soon  afterwards,  and  retained  it  with- 
out interruption  to  the  end  of  the  reign. 

In  the  reign  of  Henrv  I.  there  was  a 
chancellor  described  by  the  name  of  Wal- 
dric,  and,  considering  that  the  letters  G 
and  W  were  often  indiscriminately  used  in 
spelling  Christian  names,  as  Gualterus. 
Walterus ;  Gulielmus,  Willielmus ;  and 
also  that  there  is  only  an  interval  of  ten 
years  between  them,  it  does  not  appear 
improbable  that  Waldric  was  the  same 
man.  There  is  not,  however,  sufficient 
evidence  to  warrant  a  united  notice. 

Galdric  was  one  of  the  royal  chaplains^ 
and  accompanied  Kin^  Henrjr  in  1106  to 
Normandy,  where  he  distinguished  himself 
in  the  battle  of  Tenchebrai,  fourfit  on 
September  28,  by  taking  Duke  Robert 
prisoner.  He  was  rewarded  for  his  ser- 
vices with  the  bishopric  of  Laon,  Laudu- 
nensis  (Notes  and  QtterieSy  2nd  S.  v.  46), 
not,  as  elsewhere  said,  Llandaff,  Landa- 


286 


GA5T 


veneifi  {Lmgard^  iL  115),  being  elected, 
notwithstanding  the  protest  oi  Anselm, 
•dean  of  the  cathedral.  Incurring  the 
hatred  of  the  citizens,  he  was  murdered 
in  a  field  with  seven  of  his  prebendaries. 
A  curious  account  of  his  episcopate  is  in 
book  iii.  of  Guibert  of  Nogent,  '  De  Vit& 
Su&.' 

OAHT,  Robert  de.  Philipot,  following 
Thynne,  names  a  Robert  as  chancellor  to 
Stephen,  without  any  surname.  Spelman 
Adds  the  surname,  but  neither  Dugdale  nor 
the  author  of  the '  Lives  of  the  Chancellors ' 
(1708)  mentions  him.  Madox  fii.  188), 
however,  ffives  the  copy  of  a  cnarter  of 
King  Stepnen,  the  first  witness  to  which 
ia  Robert  de  Gant,  chancellor.  Another 
witness  to  this  charter  is  William,  Earl  of 
Lincoln,  who  acquired  that  title  in  1142, 
and  died  about  1152.  'Robert  the  Chan- 
cellor '  is  also  the  first  witness  to  a  grant  of 
the  church  of  Lanseford  made  by  that  king 
to  the  Templars  (Monast  vi.  320),  which 
must  have  been  dated  between  the  years 
1139  and  1151. 

There  were  two  Roberts  de  Gant  who 
were  alive  about  this  time,  uncle  and 
nephew.  The  former  was  the  second  son 
of  Gilbert,  the  first  baron  of  that  name 
(son  of  Baldwin,  Earl  of  Flanders  or  Gant), 
by  Alice  de  Montfort ;  the  latter  was  the 
second  son  of  Walter  de  Gant,  the  second 
bai'on,  by  Matilda,  the  daughter  of  Ste- 
phen, Earl  of  Brittany  and  Richmond.  In 
the  absence  of  any  decisive  authority,  the 
presumption  to  be  drawn  from  facts  and 
dates  seems  to  be  that  the  uncle  was  the 
chancellor.  He  preceded  Becket  as  pro- 
Tost  of  Beverley  (Ibid.  1307),  and  was 
dean  of  York  in  1148.  He  was  succeeded 
in  the  deanery  in  1153,  which  was  doubt- 
less the  date  of  his  death.  The  nephew 
lived  till  1192,  and  was  the  ancestor  of 
Maurice  de  Gant,  the  next-noticed  justice 
itinerant.  {Arch.  Inst.  York;  Hoiu  Tri- 
nity, 59,  &c. ;  Duffdale's  Baron,  i.  402.J) 

OANT,  Maurice  de,  was  the  son  or  Ro- 
bert de  Berkeley  (son  of  Robert  Fitz- 
Harding),  by  Auce,  daughter  of  Robert 
de  Gant  (above  named)  and  Alice  Pa- 
ganell,  his  wife.  He  attained  his  majority 
about  9  John,  and  soon  afterwards  assumed 
his  mother^s  name,  inheriting  the  large  pos- 
«iessions  she  derived  from  her  mother.  In 
15  John  he  married  Matilda,  the  only 
child  of  Henry  D'OiUy,  baron  of  Hook- 
norton  in  Oxfordshire. 

He  was  one  of  the  principal  instigators 
of  the  contest  between  the  king  and  the 
discontented  barons,  and  thereupon  suffered 
excommunication  and  lost  all  his  lands. 
(Eot.  Pat.  162-198 ;  Hot.  Claus.  i.  232^  &c) 
On  the  accession  of  Henry  UI.  he  contmued 
to  adhere  to  Prince  Lewis  of  France,  and 
was  taken  prisoner  at  the  battle  called  the 
Fair  of  Lincobi,  on  May  20, 1217,  by  Ra- 


OABDINEB 

nulph,  Earl  of  Cboster,  in  whoee  enstody  he 
remained  for  a  year,  and  ransomed  himself 
by  the  cesnon  of  two  of  his  capital  manon, 
those  of  Leeds  and  Bindley  in  Yorkshire. 
After  the  treaty  with  Prince  Lewis,  he  was 
allowed  to  make  his  peace,  and  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  second  year  of  Henry's  reign  his 
lands  were  restored  to  him.  (ItoL  dam. 
L  368,  37a) 

His  loyalty  was  thenceforward  steadfut 
and  active.  In  9  Henry  III.  he  assisted 
William,  the  earl  marshal,  in  fortifyinf  i 
castle  in  Wales ;  and  although  he  had  tor- 
tified  his  castle  of  Beverston  in  Gloucester- 
shire vrithout  the  necessary  royal  licence, 
he  obtained  the  royal  confirmation  of  hu 
act.  And  in  August  of  the  same  year,  1227, 
he  was  nominated  one  of  the  justices  itise* 
rant  for  five  counties.    (Ibid.  iL  180,  213.) 

In  April  1230  he  embarked  with  Ejog 
Henrv  on  his  expedition  into  France,  during 
whicn,  in  the  tollowinff  August,  he  died. 
(Excarpt.  e  Rot  Fin.  i.  §01.) 

After  the  death  of  his  first  wife,  Matildi, 
he  married  Margaret^  the  widow  of  Ralpli 
de  Sumeri,  who  survived  him ;  but  he  left 
no  issue  by  either.  (Dugdale' s  Bar(m.i 
402.)      

OABDIKEB,  Stephex  (Bishop  of  Wi5- 
chester),  is  stated  to  have  been  an  illegiti- 
mate son  of  a  bishop,  who  concealed  His 
incontinence  by  makmg  one  Qardiner,  an 
under-servant  m  his  household,  many  his 
concubine,  and  thus  become  the  appsieat 
father  of  the  child  of  which  she  was  preg- 
nant.   The  actual  father  is  represented  to 
have  been  Lionel  Woodvill,  brother  of  the 
queen  of  Edward  IV.,  who  was  made  B- 
snop  of  Salisbury  in  1482,  and  died  in  1485. 
He  was  bom  at  St.  Edmund^s  Bury  in  1483. 
A  will  has  been  lately  published  (GtnL 
Mag.  May,  1855,  p.  495),  made  by  one  John 
Gardener,  a  cloth-maker  of  Bury  St  Ed- 
munds, dated  Januarv  18,  150G~7,  which 
bequeaths  some  valuable  legacies '  to  Stev^ 
my  sone,'  one  of  which  is  to  be  paid  to  hun 
'when  he  comyth  to  the  full  age  of  xxj 
years,'  and  another  'when  he  snail  take 
commensement  in  the  scole  at  the  nmye^ 
site ; '  and  it  is  inferred  with  great  proba- 
bility that  this  John  was  the  father  of  the 
lord  chancellor. 

He  was  sent  to  Trinity  Hall,  Cambridge, 
where  his  perseverance  and  attsinmentB 
secured  to  lum  a  reputation  which  he  miin- 
tained  through  life.  Proceeding  doctor  in 
both  laws  in  1520  and  1521,  he  entered  into 
holy  orders,  and  in  1525  he  was  elected 
master  of  his  college,  eventuaUy,  in  1540| 
becoming  chancellor  of  the  university.  At 
an  earlv  period,  however,  he  had  been  re- 
ceived nrst  into  the  fandly  of  the  Duke  of 
Norfolk,  and  then  into  that  of  Cardinal 
Wolsey,  who  had  made  him  his  aecretaiy. 
About  the  year  1525  the  king,  being  on  t 
visit  to  his  minister^  found  Gardiner  em- 


GABBINiai 

ojed  in  dimwing  vp  the  plan  of  an  alli- 
lee  psojeeted  bj  Woliey  with  the  long  of 
ranoi^  idiich  lie  did  in  a  manner  so  aatis- 
etarjf  supporting  his  Tiews  with  so  much 
bUitji  ana  soggwting  expedients  with  so 
inch  ease,  thai  he  at  onoe  acquired  the 
)jal  oonfidenoey  and  was  soon  admitted 
ito  the  oounciL  In  1628|  when  he  and 
'ox  were  sent  to  the  pope,  to  negotiate 
le  qaeation  as  to  the  kmg*s  diTorce  from 
iatherine  of  Axragon,  he  gratified  Henry 
J  obtaining  a  new  commission  to  Wolsej 
nd  to  Cardinal  Campeggio,  and  Wolsej 
lao  by  reconciling  the  pope  to  the  endow- 
nent  of  his  two  colleges  at  Oxford  and 
pswich  out  of  the  revenues  of  some  lesser 
Qooaateriea  which  had  been  dissolved,  as 
f  eU  as  by  his  arduous  exertions  to  secure 
lie  pontificate  for  the  cardinal  in  the  event 
if  the  pope's  expected  death. 

On  Gardiner*s  return  he  received  his  first 
neferment  in  the  Church,  that  of  the  arch- 
lesoonrj  of  Norfolk,  on  March  1, 1520.  In 
Jie following  October  his  name  'Stephen 
judvner'  appears  as  'counsellor  to  the 
king  in  the  record  of  the  delivery  up  of  the 
SfMt  8e$l  by  Cardinal  Wolsey.  (jRymer^ 
DT.  349.)  Placed  by  the  changes  which 
took  place  on  that  event  in  the  office  of 
Moetary  of  state,  it  has  been  a  question 
how  far  ne  exerted  the  great  influence  which 
lie  certainly  had  with  the  king  in  behalf  of 
Ui  &Uen  master,  and  it  is  generally  ad- 
Bitted  that  Cromwell's  conduct  was  more 
generous,  bold,  and  decided.  A  letter^  how- 
ever, from  Wolsey  to  Gardiner,  without 
entirely  attributing  to  his  interference  the 
piidon  which  the  king  had  consented  to 
flut,  seems  to  exhibit  a  firm  reliance  on 
m  'love  and  afiection'  in  the  preparation 
of  the  instrument.  (^rd^<eo2o^ui,  xviiL  57.) 

Gardiner  was  next  employed  in  inducing 
the  university  of  Cambndge  to  make  a  de- 
daiation  affirming  the  prohibition  by  the 
dirine  and  natural  law  for  a  brother  to 
marry  the  relict  of  his  deceased  brother. 
This  he  and  his  coadjutor  Fox,  after  some 
tronUe,  contrived  by  management  to  obtain 
(Lmgardy  vL  386) ;  and  the  king  was  not 
long  in  rewarding  both.  Gardiner  received 
the  archdeaconry  of  Leicester  on  March  31, 
1^1,  and  on  the  27th  of  November  in  the 
Moie  year  he  was  consecrated  Buhop  of 
Winchester,  the  patent  for  the  restitution 
)f  the  temporahties,  dated  December  5, 
leseribing  bun  as  '  our  principal  secretary.' 
I^^f  xiv.  429.) 

Thron^iout  the  remainder  of  Henry's 
agn  Gardiner  devoted  himself  to  the  king's 
irvice,  and  until  towards  its  close  succeeded 
1  preserving  his  ascendency  in  the  royal 
Doncila.  1^  he  effidcted  by  accommoda- 
ng  himself  to  Hemy's  humours,  whatever 
bey  might  be.  When  the  king's  marriage 
ras  pronoonced  null  and  void,  he  went  as 
*     to  the  French  king.    Bonner, 


GABDINKR 


287 


who  was  ioined  in  the  embassy,  complainetl 
loudly  of  his  being  obstinate  and  self-willed, 
and  of  his  extreme  jealousy  of  any  inter- 
ference in  the  management  of  tiie  business, 
or  of  any  supj^osed  assumption  of  an  equality 
of  rank.  This  spirit  he  soon  after  exhibited 
toward  his  ecclesiastical  superior.  Arch- 
bishop Crammer,  b^  raising  every  obstacle 
against  the  visitation  which  that  prelate 

E reposed  to  make  in  his  diocese.  Lake  all 
is  brethren  of  the  episcopal  bench,  he  was 
compelled  by  the  new  statute  to  swear  to 
the  King's  supremacy,  which  he  not  only 
appeared  to  do  with  the  ffreatest  readiness, 
but  wrote  strongly  and  ably  in  its  support^ 
although  at  the  same  time  he  was  devotedly 
attached  to  the  superstitious  doctrines  of 
the  Romish  Churcn.  The  king,  though 
professing  the  same  sentiments,  was  still 
desirous  of  introducing  some  reforms,  and 
of  permitting  the  Scriptures  to  be  read  in 
the  vulgar  tongue,  but  Gardiner  vigorously 
opposed  every  step  taken  to  promote  the 
Keformation.  *He  stirred  up  the  king*s 
zeal  against  those  who  denied  uie  Heal  Pre- 
sence, and  seems  to  be  justly  chargeable 
with  bringing  Lambert  and  others  to  the 
stake  for  retusing  to  adopt  Uie  doctrine  ; 
he  procured,  or  at  least  promoted,  the  en- 
actment of  the  bloody  statute  of  the  Six 
Articles,  under  the  cruel  provisions  of  which 
so  many  suffered ;  and  he  plotted  to  get  rid 
of  Archbishop  Cranmer,  ^om  he  hated  as 
the  great  supporter  of  the  Protestant  party, 
by  charges  ot  on  heretical  nature.  But  in 
the  latter  he  failed ;  the  king  saw  through 
his  malevolent  design,  and  urom  that  mo- 
ment ceased  to  have  confidence  in  him.  He 
did  not  improve  the  impression  on  the  royal 
mind  by  the  servile  submission  and  ac- 
knowledgment which  he  made  in  anticipa- 
tion of  a  charge  against  himself  of  doubtmg 
the  king's  supremacy,  although  he  obtainea 
his  pardon  by  an  abject  promise  to  reform 
his  opinion.  But  he  put  a  finishing  stroke 
to  the  king's  alienation  from  him  by  com- 
bining with  Lord  Wriothedey  in  the  en- 
deavour to  implicate  Queen  Catherine  Parr 
in  reference  to  these  religious  questions. 
From  that  time  Henry  not  only  withdrew 
all  show  of  favour  to  him,  but  his  name 
was  struck  out  of  the  king's  wiU,  of  which 
he  had  before  been  appointed  one  of  the 
executors.  He  was  thus  exduded  from  the 
council  of  regency. 

Strongly  opposing  all  the  means  then 
taken  to  a<ivance  the  Reformation,  he  was 
committed  to  the  Fleet  in  September  1547, 
resisting  all  the  attempts  of  Archbishop 
Cranmer  to  bring  him  round  to  the  new 
opinions.  From  this  imprisonment  he  was 
released,  in  consequence  of  the  general 
pardon  granted  at  the  close  of  the  session, 
on  December  24.  In  the  following  June, 
however,  being  commanded  to  preach  be- 
fore the  king,  his  sermon  was  so  uttle  satis- 


288 


GABDINEB 


factory  that  he  was  sent  to  the  Tower  on 
the  next  day.  The  removal  of  the  lord 
protector,  whom  he  looked  on  as  his  great 
enemy,  made  no  change  in  his  state,  and  at 
the  end  of  two  years  he  was  subjected  to  a 
sort  of  examination,  and  offered  his  freedom 
if  he  would  subscribe  to  certain  articles  sub- 
mitted to  him.  This  he  declined  to  do 
until  he  was  discharged  from  his  imprison- 
ment. A  special  commission  was  then  a,^- 
pointed  to  tir  him,  when,  persisting  in  his 
refusal,  his  bishopric  was  sequestered,  but 
three  months  were  given  him  for  considera- 
tion, at  the  end  of  which  he  was  brought 
before  a  court  of  delegates,  over  which 
Archbishop  Cranmer  presided,  and  on 
February  14,  1561,  he  was  deprived  for 
disobedience  and  contempt  of  the  king's 
authority.  His  contemptuous  behaviour 
towards  the  court  led  to  an  increased  rigour 
in  his  confinement,  which  continued  till 
the  end  of  the  reign. 

The  accession  of  Queen  Mary  opened  a 
brighter  prospect  to  llie  determined  prelate,    powerful  ecclesiastic  were  not  successful 


GARLAND 

to  say  that  several  Protestant  bishopB  were* 
deprived,  others  compelled  to  fly  the  coun- 
try, the  prisons  were  filled  to  oyerflowing, 
and  after  a  short  time  innumerable  Tictimf^ 
suffered  at  the  stake.    With  every  desire- 
to  give  an  impartial  conaideratioii  to  the- 
arfi^ments  of  tnose  writers  who  attempt  to 
palliate  his  conduct,  it  is  impoaeible  to  ac- 
quit Gardiner  of  originating  l}ie  laws  whidi 
authorised  these  cruel  measures,  and  of 
canring  them  into  effect  with  their  ex- 
tremest  severity,  and  conscientious  as  some 
may  think  him  in  his  zeal  for  the  and^t 
Church,  none  but  the  most  bigoted  can 
justify  the  means  he  adopted  for  its  restora- 
tion.     That  his  old  enemy,   Archbishop 
Cranmer,  who  had  already  oeen  tried,  did 
not  suffer  at  the  same  time  vnth  Bi^ops 
Hidley  and  Latimer,  has  been  ascribed  to 
his  desire  to  succeed  to  the  archbishopric,, 
with  which  he  knew  that  Cardinal  Pole 
would  be  immediately  invested  if  his  in- 
trigues in  the  court  of  Rome  against  thst 


On  her  public  entry  into  the  Tower  on 
August  3,  1553,  he  made  a  congratulatory 
speech  in  the  name  of  himself  and  his 
fellow-prisoners,  among  whom  were  the 
Duke  of  Norfolk,  the  Duchess  of  Somerset, 
the  Lord  Courtney,  and  Bishop  Tunstall. 
The  Queen,  in  releasing  them  all,  is  said  to 
have  kissed  them,  and  to  have  called  them 
*  her  prisoners.'  Thus,  aft«r  a  confinement 
of  more  than  five  years,  was  he  restored  to 
liberty.  He  was  immediately  admitted 
to  a  neat  in  council,  and  within  five  days 
he  exercised  his  episcopal  functions,  per- 
forming in  the  queen's  presence  the  obse- 
quies of  the  late  king.  On  the  23rd  of 
tnat  month  the  Great  Seal  was  delivered  to 
him  as  chancellor,  but  it  was  not  till  Sep- 
tember 21  that  his  patent  was  dated.  He 
performed  the  ceremony  of  coronation  *on 
October  1,  opened  the  first  parliament  of 
the  reign  four  days  afterwards,  and  from 
that  time  during  the  remainder  of  his  life 
acted  as  Mary's  chief  adviser  in  all  civil 
matters,  and,  until  the  arrival  of  Cardinal 
Pole  in  November  1554,  in  the  affairs  of  the 
Church  also. 

The  first  difficulty  which  he  had  to  en- 
counter was  the  necessary  confirmation  of 
the  marriage  of  Henry  Vlll.  with  Catherine 
of  Arragon,  in  order  to  remove  the  illen- 
timation  of  Queen  Mary.  Here,  though  he 
hftd  been  one  of  the  pnncipal  promoters  of 
the  divorce,  by  his  contrivance  the  whole 
blame  was  thrown  on  Archbishop  Cranmer. 
The  repeal  of  the  laws  passed  m  the  last 
reign  with  regard  to  religion,  and  the  re- 
storation of  all  the  ancient  Romish  practices, 
were  not  delayed,  but  the  measures  adopted 
for  this  purpose,  and  the  cruel  consequences 
with  which  all  opponents  were  visited,  be- 
long rather  to  the  nistory  of  the  period  than 
to  the  biography  of  an  individual.  Suffice  it 


Whatever  were  his  motives  for  delaying  tlie 
execution,  it  is  difficult  to  ascribe  them  to 
merciful  connderations,  since  these  did  not 
operate    to    save    the    two  other  Oxford 
martyrs.      During  the  interval,  however, 
between    the    archbishop^s  trial  and  the 
execution  of  his  sentence,  Gardiner,  after 
opening  the   parliament    on   October  21, 
1555,  was  seized  with  a  mortal  disease,  the 
nature  of  which  has  been  variously  repre- 
sented, of  which  he  died  at  Whitenall,  oi 
November  12,  terminating  a  short  ministtj 
of  two  years  and  less  tnan  three  month* 
more  disreputable  than  any  other  of  similar 
extent  recorded  in  the  annals  of  the  king- 
dom.     He    was   buried    in    Winchester 
Cathedral. 

Of  Gardiner's  learning  there  can  be  no 
doubt;  but  even  in  his  contest  with  Sir 
John  Cheke  on  the  pronunciation  of  the 
Greek  language  he  exnibited  the  obstinftcy 
and  tyranny  of  his  disposition,  visiting  wita 
punishment  those  who  adopted  the  refor- 
mation proposed  by  his  antagonist  With 
very  qmck  parts  and  great  acuteness  of 
mind,  his  early  initiation  into  business 
highly  qualified  him  for  a  statesman,  and 
the  measures  which  he  took  on  the  mar- 
riage of  Queen  Mary  to  prevent  foreicn 
interference  with  the  government  of  the 
kingdom  are  sufficient  proo&  of  his  abili- 
ties as  a  politician. 

His  work  *  De  Vera  ObedientiA,*  writtea 
against  the  Papal  supremacy,  he  was  after- 
wards obliged  to  retract  by  another  called 
^  Palinodia  Dicti  Libri.'  Besides  these  he 
published  several  other  controversial  pieces; 
and  many  of  his  sermons  have  been  pre- 
served. (Oodtoin,  236;  State  Triak,  i. 
551 ;  Brit,  Biog,  ii.  202 ;  Itoberteons  Hey- 
lin:  Lingard;  Burnet  \  &c.) 

GABLAKD,  John  de,  waa  one  of  the  cus- 


OABBOW 

kodct  of  tlie  IriahoDrie  of  'Wincheater  duiing 
li  Taomcjr  in  118D.  (AmJ2o2^/S.)  There 
•  no  douDt,  thezeforey  tnat  he  held  some 
Am  in  iha  oonrt  In  8  Richard  I.,  1196, 
le  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant,  setting  the 
aDage  fSor  the  united  counties  of  Essex  and 
fo&d.    {Madox,  LTOL) 

ftABBOW,  WiLLiAX,  one  of  the  most 
foocesBfol  adTocates  of  his  day,  was  horn 
n  Ann  13,  1760,  at  Monken-Hadley  in 
JCddbsex,  where  his  father,  the  Kev. 
Dayid  Gwnrow,  kept  a  school,  in  which 
ns  son  ncelTed  the  whole  of  his  education. 
kt  fifteen  he  was  articled  to  Mr.  South- 
suse,  a  respectable  attcnney  residing  in 
IClk  Stree^  Cheapside,  where  he  showed 
»  much  ahUity  and  auidkneas  that  he  was 
rtroogly  recommended  hy  his  master  to  aim 
it  the  higher  branch  of  the  law.  His 
Uends  consenting,  he  was  entered  at 
linooln's  Inn  in  1778,  and  was  called  to 
die  bar  on  November  20,  1783. 

He  attended  the  debating  societies  then 

tafaihlished  in  the  metropobi^  and  at  Coach- 

mikerB*  Hall  and  other  similar  schools  he 

aoon  became  a  powerful  debater,  and  his 

ipeeehes  were  so  admired  for  tiieir  elo- 

mnde  and  ingenuity  that  his  pesence  at 

'oeni  was  alwa3rs  welcomed.    He  assumed 

ihe  goivn,  therefore,  with  a  certain  pres- 

"^  which  immediately  secured  him  some 

ImiesB  at  the  Old  Bailey,  where,  so  early 

Mtiie  January  after  he  was  called,  he  was 

fortoBate  enough  so  to  distinguish  himself 

V  to  establish  a  sure  foundation  for  his 

inoze  saccess.    A  deyer  swindler,  Henry 

Aiddes,  was  indicted  for  stealinff  a  bill  of 

odumge,  which  he  had  obtained  under  the 

Vnmise  of  getting  it  discounted ;  instead  of , 

oobg  which  he  had  converted  it  to  his  own  I 

ue.    £Bs  counsel  contended  confidentiy 

tjttt  this  was  no  felony,  and  it  was  con- 

>dered  a  Terr  doubtful  point;  but  the 

WenesB  of  Mr.  Garrow's  reply,  and  the 

nidiDess  and  cogency  of  his  arguments,  so 

^  satisfied  the  judge  that  he  left  the 

JttBtion  of  fact  to  the  jury,  who  convicted 

«e delinquent;  and  on  a  reference  to  the 

Wtb  Judges,  they  coincided  with  Gar- 

^i  view  of  the  law. 

His  reputation  thus  established,  his  busi- 

j^  rapidly  increased,  not  only  in  criminal 

ki  in  civil  cases.    In  the  general  election 

2  the  same  year  he  was  fully  employed. 

-nnt,  he  was  chosen  assessor  to  the  sheriff 

^  Hertford,  in  the  county  election ;  next, 

N  was  retained  in  the  London  scrutiny  for 

Hr.  Sawbridffe;    and  then  he    acted   as 

^ouisel  for  mi.  Fox  in  the  famous  West- 

^iiDster   scrutiny.     In   reference    to   the 

liter,  when  he  was  suddenly  called  upon 

0  address  the  House  of  Commons,  nis 

topnmeditated  speech  was  so  forcible  and 

uoinoua  that  it  excited  the  applause,  and 

le  reeeived  the  coospratulations,  of  even  the 

pponig  party.    All  this  occurred  in  the 


OABROW 


289 


first  year  after  his  call  to  the  bar.  He  not 
only  acquired  the  undisputed  lead  in  the 
crown  courts,  but  was  also  so  much  em- 
ployed, both  on  the  Home  Circuit  and  in 
Westminster  Hall^  that  in  April  1703  he 
was  appointed  a  king's  counseL 

His  services  were  perpetually  engaged  in 
honourable  contest  witn  the  phalanx  of 
eminent  men  who,  during  the  twenty- 
four  years  that  he  remained  at  the  bar 
with  a  silk  gown,  graced  the  courts  in 
London  and  the  count^y^  the  principal  of 
whom  were  Erskine,  Gibbs,  ana  Best.  He 
was  employed  by  the  government  in  most 
of  the  state  trials  occurring  during  tJiat 
period;  and  in  many  of  uiem  the  sole 
management  was  entrusted  to  him.  (State 
Trialsy  xxiL-xxxi.)  In  June  1812  he  was 
appointed  solicitor-general,  and  knighted, 
having  six  years  previously  held  the  ofiice 
of  attorney-general  to  the  Prince  of  Wales, 
before  he  was  regent.  In  the  next  year  he 
was  raised  to  the  same  office  as  the  king's 
attorney,  and  further  ]^romoted  to  the  chief 
justicesnip  of  Chester  in  March  1814. 

He  entered  parliament  in  1805,  and  re- 
presented successively  Gatton,  Collington, 
and  Eye ;  but  his  senatorial  harangues  were 
not  distinguished  with  more  success  than  is 
usually  attributed  to  members  of  the  legal 
profession. 

After  performing  the  duties  of  attorney- 
general  tor  four  years  with  exemplary  for- 
bearance and  ffenenJ  commendation,  he 
relieved  himself  from  its  responsibility  by 
accepting  on  May  6,  1817,  a  seat  on  the 
bencn  of  the  Excheauer.  For  nearly  fifteen 
years  he  exercised  the  functions  of  a  judge, 
when,  prompted  by  the  advance  of  age  and 
infirmity,  he  retireoi  in  February  1832,  re- 
ceiving an  honourable  reward  K>r  his  ser- 
vices Dv  being  made  a  privy  counsellor. 
He  Uvea  nearly  eight  years  afterwards,  and 
died  on  September  24,  1840,  at  his  house 
at  Pegwell  Bay,  near  Ramsgate,  at  the  age 
of  eighty. 

The  influx  of  business  with  which  he 
had  to  cope  from  the  very  commencement 
of  his  career,  although  it  made  him  an 
adept  in  the  practice  of  the  courts  and  in 
the  superficial  questions  of  law,  deprived 
him  01  the  opportunity  of  studying  the 
abstruser  points.  So  conscious  was  ne  of 
his  deficiency  in  the  knowledge  of  the  law 
of  real  property  that  he  always  in  cases 
which  touched  that  branch  relied  on  the 
intelligence  of  his  junior. 

As  a  judge  his  former  experience  gave 
him  considerable  advantages  in  the  ordinary 
cases  of  Nisi  Prius,  by  enabling  him  at 
once  to  pierce  into  the  real  merits  of  the 

guestion,  and  to  detect  any  evasion  or  am- 
iguity,  and  in  Banco  he  had  the  discretion 
not  to  tto  beyond  the  limits  of  his  own  learn- 
ing.  He  maintained  an  mtimate  mendsnip 
^th  those  who  were  his  forensic  antago- 

u 


290 


GAKTON 


nists  and  rivals,  and  he  closed  his  long  life 
without  a  single  stain  on  his  moral  cha- 
racter, and  with  the  respect  and  deep  af- 
fection of  all  who  were  closely  connected 
with  him. 

By  his  wife,  whom  he  lost  in  1808|  he 
had  two  children — a  son,  Dr.  David  (Har- 
row, who  died  rector  of  East  Bamet ;  and  a 
daughter,  Eliza,  who  married  the  eldest 
son  of  the  well-known  Dr.  Lettsom. 

OABTOK,  Thomas  de,  was  a  memher  of 
the  clerical  profession,  and  appointed  in  18 
Edward  IE.  to  assist  the  bishops  in  removing 
foreign  priests.  Under  Edwiurd  III.  he  held 
the  offices  of  comptroller  of  the  king's 
household  and  keeper  of  the  wardrobe,  and 
on  October  10,  ISSl,  6  Edward  IIL,  he 
was  placed  on  the  bench  of  the  Exchequer, 
as  second  baron.  (N,  Fcedera,  ii.  574, 
7G9, 786.) 

aASCOIOKE,  William,  is  the  first  chief 
justice  of  whom  we  have  any  personal 
anecdotes,  and  the  incidents  related  of 
him  are  not  only  creditable  to  himself  as 
an  individual,  but  afford  also  the  first  ex- 
ample of  that  honestv,  independence,  and 
courage  which  shoula  characterise  the  ju- 
dicial bench,  and  of  which  in  our  own  days 
we  have  so  much  reason  to  be  proud;  but  of 
him  we  know^  and  we  can  expect  to  know, 
but  litUe.  until  he  became  cnief  justice  of 
the  King  s  Bench. 

The  family  of  Gascoigne,  the  derivation 
of  which  IB  sufficiently  shown  in  the  name, 
is  very  ancient  no  less  than  seven  succes- 
sive Williams  oeing  recorded  in  the  pedi- 
gree before  the  chic?  justice.  The  third  of 
these  is  described  as  of  Harewood,  near 
Leeds,  in  Yorkshire,  whose  son  acquired 
Gawthorp  in  the  same  parish  by  marrying 
the  heiress  of  that  manor.  There  the  judge's 
&ther  was  settled,  and  there  the  judge  was 
bom,  his  mother  being  Agnes,  daughter  and 
coheir  of  Mr.  Nicholas  Franke. 

In  which  of  the  le^al  seminaries  he 
received  his  instruction  it  is  impossible  to 
determine,  because  the  records  of  none  of 
them  extend  to  so  ancient  a  date.  Fuller 
jsays  he  was  of  the  Inner  Temple,  but  ad- 
duces no  authority ;  and  in  the  MS.  account 
of  Gray's  Inn,  written  in  the  seventeenth 
century,  his  name  stands  among  the  undated 
and  supposed  readers  of  that  society. 

He  was  old  enough  in  48  Edward  m., 
1374,  to  be  mentioned  as  an  advocate  in 
the  Year  Books,  and  in  21  Richard  II., 
1997,  he  was  appointed  one  of  the  king's  ser- 
jeante.  In  139o  he  was  among  the  ^enty 
attorneys  assigned  for  different  courts  or 
jurisdictions  by  Henry  of  Lancaster,  Duke 
of  Hereford  (Ayrner,  viii.  49),  on  his  banish- 
ment from  the  kingdom  in  consequence  of 
the  quarrel  with  the  Duke  of  Norfolk ;  but 
on  uie  death  of  Henry's  father,  John  of 
Oaunt,  four  months  afterwards,  the  infift- 
taated  mooareh.  seized  the  duke's  lands,  not- 


GASCOIGNS 

withstanding  his  declaration  that  Heory'ft 
succession  to  his  inheritance  should  not  oe 
interrupted. 

Henry  IV.  had  not  been  fourteen  months 
upon  the  throne  before  he  rewarded  Gas- 
coigne for  his  services,  by  constituting  him 
chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench  on  No- 
vember 15, 1400.  All  writers  acknowledge 
his  legal  merit  in  the  ordinary  execution 
of  his  office,  and  it  was  not  long  before  he 
had  occasion  to  exhibit  the  higher  charac- 
teristics of  his  nature.  In  1^5  the  army 
raised  by  Richard  Scrope,  Ajnchbishop  oi 
York,  and  Thomas  Mowbray,  earl  mar- 
shal, having  been  dispersed  1^  the  capture 
of  the  two  leaders,  they  were  taken  to  the 
royal  pr^ence  at  Bbhop's  Thorpe,  the 
pnmate's  palace,  when  the  king  com- 
manded the  chief  justice  to  pronounce  on 
them  the  sentence  of  death.  Gascoifne 
resolutely  refused  to  obey,  sayinff,  *  Neiuer 
you,  mj  lord,  nor  any  of  your  subjecta,can, 
accordmg  to  the  law  of  the  realm,  aentenee 
any  prelate  to  death;  and  the  earl  has  a  right 
to  be  tried  by  his  peers.'  The  king,  how- 
ever, was  not  to  be  stopped,  and  he  found  t 
willmg  instrument  in  a  knight  of  Yotk- 
shire,  named  Sir  William  jPulthorp&  in 
no  way  himself  connected  with  the  Isw. 
{Scrope  and  Grosvenor  JRoUf  ii.  124.) 

Henry  on  reflection  could  not  help  ^• 
proving  his  judge's  boldness,  and,  so  nr 
m)m  withdrawing  his  confidence  from  hinu 
seems  to  have  been  in  the  familiar  habit  or 

Cutting  supposed  cases  for  his  opimoot 
'he  history  of  Gkiscoi^e's  oommittiBg 
Prince  Henry  to  prison  is  told  in  vanGoi 
ways.  The  most  authentic  seems  to  l» 
that  the  prince,  on  the  arraignment  d  osa 
of  his  servants  for  felony  before  the  ehki 
justice,  imperiously  demanded  his  release^ 
and  having  been  refused,  with  a  rebuke  ftr 
his  inter&rence,  had  angrily  drawn  lus 
sword  on  the  judge.  His  passion  was  in- 
stantly checked  by  the  digmfied  demeaftoar 
of  Gascoigne,  who  calm^  called  on  him 
to  remember  himself,  remmded  him  of  tlie 
position  in  which  he  would  one  day  stand, 
and  committed  him  to  prison  for  his  con- 
tempt and  disobedience.  The  prince  tub- 
mitted  at  once  and  went  away  m  cuitodir; 
and  when  the  incident  was  mated  to  die 
king,  he  exclaimed,  '  How  much  am  I 
bound  to  your  infinite  goodneae^  0  merci^ 
fill  GKkL,  for  having  ^ven  me  a  judffe  who 
feareth  not  to  adnumster  justice,  aira  a  sob 
who  can  thus  nobly  subnut  to  it ! ' 

Almost  all  of  Gascoinie's  biogiapkeit 
have  fixed  his  death  to  have  taken  pUoe 
on  December  17, 1412, 14  Heniy  IV«  and 
consequently  have  determined  uiat  Slak- 
speare  s  introduction  of  him,  aa  chief  jus- 
tice to  Henry  v.,  is  a  poetic  fiction  invented 
for  dramatic  effect.  Whatever  entknii- 
asm  we  may  indulge  for  the  works  of  oar 
immortal  bard,  it  cannot  extend  to  our 


OASC0iaN£ 

aeoefpting  them  as  aathoritj  for  historical 
facte,  and  nnquestionabl j  in  a  trial  between 
him  and  the  biogiaphen  we  should  feel 
bound  in  the  absence  of  other  evidence  to 
give  a  Todict  fSor  the  latter.  But  in  this 
case  there  are  materials  which  render  it 
mmeoeflBaiT  to  rely  whoUj  on  either,  and 
which  enable  us  to  arrive  with  a  clearer 
judgment  at  the  truth.  The  result  of 
the  investigalion  proves  that  both  are 
wrong — the  biographers  wholly,  the  poet 
pardaUy. 

The  error  of  the  bio^phers  in  fixing 
the  death  of  Gascoigne  m  December  1412 
is  manifest  in  many  ways. 

In  the  first  place,  he  is  the  judge  in  a 
case  reported  m  February  1418.  (F.  B, 
14  Heiiry  IV.  fo.  19.)  Secondly,  he  was 
summoned  to  the  firstparliament  of  Henry 
V.  in  Easter  1413.  Tnirdly,  on  the  Issue 
EoUs  of  the  same  vear  the  sum  of  79/. 
3<.  (UdL  is  stated  to  have  been  paid  to  him 
OQ  July  7  for  his  salary  and  additional 
ttmoity.  (Devon's  Issue  BoUy  322.)  And 
lastly,  nis  will  has  been  found  in  the  eccle- 
sitstical  court  at  York,  the  date  being  on 
Ileoember  15, 1419,  and  the  probate  being 
granted  on  the  23rd  of  the  same  month. 

Thus  therefore  the  poet  correctly  intro- 
duces Gascoigne  as  ahve  on  the  accesaon 
of  Hemry  V. ;  but  we  fear  we  must  convict 
him  of  fiilsifying  histoiy  in  his  desire  to 
^ahanoe  the  character  of  his  hero,  when  he 
inakee  Henry  with  a  noble  generosity  re- 
iiiTeet  the  inflexible  magistrate  with  '  the 
^lir^  and  the  sword ; '  nor  can  we  acauit 
Loid  Campbell  of  a  similar  charge,  wnen 
lie  aaaerta  that  he  can  '  prove  to  demonstra- 
tion  tiiat  Sir  William  Gascoiffne   *  *  * 
Actually  filled  the  office  of  chief  justice  of 
the  King's  Bench  under  Henry  Y.' 

The  only  evidence  that  has  the  slightest 
tendency  to  support  this  view  is  the  sum- 
r^cmm  to  pariiament,  which  was  dated  March 
^,  \4k\if  the  day  after  the  accession,  in 
"^hiefa  he  is  called  'chief  justice  of  our 
lord  the  king.'  This  single  fiact,  however, 
Mxw^m  little  assistance  to  the  argument; 
tocanse  the  title  of  chief  justice  would 
l>e  pwperly  applied  to  him  untU  he  was 
^etneliy  su^wrseded,  and  because  the  king, 
liaviztf  obviously  had  no  more  time  thim 
to  or&r  a  parliament  to  be  summoned,  the 
'writs  of  summons  would  be  naturidly 
^ddreand^to  those  peers,  judges,  and  others 
>vho  were  sommoned  to  uie  preceding 
'pariiamcnt,  and  consequently  to  the  judi- 
cial olBoen  existing  at  the  demise  of  the 
lale  king.  But  the  slight  presumption 
tbnaded  upon  the  fact  is  invalidatea  by 
unflMffous  contrary  prooft. 

Tins  in  the  parliament  held  by  virtue 
^f  that  summons,  which  commenced  on 
>fay  15,  Gasooigne  not  only  was  not  pre- 
eent,  hat  his  usual  place  among  the  triers 
^   petitioBi  WM  filed   by  S&  William 


GASCOIGNE 


291 


Hankford,  who,  though  previously  only  a 
puisne  judge  of  the  Common  Fleas,  is 
named  in  precedence  of  Sir  William  Thim- 
ing,  the  chief  justice  of  that  court  (Bat. 
Pari  iv.  4.) 

Again,  although  Dugdale  defers  Hank- 
ford's  elevation  to  the  chief  justiceship  for 
more  than  ten  months  from  the  accession, 
and  although  he  was  not  included  in  the 
new  patents  to  the  judges  of  the  Common 
Pleas  which  were  issued  on  May  2,  a  day 
or  two  before  the  opening  of  Easter  Term 

1413,  yet  in  several  cases  reported  in  the 
Year  Books,  not  only  of  that  term  but  of 
Trinity  also,  we  find  him,  not  indeed  act- 
ing in  the  Common  Pleas,  but  presiding  in 
the  King's  Bench. 

Even  if  these  two  facts  were  not  suffi- 
cient to  remove  any  doubt  u^n  the  ques- 
tion, the  two  records  to  which  reference 
has  been  already  made  contain  such  con- 
clusive proof  that  Sir  William  Gascoigne 
was  not  reappointed  to  his  place  as  cmef 
justice  that  it  seems  impossible  that  any 
one  can  maintain  the  contrary. 

In  one  of  them,  the  payment  on  the 
Issue  Roll  of  July  1418,  (Gascoigne  is  called 
'  late  chief  justice  of  the  Bench  of  Lord 
Henry,  father  of  the  present  king  J 

In  the  other,  the  inscription  on  his 
monument  in  Harewood  Church  in  York- 
shire in  1419,  he  is  described  as  ^mqper 
capit.  justic.  de  Banco  Hen.  nt^fer  regis 
Anglin  quarti' 

Can  it  be  for  a  moment  supposed  that  in 
either  of  these  records  he  would  have  been 
docked  of  his  title  had  he  ever  been  chief 
justice  of  the  reigning  king  P 

StiU,  however,  the  difficulty  remained 
arising  from  Dugdale's  date  of  Hankford's 
appointment  as  chief  justice;  but  this 
has  been  removed  by  reference  to  the 
roU  itself.  It  turns  out,  on  inspection, 
that  the  date,  instead  of  bein^  Januarv  29, 

1414,  as  stated  by  Dugdale,  is  March  29, 

1413,  just  eight*  days  after  King  Henir's 
accession,  and  ten  days  previous  to  his 
coronation. 

The  peculiar  period  chosen  for  this  act, 
and  its  precipitancy  in  contrast  with  the 
delay  in  issumg  the  new  patents  to  the 
other  judges,  seem  strongly  to  show  that 
it  resulted  from  the  kinj^s  peremptory 
mandate  rather  than  (Gascoigne  s  personal 
choice,  and  conseauently  to  raise  a  sus- 
picion that  the  indignity  he  had  laid  upon 
the  prince  was  not '  washed  in  Lethe,  and 
forgotten  *  by  the  kinff. 

A  royal  warrant  dated  November  28, 

1414,  twenty  months  after  his  dismissal, 
granting  him  four  bucks  and  four  does 
yearly  during  his  life,  out  of  the  forest  of 
Pontefract  (Tvler's  Henry  V,  i.  379),  was 
a  favour  too  long  retarded  to  warrant  a 
more  lenient  cons&uction  of  the  conduct  o( 
the  king. 

tj2 


292 


GASELEE 


This  great  judge  was  buried  in  the  parish 
church  of  Huewood^  where  the  monument 
bean  his  effigy  in  judicial  robes. 

He  married  first  Elizabeth,  daughter 
and  heir  of  Alexander  Mowbray,  of  lurth- 
ington,  Esq. :  and  secondly,  Joan,  daugh- 
ter of  Sir  William  Pickering,  and  relict  of 
Sir  Henry  Greystock,  baron  of  the  Exche- 
quer. By  both  he  had  issue.  The  eldest 
son  by  his  first  was  named  William,  and 
as  there  were  seven  successive  Williams 
before  the  judge,  so  also  were  there  seven 
after  him. 

The  baronetcy  of  Gascoigne  of  Bambow 
was  mnted  by  Charles  L  to  a  descendant 
of  Nicholas,  a  youn^r  brother  of  the 
judge,  and  became  extmct  in  1810.  ( Wot^ 
ton's  Baronet,  v.  834 ;  Testam,  Ebor.  p.  i. 
410.) 

0A8ELSE,  Stephen,  was  the  son  of  an 
eminent  surgeon  at  Portsmouth,  where  he 
was  bom  in  1762.  He  chose  the  legal 
profession  and  entered  the  society  of  Gray's 
Inn,  became  a  pupil  of  Sir  Vicary  Gibbs, 
and  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1?93.  He 
joined  the  Western  Circuit,  and  was  so  well 
respected  as  a  careful  and  well-informed 
jumor  that  when,  after  six-and-twenty 
years'  practice,  he  was  made  a  king's  coun- 
sel in  1819,  his  professional  income  was 
probably  dimimsned.  But  though  not 
gifted  with  those  oratorical  powers  which 
were  likely  to  gain  him  employment  as  a 
leader,  his  deserved  reputation  for  legal 
knowledge  soon  recommended  him  to  a 
judge's  place.  Accordingly  he  was  selected 
on  July  1,  1824,  to  supply  a  vacancy  in 
the  Common  Pleas,  and  was  knighted.  In 
that  court  he  sat  for  nearly  fourteen  years, 
with  the  character  of  a  painstaking  and 
upright  judge,  and  in  his  private  capacity 
as  a  worthy  and  benevolent  man.  H!e 
resigned  his  place  at  the  end  of  Hilary 
Term  1837,  and  died  on  March  26,  1839. 

His  widow  survived  him,  and  one  of  his 
sons  is  now  a  serjeant-at-law. 

0ATS8,  Thomas,  is  described  as  of 
Churchill  in  the  county  of  Oxford  in  his 
admismon  to  the  Inner  Temple,  on  January 
1, 1606-7.  Having  been  called  to  the  bar  on 
January  29, 1614-15,  he  was  elected  reader 
to  that  society  in  autumn  1635.  As  his 
name  is  never  mentioned  in  the  Reports, 
there  seems  nothing  but  his  politics  to 
induce  the  Lonff  Parliament  (or  which  he 
was  not  a  member)  to  recommend  him  to 
be  called  Serjeant,  and  to  be  made  a  baron 
of  the  Exche<mer.  This  however  they 
did  on  October  12, 1648,  and  he  accepted  a 
renewal  of  his  commission  on  the  death  of 
the  king.  His  death  on  August  19,  1650, 
at  the  age  of  sixty-three,  was  occasioned  by 
an  infection  taken  at  Croydon  while  engaged 
in  his  judicial  duties,  and  he  was  bunea  in 
the  Temple  Church.  (Peck^s  Dedd,  Cur, 
h.  xiv.  330 


GAWDY 

0ATI8DSV,  Jomr  DX,  is  called  by  Bag- 
dale  (Oriff.  21)  a  canon  of  St  Paul's ;  but 
if  so,  civilians  must  have  held  those  ^« 
pointments^asmuch  as  he  had  a  wife  and 
children.  He  was  poseeaBed  of  property 
in  Norton  and  Bradford  in  Someraetahire, 
and  held  the  office  of  sheriff  of  Surrey 
and  Sussex  in  20  Henry  HI.  and  the  three 
following  years.  (Madox,  iL  177.)  In  25- 
Henry  UL  he  had  a  liberate  for  502.,  ta 
discharge  the  expenses  of  the  queen.  (iV0 
Hecords,  iii.  17.) 

He  is  inserted  in  Dugdale's  list  of  jns- 
ticiers  of  the  Common  Pleas  in  34  Heniy 
HI.,  1250,  on  account  of  a  fine  having  been 
acknowledged  before  him  in  Hilary  Term  of 
that  year,  and  also  as  a  justice  itinerant  into 
Lincolnshire.  He  is  again  mentioned  as  a 
justicier  in  an  entry  of  38  Henry  HI.  rela- 
tive to  certain 'heccagiis*  in  Sussex  heldhy 
himself  and  some  other  persona.  (Abb, 
PlacU.  137.) 

He  and  the  Bishop  of  Ely  were  sent  as 
ambassadors  to  Spam  on  the  king's  afbbs 
in  40  Henry  m.    (Bymer.i.SiS.)   He  died 
in  April  1262,  46  Henry  IH.,  leaving  laige 
property  both  in  Sussex  and  Somersetshire, 
by  nis  wife  Hawise  he  had  a  son  named 
John,  who  died  in  his  lifetime,  leaving  a 
widow;  and  at  the  date  of  his  own  deitith, 
Margaret,  his  daughter,  or  granddaughter, 
I  was  a  minor.  She  married  John  de  CamoT& 
(Excerpt   e  Hot,  Fin.  ii.  316-^84:  Abb. 
PlacU.  187,  334.) 

OAUirSTSDE,  SiMOK,  was  in  holy  orders, 
and  connected  with  the  court  as  early  tf  ^ 
Richard  H.,  1386,  when  his  name  appttis 
attached  to  the  confederation  with  the  King 
of  Castile.  Throughout  the  reign  of  Heoiy 
IV.  he  is  mentioned  as  one  of  me  derb  a 
the  Chancery.  (Rymer,  vii.  515, 809.)  Oa 
June  3, 1415,3  Henry  V.,  he  was  appcnnted 
master  of  the  Rolls,  and  on  the  chanceUor** 
going  to  France  the  Great  Seal  was  left 
with  him  from  September  5  to  October  13, 
1416.  He  held  it  again  under  Hemy  VL, 
from  September  28, 1422,  till  November  16, 
when  he  was  recognised  as  an  indepeDdeot 
keeper  with  all  the  usual  powers,  fad  i^ 
ceived  the  accustomed  salary.  (Bjfntr^  x. 
262.)  He  probably  died  soon  afHr,  since 
John  Frank  was  appointed  his  soceeseor  on 
October  28, 1423. 

OAWDT,  Thomas,  was  the  son  of  anotho' 
Thomas  Oawdvy  of  Harleston  in  Ncsriblk. 
Both  were  of  tne  Inner  Temple,  and  both 
serjeants-at-law.  The  father  was  reader 
there  in  Lent  1548  and  1553,  and  for  refuaiM 
to  read  in  the  latter  year  he  was  amerced, 
although  he  had  been  promoted  to  beaeer- 
jeant  m  the  previous  October.  (Dwdale^ 
Orig.  164 ;  Machyn'a  Diary,  260  H®  «' 
presented  Norwich  in  Queen  Mary's  first 

Earliament    He  died  in  August  1506,  and 
is  virtues,  together  with  those  of  Serjeant 
Richard  Catlin,  are  recorded  in  a  joint  Litin 


GAWDY 

^emiaph  introduced  into  Plowden's  Reports. 
{180.3  By  one  of  his  wives,  Anne,  the 
_  iter  of  John  Bassingboome,  Esq.,  of 
Woodhall  in  Hertfordshire,  he  had  two  sons, 
ThosDAS  and  Basongboume,  the  latter  of 
whom  wia  the  great-grandfather  of  two 
iMZonets — Gawdy  of  Crow's  Hall  in  Suffolk, 
sod  Gswdj  of  West  Herling  in  Norfolk  ,*  but 
Iwth  titles  became  extinct  at  the  beginning 
of  the  last  century. 

Thomas  Ghiwdy,  the  eldest  son,  who  was 
bom  at  Harleston^  became  in  1558  member 
for  Norwich,  as  his  father  had  been  before 
him,  and  was  amonip  those  who  were  sum- 
moned by  Queen  Mary  in  October  of  the 
same  year  to  take  the  degree  of  the  coif  in 
tise  following  Easter ;  but  her  death  inters 
Teninff,  it  became  necessary  to  have  a  new 
writ,  crom  which,  probably  at  his  own  re- 
quest, his  name  was  excluded.  In  the  fol- 
lowinff  year  he  was  reader  at  the  Inner 
Temple,  and  treasurer  in  1562.  In  1563  he 
became  recorder  of  Norwich,  and  on  an- 
other summons  he  took  the  degree  of  the 
coif  in  1567 ;  and  on  November  16,  1574, 
he  was  constituted  a  judge  of  the  Queen's 
Bench.  Here  he  sat  for  fourteen  years,  and 
was  one  of  the  few  puisne  judges  on  whom 
Queen  Elizabeth  li^stowed  a  knighthood. 
He  was  both  in  the  commission  for  the  trial 
of  Dr.  Parry  in  February  1586,  preserved 
in  the  *  Baiga  de  Secretis,'  and  in  that  of 
October  1586  for  the  trial  of  Mary  Queen 
of  Scots  at  Fotheriugay.  {State  Trials,  i. 
1167.)  His  legal  arguments  are  reported 
by  Dyer,  Plowden,  and  Coke;  and  the 
latter,  in  statins  Rawlyn's  case  in  Michael- 
mas 1667  (4  Mmortf64)y  gives  this  cha- 
racter of  him :  'This  was  the  last  case  that 
Sir  Thomas  Ghiwdy  argued,  who  was  a 
most  reverend  judge  and  sage  of  the  law,  of 
ready  and  profound  judgment,  and  vene- 
laUe  gravity,  prudence,  and  integrity.'  He 
died  on  November  4, 1588^  ana  his  place 
WM  sapnlied  by  the  appomtment  or  his 
half-hrotner,  Francis  Quwdy. 

He  was  married  twice :  his  first  wife  was 
Hamad  Helwise,  and  his  second  Frances,  by 
both  of  whom  he  left  issue. 

ai,WBT,  Fbakcis,  was  the  half-brother 
of  his  predecessor.  Sir  Thomas  Oawdy, 
being  the  third  son  of  Serjeant  Thomas 
Qswdy,  of  Harleston  in  Norfolk,  by  his 
third  wife,  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Thomas 
or  OliTer  Shvres.  He  presents  an  instance 
as  wan  of  the  same  name  being  given  to 
two  Bona  as  of  a  Christian  name  being 
altered  at  confirmation.  At  his  baptism  he 
called  Thomas,  which  at  his  confirmar 


OEDDINa 


293 


tioo  was  changed  to  Francis,  and  the  latter 
name,  '  by  the  advice  of  all  the  judges  in 
jnao  36  Henry  YIIL  (1544),  he  did  beare. 
aad  after  used  in  all  his  purchases  and 
gnmta.'    (Coke  LiU.3fL) 

Ha  was  admitted  a  member  of  the  Inner 
Temple  in  1549,  and  became  Lent  reader 


in  1566.  In  Lent  1571  he  was  appointed 
duplex  reader,  and  idso  treasurer  to  the 
society.  Being  called  to  the  degree  of  the 
coif  in  1577,  he  was  made  one  of  the  queen's 
Serjeants  on  May  17, 1582.  and  was  present 
at  Fotheringay  on  the  trial  of  Mary  Queen 
of  Scots,  but  no  dutv  appears  to  have  de- 
volved upon  him.  On  tne  arraignment  of 
Secretary  Davison  in  1587,  for  forwarding 
the  warrant  for  that  unfortimate  lady's  exe- 
cution^ he  joined  in  the  solemn  farce  with 
as  serious  a  face  as  any  of  the  rest  of  the 
actors.    {State  Trials,  i.  1173, 1233^ 

On  the  death  of  his  brother.  Sir  Thomas 
Gawdy,  he  was  nominated  his  successor  as 
a  j  udge  of  the  Queen*s  Bench  on  November 
25, 1588.  In  none  of  the  criminal  trials  on 
which  he  was  a  commissioner,  either  in  the 
reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth  or  of  Kin^  James 
(by  whom  he  was  continued  in  his  place 
and  knighted),  is  he  represented  as  taking 
any  part  except  in  that  of  Sir  Walter  Ra- 
leigh, when  he  is  made  to  say, '  The  statute 
you  speak  of  concerning  two  vntnesses  in 
case  of  treason  is  found  to  be  inconvenient ; 
therefore  by  ano&er  law  it  was  taken 
away.'  (Ibid,  ii.  18.)  He  was  named  as 
one  of  the  commissioners  to  hear  causes  in 
Chancery  on  the  death  of  Sir  Christopher 
Hattoninl59L 

It  seems  not  improbable  that  he  owed 
his  elevation  to  the  bench  to  Elizabeth's 
favoured  chancellor,  whose  nephew.  Sir 
William  Newport,  alias  Hatton,  about  six 
months  after  it  took  place,  married  the 
judge's  only  daughter  Elizabeth.  The 
judge  perhaps  was  also  indebted  for  his 
next  promotion  to  the  marriage  of  his  grand- 
daugnter  Frances,  the  only  issue  of  the 
above  imion,  to  Ilobert  Rich,  second  Earl 
of  Warwick.  These  nuptials  took  place  in 
February  1605  (Nicolas' s  Hatton,  478,  502), 
and  on  the  26th  of  the  following  August 
Sir  Francis  was  raised  to  the  post  of  cnief 
justice  of  the  Common  Pleas.  He  enjoyed 
this  high  position,  for  which  he  is  said 
to  have  paid  at  a  dear  rate,  less  than  a 
year.  He  was  stricken  with  apoplexy  at  lus 
chambers  in  Serjeants'  Inn  aoout  Whit- 
suntide 1606,  and  was  taken  to  hb  mansion 
at  Eston  Hall,  Wallington,  in  Norfolk; 
but,  having  converted  the  parish  church  into 
a  hay-house  or  dog-kennel,  his  body  was 
obliged  to  be  buried  in  the  neighbouring 
church  of  Rungton. 

His  wife  was  Elizabeth,  the  eldest 
daughter  of  Christopher  Coningsby,  the  son 
of  William  Coningslby  the  judge. 

QZDDISQ,  Ranttlph  de,  is  named  among 
the  justiciers  and  barons  before  whom  fines 
were  acknowledged  in  the  Curia  Regis  in 
28  Henry  II.,  1182,  and  the  two  following 
years  (Hunter's  Preface,  xxi. ;  Madox,  1. 
82,  113,  213) :  but  his  attendance  on  these 
occasions  prolxibly  arose  from  his  holding 
an  office  connected  with  the  Exchequer,  m 


2»4 


GENT 


the  last  of  those  yean  he  was  pud  out  of 
the  issues  of  the  honor  of  the  coDstabularj 
diveis  sums  expended  for  oordagre,  instru- 
ments, and  other  necessaries  for  the  ship  of 
Heniy  de  Schomis.  when  it  sidled  to  Spain 
for  the  Infanta  of  Portugal  (Jdadoa^s  Ba- 
ron, Anal.  76.) 

The  Great  Koll  of  31  Heniy  IL,  1185, 
contains  a  curious  instance  of  the  pretences 
made  in  those  times  for  biineing  money 
into  the  king's  exchequer.  Wmiam  de 
Beaumont,  it  seem&  had  contracted  to 
marry  l^e  daughter  of  Ranulph  de  Geddingr, 
but,  altering  his  mind,  had  ta&en  to  wife  the 
daughter  of  Maurice  de  Barsham ;  where- 
upon the  fjEuthless  William  was  fined  fifty 
marks,  while  his  manosuvring  father-in- 
law  was  fined  in  double  that  amount  for 
permitting  the  breach  of  the  contract. 

0SVT,  Thoicas,  was  the  son  of  William 
G^nL  Esq.,  of  the  manor  of  Moynes  in  the 
parisn  of  Biunpstead-Steeple,  Essex,  who 
could  trace  his  jjedigree  backwards  more 
than  two  centuries,  by  his  second  wife 
Agnes,  daughter  and  coheir  of  Thomas 
Carr,  Esq.,  of  Great  Thurlow  in  Sufiblk. 
Educated  at  Cambridge,  he  entered  the 
Middle  Temple,  where  he  arrived  at  the 
post  of  reader  in  Lent  1671,  and  a^ain 
filled  it  three  years  afterwards,  having  been 
elected  meml>er  for  Maiden  in  1672.  He 
was  called  seneant  in  June  1684^  and  in 
the  meantime  he  enjoyed  the  lucrative  ap- 
pointment of  steward  of  all  the  courts  of 
Edward  de  Yere,  Earl  of  Oxford.  Accord- 
ing to  Dugdale  he  was  not  raised  to  the 
bench  of  the  Exchequer  till  June  28, 1688, 
30  Elizabeth ;  but  this  is  clearly  an  error, 
for  he  is  so  designated  in  a  special  com- 
mission of  oyer  and  terminer  in  Sussex 
on  February  1,  28  EHzabeth,  168G,  pre- 
served in  the  '  Baga  de  Secretis.' 

Ck>ke  reports  his  judgments,  and  he  had 
the  special  privilege  granted  him  of  acting 
in  his  own  county  as  a  judge  of  assize,  not- 
withstanding  the  prohibition  in  the  statute 
33  Henry  YUL  c.  24.  He  died  in  1503, 
and  was  buried  at  Bumpstead.  His  cha- 
racter mavbe  estimated  by  the  lines  which 
Thomas  Newton  in  his '  Encomia '  addressed 
to  him,  commencing  thus : 

Religio,  virtus,  pietas,  pudor,  ac  aletheia 
Ezulat  e  terru,  mobile  vulgus  ait. 

Fallitur :  Eximias  nam  qui  coiuidenit  in  te 
Dotes,  Ac. 

He  married  first  Elizabeth,  onl  v  daughter 
and  heir  of  Sir  John  Swallow,  ot  Boc£ing ; 
and  secondly  Elizabeth,  the  widow  of  Eo- 
bert  Hoffeson,  of  London,  and  sister  of 
Morgan  Kobyns^  Esq.  By  the  fijrst  he  had 
a  laiqge  £unily,  and  tne  estate  has  continued 
from  that  time  to  this  in  his  descendants. 

0BOTFBXT  was  archdeacon  of  Berks 
from  1176  to  1200  (Le  Neve,  278),  and  in 
9  Bichaid  L,  1107-^  was  the  first  of  four 


GKRABD 

justices  itinerant  who  set  the  taUsgeiifii 
that  county.    {MadoXf  L  706.) 

GBOTPBST  IHB  Texplab,  to  wiuun, 
with  John  de  Lexinton,  King  Hemr  gim- 
the  custody  of  the  Great  Seal  in  AngHt 
1238,  does  not  seem  to  have  held  it  lo^ 
as  it  was  soon  after  in  the  posseaBonif 
Simon  the  Norman.  There  is  vaiy  Me 
information  as  to  Geofirey-and  indeed  of 
the  persons  so  named  at  dimsent  dateititt 
identification  is  doubtfbl.  (^MaL  Ban$,  474.) 

GEOFFBET  ^Bishop  op  Covxivci)ni 
a  member  of  tne  noble  Nonnan  hamd' 
Mowbrsy,  and  was  elected  Bi^iop  of  Gob- 
tance  (Cfonstantia)  in  Lower  NonntDdj  ii 
1048.  He  was  more  of  a  soldier  thim  i 
divine,  and,  accompanying^  William  on  Ui- 
invasion  of  England,  neld  a  ^*«^"g™*^ 
command  in  the  battle  of  HastingB.  He- 
assisted  at  the  coronation  of  the  Oouioaar, 
and  harangued  the  Normans  on  the  occMUi. 
He  afterwards  exerted  himself  in  supprai- 
ing  the  rebellions  of  the  English  and  ii< 
resisting  the  incursions  of  the  Danes.  M 
the  hesd  of  the  men  of  Monmouth,  Londfli^ 
and  Salisbury,  he  checked  the  asainltif 
the  West  Saxons  of  Dorset  and  Somenit 
on  Montacute,  and  he  joined  in  reducing  ts- 
subjection  the  rebels  undeff  the  Earii  of 
Hereford  and  Norfolk.  He  was  revudBd 
with  no  lees  than  280  manors. 

He  is  said  to  have  held  the  ofBod  ddad 
justiciarv  in  conjunction  with  Liofiiic^ 
Archbisnop  of  Canterbury,  and  Boboit,. 
Earl  of  Moreton,  during  ]^  of  T^^liiB'* 
reign,  several  precepts  miving  been  directed 
to  them  by  the  king  which  bear  that  inlB^ 
pretation.  There  is  no  doubt  that  he  {»■ 
sided  in  loco  regie  at  the  contest  hetveS' 
Archbishop  Lanfiranc  and  Bishop  Odo^n- 
lative  to  certain  lands  and  rights  of  ^dnck' 
the  former  alleged  his  church  of  GanteilxBf 
had  been  disseised  by  the  latter.  The  tail- 
took  place  on  Penenden  Heath,  about  1099^ 
lasting  three  days^  and  was  deddedin  &r 
vour  of  Lanfiranc 

After  William's  death  he  asristedKoW* 
the  king's  eldest  son,  in  his  attempt  on  the 
English  crown,  and  with  his  nephew.Bobert 
Mowbray,  Earl  of  Northumberland,  fioiti- 
fied  themselves  in  BristoL  On  the  fiulnn 
of  Robert's  enterprise  the  bishi^  was  al- 
lowed to  return  to  Normandy,  where  hs 
died  on  February  4,  1003.  (Dugdidi 
Monaet,  i.  546;  WiU.  Malmeeb.m ^  Me- 
dox,  i.  32 ;  Dugdale'e  Orig.  20;  Berimeot^ 
i.  56 ;  Hutchin^e  DorteM.  L  11 ;  Bepm; 
Turner ;  Lingard,) 

GERARD,  Gelbebt,  a  deacendant  froa 
the  family  of  Gerard  of  Bryn,  whidli  no* 
enjoys  a  naronetcj  arranted  in  1611|  W 
the  son  of  James  Gerard  and  Mannl 
daughter  of  John  HoloKift  of  BdmnA 
After  receiving  his  education  at  HwilriHf 
he  entered  Giay'a  Inn,  aad  ttm  caHirf  * 
the  bar  in  1539,  became  aaandHt  ka  IM 


GERARD 

Temdet  in  1^54,  and  in  the  next  year  he 
'WVLS  joined  ¥rith  Sir  Nicholas  Bacon  in  the 
office  of  treasurer.  (Dugdale^s  Oria.  293, 
2Q6.)  He  zepresentea  Wigan  in  the  par- 
lijunent  of  1553,  Stejninff  in  1654,  and 
Ijancaahire  in  1585.  Diipfdale  says  {Baron, 
iL  417),  *In  the  time  of  Queen  Mary  (as 
Inr  credible  tradition  I  haye  heard),  upon 
toe  Lady  Elizabeth's  being  questionea  at 
the  council  table,  he  was  permitted  to  plead 
there  <m  her  behalf,  and  performed  his  part 
ao  well  as  that  he  suffered  imprisonment 
foir  the  same  in  the  Tower  of  London  during 
the  remaining  terme  of  Queen  Marie^s reign.' 
However  true  the  former  part  of  this  story 
may  be,  the  latter  part  is  certainly  incor- 
recty  for  Plowden  records  his  appearance  in 
oonrt  in  Michaebmas  1557 ;  ana  on  October 
27, 1568,  he  was  summoned  to  take  the  de- 
gree of  the  coif  in  the  ensuing  Easter  Term« 
Before  that  time  arrived  the  death  of  Mary 
had  taken  place,  and  Queen  Elizabetii  had, 
on  January  22,  1559,  raised  him  to  the 
office  of  attorney-general.  He  retained  his 
important  post  for  twenty-two  years,  during 
which  time  there  are  only  two  English 
atate  trials  reported— those  of  the  Duke  of 
Norfolk  and  of  his  servant  Hickford  for 
high  treason  in  1571.  At  both  of  these 
Gmrd  assisted,  and  in  the  first  took  a  pro- 
minent part  In  the  last  Hickford  pleaded 
gdlty.     {StaU  Trials,  I  957- 1030.) 

He  was  knighted  in  1579,  and  was  pro- 
moted to  the  office  of  master  of  the  KoUs 
on  May  30,  1581.  While  occupying  this 
post  he  seems  to  have  been  more  engaged 
m  criminal  trials  than  when  he  was  attomey- 
flenerBl,  as  the  '  Baga  de  Secretis '  contains 
the  proceedings  of  five  in  which  he  is  named 
as  a  commissioner.  He  was  also  one  of 
the  commissioners  on  the  arraignment  of 
Baviflon,  and  joined  with  his  colleagues  in 
the  shameful  sentence  pronounced  against 
the  aacretary,  of  whom  he  says  that '  his 
great  zeal  made  him  forget  his  duty.' 
{StaU  TriaU,  i.  1094, 1230, 1250, 1315.) 

During  the  vacancy  in  the  office  of 
rhancelloT  between  November  20,  1591, 
and  May  28,  1592,  he  was  placed  at  the 
head  of  the  comnussion  for  hearing  causes 
in  Chancery.  This  of  itself  would  be  a 
•officient  contradiction  to  the  account  of 
Dugdale,  who  says  that  he  died  shortly 
after  January  8,  1592,  34  Elizabeth,  the 
date  of  his  will,  which  was  proved  in  '  April 
next  ensuing.'  It  turns  out,  however,  tnat 
the  probate  is  dated  on  April  6, 1593,  and 
the  en^  in  the  parish  register  of  Ashley 
in  Staffordshire  rather  unusually  records 
his  death  on  February  4,  1592-3,  and  his 
burial  on  the  6th  of  Murch  following.  A 
DoUe  monument  was  erected  to  his  memory. 
(IhUt  and  Queries,  Ist  S.  viL  609.) 

JBy  his  wife  Anne,  daughter  and  heir  of 
Wifliam  Ratcliffe,  he  had,  besides  four 
dtoghters,  two  sons^  Thomas  and  Ratcliffe, 


GESTLING 


295 


from  both  of  whom  peerages  sprang,  all  of 
which  have  since  become  extinct.  (Dn^- 
days  Baron,  ii.  417;  WoUon^s  Baronet,  i. 
51,  iv.  271,  279.) 

OBBmsinrE,  Adak  db  (Yarmouth), 
was  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  who,  in  19 
and  20  Henry  H.,  1173-4,  fixed  the  tallage 
for  Essex  and  Hertford,  and  for  Norfcuk 
and  Suffolk.  (Madox,  I  124,  701.)  He 
probably  held  some  office  in  the  kind's 
court  or  household,  for  he  was  one  of  uie 
four  commissioners  whom  the  king  in  1174 
sent  over  to  Ireland  to  settle  the  affairs  of 
that  country,  and  to  bring  Raymond  over 
to  England.     {Brady's  England^  363.) 

Camden  (lUmains,  247)  relates  a  story 
of  Adam  de  Gememue,  who,  beingclerk 
of  the  siffnet,  was  summoned  before  Henry 
1.  by  Tnurstan  le  Despencer,  or  stewtto, 
for  refusing  to  dgn  a  bill  he  had  without 
a  fee.  as  was  the  custom  among  the  officers 
of  the  court  Upon  Adam^  answering 
that  he  merely  deaired  him  to  bestow  two 
spice  cakes  made  for  the  king's  own  mouth, 
the  king  compeUed  Thurstan  to  put  off  his 
doak  and  to  go  and  bring  the  two  cakes  on 
a  white  nap£n,  and  with  a  low  curtsey 
to  present  tnem  to  Adam.  He  then  made 
them  friends,  observing  that '  officers  of  the 
court  must  ffratifie  and  shew  cast  of  their 
office,  not  omy  one  to  another,  but  also  to 
strangers,  whenever  need  shall  require.' 

OEBVini,  Ralph,  was  one  of  those 
before  whom  a  fine  was  levied  at  West- 
minster in  3  Henry  HI.,  and  described  as 
justices  itinerant. 

He  was  descended  from  Robert  de  Ger- 
non,  a  Norman  who,  for  the  assistance  he 
gave  to  William  the  Conaueror,  received 
various  lordships  in  Hertfordshire.  EQs 
father  Ralph  was  great-grandson  of  this 
Robert,  and  his  mother  was  a  sister  of 
William  de  Breuse.  During  John's  reign 
he  was  one  of  his  marshals  (JRct,  Ckms,  i. 
77),  and  was  a  firm  adherent  to  him  in  his 
troubles.  Several  valuable  grants  of  land 
rewarded  his  loyalty,  besides  other  marks 
of  favour  and  confidence. 

In  4  Henry  HI.  he  was  twice  sent  over 
to  Poictou,  and  the  last  time  to  accompany 
the  king's  sister  Joanna  to  England.  In 
5  Henry  III.  he  was  appointed  constable 
of  the  castle  of  Corfe,  wnich  he  held  for 
manyyears.  In  7  and  8  Henry  HL  he  was 
shenffof  the  county  of  Dorset,  and  in  the 
following  year  he  was  appointed  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  for  that  county.  {Ibid  i. 
418-586,  ii.  76.)  He  Uved  to  a  good  old 
age,  and  died  in  1247.  His  son  William 
had  two  son^  from  one  of  whoin,  Geoffirey, 
descended  Chief  Justice  Sir  John  Cavendisn, 
a  name  assumed  from  a  lordship  so  called 
in  Suffolk. 

GESTLIKG,  John  de,  had  property  at 
Winchelsea,  and  is  first  named  as  a  justicier 
in  9  Richard  I.,  1198,  and  acted  regularly 


296 


GIBBEWIN 


in  that  capacity  during  the  first  ten  years 
of  John's  reign,  and  up  to  4  Henry  III. 
He  died  about  1223.  (BugdMs  Orig.  41^ 
&c)      

OIBBEWUi,  GEOFFBETy  is  recorded  by 
Madoz  (ii.  43),  from  the  archives  of  West- 
minster Abbey,  as  taking  a  fine  in  the  King's 
Court  at  Westminster  in  3  Henry  HI.,  but 
he  is  not  mentioned  in  any  other  record  as 
occupying  a  place  on  the  benck  He  had 
land  at  Bixe  in  Oxfordshire,  the  com  of 
which  be  gave  to  the  monks  of  Thame  {Rot, 
Clam,  ii.  o2)  ;  and  there  is  a  hamlet  near 
Henley  in  that  county  still  called  Bix 
Gibwen. 

GIBBS,  ViCART,  was  the  son  of  Geoi^ 
Abraham  Gibbs,  Esq.^  a  member  of  the 
medical  profession  practising  at  Exeter  till 
1761,  when  he  retired  to  a  small  estate  he 
bad  inherited  at  Clyst  St  George.  He 
was  bom  in  October  1751,  and  was  sent  to 
Eton,  and  thence  was  elected  scholar  of 
King's  College,  Cambridge.  At  the  former 
he  contributed  some  elegant  Latin  compo- 
sitions to  the '  Musse  Etonenses,'  and  at  the 
latter  he  was  notorious  for  his  scholarship 
in  Greek.  Taking  his  degree  of  B.A.  in 
1772,  he  was  elected  fellow  of  his  college, 
and  became  a  member  of  Lincoln's  Inn  in 
August  1769.  When  he  commenced  busi- 
ness for  himself  as  a  special  pleader  he 
soon  acquired  a  high  reputation  for  ability 
in  the  science.  The  most  complicated 
cases  were  submitted  to  him,  and  they 
flowed  in  with  such  abundance  that  he  was 
wont  to  complain  of  the  absence  of  easy 
ones.  Yet  he  enjoyed  the  usual  pleasures 
of  society,  of  which  the  theatre  was  one  of 
his  favourite  relaxations,  evidenced  by  an 
extensive  familiarity  with  almost  every  line 
of  Shakspeare,  and  vrith  passages  and  scenes 
from  the  best  comedies. 

He  was  called  to  the  bar  in  February 
1783,  and  in  the  next  year  he  married. 
Joining  the  Western  Circuit,  he  soon  obtained 
Bufiicient  employment,  leading  naturally  to 
equal  success  m  Westminster  Hall,  and 
only  ten  years  after  his  call  Home  Tooke, 
disregarding  Mr.  Gibbs's  known  predilec- 
tions on  the  side  '  of  public  peace  and  pub- 
lic order,'  and  no  doubt  being  aware  of  his 
energetic  defence  at  Exeter  of  the  Rev. 
Mr.  Winterbottham,  indicted  for  alleged 
sedition  in  two  sermons  {StateTriaU^  xxii. 
838,  884),  strongly  recommended  him  to 
be  employed  in  aid  of  Erskine  in  the  trials 
for  high  treason  that  were  then  about  to 
take  place.  Discarding  all  political  prepos- 
sessions, Mr.  Gibbs  threw  himself  into  the 
cases  with  such  zeal,  and  displayed  so  much 
constitutional  leaming,  that  by  his  exposi- 
tion of  the  law  and  application  of  the  facts, 
almost  as  much  as  by  the  wonderful  elo- 
quence of  his  leader,  verdicts  of  acquittal 
were  not  only  gained  for  all  the  defendants 
in  thoee  extraordinary  tiials,  but  also  a  re- 


aiBBS 

lease  from  apprehennon  for  the  nnmeroua 
misguided  men  who  mi^t  have  been  im- 
plicated in  the  tranaactians  which  formed 
the  groundwork  of  the  charge.  Sir  John 
Scott  (LordEldon),  the  prosecutor  on  these 
trials,  sent  him  acroes  the  table  thia  writtao 
testimony  at  the  termination  of  them :  '  I 
say  from  my  heart  that  you  did  yooraelf 
great  credit  as  a  ^^ood  man,  and  great  credit 
as  an  excellent  citizen,  not  Baarificing  any 
valuable  public  principle ;  I  say  fiN>m  my 
judgment  that  no  lawyer  ever  did  himneff 
more  credit  or  his  client  more  service ;  so 
help  me,  God  I ' 

This  masterly  performance  at  once  raised 
Mr.  Gibbs  to  tne  front  rank  of  his  {nxifes- 
sion,  and  led  to  a  rapid  succession  of  forenuc 
honours.    The  recordership  of  Bristol  he 
had  received  in  February  1794,  before  the 
treason  trials,  as  a  reco^ition  of  his  legal 
merits.     In  the  following  years  he  was 
made  king's  counsel,  and  received  the  ap- 
pointment of  solicitor-general  to  the  Prince 
of  Wales,  which  was  followed  by  that  of 
his  royal  highness's  attomey-TOneral.    In 
1804  he  was  promoted  to  the  cnief  justice- 
ship of  Chester,  and  in  Febraary  1806  he 
became  solicitor-general  in  Mr.  Fitfs  last 
administration,  and  was  then  knighted.   He 
held  this  place  for  a  year  only,  resigniDg 
on  that  statesman's  death;  but  the  whig 
administration  that  succeeded  holding  the 
reins  of  government  little  more  than  twelve 
months,  Sir  Vicary,  on  their  exclusion,  was 
restored  to  office,  but  in  the  higher  grade 
of  attorney-general. 

In  the  parliament  thatfollowed  the  change 
of  ministry  he  had  the  honour  of  being  re- 
turned for  his  own  university,  defeadng 
the  late  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  Lord 
Henry  Petty,  and  also  the  late  prime  mi- 
nister, Lord  Falmerston,  then  first  entering 
into  political  life.    As  a  senator  he  nn- 
doubtedly  did  not  shine,  his  style  of  elo- 
quence not  being  adapted  to  the  audience 
he  was  addressing.   As  a  legislator,  the  oolj 
statute  he  introduced  was  one  enacting  tiist 
a  person  against  whom  an  information  bad 
been  filed  might  be  arrested  and  held  to 
bail  (48  Geo.  III.  c.  68),  the  provuions  of 
which  were  so  obnoxious  that  neither  he 
nor  any  subsequent  attorney-general  eyer 
put  them  in  force.    In  the  exercise  of  his 
official  functions  he  is  considered  to  have 
been  extremely  severe,  and  there  is  no  doubt 
that  he  filed  many  more  ex-offido  informi- 
tions  than  any  of  his  predecessors.    The 
fact  is  that  wliile  Sir  Vicary  held  ofBoe  n- 
ditious  libels  were  the  order  of  theday,aad 
there  was  so  much  licentiousness  in  oertiin 
publications  of  the  daily  and  weekly  pren 
that  it  was  deemed  necessary  to  pat  sofflo 
restraint  on  them.    But  it  might  well  be 
a  question  whether  the  attomey-genenl's 
power  was  not  too  freely  exercised,  when 
bv  a  retum  made  to  the  House  of  Commoni 


GIBfiS 

it  appears  that  from  1808  to  1810  no  less 
than  forty-two  informationB  had  been  filed, 
idiile  only  fourteen  had  been  filed  during 
the  preoBmnff  seven  years.  The  wisdom  of 
tbaae  nrooeecLings  becomes  still  more  doubt- 
faly  wnen  out  of  these  forty-two  informa- 
tUHis  no  less  than  twenty-five  were  not 
THosecnted,  but  the  subjects  of  them  were 
left  in  a  state  of  suspense  and  anxiety.  The 
■sptences  passed  on  those  who  were  con- 
victed show,  by  their  severity,  how  strongly 
the  jadges  felt  the  necessitv  of  stopping  the 
seditious  incitements^  and  how  clearly  they 
saw  the  danger  that  induced  the  attorney- 
general  to  prosecute  them. 

Among  the  acquitted  were  James  Perry 
and  John  Lambert  for  an  apparently  inno- 
cent passage  in  the  'Mommg  Chronicle/ 
and  John  and  Leigh  Hunt  for  a  much  more 
questionable  article  in  the  'Examiner.' 
These  defeats  seem  to  have  put  an  end  to 
anjr  farther  proceedings  on  Sir  Vicary's  ex- 
oflScio  informations,  but  not  before  a  general 
outcry  had  been  excited  against  the  fre- 

3uency^  of  them ;  and  the  active  mover  no 
oubt  incurred  great  unpopularity,  which 
was  aggravated  by  the  personal  character 
of  severity  and  hsjvhness  which  generally 
but  undeservedly  attached  to  him.  Few 
men  were  reaUy  more  sensitive,  more  kind- 
hearted,  more  anxious  to  atone  for  an  im- 
premeditated  wrong,  and  more  desirous  of 
the  good  opinion  of  good  and  morid  men.  | 
fint  his  manner  was  so  caustic  and  bitter, 
lod  sometimes  so  rude  and  imcivil,  that  the 
prevalent  feeling  would  be  amply  justified ; 
snd  his  assumption  of  superiority  over  his 
Iffother  barristers,  which  on  one  occasion 
received  a  severe  rebuke,  did  not  tend  to 
lemove  it. 

At  the  same  time  his  superior  merits  as 

t  lawyer  were  universaUv  acknowledged. 

After  ne  had  filled  his  office  for  five  years 

be  found  its  duties,  together  with  his  vast 

aocumulation  of  business  both  in  court  and 

in  chambers,  so  much  more  onerous  than 

Ids  atrength  or  his  health  could  bear  that 

tm  May  &,  1812,  he  accepted  a  seat  in  the 

Common  Pleas  as  puisne  judge.     He  sat 

there  only  eighteen  months,  wnen  he  was 

promoted  to  be  chief  baron  of  the  Exche- 

qoer  in  November  181.3.    In  less  than  three 

motitha  Sir  James  Mansfield's  retirement 

enabled  him  to  take  the  place  which  he 

meet  deeired  and  was  best  fitted  for.    He 

iraaawom  lord  chief  justice  of  the  Common 

Pleas  in  Hilary  vacation  1814,  and  presided 

in  that  court  for  nearly  five  years.    The 

attacks  of  ill-health  from  which  he  had  long 

soffered,  and  to  which  it  is  charitable  to 

attribute  much  of  his  ill  temper,  becoming 

more  frcMquent,  he  felt  himselr  compelled  to 

resign  his  seat  on  November  5,  1818. 

As  a  judge  all  competent  authorities 
^ve  him  the  highest  praise.  The  pre- 
jodioe  which  undoubtedly  existed  against 


OIFFARD 


297 


him  personaUy  is  altogether  silenced  when 
his  judgments  are  the  subject  of  observa- 
tion. One  of  the  most  severe  of  his  critics 
admits  that '  there  was  but  one  opinion  as 
to  his  fitness  for  the  situation  which  he 
had  been  selected  to  till,  and  that  in  point 
of  learning  and  experience  no  one  coufd  be 
better  qualified  for  it.  ...  His  decisions 
on  the  bench  or  at  Nisi  Prius  furnished 
equal  proofs  of  the  extent  of  his  learning 
and  of  the  accuracy  of  his  mind.' 

On  quitting  the  bench  he  retired  alto- 
gether from  public  life.  In  his  domestic 
society  he  haa  always  shone,  and  they  who 
partook  of  it  are  loud  in  their  declaration 
of  the  charms  he  imparted  to  it  His  fa- 
miliar friends,  and  tnev  were  many  from 
both  sides  of  politics,  Dear  witness  to  his 
virtues,  his  high  religious  feelings,  his 
honourable  principles,  .  his  goodness  of 
hearty  and  the  kindness  of  his  disposition, 
notwithstanding  occasional  irritabilities  of 
temper.  After  sufi'ering  for  fifteen  months, 
he  died  on  February  8,  1820.  and  was 
buried  in  the  family  vault  at  Hayes,  with 
a  monumental  inscription  of  great  elegance 
and  truth  penned  bv  his  friend  Sir  Wuliam 
Scott,  Lord  Stowell. 

He  married,  in  June  1784^  Frances  Cer- 
joit  Kenneth,  sister  of  Francis  Humberston 
Mackenzie,  Lord  Seaforth ;  and  their  only 
child,  Maria  Elizabeth,  was  married  to 
Lieutenant-General  Sir  Andrew  Pilking- 
ton,  KC.B. 

0IP7ABD,  William  (Bishop  of  Win- 
chester), was  a  Norman  of  high  birth, 
and  probably  a  relative  of  Walter  Gifiard, 
who  came  over  with  King  William  at  the 
time  of  the  Conquest,  and  was  rewarded 
with  the  earldom  of  Buckingham.  In  con- 
sequence of  that  connection  he  was  in  all 
likelihood  received  into  the  Conqueror's 
household  as  one  of  his  chaplains ;  but  the 
first  certain  notice  of  his  name  is  as  chan- 
cellor. 

He  is  placed  by  all  the  authorities  as  the 
last  chancellor  to  William  I.,  succeeding 
William  Welson,  afterwards  Bbhop  of 
Thetford;  and  is  generally  mentioned  as 
the  first  chancellor  under  William  IL,  and 
to  have  been  succeeded  by  Robert  Bloet  in 
1090.  His  restoration  to  the  chancellorship 
between  1093  and  1098  is  rendered  certain 
by  his  witnessing  in  that  character  a  char- 
ter granting  the  manor  of  Stone  to  Koches- 
ter  Cathe(fral;  for,  though  it  is  undated, 
one  of  its  witnesses  is  Robert  Bloet,  Bishop 
of  Lincoln,  who  was  not  raised  to  that  see 
till  1093 ;  whUe  Walkeline,  Bishop  of 
Winchester,  another  witness,  died  in  Ja- 
nuary 1098.  (Duffdale's  Monad,  i.  164, 
241,  vi.  1271.)  By  a  similar  process  of 
investigation  lus  continuance  in  the  office 
may  be  traced  to  the  end  of  the  reign,  and 
that  he  so  continued  at  the  commencement 
of  that  of  Henry  I.  appears  by  several 


298 


GIFFARD 


charters  granted  by  that  king.  (Ibid.  i. 
241,  ii.  18,  V.  14.)  He  was  superseded  in 
hia  office  by  Hoger,  afterwards  Bishop  of 
Salisbury,  who  is  designated  chancellor  in 
two  charters,  dated  September  3,  1101. 
(Ibid.  iv.  16,  17.)  After  Roger^s  eleva- 
tion to  the  episcopal  bench,  however,  Gif- 
fard  was  reinstated,  as  appears  from  his 
being  present  as  chancellor  at  the  signing 
of  the  convention  between  King  Henry  and 
the  Earl  of  Flanders,  on  March  10,  1103 
{Rymer,  i.  7, 12),  shortly  after  which  there 
is  every  probability  that  he  was  discharged 
from  the  office  in  consequence  of  the  dis- 
pleasure of  the  king. 

At  the  coronation,  or  soon  after  the 
accession  of  Henry,  Giffard  had  been  no- 
minated to  the  vacant  bishopric  of  Win- 
chester; but  his  consecration  had  been 
prevented  at  first  by  the  absence  of  Arch- 
oishop  Anselm,  and  then  by  that  prelate's 
refusal  to  perform  the  ceremony  upon 
him,  and  several  others  then  appointed, 
unless  the  king  would  give  up  the  right 
of  investiture,  which  had  been  gradually 
assumed  by  the  crown.  This  disnute  lasted 
for  the  four  following  years,  and  was  then 
terminated  by  mutual  concessions,  the  king 
giving  up  tne  claim  to  invest  with  the 
crozier  and  ring,  and  being  allowed  to 
retain  the  more  important  right  of  receiv- 
ing the  fealty  and  homage  of  the  bishops 
for  their  temporal  possessions.  This  ac- 
commodation was  arranged  in  1107,  and 
on  August  11  Anselm  solemnly  consecrated 
seven  bishops,  William  Giifard  being  among 
the  number. 

He  presided  over  his  see  for  nearly 
twenty-one  years,  during  which  period  he 
performed  mwy  acts  to  make  his  rule  re- 
membered. H!e  introduced  monks  of  the 
Cistercian  order  into  England,  and  in  1128 
founded  an  abbey  for  them  at  Waverley  in 
Surrey.  He  erected  a  priory  for  Augustin 
canons  at  Taunton  in  Somersetshire.  He 
was  either  the  founder  of,  or  the  principal 
contributor  to,  the  priory  of  St.  Mary 
Overy  in  Southwark,  and  he  built  the 
magnificent  mansion  there  which  was  so 
long  the  residence  of  his  successors  when 
in  London.  His  death  occurred  on  Ja- 
nuary 25, 1129. 

There  is  no  act  recorded  of  him  that 
throws  doubt  on  the  praises  awarded  by 
Henry  of  Huntingdon,  and  Thomas  Rud- 
bome  in  his  '  History  of  Winchester ;  *  and, 
holding  the  office  ox  chancellor  five  times 
imder  three  kin^  the  last  of  whom  was 
celebrated  for  his  discrimination,  he  must 
have  been  endowed  with  no  ordinary  quali- 
fications. (Godioin,  213 ;  An^L  Sac,  i.  279, 
700 ;  Hoger  de  Wendover,  ii.  164,  &c. ; 
Bapin;  Turner:  Lmgard.) 

OIPFAItD,  Richard,  tne  great-grandson 
of  Osbert,  one  of  the  Norman  barons  who  ac- 
compani^  the  Conqueror,  and  a  younger  son 


GIFFABD 

of  Elias  Giffaid^  the  third  lord  of  Bdnsfield 
in  Gloucestershire,  was  one  of  the  eighteen 
justices  itinerant  who  were  appointed  to 
admmister  justice  throughout  tne  kingdom 
by  the  council  of  Northampton,  22  Hemy 
it,  1176.  (flfaifox,  i.  126-135.^  In  1180 
he  was  bailiff  of  the  Oximin  in  Normandj, 
receiving  200/.  per  annum  as  custos  of  the 
castle  of  Falaise.  To  the  hospital  of  the 
latter  town  he  was  a  benefactor.  (MU. 
Scacc,  Norm,  i.  41.)  One  of  his  desoeDoants 
was  summoned  to  parliament,  but  the  title 
became  extinct  in  1322.  (JDvgdale's  Baron. 
i.  499.) 

OIPFAItD,  Hugh,  if  not,  as  not  unlikely, 
the  son  of  Osbert  GilEEurd,  who  was  a  natoral 
son  of  King  John  {DvgdMs  Barom,  L  601), 
v«ras  undom}tedly  of  noble  connectioD,  as 
William,  Earl  of  Salisbury,  Hugh  de  Mortuo 
Man,  and  Walter  de  Clifford  became  hia 
pledfires  in  1  Henry  UL  that  he  would 
satisfy  the  king  for  a  transgression  which  he 
had  presumed  to  commit    From  the  rest 
of  the  record  it  may  be  collected  that  this 
offence  was  his  marriage,  without  the  nmd 
licence,  with  SibiUa,  the  daughter  of  Walter 
de  Cormaill,  an  heiress.     (Rot,  Clam.  L 
301 .)    In  20  Henrv  HI.  Hugh  Gi&d  wis 
made  constable  of  the  Tower  of  Lcmdao; 
and  two  years  after  a  fine  was  levied  before 
him  as  a  j  usticier  (DugdaUs  Baron,  L  502^, 
probably  only  sitting  as  constable,  as  \as 
name  does  not  afterwards  occur  in  a  jndi- 
cial  character.     He  was  connected  with 
the  household  of  Edward  the  king's  flon, 
and  several  payments  were  made  to  kirn 
for  the  prince's  expenses,  and  other  Mo- 
ments up  to  26  Henry  UL    (JjMie  BioOfVL 
15,  18,  29,  30.^ 

It  appears  that  in  1256  King  Hemy  gave 
his  widow  and  her  son,  the  next-meotiooed 
Walter  Giffard,  permission  to  live  in  the 
castle  of  Oxford  during  pleasure  (ExeajL  t 
Bat.  Fin.  ii.  243),  ana  by  a  pediffree  i& 
Dugdale's  'Baronage'  (i.  424),  under  the 
title  '  Cormeilles,'  it  seems  that  sho  hftd 
another  son,  named  Geoffirej,  whidi  i^ 
probably  a  misreading  for  Qoixrej,  fiishop 
of  Worcester,  also  hereafter  noticed,  who, 
according  to  Richardson's  notes  on  Godwin 
(461),  was  Walter's  brother. 

GIFFABD,  Walteb  (Abchbishop  or 
York),  was,  as  before  stated,  the  son  of 
the  above  Hugh  Giffard,  and  of  StbiDa  de 
Cormaill.  The  first  notice  of  his  naoe 
occurs  in  the  permission  from  King  Heoxy 
IIL,  on  November  3,  1266,  to  'SiWle 
Giffard,  and  her  son,  Master  Walter 
Giffard,'  to  lodge  in  the  castle  of  Oxktit 
and  to  use  the  mills  below  it  Heifte^ 
wards  became  a  canon  of  Wells  and  ft 
chaplain  to  the  pope,  and  on  May^2, 1264, 
was  elected  Bishop  of  Bath  andWdls. 

After  the  battle  of  Evesham,  which  yn& 
fought  on  August  4, 1265,  he  was  i^ipointed 
chancellor^   in    the   room  of  Thomas  de 


aiFFAED 

-Gaiitili^«who  had  been  nominsted  by  tbe 
iMtfODfl.  He  was  tnmalated  to  the  arch- 
Vishoprie  of  York  on  October  18,  1266; 
«ooa  after  which  he  is  believed  to  have  re- 
aiffiied  the  Great  Seal,  but  the  actual  date 
of  his  retirement  nowhere  appears.  He 
still  continued  a  member  or  the  l^^'^ 
council,  and  in  54  Henry  IH.  was  ^erinof 
the  counties  of  Nottingnam  and  'Derby f  an 
office  whidi  he  filled  m>m  that  time  till  1 
EdwaidL 

On  the  accession  of  Edward  L  he  was 
aelacted  as  one  of  the  regents  of  the  king- 
dom during  the  king's  absence,  and  was 
made  constable  of  the  Tower  of  London, 
and  according  to  Philipot  was  also  treasurer. 
Vanoufl  dates  are  asagned  for  hb  death, 
but  the  most  probable  seems  to  be  April  25, 
127a  He  was  buried  in  York  Catbedzal. 
{Gotknn,  378,  682 ;  Le  Neve,  32, 30a) 

0IF7ASD,  GoDFBET  (Bishop  of  Wor- 
gebtba),  is  said  by  Bishop  Godwin  (461) 
to  hare  been  near  to  the  king  in  blood,  and 
Bichaidson,  his  editor,  adds  that  he  was  the 
brother  of  the  above  Walter  Gifilard,  Arch- 
biahop  of  York. 

On  November  6,  1265,  he  was  collated 
archdeacon  of  Barum  (Barnstaple),  {Le 
JVfoe,  98),  and  in  the  following  May  he 
occupied  the  post  of  chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer, and  had  permission  to  appoint 
1  substitate  to  act  during  his  abs^ce. 
{Madox,  L  476,  u.  52.) 

In  12t{6  he  was  appointed  chancellor  of 
Rngland,  in  the  room  of  his  brother,  Walter 
Oi&id,  probably  soon  after  that  prelate's 
nromotion  to  the  see  of  York.  In  June 
1268  he  was  elected  Bishop  of  Worcester, 
ind  continued  qhanceUor  till  the  29th  of 
October  following.  In  6  Edward  I.,  1278, 
ka  was  at  the  head  of  the  justices  itinerant 
for  the  counties  of  Hereford,  Hertford,  and 
Kmt. 

He  died  on  January  26, 1301.  He  was 
a  Bun  of  high  spirit,  overbearing,  and 
litigioiia,  and  made  his  visitations  burthen- 
some  by  the  extent  of  his  retinue,  which 
amoimted  to  near  a  hundred  horse.  {Cham- 
htr^e  IQud,  Worcestershire.) 

0IF7ABD,  GsoBOE  Maiucham,  one  of 
the  preeent  lord  justices  of  appeal  in 
Chancery,  is  the  son  of  Admiral  Giffard, 
kjr  Susannah,  daughter  of  Sir  John  Carter. 
He  was  bom  at  the  Dockyard,  Portsmouth, 
ia  the  year  1813,  and  was  educated  at 
Winchester,  and  New  College,  Oxford,  of 
which  he  eventually  became  a  fellow. 
Kntflring  the  society  of  the  Inner  Temple, 
he  was  called  to  the  bar  on  November  20, 
1840,  and  practised  in  the  Court  of  Chan- 
ceiy.  He  was  raised  to  the  rank  of  queen's 
eoonsel  in  1858,  and  took  a  nrominent  lead 
without  holding  any  official  situation  till 
1868,  when,  on  March  5,  he  was  made  a 
vice-chancellor  and  knighted,  and  in  less 
than  ten  months  was  promoted,  on  January 


GIFFORD 


29» 


1, 1869,  to  his  presentjudidal  seat,  in  each 
case  suoceedinff  Sir  William  Page  Wood 
(Lord  Hatherley).  He  was  hereupon 
added  to  the  piiyr  counciL 

He  is  married  to  Maria,  daughter  of 
Charles  Pilgrim,  Esq.,  of  Kingsfield,  South- 
ampton. 

GIPFOED,  Robert  (Lo£d  Gipford), 
was  the  son  of  Bobert  GKfford,  carrying  on 
the  business  of  grocer  and  linendraper  in 
the  city  of  Exet^,  where  he  was  bom  on. 
February  24, 1779.  From  his  earliest  youth 
he  showed  remarkable  quickness  and  an 
ardent  desire  of  improvement  His  ereateat 
delight  was  to  attend  the  assizes  ana  watch 
the  proceedings  of  the  courts,  and  he  longed 
for  an  oppor&mity  to  emulate  the  talents- 
he  witnessed,  lliough  his  father  could 
not  afford  to  educate  him  for  the  bar,  he 
so  far  encouraged  his  taste  as  to  article 
him  to  Mr.  Jones,  a  respectable  attorney  of 
his  native  dty^  "with  wnom  he  served  the 
whole  of  his  time.  Here  he  made  himself 
so  practically  useful  in  the  business  of  the 
office  that  during  the  illness  of  his  master 
he  was  entrusted  with  its  sole  management. 
Before  the  end  of  his  clerkship  his  £Either 
died,  and  at  its  termination  he  entered 
himself  at  the  Middle  Temple  in  1800* 
After  a  year  or  two's  study  imder  Mr. 
Robert  !Bayley  and  Mr.  Godfrey  Sykes, 
eminent  special  pleaders,  he  commenced 
practice  for  himself  in  the  same  line.  For 
five  years  he  pursued  this  useful  branch 
with  considerable  success,  and  was  called 
to  the  bar  on  February  12, 1808, 

He  joined  the  Western  Circuit,  and  the* 
Exeter  and  Devon  Sessions,  where  he  sooa 
acquired  an  extensive  business.  In  Londoa 
too  his  abilities  were  soon  recognised,  and 
many  opportunities  occurred  in  which  he 
distinguished  himself  by  his  intimate  ac- 

Suaintance  with  the  law  of  real  property, 
y  the  ready  cogency  of  his  arguments,  and 
by  his  easy  elocution. 

He  had  been  only  nine  years  at  the  bar 
when  he  was  appointed  solicitor-general 
on  May  0, 1817.  So  entirely  did  he  owe 
it  to  his  professional  merit  that  many  of 
those  advocates  who  were  opposed  to  the 
government  acknowledged  its  propriety. 
He  was  then  knighted  and  electea  bendier 
of  his  inn,  and  took  his  place  in  the  House 
of  Commons  as  member  for  £ye  in  Suffolk. 
On  that  stage,  though  not  acting  a  promi- 
nent part  in  politics,  he  asdsted  the  govern- 
ment by  the  dexterity  he  displayed,  and 
by  the  clearness  with  which  he  explained 
their  legal  measures.  He  was  almost  im- 
mediatdy  called  upon  to  take  part  in  those 
state  prosecutions  rendered  necessary  by 
the  treasonable  practices  of  the  time.  The 
talent  he  displayed  on  these  occasions  at 
once  dissipated  all  doubts  upon  the  pro- 
priety of  his  promotion.  In  July  1819  he 
succeeded  to  the  office  of  attorney-general. 


300 


GIFFOSD 


mid^  holding  it  at  the  commenoement  of 
the  reign  of  George  lY.,  it  fell  to  his  lot  in 
April  1820  to  conduct  the  prosecution  of 
the  conspirators  who  were  implicated  in 
'the  Cato  Street  plot  for  oyertuming  the 
govemment,  intended  to  be  commenced  by 
the  assassination  of  all  the  ministers  at  a 
cabinet  dinner.  (State  TriaU,  xxxii.  538, 
&c,  xxxiii.  716,  &c.)  In  the  same  year  he 
liad  the  more  arduous  duty  im]^osed  upon 
him  of  oj^ening  the  charges  agamst  Queen 
-Caroline  m  support  of  the  preamble  of  the 
Bill  of  Pains  and  Penalties;  hiscompara- 
-tive  failure  in  which  was  amply  redeemed 
by  his  powerful  reply,  which  in  the  most 
perspicuous  manner  collected  all  the  facts 
and  corroborative  evidence  into  one  focus, 
and  to  the  satisfaction  of  most  unprejudiced 
minds  made  clear  and  evident  the  guilt  of 
that  unfortunate  lady.  But  few,  though 
they  could  not  shut  their  eyes  to  her  mis- 
conduct, approved  of  the  proceedings,  and 
the  outcrv  was  so  great  at  the  harshness 
and  impolicy  of  the  measure  that  the  mi- 
nisters were  obliged  to  withdraw  the  bill. 
The  temporary  popularity  of  the  queen  soon 
subsided,  and  her  death,  which  was  hastened 
by  chagrin,  occurred  soon  after  the  corona- 
tion in  the  next  year. 

Exercising  his  office  with  great  modera- 
tion, he  instituted  very  few  prosecutions, 
itnd  principally  confined  himself  to  his 
forensic  duties  m  Chancery,  to  which  court 
he  had  removed  on  being  appointed  solicitor- 
general.  Here  he  obtained  very  consider- 
able practice,  which  was  flpreatly  increased 
-after  the  lamentable  deatn  of  Sir  Samuel 
Bomilly.  In  the  House  of  Lords  also  he 
had  the  principal  lead,  especially  in  the 
appeals  from  Scotland,  having  carefully 
made  himself  master  of  the  laws  of  that 
country.  As  recorder  of  Bristol^  to  which 
he  had  been  elected  on  the  resignation  of 
^ir  Vicary  Gibbs,  he  was  such  a  &vourite 
with  the  corporation  that  they  placed  his 
portrait,  a  whole-length  by  Sir  Thomas 
Lawrence,  in  their  town-haU. 

After  filling  the  office  of  attorney-general 
for  four  years  and  a  half,  he  was  jaised  to 
the  bench  on  January  9, 1824,  as  lord  chief 
justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  and  was  en- 
nobled on  the  31st  of  the  same  month  by 
the  titie  of  Lord  Gifford  of  St.  Leonards  in 
the  county  of  Devon.  This  elevation  to  the 
peerage  he  owed  to  the  alteration  then 
adopted  in  the  House  of  Lords  in  the  hearing 
of  appeals,  and  he  was  constituted  at  the 
same  time  deputy  speaker  for  the  special 
purpose  of  hearing  those  from  Scotland.  So 
satisfied  were  the  Scottish  lawyers  with  his 
decisions  that  on  a  visit  to  Edinburgh  a 
short  time  after  he  was  received  and  in- 
yested  with  extraordinary  honours.  In  less 
than  three  montiis  he  changed  his  judicial 
post  for  the  more  a]jpiopiiate  one  of  master 
cf  the  Bolls,  to  which  lie  waa  removed  on 


GILBERT 

April  5.  The  increase  of  labour  coose^uent 
on  these  apj^intments  at  length  weidied 
upon  his  spirits,  and  so  greatly  affeetea  lua 
health  and  strength  that  he  soociimbed  to 
a  bilious  attack  on  September  4, 1896^  at 
Dover,  where  he  was  spendinff  his  yacaaoB. 
His  remains  repose  in  the  RoXla  ChapeL 

At  the  time  of  hia  prematuxe  death  he 
was  only  in  the  for^-eighth  year  of  lusag«. 
He  was  then  the  umverMlly  deaignated  heir 
to  the  chancellorship  upon  the  expected  re- 
signation of  Lord  Eldon.    But  he  was  not 
permitted  thus  to  complete  the  parallel  wiA 
liord  Chancellor  King.    Lora  Teatetdm 
wrote  of  him :  '  The  present  attomey-gas- 
ral  (Gifford)  will  probably  be  his  (Lofd 
Eldon^s)  successor;  he  is  a  sound  lawyer 
and  a  sound-hearted  man  ....  the  fitteit 
man  living  to  succeed  one  for  whom  a  ne- 
cessor  must  soon  be  found — ^though  periHp 
an  equal  will  never  be.'    High  as  was  hii 
professional  character,  in  private  life  he  mi 
equally  to  be  admired.  Unaffected,  amitUe^ 
kind,  and  indul^nt,  he  secured  the  afi^ction 
of  numerous  friends,  and  totally  dinnDed 
whatever  jealousy  might  at  first  have  bets 
entertained  at  his  sudden  advancement 

He  married  in  1816  the  daughter  of  the 
Rev.  Edward  Drew,  rector  of  WiUsod  in 
Devonshire,  and  by  ner  had  seven  childnB^ 
the  eldest  of  whom  is  the  present  peer. 

GILBERT,  Jeffrst,  who,  from  his  mi 
being  somewhat  similar  to  those  of  Sir 
Humphrey  Gilbert,  the  noted  seaman  end 
discoverer  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  reign,  ii 
supposed  to  have  belonffed  to  a  bianeh  of 
that  family,  is  said  to  have  been  bom  it 
Burros  Farm,  a  manor  in  the  parish  of  Qood- 
hurst  in  Kent,  which  he  afterwardB  pa^ 
chased,  in  1674.  He  wastiiesonof  WilBni 
Gilbert^  Esq.,  and  Elizabeth  his  wife.  Ad- 
mitted mto  the  Inner  Temple  in  1698,  lis 
was  called  to  the  bar  in  1698,  and,  jndginf 
from  Ihe  numerous  treatises  of  which  he  iM 
the  author,  he  must  have  been  indefiUiff^ 
in  his  early  studies.  He  commenced  taking 
notes  of  cases  in  1706,  when  hisEautf  Bs- 
ports  begin.  It  is  evident  that  he  had  eitar 
olished  a  good  legal  reputation  before  1714» 
as  on  November  8  of  that  year  he  was  9- 

g)inted  one  of  the  judges  of  the  fingt 
ench  in  Ireland,  from  which  he  was  pro- 
moted on  the  16th  of  the  following  Jimeto 
be  chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer  there.^  In 
1 719  he  and  the  other  barons  were  oonunittsd 
by  the  Irish  House  of  Lords  to  the  costodj 
of  the  usher  of  the  black  rod,  for  granting 
an  injunction  in  pursuance  of  an  order  of  tba 
English  House  of  Lords  (State  TriaU,  xr. 
1301-16)  in  an  appeal  from  the  Irish  oomti 
(Annesley  v,  Sherlock).  In  Uxe  neidt  jatf 
an  act  of  parliament  was  passed  pntliMiB 
end  to  the  dispute  by  excludinj^  Aslv 
House  of  Loros  from  any  ji  ~  ^"^'^  "** 


though  this  act  was  afterwiidaNMlU^ 
whole  question  is  ainoe  setdad.qT'Ah^ 


GISELHAM 

of  Union.  How  long  the  barons  remained 
in  coatody  is  not  mentioned,  but  the  con- 
duct of  tne  chief  was  evidently  approved 
by  the  English  government,  fiis  ^itaph 
ajs  that  he  was  offered  the  Great  Seal  of 
Ireland,  and  that  he  refused  the  honour, 
and  redsned  his  place  upon  being  made  a 
baion  of  the  English  Exchequer  in  May 
1722.  He  received  the  honour  of  knight- 
hood in  January  1724.  On  the  resignntion 
of  Lord  Macclesfield  he  was  nominated  se- 
cond commissioner  of  the  Great  Seal,  and 
filled  that  position  from  January  7  to 
Jane  1,  1725,  on  which  day  he  was  pro- 
moted to  the  place  of  diief  baron,  wnich 
seat  he  only  occupied  for  fifteen  months, 
being  snatched  away  by  an  early  death  on 
October  14, 1726.  This  event  occurred  at 
Bath,  in  the  abbey  church  of  which  he  was 
buried.  A  tablet  to  his  memory  is  placed 
in  ^e  Temple  Church,  with  an  elegant 
eulogium  in  Latin  of  his  legal  and  scientific 
attainments. 

Of  all  the  works  that  appear  under  his 
name,  and  which  exhibit  so  much  learning 
in  almost  every  variety  of  legal  investiga- 
tion that  they  are  stiU  constantiy  referred 
to  as  authority,  it  is  extraordinary  that 
none  were  published  in  his  lifetime.  They 
comprehena  Reports  in  Equity,  histories  of 
the  Uourts  of  Exche<][uer,  Common  Fleas,  and 
Chancery,  and  treatises  on  Uses  and  Trusts, 
Tenuies,  Devises,  Ejectments,  Distresses, 
Executions,  Rents,  Remainders,  and  Evi- 
dence. Tlus  latter  Blackstone  describes  as 
excellent,  and  calls  it '  a  work  which  it  is 
impoaaible  to  abstract  or  abridge  without 
loang  some  beauty  and  destroying  the 
duin  of  the  whole.'  He  was  a  feUow  of 
the  Royal  Society,  and  was  equally  famous 
for  his  mathematical  as  for  his  lefftu  studies, 
and  for  his  refined  taste  in  polite  litera- 
tmre.  The  modesty  he  showed  in  not  him- 
nlf  publishing  any  of  his  works  distin- 
nnshed  him  throughout  his  career;  and 
he  was  held  in  as  much  esteem  by  his  con- 
temporaries  as  he  is  regarded  with  respect 
and  admiration  at  the  present  day.  {Lwd 
Saymond,  1380-1420 ;  Sasted's  Kent,  vii. 
77, 196.) 

OISXLHAIC,  William  de,  probably  took 
his  name  ^m  the  place  so  called  in 
Suffolk.  On  several  occasions  firom  7  to 
14  Edward  1.  he  is  described  as  the  kioff^s 
attomey,  and  in  the  tenth  year  both  ne 
and  Gilbert  de  Thoxnton  are  designated 
'naxiatores  pro  rege.'  In  0  Edward  1.  he 
was  called  to  the  degree  of  king's  seijeant- 
ai-law ;  but  it  should  be  observed  that  all 
who  are  noticed  at  this  time  as  of  the 
degree  of  the  coif  seem  to  have  been  so 
deog^ted,  and  that  it  is  doubtful  whether 
the  modem  distinction  then  existed. 

Wlien  Edward  1.  purified  the  bench  in 
1239  of  those  members  who  had  disgraced 
iif  William  de  Giselham  was  constituted 


GLANVILLE 


301 


one  of  the  new  judges  of  the  Common 
Pleas.  In  January  1293  he  came  to  an 
untimely  end,  but  no  other  particulars  of 
his  death  have  been  found  tnan  are  con- 
tained in  a  letter  firom  William  de  Were- 
minster  to  John  de  Jjangton,  the  chancellor, 
in  which  he  simply  communicates  that 
William  de  Giselham  had  been  killed.  (7 
RepariFitb,  Hec,  App.  ii.  249.) 

OLAVYILLE,  Raitulph  de,  was  bom  at 
Stratford  in  Suffolk.  He  was  a  grandson 
of  a  baron  of  the  same  name,  whose  posses- 
sions were  in  the  counties  of  Norimk  and 
Suffolk,  and  younger  son  of  William  de 
GlanviUe,  and  on  the  death  of  Bartholo- 
mew, his  eldest  brether,  he  succeeded  to> 
the  bareny. 

Long  previous  to  this  event  he  had 
raised  himself  to  a  considerable  position. 
It  does  not  precisely  appear  in  what  capa- 
city he  began  his  career,  but  it  seems  most 
likely  that  he  filled  some  office  in  the  Ex- 
chequer. It  was  probably  in  this  character 
that  he  held  the  ofiice  of  sheriff  of  War- 
wick and  Leicester  in  10  Henry  II.,  1164. 
and  that  in  the  same  year  he  was  advanced 
to  the  sheriffalty  of  the  more  important 
county  of  York.  The  former  he  retained 
for  only  one  year,  but  in  the  latter  he  con- 
tinued during  the  whol^  remainder  of  the 
reign.  These  appointments  took  place 
twelve  years  before  his  name  is  recorded  aa 
a  justicier ;  but  after  he  was  raised  to  the 
bench  several  other  counties  were  placed 
under  his  care  as  sheriff. 

According  to  Benedict  Abbas,  Queen 
Eleanor  was  consigned  to  his  care  during 
the  sixteen  years  of  her  confinement  in  the 
castle  at  Wmchester,  of  which,  and  also  of 
the  royal  treasury  there,  he  had  the  custody. 
That  he  treated  her  with  the  respect  due 
to  her  station  is  shown  by  the  confidence 
she  reposed  in  him  when  placed  in  autho- 
rity on  her  release. 

During  his  northern  sheriffalty  his  mili- 
tary talents  were  called  into  action  by  the 
incursion  of  the  Scots,  and  his  efficiency  as- 
an  energetic  and  brave  commander  was- 
soon  proved.  Having,  with  the  assistance 
of  Kii^^  Henry's  illeffitimate  son  Geofirey, 
then  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  forced  the  Scottish 
king  to  retire,  that  monarch  a  short  time 
afterwards  renewed  his  attack,  and  while 
his  army  was  ravaging  the  neighbouring 
country  he  himself  oesieged  Alnwick» 
There  Ranulph  de  Glanville,  at  the  head 
of  the  Yorksnire  barens.  siurprised  him  on 
July  11,  1174,  and,  defeating  his  troops, 
took  him  prisoner.  (Lord  LytteUony  liL 
136, 148.)  This  victory  was  of  the  highest 
importance  to  King  Henry  in  the  critical 
state  of  the  kingdom,  then  distracted  by 
the  rebellious  conduct  of  his  sons.  From 
this  time,  therefore,  the  valorous  sheriff, 
brouffht  more  immediatel;^  under  the 
]dagB  notice^  was  employed  in  services  for 


302 


GLANVILLB 


whicli  he  waa  not  long  in  proying  that  he 
was  equally  fitted. 

In  the  yeiy  next  year  he  appean  as  a 
justice  itmeranty  his  pleas  being  recorded 
not  only  in  his  own  county  of  York,  but  in 
thirteen  other  counties,  and  in  1176  one  of 
the  six  circuits  into  which  the  council  of 
Northampton  then  divided  the  kingdom 
was  appropriated  to  him  and  two  ouiers. 
"When  the  council  of  "Windsor  in  1179  re- 
arranged the  kingdom  for  judicial  purposes 
into  four  divisions,  although  most  of  his 
brethren  were  removed,  his  capacity  was 
so  conspicuous  and  his  integrity  so  im- 
blemished  that  he  was  not  only  reappointed 
to  act  in  one  of  them,  but  was  among^  those 
specially  selected  to  hear  the  complaints  of 
tne  people  in  the  Curia  Regis  at  West- 
minster (Madox,  i.  77,  125-137)^  and  in 
1180  he  was  appointed  chief  justiciary,  and 
continued  in  the  office  durm^  the  whole 
remainder  of  the  reign,  as  high  m  the  royal 
favour  and  confidence  at  the  close  as  at  the 
commencement,  being  named  one  of  the 
executors  to  the  king's  will.  A  dereliction 
from  the  path  of  judicial  integrity  is  re- 

Sorted  of  him  in  having,  in  1184,  con- 
emned  Sir  Gilbert  de  Plumpton  to  death 
on  a  charge  of  rape,  for  the  purpose  of 
giving  the  widow  of  the  unfortunate  Knight, 
a  ridi  inheritrix,  to  his  friend  Rainer:  who 
peribrmed  his  duties  as  sheriff  of  York- 
shire. The  execution  of  the  sentence  was 
delayed  by  the  interference  of  the  Bishop 
of  Worcester,  and,  the  case  being  remitted 
to  the  king,  Sir  Gilbert's  life  was  saved, 
but  his  person  imprisoned  for  the  rest  of 
the  reigxL  Presuming  this  story  to  be 
true,  the  chief  justiciary's  merit  must  have 
been  great  indeed  to  mduce  the  king  to 
pardon  so  monstrous  a  perversion  of  jus- 
tice. Much  doubt,  however,  cannot  but 
be  attached  to  the  relation.  It  appears 
that  in  his  account  of  the  year  as  sheriff  of 
York  he  charges  13<.  for  conveying  Sir 
Gilbert  firom  York  to  Worcester,  and  in 
the  next  year  accounts  for  half  a  year's  rent 
of  his  lands.  Gilbert's  brother  afterwards 
pays  a  fine  of  100  marks  for  his  discharge, 
and  Hainer  pays  a  fine  of  1000  marks  for 
having  the  long's  benevolence.  These 
show  no  evidence  that  Hanulph  de  Glan- 
ville  was  cognisant  of  Gilbert's  innocence, 
or  a  party  to  Rainer's  intentions  towards 
the  lady.  (Phmtpton  Corresp,  x.)  Indeed, 
it  is  scarcely  possible  to  suppose  that  a 
king  so  just  as  Henry  II.  woula  have  over- 
looked the  guilt  of  the  judge  or  have 
visited  the  innocence  of  the  accused  with 
imprisonment 

in  the  year  after  his  appointment  he 
headed  a  large  army  against  the  Welsh, 
and,  though  at  first  he  xnade  little  progress, 
he  succeeded  at  last  not  only  in  bringing 
them  back  to  their  fMlty,  but  in  procuring 
from  them  a  large  body  of  infantry  to  serve 


GLANVILLE 

in  the  subseqaent  wan  against  Fhi^  of 
France.  In  tnose  wars  we  find  him  soo- 
cessfully  engaged  in  procuring  a  tmee 
between  the  two  kin^.  (Lord  LiftMoiu 
iii.  369,  441.)  So  high  an  opinion  haa 
Hennr  of  his  wisdom  and  sagacity  that  he 
sent  him  with  his  son  John  to  asiist  and 
direct  in  the  government  of  Ireland.  (Le^ 
land's  Ireland,  i.  143.) 

In  1188,  when  the  crusade  was  preached 
at  Gedington,  though  his  age  and  positioo 
would  have  been  a  sufficient  excuse^  ha 
partook  of  the  enthusiasm  and  engaged  ni 
the  enterprise.  The  king's  death,  whiiA 
happened  the  next  year,  only  delayed,  hot 
dia  not  prevent,  the  performance  oi  hii 
vow.  His  pety  was  further  evidenced  bj 
the    foundation  and    endowment  of  tM 

Eriorj^  of  Butley  and  the  abbey  of  Leyetooe^ 
oth  in  Suffolk,  for  canons  of  the  order  of  JBt 
Aiigustin.  (Dugdale^B  Monast.  vi.  379, 879.) 
In  his  character  of  chief  JusticiaiT  he 
assisted  at  the  coronation  of  Richard  I.,  on 
September  3,  1189,  and  was  sent  by  the 
king  to  restrain  the  people  from  the  mas- 
sacre of  the  Jews  which  disgraced  thit 
solemnity.  Two  or  three  authors  testify 
that  he  was  deprived  of  his  office  at  tM 
I  beginning  of  this  reign,  and  was  obliged  to 
purchase  his  release  from  imprisonment  tf 
an  enormous  fine,  fixed  by  some  at  500W, 
and  by  others  at  15,000/.  The  silence  of 
other  historians  throws  a  discredit  oo  fiie 
story,  which  is  supported  by  his  subseqaent 
proceedings.  His  retirement  firom  the 
office  of  chief  justiciary  would  be  a  ne- 
cessary result  of  his  determination  to  pro- 
ceed to  Jerusalem,  and  his  payment  of  a 
sum  of  money  to  assist  the  king  in  hii 
holy  war  would  be  only  what  that  monardi 
required  from  all  who  could  affiszd  it.  Hw 
roU  of  that  year,  so  far  frt>m  givinff  nj 
evidence  of  his  disgrace,  proves  plihilr 
that  he  continued  to  act  in  his  judidil 
character  after  the  death  of  King  Hemr. 
{Pipe  EoU,  8, 15,  &c.)  There  is  also  sob- 
sequent  evidence  of  his  being  with  tiie 
king  in  Normandy  on  his  way  to  the  ILdj 
Land,  as  he  is  the  first  of  the  witeeeni 
attesting  a  royal  charter  given  under  the 
hand  of  John  de  Alen^n,  the  yiee-duB- 
cellor,  '  apud  Moret,'  on  April  11, 1100, 1 
Richard  1.  (Madax,  i.  77),  and  he  after- 
wards travelled  towards  Jerusalem  in 
company  with  Baldwin,  Archbishop  of 
Canterburv,  and  Hubert  Walter,  his 
nephew,  fiishop  of  Salisbury,  and  landed 
at  Tyre  about  Michaelmas  1100,  aU  of 
them  having  been  despatched  l^  JSk 
Richard  to  assist  at  the  siege  of  Acfe^  tm 
having  previously,  according  to  soma  a^ 
counts^  accompanied  the  kii^  hoMrif 
through  France  as  far  aa  MaraeilMa 

He  and  his  companions  leacbad  AM 
before  which  Archbishop  BiUwiB  iHlflS 
a  victim,  and  then,  before  tlia  — ^^-^  *•  * 


GLANVILLE 

^     ?,  Ranulph  de  Glanville ;  not,  as  some- 
limes  stated^  in  the  heat  of  battle,  but  ^  ex 
.aexiB  nimia  corraptione.'     (12.  de  Wend" 
or«i!\iiL  90,  36^ 

He  mairied  &rta,  one  of  the  daughters 
of  Theobidd  de  Valoins,  lord  of  Parham. 
Leaving  no  male  issue,  he  distributed  his 
lands  before  he  sailed  on  his  last  expedition 
«mong  his  three  daughters — Matilda,  the 
wife  of  William  de  Auberville,  a  before- 
named  iustider;  Amabilia,  the  wife  of 
Ralph  de  Arden,  a  justicier  also  before- 
named  ;  and  Helewise,  the  wife  of  Robert 
Fit»-Robert 

Although  some  question  has  been  raised 
whether  the  work  generally  attributed  to 
this  great  man,  entitled  'Tractatus  de 
Legibus  et  Gonsuetudinibus  Regni  Anglise,* 
was  really  composed  by  him,  there  are  still 
stronger  grounds  for  considering  him  as  its 
4uithor.  If  decisive  evidence  of  the  fact 
cannot  be  advanced,  there  is  at  all  events 
no  candidate  who  has  superior  claims  to 
the  honour  of  having  produced  it,  nor  is 
there  any  hypothesis  of  sufficient  weight 
to  counterbalance  the  presumptions  in 
fiiTour  of  the  tradition.  (jDugdale^s  Baron, 
L  423 ;  Lord  LytteUcn  ;  Lingard,) 

ftLAlVlLLS,  William  de,  no  otherwise 
appears  in  connection  with  his  eminent 
Dsmeeake  than  that  he  was  a  witness,  with 
the  title  of  'clericus,*  to  the  charter  of 
Hervey  Walter,  Ranulph  de  Glanville's 
brotbc^in-law,  to  the  priory^  of  Butley, 
which  was  founded  by  the  chief  justiciary. 
{MotuuL  V.  380.)  He  was  one  of  the 
joBticierB  in  7^  8,  and  0  Richard  I.,  and 
was  still  alive  m  3  John.  (Madox,  i.  705 ; 
HtnUer^e  Treface ;  Rot,  Cancell.) 

Mr.  Hunter,  in  his  valuable  preface  to 
the  ' Fines  of  Richard  I.  and  John,'  sug- 
gests the  possibility  of  his  having  been  the 
aathoT  of  the  treatise  ffeneraUy  attributed 
to  Ranulph  de  Glanville ;  but  he  offers  no 
other  grounds  for  the  suggestion  than  the 
identity  of  the  name. 

OUUmLLB,  OsBERT  DK,  was  present 
as  a  justicier  when  fines  were  levied 
in  the  Curia  Regis  in  28  and  35  Henry 
IL,  1182,  1189.  (HurUer^s  Preface.)  As 
the  former  of  these  years  was  soon  after 
the  appointment  of  Ranulph  de  Glanville 
to  tba  office  of  chief  justiciary,  and  the 
latter  Just  before  his  retirement  from  it,  it 
is  probable  that  Osbert  was  in  some  way 
related  to  him,  and  had  been  brought  into 
the  eoort  under  his  auspices.  This  is  ren- 
dered still  more  likely  by  the  fact  that  he 
was  one  of  the  witnesses  to  the  justiciary's 
charter  to  the  priory  of  Butley.  (Monaet. 
vLieO.) 

GUUIVILLS,  Gilbert  de  (Bishop  of 
Rochzstbb),  was  archdeacon  of  Lisieux 
when,  on  July  16,  1165,  31  Henry  II.,  he 


GLANVILLE 


303 


I  elected  Bishop  of  Rochester,  and  was 
ohliged  to  be  oidamed  priest  before  he  re- 


ceived consecration.  He  appears  among  the 
justiciers  in  1  Richard  I.,  1189,  and  acted 
as  a  justice  itinerant  in  several  counties. 
He  was  present  also  in  5  and  7  Richard.!., 
when  fines  were  levied  before  him.  {Pipe 
EoU,  27,  &c. ;  ffufUer's  Preface,) 

The  whole  of  his  episcopal  life  was  en- 
gaged in  a  contest  with  the  monks  of  his 
diurch  relative  to  certain  lands  which  he 
claimed  as  belonging  to  the  see ;  and  they 
are  said  by  some  to  have  carried  their  ani- 
mosity so  far  as  to  refuse  the  ordinary  funeral 
rites  to  the  bishop's  body  when  he  died. 
This,  however,  according  to  others,  was  oc- 
casioned by  the  interdict  then  hanging  over 
the  kingdom.  The  bishop^s  death  happened 
on  June  24,  1214,  and  ms  tomb  is  within 
the  rails  of  the  altar  of  his  cathedral.  He 
founded,  and  amply  endowed,  the  hospital 
at  Stroud  in  Kent,  an  act  which  is  a  suffi- 
cient answer  to  the  harsh  character  given  . 
to  him  by  the  monks  in  their  doggerel 
rhymes  written  on  his  death. 

GLANVILLE,  Bartholomew  de,  is  in- 
serted by  Dugdale  as  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant  for  Norfolk  and  Suffolk  in  9  Henry 
in.  It  is  found  that  the  record  in  which 
his  name  was  at  first  introduced  is  altered 
by  substituting  that  of  William  de  Ambly. 
(Rot,  Clatts.  ii.  77.) 

OLAimLLE,  John,  is  stated  by  Anthony 
Wood  (Faetif  iL  64)  to  have  been  bred  an 
attorney.  If  so,  he  is  the  first  judge  who 
is  recoraed  as  having  commenced  his  career 
in  that  branch  of  the  profession.  He  was 
a  younger  son  of  another  John  Glanville,  of 
Tavistock,  and  entered  himself  at  Lincoln's 
Inn  in  1567^  and,  having  retired  from  his 
first  occupation,  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in 
1574.  He  filled  the  office  of  reader  both  in 
Lent  and  autumn  1589,  the  latter  occasion 
being  in  consequence  of  his  having  been 
called  to  the  degree  of  the  coif.  Prince 
states  that  it  was  said  of  him,  and  of 
Thomas  Harris  and  Edward  Drew,  who 
were  called  Serjeants  at  the  same  time,  that 

{gahied) 
spent    Vas  much  as  the  other  two. 
gave   J 

He  does  not  specially  appropriate  these 
characters,  but  intimates  that  Drew  was  on 
the  getting  side. 

I^  was  TOomoted  to  the  bench  as  a  jus- 
tice of  the  Common  Pleas  on  June  30, 1598, 
a  position  which  he  occupied  for  little  more 
than  two  years,  his  death  occurring  on 
July  27, 1600.  Uis  monument  in  Tavistock 
Church  represents  him  as  a  corpulent  man, 
in  full  judicial  costume,  in  a  recumbent 
posture,  and  is  considered  a  superior  work 
of  art.  It  was  erected  by  his  wife,  Alice, 
the  daughter  of  —  Skirret,  who  after  his 
death  married  Sir  Francis  Godolphin.  He 
left  several  children;  his  second  son,  Sir 
John  Glanville,  who  became  a  serjeant,  and 
was  speaker  of  the  House  of  Commona  in 


304 


GLOUCESTER 


OLYNKE 


April  1640,  gained  a  far  higher  eminence  ,  slain  hv  an  arrow  in  a  hunting  matdiy  oo 
for  his  legal  attainments  than  his  father  did,    Decem\>er  24, 1146, 
and  his  Keports  on  controverted  elections 
are  still  in  considerable  estimation.  (MMm, 


403.) 

GLOXTCfESTEB,  MiLO  de  (Earl  of Here- 
pord),  sometimes  called  Milo  Eitz-Walter, 
was  son  of  Walter,  '  constabularius  princens 
militisB  domus  regise/  who  built  the  casUe 
of  Gloucester  on  his  own  domain.  His 
mother  was  Emma,  sister  of  Hameline  de 
Balun,  also  a  powerful  noble,  and  a  com- 
panion of  William  the  Con(^ueror  on  his 
mvasion.  By  his  marriage  with  Sibyl,  the 
eldest  daughter  of  Bernard  de  Newmarche, 
he  acauired  the  honor  of  Brecknock. 

In  31  Henry  I.  he  was  sheriff  of  Stafford- 
shire and  Gloucestershire ;  and  one  of  the 
entries  is  an  allowance  to  him  as  sheriff  of 
thirty  shillings  for  mead  and  beer  pro- 
vided for  the  king.  By  the  same  roU  it 
appears  that  he  was  justice  of  the  forest 
for  the  former  county,  and  that  he  and 
Pain  Fitz-John  were  justices  itinerant  in 
both  counties. 

On  the  death  of  Henry  he  concurred 
witii  the  other  barons  in  placing  Stephen  on 
the  throne,  he  being  then  high  constable  as 
successor  to  his  father,  and  received,  as  the 
first  fruits  of  his  acquiescence,  a  charter  of 
confirmation  of  all  nis  lands.  The  king, 
in  this  grant,  covenants  with  him  ^sicut 
haroni  et  jtuticiario  meOy*  evidentiy  using 
the  expression  as  if  the  two  titles  were 
synonymous. 

The  royal  favour,  however,  made  no  per- 
manent impression ;  for  soon  after  Milo  for- 
sook the  king*8  party,  and  joined  that  of  the 
Empress  Matilda.      To  that  unfortunate 
lady  he  proved  himself  a  firm  friend  during 
the  remainder  of  his  life,  receiving  her  as 
his  guest  in  her  difficulties,  supporting  her 
and  ner  establishment  at  his  own  expense 
during  a  period  of  two  years,  guiding  her 
bv  his  counsels,  and  aiding  her  by  his  arms, 
l^ho  oldest  patent  on  record  shows  the  ex- 
tent of  her  gratitude.    It  is  dated  on  July 
25, 1141.    It  confers  upon  him  the  title  of 
Earl  of  Hereford,  and  gives  him  and  his 
heirs  the  castle  and  moat  of  Hereford,  and 
extensive  privileges.    In  the  following  Sep- 
tember he  was  one  of  those  devoted  warriors 
who  covered  Matilda*s  retreat  from  Win- 
chester when  closely  pressed  by  the  bishop. 
.    He  was  renowned  for  his  bravery  and 
good  conduct,  and  they  were  both  strongly 
exemplified  in  his  almost  romantic  rescue 
of  the  sister  of  the  Earl  of  Chester,  when 
she,  after  the  murder  of  her  husband,  Ri- 
chard de  Clare,  was  besie^^ed  by  the  Welsh, 
and  being  without  provisions,  despaired  of 
succour.    He  gained  the  castie  on  the  side 
where  it  was  considered  inaccessible,  and 
relieved  her  from  her  cbeadful  condition. 

Unharmed  amidst  all  the  perils  he  had 
encountered,  he  was  at  last  accidentally 


He  translated  the  canons  of  the  abbey  of 
Lanthony  in  Monmouthshire^  who  weis 
oppressed  by  the  Welsh,  to  a  pboe  dOed 
the  Hide,  near  Gloucester,  where  he  eili- 
blished  them  in  a  new  abbey  called  Ln- 
thony  Secunda. 

He  had  five  sons,  all  of  whom  died  witk* 
out  issue,  and  three  daughters,  thedesooH 
dauts  of  tiie  eldest  of  whom  acqiiired,berid» 
the  earldom  of  Hereford,  those  of  Eaiexaiid 
Northampton.  These  titles  all  became  ex- 
tinct in  1372.  (Duffdak's  Monad.  liAZU 
136:  Madox,  L  40,  &c.;  Lord  ZfUOm: 
Lingmrd:  Magn.  Hot.  21  Henry  J.) 

OL0XTCE8TEB,  WiUCTER  DE,  one  of  th» 
canons  of  Beverley,  is  called  the  noo  of 
Simon Lymereth.    {Ahb. Placik^li.)   H» 
was  an  officer  of  the  Exchequer,  ana  in  SS 
Edward  I.  was  entrusted  with  the  shenflUtf 
of  Dorset  and  Somerset,  which  he  held  ftr 
five  years.    He  then  was  appointed  to  riot 
the  seaports  to  enquire  into  the  coooeil* 
ment  ot  the  king's  customs  on  wod,  kt, 
(3fa</ar,  i.  784,  iL  169.)    In  28  EdwndL 
he  was  a  perambulator  of  the  forests  ia 
Hants  and  Wilts,  and  about  the  same  thus 
was  selected  as  one  of  the  king's  escheatow^ 
acting  in  the  north  till  the  end  of  that  nign, 
and  in  the  south  for  the  first  four  yean  of 
the  following.    In  35  Edward  L  he  wm  a 
commissioner  of  array  in  Glamorgan,  ind 
paymaster  of  the  levies  there.  {IM.  L  740.) 
During  the  early  years  of  the  rdgn  of 
Edward  II.  he  was  summoned  to  parliament 
among  the  judges,  and  was  regularly  con- 
stituted one  of  the  three  justices  of  lanie 
for  Gloucestershire  and  four  other  counties 
in  1310.    Duffdale  does  not  notice  him  ai  a 
baron  of  the  Exchequer,  although  there  ]» 
no  doubt  that  he  was  so,  being  deeignated 
by  that  titie  in  two  writs,  directinghim ti> 
confer  with  Nicholas  de  Segrave,  and  ii 
the  letters  patent  constituting  Walter  de 
Norwich  a  baron  in  his  place.    The  patent 
of  his  own  appointment  has  not  been  dii- 
covered,  but  it  must  have  been  between 
June  16  and  July  5, 1311,  the  former  being 
the  date  of  his  last  summons  to  parliament, 
where  he  is  evidentiy  placed  among  the  jus- 
tices of  assize,  and  the  latter  being  that  of 
the  writ  to  Nicholas  de  Seffrave. 

He  held  his  rank  for  little  more  than  dx 
weeks ;  for  his  death  is  recorded  in  Walter 
de  Norwich^s  patent,  whidi  is  dated  on 
August  29.  (Par/.  TFri3rs,ii.  929.)  He  died  - 
in  possession  of  considerable  proper^  in 
Surrey,  and  the  counties  of  Lincoln,  Wor- 
cester, and  Gloucester.  By  his  wife  HawiiB 
he  had  a  son  Walter,  who  died  in  16  Ed- 
ward H.    (Cd/.  Jn(^.  p.  m.L  247,806.) 

GLTHITE,  John,  whose  geneakgr  eoB- 
mences  in  the  vear  848  with  Ciliiiifl)feoe&* ' 
tu,  one  of  the  fifteen  tribes  of  N<stiiWaliV>- 
was  the  eldest  son  of  Sir  WQlitM  ''" 


OLYNNE 

kniffhty  of  Glyn-Lliyon  in  Carnaironshire, 
by  Jane,  daughter  of  John  Griffith,  Esq.,  of 
Cfamanron  (Wotton^s Baronet,  iiL  289) ,  and 
was  bom  in  1602  at  the  ancient  seat  of  his 
aDcestors.  He  was  educated  at  Westmin- 
ster School,  and  at  Hart  Hall,  Oxford  (now 
part  of  New  College).  At  the  same  time 
ne  kept  his  terms  at  Lincoln^s  Inn,  and 
haying  been  called  to  the  bar  in  1028,  he 
cot  quickly  into  practice,  for  he  appears  in 
Croke's  Reports  in  Hilary  Term  1033. 

In  August  1638  he  received  a  grant  of 
the  office  of  keeper  of  the  writs  and  rolls  in 
the  Common  Pleas  in  reversion  (Rymery  xz. 
300),  a  place  of  considerable  profit.   Having 
been  previously  appointed  high  steward  of 
Westminster,  he  was  elected  representative 
for  that  ci^  in  both  the  parliaments  that 
met  in  IGiCf.   In  the  last  or  these,  the  Long 
Parliament,  he  showed  himself  to  be  an 
ictiye  partisan  of  the  discontented  party. 
He  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  prosecution 
of  the  Earl  of  Stranord ;  and  one  of  the 
amiments  he  used  to  prove  that  the  multi- 
tode  of  the  earFs  minor  offences  amounted 
to  high  treason,  was  '  Kaine  in  dropps  is  not 
terrible,  but  a  masse  of  it  did  overflow  the 
whole  world.'    In  all  the  proceedings  his 
reasoning  was  inconsequential  and  his  con- 
duct hareh  and  inhuman.    He  was  one  of 
the  committee  to  prepare  the  votes  con- 
demnatory of  the  canons,  and  to  draw  up  a 
charge  against  Archbishop  Laud,  and  was 
the  messenger  from  the  Commons  with  a 
charge  of  mgh  treason  against  the  bishops 
who  had  signed  a  protestation  against  tne 
Lords  proceeding  in  their  absence.   ( White- 
iocke,  53.)    He  supported  the  remonstrance 
on  the  state  of  the  kingdom,  the  carrying 
of  which  had  so  great  an  effect  in  vTidening 
the  breach  with  the  king  ( Vemey^s  Notes, 
44-125);  and  he  published  a  speech,  deli- 
vered by  him  in  January  1642.  strenuously 
▼indicating  the  privileges  of  tne  Commons 
on  the  occasion  of  the  kins^s  unadvised  at- 
tendance at  the  house,  ana  demanding  the 
delivery  of  the  five  members  whom  he  had 
caused  to  be  accused  of  high  treason.   (Pari. 
But,  ii.  1023.^    He  further  showed  his  zeal 
k  the  cause  ov  subscribing  100/.  in  money 
or  plate,  togetlier  with  the  maintenance  of 
*  horae,  for  the  defence  of  the  parliament. 
(Xote$  and  Queries,  1st  S.  xii.  358.) 

Hia  active  zeal  will  account  for  his  being 
Mected  on  May  30, 1643,  recorder  of  London. 
In  the  next  year  he  assisted  at  the  Assembly 
of  Diyinea,  and  had  the  thanks  of  the  house 
toft  his  speech  on  the  Jus  Divinum.  In  all 
the  questions  discussed  he  was  a  popular 
^ebttter,  but  stoutly  opposed  the  self-aeny- 
i)i^  ordinance.  (Ciarendon,  Y,Sd.)  Noun- 
Villing  sharer  in  the  forfeited  spoils  of  the 
loyalists,  the  small  were  as  welcome  as 
tiiie  great,  and  he  did  not  disdain  a  grant  of 
Vm  books  of  Mr.  Vaughan  of  Lincoln's  Inn 
(  WhiUiocke,  177),  at  Uie  time  he  was  being 


GLYNNE 


305 


gratified  with  the  clerkship  of  the  petty 
bag,  worth  1000/.  a  year. 

The  Presbyterian  party,  with  which  he 
was  connected,  becoming  jealous  of  the 
army,  took  measures  in  June  1647  for  ite 
being  disbanded.  Sir  Thomas  Fairfax  coun- 
teracted this  attempt  by  brin^g  a  charge 
in  the  name  of  the  army  a^nst  eleven  of 
the  opposing  leaders,  iucludmg  Glynne,  and 
insisting  on  their  being  sequestered  from 
their  attendance  on  the  house.  Though 
the  Commons  at  first  resisted  the  inter- 
ference, the  accused  members,  upon  the 
army's  advance  towards  London,  thought 
proper  to  withdraw.  This  was  quickly  fol- 
lowed by  their  impeachment,  their  expul- 
sion from  the  house,  and  the  attempt  to 
Elace  Mr.  Steele  as  recorder  instead  of 
Hynne.  After  a  year's  byplay,  resulting 
in  the  discharge  of  the  accused,  and  their 
being  restored  to  their  seats,  the  farce  con- 
cluded, having  answered  its  purpose  of  get- 
ting ria  for  the  time  of  the  popular  opponente 
of  the  army  and  their  plans.  (Aid,  253- 
310.)  Glynne  was  re-admitted  on  June  7, 
1648,  and  was  so  entirely  restored  to  confi- 
dence as  to  be  appointed  in  the  following 
September  one  of  the  commissioners  to  treat 
with  the  king  in  the  Isle  of  Wight,  and 
while  engaged  in  that  service  to  be  named, 
on  October  12,  a  serj eant-at-law.  {Ibid,  334, 
342.)  In  DecemlJer,  however,  he  was  one 
of  the  victims  of  Pride's  Purge,  by  the  vote 
of  the  Rump  repealing  the  previous  revoca- 
tion of  the  proceedings  against  the  eleven 
impeached  members,  which,  so  far  from 
bemg  detrimental  to  him,  turned  out  to  his 
future  advantage,  by  relieving  him  from  all 
implication  in  the  murder  of  the  king. 

Glynne's  party  having  now  lost  all  power, 
he  soon  after  showed  an  inclination  to  side 
vdth  that  of  Cromwell,  who,  willing  enough 
to  encourage  his  advances,  made  him,  on 
becoming  protector,  his  Serjeant.    In  this 
character  he  appeared  in  the  High  Court  of 
Justice,  and  went  the  Oxford  Circuit  as  a 
judge  in  1654.    In  the  same  year  he  re- 
ceived the  appointment  of  chamberlain  of 
Chester,  and  was  returned  member  for  Car- 
narvonshire in  Cromwell's  parliament  of 
September,'   in  which  he  seems  to  have 
been  extraordinarily  silent     In  AtoiI  1655 
he  presided  at  the  trial  of  Colonel  Penrud- 
dock  for  the  rising  in  the  west,  when  the 
judges  were    seized    at    Salisbury    {St^xte 
Trials,  v.  518,  604,  767;  Athen,  Oxon,   i. 
xxiii.,  iii.  604^ ;    and  on  July  15,   when 
Chief  Justice  KoUe,  who  had  refused  to  be 
concerned  in  that  trial,  had  retired,  was 
put  into  his  place  as  chief  justice  of  the 
Upper  Bench.   (Style's  Reports,  462.)    This 
position,  there   bein^  then  no  House   of 
Lords,  did  not  disquamy  him  firom  sitting  for 
Flintfiiire  in  Cromwell's  next  parliament 
of  September  1656.    He  supported  Alder- 
man's Pack's  motion  to  offer  Cromwell  the 


306 


GLYNNE 


title  of  l^inj^y  And.  being  one  of  the  com- 
mittee to  forward  the  applicationi  in  a 
roundabout  inconclusive  speech  he  endea- 
voured to  remove  the  protector's  scruples, 
by  arguing  that  the  kingly  office  is  essential 
to  our  constitution.  (Harris's  Lives,  iii  472.) 
He  cunningly  published  his  speech  as  a 
pamphlet  on  the  king's  return,  under  the 
title  of '  Monarchy  asserted  to  be  the  best, 
most  ancient,  and  legal  form  of  Govern- 
ment' In  the  new  constitution  which  fol- 
lowed he  accepted  a  seat  in  Cromwell's 
House  of  Peers.     (  Whitdocke,  666.) 

The  protector  died  on  September  3, 1668, 
and  Glynne  was  continued  chief  justice  by 
Hichard,  on  whose  removal  and  tlie  return 
of  the  Long  Parliament,  with  a  prophetic 

glance  at  the  political  horizon,  he  resigned 
is  chief  justiceship.  In  the  new  parlia- 
ment, <»Ued  the  Convention  Parliament, 
that  met  on  April  25,  1660^  he  was  re- 
turned for  the  county,  and  his  son  for  the 
town,  of  Carnarvon,  and  played  his  cards 
so  adroitiy  that,  on  the  arrival  of  Charles 
n.  in  England,  he  was  included  in  the  first 
batch  of  Serjeants,  being  those  who  had 
been  appointed  irregularis  by  the  parlia- 
ment. On  November  8,  in  the  same  year, 
all  bygones  forgotten,  he  was  made,  ac- 
cording to  Anthony  Wood,  *  by  the  cor- 
rupt dealing  of  the  then  lord  chancellor ' 
(Clarendon),  the  king's  serjeant  (JSider- 
Jfi/tf  3),  and  was  knighted.  He  and  May- 
nard,  who  also  attamed  the  same  rank, 
were  both  employed  in  the  crown  prosecu- 
tions that  followed,  and  divided  the  shame 
of  appearing  against  Sir  Harry  Vane,  their 
old  coadjutor  and  friend.  (Burton* s  Diary, 
iii.  175, 182.) 

Charles's  coronation  took  place  on  April 
23, 1661 ;  and  the  account  given  by  Pepvs 
of  an  accident  on  the  occasion  shows  the 
feeling  that  existed  in  regard  to  the  two 
leffal  renegadoes :  '  I  have  not  heard  of  any 
mischance  to  anybody  through  it  all,  but 
only  to  Serjeant  Glynne,  whose  horse  fell 
upon  him  yesterday  and  is  like  to  kill  him, 
which  people  do  please  themselves  to  see 
how  just  God  is  to  punish  the  rogue  at 
such  a  time  as  this,  he  being  now  one  of 
the  king's  Serjeants,  and  rode  in  the  caval- 
cade with  Maynard,  to  whom  people  wish 
the  same  fortune.'  That  the  nostile  im- 
pression was  not  confined  to  the  courtier  is 
proved  by  Butler's  immortalising  their 
names  in  tne  following  couplet : — 

Did  not  the  learned  Glynne  and  Maynard 
To  make  good  robjects  traitors  strain  bard  ? 

He  continued  in  the  practice  of  his  pro- 
fession till  his  death,  which  occurred  at  bis 
house  in  Portugal  Row,  Lincoln's  Inn  Fields, 
on  November  15, 1666.  He  was  buried  in 
his  own  vault  under  the  altar  in  St  Mar- 
garet'Sy  Westminster. 

The  reputation  of  his  wealth  was  no 
doubt  founded  in  tnith;  ibr,  besides  his 


GODFREY 

professional  gains,  the  places  which  he  eo^ 
joyed  must  have  brougnt  him  consdersble 
profit    He  was  undoubtedly  an  able  lawje^ 
and  in  his  judicial  character,  as  between 
man   and  man,   was   just   and  impaitiiL 
Siderfin  (159)  states  that  his  plainness  nd 
method  in  arguing  the  most  intricate  em 
were  such  that  it  was  made  dear  to  tke 
comprehension  of  every  student    But  bm 
his  praise  must  end.    As  a  politician,  thouh 
the  cunning  with  which  ne  joined  all  ae 
ruling  powers  in    turn   may  be  admind, 
wlio  but  must  despise  his  vuious  tergive^ 
sations? 

Sir  John  was  twice  married,  ffis  fint 
wife  was  Frances,  daughter  of  Artluff 
Squib,  Esq. ;  his  second  was  Anne,  dang^ 
ter  and  coheir  of  John  Manning,  Esq.,  of 
Crallo  in  Sussex.  By  both  he  left  childm 
His  eldest  son,  William  (hj  his  first  wife), 
was,  during  his  fathers  life,  created  • 
baronet  on  May  20,  1661,  and  his  deaen- 
dants  still  enjoy  the  titie. 

OOBBOLT,  John,  was  of  Toddington  ia 
Suffolk,  and  after  studying  at  Buntid's 
Inn  was  admitted  into  Gray's  Inn,  when 
he  was  called  to  the  bar,  and  was  elected 
reader  in  autumn  1627,  and  soon  appen 
in  Croke^s  Reports  with  considerable  ptiD- 
tice.  He  received  the  dignitv  of  the  caif 
at  the  great  call  in  1636 ;  and  it  must  liiie 
been  ^m  his  professional  reputation,  ftr 
there  is  no  account  of  his  intenering  in  fbe 
political  troubles  of  the  time,  that,  wbea 
the  parliament  took  upon  them  to  appoiot 
the  judges,  he  was  selected  to  fill  a  vacut 
seat  in  the  Common  Pleas.  This  occmnd 
on  April  80, 1647,  and  he  was  immedistelj 
addea  to  the  commission  to  hear  causes  ii 
Chancery.  (IVhitehcke,  245;  -^^^^ 
He  did  not  long  retain  his  place,  but  diH 
at  his  house  in  High  Holbom  on  Augort 
3,  1684.  (Begister.)  His  collection  of 
Reports  was  published  soon  after  his  desA* 
The  family  appears  to  be  now  extinct 

OOBEBEDE,  WiLLiAic,  was  a  resident  it 
Middleton  in  Norfolk.  His  name  does  sot 
occur  in  the  Year  Books  till  he  was  esDed 
to  the  degree  of  a  serjesnt-at-law  in  8 
Henry  VI.    In  1431  he  received  tiie  «• 

? ointment  of  king's  seijeant,  and  on  Joly  «^ 
433,  he  was  constituted  a  judse  of  tb* 
King's  Bench,  his  attendance  in  wnich  oomt 
is  noticed  till  Easter,  21  Henry  VL,  1441 
His  wife  Catherine  was  a  great  promoter 
of  the  rebuilding  of  the  churah  of  Walpols 
St.  Peter  in  Marshland,  in  the  window  of 
which  her  effigy  is  placed.  (Blom^dh 
Norfolk,  i.  715.) 

€k)BFBET  (Bishop  of  Bath)  is  p^M^ 
erroneously  by  Thynne  and  Phil^ot  Ml 
their  followers  in  the  list  of  the  cibaniJll 
of  Henry  I.  The  sole  aathoritj  tksj  rff"^ 
that  of  Matthew  Ptoker,  who  b  MilM 
Archbishop  William  GcnM  m 
oonaecratea  'Gtodfridnm,  HUB  i 


GOLDINGTON 

ritxm,  Bathoniensem  Ej^iscopum/  The 
word  'regniy'  however,  in  tnis  passage, 
was  no  doubt,  by  a  mistake  of  the  tran- 
scriber or  the  printer,  substitated  for 
^refiinsB,'  as  (Jodirey  certainly  was  chan- 
cellor to  Queen  Adeliza;  and  the  term 
^cancellarius  regni,'  or  'Anglise,'  was  not 
introduced  till  long  afterwaras,  that  ofHcer 
being  invariably  ouled  at  this  period  ^  can- 
celltfios  rens/  This  consecration  oc- 
curred also  m  1123,  when  Ranulph  was 
chancellor. 

Godfrey  was  a  Bel^an  priest  who  came 
over  to  England  with  the  queen  on  her 
marriage  in  1121,  as  one  of  her  chaplains. 
He  was  soon  raised  to  the  post  of  her  chan- 
cellor; andf  by  her  interest,  shortly  after- 
wards obtained  Uie  bishopric  of  JBath,  to 
▼hich  he  was  consecrated  on  August  26, 
1123.  He  presided  over  his  see  nearly 
twelve  years,  and,  dying  on  August  16, 
1135,  was  buried  at  Bath.  {Madox,  i.  60 ; 
Godmm,  368  :  Angl  Sac.  i.  560.) 

eOLDnrOTOH,  William  de,  whose  fa- 
mily was  established  in  Essex,  where  he 
held  the  manors  of  Raurethe,  Badewe 
Parva,  and  Ringgers  in  Terling,  is  men- 
tioned in  the  Year  Book  as  an  advocate  in 
the  early  part  of  the  reign  of  Edward  IT., 
in  the  fourth  year  of  which  he  was  ap- 
pointed one  of  the  three  justices  of  assize 
ff*r  Kent,  Sussex,  and  Surrey.  He  con- 
tbued  to  serve  for  several  years  in  those 
and  other  counties,  and  was  regularly  sum- 
moofsd  to  parliament  in  virtue  of  his  office 
tin  the  eleventh  year.  He  died  in  12 
Edward  H.,  and  left  a  son  named  John, 
who  was  an  adherent  of  the  Earl  of  Lan- 
caster and  the  other  barons  in  rebellion. 
(Pni.  Writs,  ii.  p.  ii.  934 ;  Col,  Liqms.  p. 
m.i.  292.) 

GOLDSBOSOXTOH,  Edward,  of  Golds- 
borough  in  Yorkshire,  was  of  a  very 
ancient  and  respectable  family.  He  was 
probably  an  officer  of  the  Exchequer,  to 
the  bench  of  which  court  he  was  raised, 
as  third  baron,  on  June  26,  1483,  1 
Riehaid  HI.  He  was  continued  in  his 
place  by  Heniy  VIL,  who  made  him  second 
baran  on  December  5, 1488.  After  sitting 
there  for  about  six  years  more,  he  was  suc- 
ceeded hj  Thomas  Bwnewell  on  October  1, 
1484.  His  daughter  Elizabeth  married  Sir 
John  Gower,  the  ancestor  of  the  Duke  of 
Sutherland.     {CoUMs  Peerage,  ii.  444.) 

GOODRICH,  Thomas  (Bishop  op  Ely). 
Ibia  learned  prelate  was  the  second  son  of 
Edward  Goodrich,  of  East  Kirby  in  the 
eoanty  of  Lincoln,  by  his  third  wife,  Jane^ 
lofe  ttoghter  of  ]t&.  Williamson^  of  Boston. 
The  name  was  pronounced  and  often  spelled 
Ooodricky  notwithstanding  that  the  epi- 
sram  ghren  by  Granger  (i.  136)  suggests  a 
diffBnnt  reading : — 

£t  bonna^  et  dives,  b«ne  janctns  et  optimua  ordo ; 
PjBBoadit  bonitas,  pone  sequontur  opet. 


GOODBIC& 


3or 


He  was  educated  at  Benett  College, 
Cambrid^,  from  which  he  was  elected  a 
fellow  of  Jesus  College  in  1510,  and  was 
proctor  of  the  university  in  1515.  His 
proficiency  in  the  canon  and  civil  laws  led 
to  his  appointment  as  one  of  the  syndics  in 
1529,  to  prepare  the  university's  answer  on 
the  question  of  the  king's  marriage  vnth 
Queen  Catherine.  Thus  introduced  to  the 
royal  notice,  he  received  the  rectory  of  St. 
Peter  8  Cheap  in  London,  and  was  nomi- 
nated one  of  the  Mug's  chaplains,  with  a 
canonry  in  St  Stephen's,  \Vestminster. 
On  March  17,  15o4,  he  was  elected 
Bishop  of  Ely.    {Rymer,  xiv.  486.) 

His  zeal  for  the  Reformation  was  soon 
manifested    in    his    diocese    by   stringent 
orders  to  his  clergy  to  erase  the  pope's 
name  from  all  their  books,  and  to  demolish 
all  im^^es  and  relics  in  their  churches. 
In  153/  he  was  one  of  the  compilers  of 
the  work  which  was  called  the '  Bishops' 
Book ; '  and  soon  afterwards  the  Gospel  of 
St.  John  was  allotted  to  his  share  in  the 
revision  of  the  New  Testament.    In  1540 
he  seems  to  have  been  suspected  of  being 
concerned  in   the  translation  of  Melanc- 
thon's  Epistle,  as  his  study  was  directed 
to  be  searched.     (^Acts  Privy  CoxmcU,  vii. 
98.)    Under  Edward  VI.  he  assisted  in  the 
compilation  of  the  Liturgy ;   and  in  1549 
and  1550  he  was  one  of  the  commissioners 
assigned  to  enquire  *  super  hseretica  pravi- 
tate.'    {Rymer,  xv.   181,   250.)    On  De- 
cember 22,  1551,  the  Great  Seal  on  the 
sudden  retirement  of  Lord  Chancellor  Rich 
was  given  into  the  bishop's  hands  as  keeper. 
This  deposit,  which  seems  in  the  first  in- 
stance to  have  been  only  temporary  till 
Rich's  recovery  from  his  pretenaed  iUness, 
was  by  the  almost  immediate  discovery  of 
the  real  cause  of  that  minister's  retirement 
converted  into  a  permanent  one,  with  the  full 
title  of  lord  chancellor,  on  January  19, 1552. 
In  the  parliament  which  met  on  the  next 
day  the  new  Liturgy  was  made  the  law  of 
the  land.     (Robertson's  HeyUn,  221,  252, 
291.)    Pre-vaously  to  the  Mng's  death  he 
had  settled  the  crown  on  Ladv  Jane  Grey, 
by    an    instrument   which   the    Duke  of 
Northumberland  had  induced  the  bishop 
to  authenticate  with  the  Great  Seal.    He 
does  not  appear  to  have  been  consulted  on 
the  subject ;  but  T^th  the  rest  of  the  coun- 
cil he  subscribed  the  undertaking  to  support 
the  ror^al  testament,  and  he  acted  on  the 
council  during  the  nine  days  of  that  un- 
fortunate lady  s  reign,  signing  as  chancellor 
several  letters  issued  by  them  on  her  behalf, 
the  last  of  which  is  dated  on  July  19.    He 
was  accordingly  one  of  the  prisoners  named 
for  trial  on  the  aocesnon  oi  Queen  Mary ; 
and  it  was  perhaps  on  account  of  his  hav- 
ing joined  m  the  order  sent  by  the  council 
on  July  20,  commanding  the  Duke  of  North- 
umberland to  disarm,  that  her  majesty  atcock 

x2 


30» 


GQUU) 


hk  name  out  of  the  list    (^Chron,  Qn,  Jane, 
91,  109;  Lmgard,  viL  122.) 

The  Great  Seal  was  of  course  taken  from 
him,  and  his  death  within  a  year  from  his 
dismissal  prohabl^  released  him  from  those 
investigations  wmch  were  so  ficital  to  some 
of  his  brethren. 

He  died  at  his  palace  at  Somersham  on 
May  10,  1554,  and  on  his  brass  in  Ely 
Cathedral  he  is  represented  in  his  episcopal 
robes  as  he  wore  them  after  the  Reforma- 
tion, with  a  Bible  in  one  hand,  and  the 
Great  Seal  in  the  other.  Of  his  munificent 
expenditure  on  the  buildings  of  his  see  the 
long  gallery  at  Ely  Palace  is  an  existing  me- 
morial {AfiffL  Sac,  1 676  j  Godwin,  272.) 
QOJTLD,  Henbt,  was  the  son  of  Andrew 
Gould,  of  Winsham  in  Somersetshire.  He 
was  bom  about  1644,  and  was  called  to  the 
bar  of  the  Middle  Temple  in  1667,  and 
elected  a  bencher  in  1689.  Included  in 
the  great  call  of  Serjeants  in  1692,  he  was 
made  one  of  the  king^s  Serjeants  in  the  fol- 
lowing year.  In  this  character  he  con- 
ducted the  case  for  the  bill  of  attainder 
against  Sir  John  Fenwick  in  1696. 

On  January  26, 1699,  he  was  promoted 
to  be  a  judge  of  the  King's  Bencn,  and  on 
his  first  circuit  had  the  unpleasant  necessity 
of  inflicting  a  fine  of  100/.  on  Sir  John  Bolls 
at  Lincoln,  for  giving  him  the  lie,  kickiug 
the  sheriff,  and  other  disorderly  conduct. 
(StaU  Trials,  xiii.  546 ;  LuttreU,  iy.  545.) 

On  the  death  of  King  William  his  pat^t 
was  renewed  by  Queen  Anne,  under  whom 
he  acted  for  the  eight  remaining  years  of 
his  life,  dying  at  his  chambers  in  Serjeants' 
Inn,  Chancery  Lane,  on  March  26,  1710. 
His  residence  was  at  Sharpham  Park,  be- 
tween Street  and  Walton,  in  Somersetshire, 
the  future  birthplace  of  the  celebrated  no- 
Telist  and  magistrate  Henry  Fielding,  who 
was  the  son  of  Sarah,  the  judge's  daughter, 
by  her  marriage  with  Lieutenant-General 
fielding,  nephew  of  the  Earl  of  Denbigh. 

He  married  Miss  Davidge,  of  Worcester, 
and  by  her  left  a  son,  Davidge,  the  father 
of  the  next- named  j  udge.  (I^rd  Raymond, 
414,  1309;  CoiUnson,  ii.  268.) 

OOXTLD,  Henbt,  the  grandson  of  the  last- 
named,  and  the  son  of  Davidge  Gould,  Esq., 
of  Sharpham  Park,  a  barrister  of  the  Mid- 
dle Temple,  by  his  wife,  Honora,  daughter 
of  —  Hockmore,  of  Bucklnnd  Baron  in 
Devonshire,  was  bom  about  the  year  1710. 
The  Middle  Temple  called  him  to  the 
bar  in  June  1734 ;  and  at  the  end  of  twenty 
years  he  arrived  at  the  dignity  of  a  bencher 
on  being  made  kind's  counsel.  His  business 
was  considerable,  out  he  was  distinguished 
more  by  the  soundness  of  his  law  man  by 
the  power  of  his  oratory.  In  Michaelmas 
1761  he  was  raised  to  the  bench  as  a  baron 
of  the  Exchequer,  where  he  sat  till  the  end 
of  the  next  year,  when  he  was  removed  into 
the  Common  Pleas  on  January  24, 1763. 


GBANDEN 

With  acknowledged  ability  he  exercised 
his  judicial  duties  till  his  death  at  the  age 
of  eighty-four  on  March  5, 1794,  a  period  of 
thirty-three  years  ^m  hisfirst  appomtment. 
In  the  riots  of  1780,  when  the  Jdnfft  after 
Lord  Mansfield's  house  had  been  oumt, 
offered  to  all  the  judges  the  protection  of 
the  military.  Judge  Gould  is  said  to  have 
declined  the  proffared  aid.  and  to  have  de- 
clared that  he  would  ratner  die  than  live 
under  any  other  than  the  laws  of  England. 
He  was  buried  at  Stapleford  Abbotts  in 
Essex,  of  which  parish  his  brother,  Dr. 
William  Gould,  was  rector.  He  married 
Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Dr.  Walker,  arch- 
deacon of  Wells.  Their  only  son  dying  in 
the  iudfi[e*s  life,  his  large  fortune  was 
divided  oetween  his  two  daughters,  one 
the  wife  of  the  Hon.  Temple  Luttrell,  and 
the  other  of  the  Earl  of  Cavan.  (OMn^ 
son,  ii.  268.) 

OEAHAM,  HoBEBT,  was  the  son  and 
heir  of  James  Graham,  Esq.,  of  Dalston  in 
Middlesex,  and  was  bom  at  Hackney  on 
October  14,  1744.  He  was  educateJl  at 
Trinity  College,  Cambridge,  and  entering? 
the  Inner  Temple  in  1766,  he  was  called 
to  the  bar  in  due  course.  After  many 
years*  practice,  he  was  in  February  179& 
made  attorney-general  to  the  Prince  of 
Wales^  and  long's  coimsel  in  the  April 
followmg.  In  June  1800  he  was  raised  to 
the  bendi  of  the  Exchequer,  on  which  he 
sat  for  nearly  twenty-seven  years. 

He  was  not  considered  a  yery  efficient 
judge,  and  that  his  previous  reputation  as 
a  lawyer  was  not  very  high  appears  from 
Sir  Edward  Law's  remark  when  he  was 
appointed, '  that  he  put  Mr.  Justice  Rooke 
upon  a  pinnacle.'  His  principal  distaD^ 
tion  was  his  equanimity  of  temper.  So 
great  was  his  politeness  and  urbanity  to 
every  one  that  Jekyll  said  of  him,  '  No  one 
but  his  sempstress  could  rufiie  him.'  His 
dignity  must  have  been  somewhat  dis- 
turbed by  an  unlucky  accident  which  befell 
him  at  Newcastle,  while  judge  of  assixa 
there,  and  which  was  made  the  subject  of 
a  humorous  song  from  the  pen  o£  Mr. 
John  Shield,  to  be  found  by  the  curious  in 
Dr.  Bruce's  interesting  *  Handbook  to  New- 
castle-upon-Tyne.' lie  resigned  in  February 
1827,  in  his  eighty-third  y^ar,  but  lived 
several  years  anerwards,  and  died  at  his 
sister's,  at  Long  Ditton  in  Surrey,  when  he 
was  beyond  ninety. 

GSAHCTTBT,  William  de,  is  noticed 
both  by  Dugdale  and  Madox  (i  356,  ii. 
320)  as  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  in  53 
IJenry  HI.,  1268,  but  no  trace  of  his  con- 
tinuance in  office  or  of  his  personal  history 
has  been  ascertained,  except  that  a  Walter 
de  Grancourt,  perhaps  his  son,  was  sheriff 
of  Norfolk  and  Suffolk  in  5  Edwazd  I 
(Abb,  Rot,  Orig,  i.  28.) 
OSAKBEV,  W  ABiN  DE,  was  one  of  the 


GRANT 

four  josticieTB  appointed  in  4  Henry  IIL, 
1220,  to  deliyer  the  gaols  of  Hereford 
(BoL  CUnu,  i  437),  but  his  name  does  not 
afterwards  occur. 

OBAHT,  William.    Among  the  judges 
that  distinguished  the  reign  of  George  lU,, 
Sir  Willuun  Grant  occupies  one  of  the 
most  prominent  places,  and  of  his  seren 
countrymen  who  graced  the  judicial  bench 
he  stands  next  in  reputation  to  Lord  Mans- 
field.   He  was  bom  at  Elchies  in  Moray- 
shire in  1755.    His  father,  James  Grant, 
was  a  humble  member  of  that  branch  of  the 
ancient  dan  of  the  Grants  settled  at  Bal« 
domie,  haying  been  at  first  a  small  farmer 
and  afterwards  collector  of  the  customs 
in  the  Isle  of  Man.    In  consequence  of  the 
death  of  both  his  parents  while  he  was  in 
early  youth,  he  was  left  to  the  care  of  his 
>Qncle,   a  wealthy  merchant   in    London. 
After  passing  through  the  grammar  school 
at  Elgin,  he  was  sent  to  the  college  of 
Aber&en,  and  then  spent  two  years  at 
Leyden  in  studying  the  ciyil  law.    He  is 
ttid  to  haye  resortea  for  a  short  time  to  an 
attomey*s  office  as  a  useful  introduction  to 
nractieal  knowledge.    Entering  Lincoln's 
Inn  on  January  30, 1769,  he  was  called  to 
the  bar  on  February  3,  1774,  and  deter- 
mined to  tiy  his  fortune  in  Canada,  where 
he  w^it  in  the  next  year.    Soon  fdter  his 
arriyal  he  rendered  military  sendee  by 
commanding  a  body  of  yolunteers  during 
the  siege  of  Quebec  by  the  Americans. 
The   goyemor   appointed   him  attomey- 
generu  of  the  colony,  where  for  seyeral 
fobeequent  years  he  had  the  principal  lead 
as  an  adyocate.    Not  satisfied  with  shining 
in  so  limited  a  sphere,  he  then  resigned  his 
office  and   returned   to   England.    Here, 
howeyer,  his   colonial  fame  had  not  ex- 
tended, and  his  effi>rts   in   the  common 
law  courts  and  on  the  Home  Circuit  were 
attended  with  so  little  success  that  he 
eoDtemplated  returning  to  his  former  exile. 
Bat  his  good  fortune  introduced  him  to 
two  patrons,  who  were  capable  both  of 
isnreciating  and  rewarding  his  superior 
tsMrta.   Mr.  Pitt,  requiring  some  informa- 
tion relatiye  to  Canada,  was  acddentall^ 
nferred  to  him,  and,  haying  found  his 
intdligence  useful  and  abundant,  and  his 
yiews  correct  and  statesmanlike,  he  at  once 
law  Ids  yalue  and  commenced  that  friend- 
ihip  which  secured  his  future  promotion. 
As  one  of  its  first  fruits  he  was  returned  to 
lariiament  at  the  general  election  in  No- 
tember  1790  for  the  borough  of  Shaftes- 
Voy.    He  aoon  distinguished  himself  in 
tbe  debates,  ^ying  an  efiectiye  support  to 
tke  minister  in  the  political  difficulties  of 
that  tionbloos  time.    In  1796  he  was  re- 
totned  for  the  county  of  Banfi^,  which  he 
eontinaed  to  represent  while  he  remained 
ianariianient. 
Hia  ■eoond  patron  was  Lord  Thurlow, 


GRAKT 


309 


who,  after  listening  to  his  argument  on  a 
Scotch  appeal  in  tne  House  of  Lords,  ex- 
pressed tne  highest  opinion  of  his  reasoning 
powers,  and  encouraged  him  to  deyote  him- 
self to  the  equity  courts.    There  he  con- 
sequently took  his   stan^  and  in  April 
1793  receiying  a  jMitent  oi  precedence,  he 
in  a  yery  short  time  acquire  a  leading 
business.    In  the  same  year  he  was  ap- 
pointed one  of  the  judges  of  the  Carmar- 
then Circuit,  and  in  1795  solicitor-general 
to  the  queen.    In  1798  he  became  chief 
justice  of  Chester,  and  in  July  1799  he  was 
appointed  solicitor-general,  and  blighted. 
He  held  this  office  nearly  two  years,  and 
on  May  27, 1801,  was  made  master  of  the 
Rolls,  and  at  once  justified  the  great  ex- 
pectations formed  of  him.     During   the 
seyenteen  years  in  which  he  sat  in  the 
Rolls  Court  he  was   looked  upon   as  a 
perfect  model  of  judicial  excellence.    No 
judge  eyer  gaye  more  satis£actioii«    Ws 
jud^ents  were  not  only  conyindng  by 
their  practical  wisdom,  but  were  remark- 
able lor  the  clearness  with  which  they 
explained    the    principles   of  equity  on 
which  they  were  founded.    No  one  who 
has  practised  under  him  can  forget  the 
patient  attention  with  which  he  listened 
to  all  the  statements  and  arguments  of 
counsel,  or  the  discrimination  he  eyinced 
in  extracting  from  confused  details  all  that 
was  releyant,  or  the  deamess  and  sim- 
plicity of  his  reasons  when  he  pronounced 
his  decisions. 

To  the  regret  of  all,  he  retired  firom  his 
court  on  December  23, 1817.  The  equity 
bar  testified  their  respect  and  yeneration 
for  him  by  requesting  him  to  sit  for  his 

Eicture,  which,  pamted  by  Sir  Thomas 
lawrence,  now  graces  the  hall  in  which 
he  sat.  For  a  few  subsequent  years  he 
assisted  in  hearing  appeals  at  the  cock- 
pit, but  afterwards  altc^ther  retired  firom 
public  life,  and  liyed  to  attain  his  eighty- 
third  year.  He  died  at  Dawlish  in  Deyon- 
shire  on  May  25, 1832. 

When  England  was  threatened  with  inr 
yasion.  Sir  William,  while  master  of  the 
Rolls,  for  a  second  time  assumed  the  mili- 
tary habit,  and,  joining  the  yolunteers  who 
embodied  themselyes  for  the  safety  of  the 
country,  he  was  called  upon,  no  doubt  firom 
the  tradition  of  his  prowess  and  experience 
at  Quebec,  to  take  the  command  of  the 
Lincoln's  Inn  corps,  which  he  put  into  as 
^ood  a  state  of  efficiency  as  any  m  Lond(m. 
In  1809  he  was  elected  lord  rector  of  the 
uniyersity  of  Aberdeen. 

The  impression  which  he  made  in  parlia- 
ment was  wonderful.  Few  men  haye  gained 
a  greater  ascendency.  Lord  Brougham  re- 
lates that  eyen  Mr.  Fox  felt  it  difficult  to 
answer  him,  and  that  once,  beinflr  annoyed 
by  some  members  talking  behind  nim  wnile 
he  was  listening  to  one  of  Sir  Williaai'a 


310 


GRAS 


speeches,  he  tuned  round  and  asked  them 
anaiply, '  Do  you  think  it  so  vexy  pleasant 
a  thug  to  have  to  answer  a  speech  like 
thai?*  The  effect  of  his  addresses  was  thus 
described  at  a  later  period: — 'There  was 
one  extraordinary  oration  that  night — Sir 
William  Grant's;  quite  a  masterpiece  of 
his  peculiar  and  miraculous  manner.  Con- 
ceive an  hour  and  a  half  of  syllogisms 
strung  tofipether  in  the  closest  tissues,  so 
artfuUy  clear  that  you  think  every  suc- 
cessive inference  unavoidable;  so  rapid  that 
vou  have  no  leisure  to  reflect  where  you 
nave  been  brought  from,  or  to  see  where 
you  are  to  be  carried ;  and  so  dry  of  orna- 
ment, or  illustration,  or  reflection,  that 
your  attention  is  stretched — stretched — 
racked.  All  this  is  done  without  a  single 
note.'  (Memoir  of  Francis  Homer,  i.  285.) 
Though  he  opposed  most  of  the  beneficial 
alterations  in  the  law  suggested  by  Sir 
Samuel  Homilly's  intellectual  and  com- 
prehensive mind,  to  Sir  Samuel's  amelio- 
ration of  the  criminal  code  he  gave  a 
hearty  support 

0EA8^  IsiCHOLAS  LE,  IS  the  last  named 
in  a  wnt  by  which  justices  itinerant  into 
Northamptonshire  were  appointed,  dated 
August  3,  1285,  13  Edward  I.  {Chron. 
Petroburg,  102,  118.)  He  was  appointed 
sheriff  of  Surrey  and  Sussex  in  8  Edward  I., 
and  held  the  office  for  five  ^ears.  The  ! 
castle  of  Odyham  in  Hampshire  was  also 
committed  to  his  charge  in  10  Edward  I.  | 
{Ahh.  Hot.  Orig.  i.  35,  41.) 

He  was  possessed  of  the  manors  of  Een- 
ger  in  Terling  and  of  Little  Badewe  in 
Essex.    (Abb.  Placii.  190-^5.) 

OSXEX,  Thomas,  who  was  bom  and 
educated  at  Cambridge,  held  the  office  of 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  for  one  year  and 
ten  months,  between  January  20, 1676,  and 
November  18, 1577,  when  he  died;  but  all 
that  is  known  of  him  is  that  he  lived  sixty- 
three  years,  and  was  buried  in  the  church 
of  St.  "Botolph,  Aldersgate.  He  left  a  son 
and  daughter.     (Stow's  London,  832-^3.) 

OBEEH,  HEimr.  Queen  Isabella  having 
granted  to  Henry  Green,  probably  for  some 
services  as  an  advocate,  the  manor  of  Brigge- 
stoke  in  Northamptonshire,  her  son  Ed- 
ward HL  confirmed  it  to  him  for  life.  He 
was  appointed  one  of  the  king's  serjeants- 
at-law  in  19  Edward  IH.,  and  was  called 
to  the  bench  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  Fe- 
bruary 6, 1354,  28  Edward  HI.,  when  he 
was  loiighted. 

In  1358,  having  been  cited  before  the 
pope  for  pronouncing  a  jud^ent  against 
the  Bishop  of  Ely  for  harbouring  one  of  his 
men  who  had  burnt  a  manor  of  L^ly  Wake's, 
and  slain  one  of  her  servants,  he  was  excom- 
municated for  his  non-appearance.  It  is 
not  related  how  he  dear^  himself  from 
this  sentence;  but  it  did  not  prevent  his 
^-     miaed  to  the  oflice  of  chief  justice  of 


GREENFIELD 

the  King's  Bench  on  May  24|  ! 
retained  his  place  four  veaza  a 
and  was  removed  on  October  29, 

Joshua  Barnes  sa;^  (624,  66' 
and  Sir  William  Slapwith  were 
rested  and  impiisonea  for  many 
against  law  and  justice,  and  we 
deemed  without  refunding  large  s 
by  injustice  they  had  got  from  < 
were  for  ever  after  excluded  i 
places  and  the  king's  favour.'  ] 
what  curious,  if  this  charge  wen 
which  no  evidence,  however,  app< 
records),  that  in  the  warrant  to 
Green,  directing  him  to  give  ove: 
&c.,  to  his  successor,  the  kin^  i 
him  '  dilectus  et  fidelis.'  He  is  ] 
as  the  '  wise  justice '  in  one  of  ti 
Richard  Bellewe's  Keports.    (14! 

That  he  was  not  much  damnif 
fine  imposed  upon  him  is  apparen 
numerous  manors  and  other  lai 
coimties  of  Northampton,  Leicee 
Hertford,  Bedford,  Buckingham, 
tingham,  together  with  a  mansioi 
Street,  Cripplegate,  London,  whi 
sessed  at  the  time  of  his  death, 
curred  in  13C9.  He  married  a  d 
Sir  John  de  Drayton,  and  his  » 
enjoyed  the  same  property  till  h: 
1391-2.  (Abb.  Rot,  Orig.  ii.  195 
Norihamj^,  ii.  247  ',  Col,  Inquis,  p 
iii.  136.) 

OBEENFIELB,  W^IUJAX  Di 
BISHOP  OF  York),  was  bom  in 
and,  from  the  practice  that  had  b 
ously  adopted  by  King  Edward  of] 
superior  officers  of  the  court  to  th 
lorship,  it  is  not  unlikely  that  he  1 
his  probation  as  a  clerk  of  the  C] 
Exchequer.  Like  those  officers, 
the  clerical  profession,  and  had 
warded  with  the  dignities  of  the  C 
deanery  of  Chichester  having,  in 
superadded  to  his  canonry  of  ^ 
like  them,  he  had  been  summoi 
parliament  from  1293,  on  one  of 
casions  he  is  called  clerk  of  th 
(Le  Neve,  CO ;  Pari  Writs,  i.  28- 

He  was  appointed  chancellor  oi 
ber  30, 1302,  and  on  December  4 
was  elected  Archbishop  of  Yo: 
after,  on  the  29th,  he  declared  to  t 
that  it  behoved  him  to  take  a  j 
Eome  on  the  business  of  this  ele 
requested  the  king  to  declare  his 
the  custody  of  the  Great  Seal.  "V^ 
Hamilton  was  immediatelv  inve 
the  office  of  chancellor,  and  the  a 
elect  proceeded  to  the  Roman  coi 
notwithstanding  the  king's  letten 
tiff  granted  him  conseciatioDy  a 

gayment  of  9500  marim  To  n 
rem  so  extortionate  an  Impoi 
clergy  of  his  provinoa  lalnd  tl 
among  them. 


GREGORY 

The  ten  years  of  his  rule  were  principally 
niustrated  by  his  sunport  of  the  Knights 
Templars  in  their  faJlen  fortunes,  and  by 
hiB  assisting  at  the  general  council  held  at 
l^enne  in  1311,  where  one  of  the  highest 
places  was  assi^ed  to  him. 

He  died  at  his  palace  at  Cawood  on  De- 
cember 6. 1315,  and  was  buried  in  the  chapel 
of  St  Nicholas  in  his  own  cathedral.  He 
had  the  character  of  an  eloquent  man  and 
an  able  statesman,  and  his  library  was  exten- 
give  enough  to  be  worthy  of  a  separate  be- 
quest to  St.  Alban's  Abbey.    (  Godtvmf  685.) 

GBEGOBT,  WiLLiAHy  son  of  the  Eer. 
Robert  Gregory,  vicar  of  Fawnthorpe  and 
rector  of  Sutton  St.  Nicholas  in  Hereford- 
shire, and  Anne,  daughter  of  John  Harvey, 
of  Bradestone  in  Gloucestershire,  was  born 
on  March  1, 1624,  and  educated  at  All  Souls* 
College,  Oxford,  of  which  he  was  afterwards 
a  fellow.  Entering  the  society  of  Gray's 
Inn,  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1650^  made 
bencher  in  1673,  and  elected  autumn  reader 
in  1675.  He  travelled  the  Oxford  Circuit, 
sad  held  several  lucrative  stewardships.  He 
attained  sufficient  eminence  in  the  law  to 
be  elected  recorder  of  Gloucester  in  1672,  to 
be  created  a  serjeant  in  1677,  and  to  be  re- 
turned as  memoer  for  Weobly  in  1678,  the 
last  year  of  Charles's  second  parliament,  and 
to  the  new  one  summoned  for  March  1679. 
^Vhen  the  latter  met,  the  king  rejected  Mr. 
Seymour,  who  had  been  chosen  speaker  in 
opposition  to  the  nominee  of  the  court,  to 
toe  great  indignation  of  the  house,  which 
would  not  give  up  the  privilege  of  choice. 
On  a  compromise,  no  we  ver,  both  candidates 
were  excluded,  and  Mr.  Serjeant  Gregory, 
having  been  called  to  the  chair,  was  imme- 
diately approved  by  the  king.  {Pearce^s 
Imu  of  Court,  344  j  Pari  Hist.  iv.  1112.) 

In  that  parliament,  which  only  lasted  two 
months,  but  had  the  credit  of  passing  the 
Habeas  Corpus  Act,  parties  ran  so  high  that, 
though  a  supply  was  granted,  and  the  biU 
read  a  third  time,  the  opposition  took  every 
means  to  delay  sending  it  up  to  the  Lords, 
till  their  grievances  were  enquired  into. 
Roger  North  {Kvamen,  460 ;  State  Trials, 
viL  524)  relates  that  the  Speaker  Gregory 
one  day,  by  a  concerted  plan,  immediately 
opon  a  member  moving  for  the  carrying  up 
01  the  bill,  rose  from  his  chair  without  put- 
ting the  Question,  and,  followed  by  the  court 
party,  before  the  opposition  could  have  time 
to  aay  a  word,  carried  up  the  bill  to  the 
Loids,  where  the  king,  being  on  his  throne, 
at  once  gave  it  his  fiat.  At  this  time,  the 
king  having  newly  arranged  the  ministry, 
reducing  the  council  to  thirty  members,  and 
making  the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury  the  nominal 
^resident  of  it,  four  of  the  judges — Wilde, 
lliurland,  Bertie,  and  Bramston — were  sum- 
marily dismissed  on  April  20.  In  the  place 
of  the  last  Serjeant  Gregory  was  appomted 
a  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  and  was  kmghted. 


GREVILL 


ail 


Thouffh  his  patent  is  dated  May  1,  it  is  evi- 
dent that  he  was  not  sworn  in,  nor  his  nomi- 
nation annoimcedy  till  some  time  after,  for 
he  still  continued  to  sit  as  speaker  till  the 
prorogation  of  the  parliament  on  the  26th 
of  that  month,  which  was  followed  bv  a  dis- 
solution in  August.  He  retained  his  place 
till  February  10,  1686,  when  he  was  dis- 
charged in  consequence  of  giving  his  opinion 
against  the  king's  dispensing  power.  {Pari, 
Hist,  V.  812 ;  BramstorCs  AutMog.  221.) 
In  the  following  year  he  was  removed  by 
roval  mandate  from  the  recordership  of 
Gloucester. 

To  the  Convention  Parliament  which 
met  on  January  22, 1689,  Sir  William  was 
returned  for  the  city  of  Hereford,  but  soon 
vacated  his  seat  on  being  selected  by  King 
William  as  one  of  the  judges  of  the  King's 
Bench.  In  one  of  his  circuits  the  mayor 
of  Bristol  thought  proper  to  send  him  a 
message  that  he  must  not  expect  to  have 
his  charges  borne  by  the  city,  to  which  he 
replied  that  they  need  not  be  frightened^ 
for  that  he  couM  bear  his  own  expenses ) 
but,  receiving  great  insolences  from  the 
people  on  his  entrance,  he  foimd  that  a 
purposed  aflfront  was  intended.  He  there- 
fore, on  the  sitting  of  the  court,  promptly 
fined  the  city  100/.  and  each  sheriff  ^/., 
and  would  not  remit  the  fine  till  they  had 
submitted  and  apologised.  He  maintained 
throughout  his  judicial  life  the  character 
for  integrity  he  had  gained,  and  dying  on 
May  28,  1696,  at  his  manor  of  How  Capel, 
Herefordshire,  he  was  buried  in  the  parish 
church  there,  which  he  had  entirely  re- 
built. By  his  wife,  Catherine,  daughter 
and  heiress  of  James  Smith,  Esq.,  of  Til- 
lington,  he  had  an  only  son,  whose  descen- 
dants in  the  male  Ime  failed  in  1780. 
(Manning^ 8  Speakers,  374  j  Kennett,  iii. 
628  ;  Ltatrell,  li.  277.) 

OBEIKYILL,  Adam  DE,paid  in  S5  Henry 
III.  a  fine  of  forty  marks  for  a  grant  of  the 
bailiwick  of  the  forest  of  Sellwood  in 
Wiltshire.  (Cal,  Rot.  Pat.  21 ;  Excerpt,  e 
Hot.  Fin.  ii.  106.)  After  this  he  was 
appointed  justice  of  the  Jews,  and  is  men- 
tioned in  that  character  in  42  and  44 
Henry  III.  (Madox,  ii.  319.)  In  the 
three  following  years,  1261-3,  he  appears 
as  a  justice  itmerant  in  several  commis- 
sions. In  50  Henry  III.,  1266,  Dugdale 
inserts  him  among  the  justices  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  on  the  authority  of  a 
liberate  of  that  date,  and  till  October  1272, 
a  month  before  the  king's  death,  there  are 
continual  entries  of  payments  made  for 
assizes  to  be  taken  before  him. 

OBEYILL,  William,  son  of  Richard 
Grevill,  Esq.,  of  Lemington  in  Glou- 
cestershire, attained  the  seijeanfs  coif  in 
November  1604  He  was  made  a  judge  of 
the  Common  Pleas  on  May  21,  1509,  1 
Henry  VHI.,  and  so  remained  till  1513, 


S12 


GREY 


GREY 


when  he  died,  and  was  buried  in  Chelten-  I  compelled  to  witness   bis  royal  petrai'i 


bam  Church,  where  there  is  a  monument 
to  his  memory.  (Duffdale's  Orig.  47  j 
Aikyni%  Gloucesters.  178.) 

OBEY,  John  de,  or  OBAY  (Bishop  op 
Norwich),  was  one  of  the  descendants  of 
Anchitel  de  Oray,  a  Norman  who  came 
over  with  the  Conqueror,  and   received 
from  that  prince  various  large  possessions. 
His  grandiather  was  Kichaxd  de  Gray,  a 
peat  benefactor  to  the  abbey  of  Ensham 
m  Oxfordshire,  and  his  father  was  Anchitel. 
John  was  a  native  of  Norfolk,  and  filled 
some  office  in  the  Curia  Regis.     (Hot,  de 
OblatiSf  12-73.)    Being  also  brought  up  to 
the  Church,  he  was,  about  1200,  preferred 
to  the  archdeaconry  of  Cleveland,  which 
he  exchanged  for  that  of  Gloucester.    (Le 
yeve,  803,   308.)    He  was   attached   to 
prince  John  before  he  came  to  the  crown, 
and  his  frequent  attendance  at  the  court 
after  John's  accession  is  shown  by  several 
royal  charters  given  under  his  hand  from 
September  1190  to  June  1200.     (Dugdale's 
Mmast.  ii.  1(38,  418,  v.  112,  vi.  956^  1000.) 
^  On  this  account  Sir  T.  Hardy  has  mserted 
his  name  among  the  keepers  of  the  Great 
Seal ;  but  it  may  be  doubted  whether  he 
is  entitled  to  any  other  designation  than 
that  of  a  mere  officer,  who  aliuted  the  Seal 
for  Archbishop  Hubert,  the  chancellor  at 
the  time. 


resignation  of  the  crown  to  Pope  LmooeDt, 
and  to  proceed  to  Rome  to  arrange  the 
terms  on  which  the  clergy  were  to  reom 
compensation  for  the  losses  they  had  m- 
tained  through  the  king's  prooeedingi. 

During  hb  return  from  this  emMssjhe 
fell  sick  at  Poictiers,  and  died  there  on 
November  1,  1214.  His  remains  wero 
brought  to  England  and  honourably  ie- 
terred  in  his  own  cathedraL  In  Fefannij 
of  that  year  he  had  been  elected  Bishqi  of 
Durham,  but  the  pope's  confirmatioo  £d 
not  arrive  till  after  his  death.  (Sutie^t 
Dttrham,  i.  xxvii.) 

He  was  a  man  of  agreeable  manners  lod 
sprightly  conversation,  well-informed  ind 
intelligent,  ready  in  counsel  and  energetic 
in  action.  He  was  fond  of  antiquanu 
studies,  and  the  author  of  some  historical 
and  other  works.  (Oodtnn,  429;  FJwwr, 
789;  BlomeJiMs  Norfolk^  i.  274,  677; 
R,  de  Wendover,  iiL  185,  &c.;  lAngorif 
ii.  17-26.) 

ORET,  Walteb  de  (Archbishop  or 
York),  was  the  nephew  of  the  above* 
named  John  de  Grey,  being  the  second  soil 
of  the  bishop's  elder  brother  John,  by  hie 
wife  Hawise. 

The  first  fact  recorded  of  him  is  hii 
purchase  of  the  Chancery  for  the  sum  ii 
live  thousand  marks,  to  be  paid  by  instal- 


His  erudition  and  his  wit,  for  both  of    ments  of  five  hundred  pounds  at  the  feait 


which  he  was  remarkable,  soon  made  him 
a  fiavourite  with  King  John,  who  procured 
his  election  to  the  bishopric  of  Norwich  on 
September  24, 1200.     Under  that  title  his 
name  frequently  appears  from   this  time 
till  the  eighth  year  of  the  reign  as  one  of 
the  justiciers  in  the  Curia  Kcgis  at  West- 
minster,   and    on    the    different    itinera. 
(JTwUer's Preface:  Rot  de  Oblatis,  211,351.) 
In  1205  he  was,  on  the  earnest  recom- 
mendation of  the  king,  elected  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury.    Although  he  was  actually 
enthroned,  the  pope  set  aside  the  election, 
pretending  that  he  was  too  much  employed 
Dy  the  king  in  secular  affairs  to  have  suffi- 
cient leisure  to    attend  to   the    spiritual 
government  of  the  Church.     The  appoint- 
ment of  Stephen  de  Lanston  followea ;  but 
the  king,  indignant  at  the  pope's  assump- 
tion, and  at  his  favourite's  election  being 
annulled,   refused    to    acknowledge    him. 
This  led  to  the  kingdom  being  placed  under 
interdict,  and  soon  after  to  the  excommuni- 
cation of  the  monarch.     The  bishop  was 


of  St  Andrew  and  at  Pentecost  in  eadi 
year.  The  charter  by  which  this  grant  it 
confirmed  is  dated  October  2, 1205, 7  John, 
and  his  uncle  makes  himself  responsible  on 
the  roll  for  the  payment  of  the  fine.  (JRot,  tk 
-FVrf.378;  JRot.  Chart,  168;  Rot.  C&w«.L63.) 
Various  ecclesiastical  preferments  were 
now  presented  to  him,  and  in  May  1207  he 
was  made  archdeacon  of  Totnes,  with  tlie 
prebend  in  the  church  of  Exeter.  In  1310 
or  1213  he  was  elected  Bishop  of  Idchfidi 
and  Coventry,  but  it  appears  that  it  wit 
only  by  the  canons  of  Lichfield,  the  monb 
of  Coventry  choosing  another  person,  and 
that  both  elections  were  made  void.  He 
was  in  October  1213  sent  on  a  mission  to 
Flanders,  and  previous  to  his  departure  he, 
of  course,  sent  the  Seal  to  the  king,  but 
still  remained  chancellor,  and  is  so  tstAti 
four  days  after.  {Rot  Ciaus.  i.  153 ;  Mot 
Pat  105.)  During  his  absence,  howeTtr, 
which  probably  lasted  longer  than  wit 
expectea,  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  knif 
appointed  Peter  de  Hupibus  hia  chaoceUor. 


soon  removed   from   the   actual  scene  of    who  is  so  designated  in  two  records  6m 
contention,  by  being  sent  as  lord  deputy  to    ~~  '  -     - 

Ireland,  where,  shortly  after,  in  1210,  he 
aided  King  John,  on  nis  visit  there,  in  the 
introduction  of  English  laws. 

On  the  invasion  of  England  by  Prince 
Louis  of  France  in  1213,  the  bishop 
brought  over  from  Ireland  a  powerful  force 
to  the  king*s  assiBtance,  but  was  soon  after 


November  21  and  24,  1213  (Rot.  de  Ai. 
507-9),  and  the  Seal  was  delivered  te 
Ralph  de  Neville  on  December  2d  to  te 
held  under  him.  The  bishop  did  M^ 
however,  long  continue  in  offioe|ftrWdlv 
de  Grey  on  nis  return  reaumad  tl»  ^ 
and  from  January  12.  1214»  till 
1214  (although  in  the  intemi  ft*  1 


GREY 

•again  abroad);  he  is  never  mentioned  with- 
oat  that  demgnation.  {Rot.  Pat,  108-111 ; 
ItoL  doHS.  i.  160-8.) 

Dming  this  second  absence  he  was  elected 
IKshop  of  Worcester,  and  was  consecrated 
on  October  5, 1214,  when  he  probably  re- 
sgned  the  office  of  chancellor^  the  29th  of 
tluit  month  beinsf  the  date  of  the  first  re- 
cord in  which  his  successor,  Bichard  de 
MariscOy  is  so  denominated. 

Diuing  the  war  with  the  barons,  Walter 
•de  Qrey  adhered  closely  to  the  Idn^ ;  but, 
though  he  was  chancellor  at  the  time,  he 
is  not  mentioned  as  haying  placed  the  Seal 
to  the  charter  of  May  15,  1213,  14  John, 
by  which  the  king  resigned  the  crown  to 
t£e  pope. 

In  the  contest  for  the  archbishopric  of 
York,  his  faithful  adherence  to  the  king 
jDrociured    his    election    in    opposition    to 
oimon  de  Langton,  brother  to  the  pri- 
mate.     The  immaculate    chastity  of  nis 
life  was  uiged  to  the  pope  to  procure  his 
confirmation  ;  and  the  plea  was  allowed  on 
a  promise  to  supply  the  papal  treasury  with 
a  donatiye  of  no  less  than  10,000/.,  and  he 
accordingly  received  the  pall  on  May  24, 
1216.    The  straitened  means  to  which  he 
was  reduced  in  order  to  meet  the  payment 
of  a  sum  so  enormous  in  those  times  ob- 
tained   for   him    a  character    for    sordid 
avarice,   an    imputation  which  no  doubt 
induced  his  contemporaries  to  believe  the 
absurd  story  that  is  related  of  his  having, 
during  a  fnmine,  hoarded  a  quantity  of  com, 
which  became  the  resort  of  innumerable 
snakes,  serpents,  and  other  reptiles,  and 
Jrom  which  a  fearful  voice  proceeded,  com- 
manding the  ricks  to  be  avoided,  as  they 
and  all  the  possessionfl^of  the  bishop  be- 
lon^red  to  the  devil. 

That  he  was  not  truly  charged  with 
avarice,  however,  is  proved  b;^  his  gene- 
rality when  he  had  cleared  himself  from 
hit  Iieayy  debt.  Not  only  did  he  restore 
part  of  his  cathedral,  and  make  many 
munificent  additions  to  the  see,  and  to 
Hs  church,  but  he  presented  the  manor  of 
Thorpe  as  a  residence  for  his  successors, 
and  purchased  also  for  them  the  palace  at 
Westminster,  which  had  been  ouilt  by 
Hubert  de  Burgh.  The  former  is  still, 
Under  the  name  of  Bishopsthorpe,  in  the 
occupation  of  the  archbishops;  and  the 
latter,  with  the  name  of  Yort  Place,  con- 
tinued to  be  so  till  Cardinal  Wolsey  alien- 
ated it  to  King  Henry  Vlll.,  when  it 
reoeiyed  the  new  designation  of  Whitehall. 
His  character  for  vnsdom,  prudence,  and 
integrity  was  so  high  that  in  26  Henry 
IDL,  1242.  though  at  a  very  advanced  age, 
he  was  len  by  Queen  Eleanor,  then  regent, 
in  the  government  of  the  kingdom  when 
she  went  to  ioin  her  husband  in  France. 
He  presided  over  his  see  nearly  forty 
and  died  at  Fulham  on  May  1, 1266. 


GREY 


313 


His  remains  were  removed  to  his  cathedral, 
where  a  splendid  monument  was  erected 
to  his  memoir.  (Godwin,  816,  469,  677  ; 
Hasted,  i.  166;  Le  Neve;  Blotnefieid's 
Norwich,  i.  478.) 

OBET,  John  de,  was  the  nephew  of  the 
above  Walter  de  Grey,  being  second  son  of 
his  eldest  brother,  Henry,  and  of  Isolda, 
the  eldest  of  the  five  nieces  and  coheirs  of 
Robert  Bardolf.  He  was  sheriff  of  Buck- 
inghamshire and  Bedfordshire  in  23  Henry 
III.,  and  had  his  seat  at  Eaton,  near  Fenny 
Stratford.  In  30  Henry  HI.  he  was  made 
constable  of  the  castle  of  Gannoc  in  North 
Wales,  and  was  also  justice  of  Chester. 
He  offended  the  king  in  36  Henry  HI.  by 
marrying  without  his  licence  Johanna,  the 
widow  of  Pauline  Peyvre,  who  had  been 
devoted  to  another  person,  and  he  was 
fined  five  hundred  marks  for  his  transgres- 
sion, but  shortly  afterwards  he  is  stated 
to  have  greatly  ingratiated  himself  with 
Henry  by  assuming  the  Cross.  The  Fine 
Roll  of  1263  cont^s  an  evidence  of  the 
favour  he  thus  obtained,  in  the  grant  of  a 
pardon  of  300/.  of  the  above  fine  and  other 
debts  which  he  owed  to  the  crown.  (jEr- 
cerpt.  e  RoL  Fin.  i.  463,  ii.  119, 167.) 

He  was  made  steward  of  Gascony,  custos 
of  the  casties  of  Northampton,  Shrewsbury, 
Dover,  and  Hereford,  and  sheriff  of  the 
latter  county.  In  1260  he  was  among  the 
justices  itinerant  sent  into  the  counties 
of  Somerset^  Dorset,  and  Devon.  When 
Henry  submitted  the  determination  of  the 
differences  between  him  and  his  barons  to 
the  decision  of  Louis,  King  of  France,  he 
was  one  of  the  barons  who  undertook  that 
he  should  abide  by  it ;  and  during  the  war 
which  followed  he  firmly  adhered  to  his 
sovereign.  After  the  battie  of  Evesham  in 
1266  he  was  made  sheriff  of  the  coimties 
of  Nottingham  and  Derby,  and  died  in  the 
following  year. 

Before  nis  union  with  Johanna  Peyvre, 
he  had  married  Emma,  daughter  and  heir 
of  Geofirey  de  Glanville,  by  whom  he  had 
a  daughter  and  an  only  son,  two  of  the  de- 
scendants of  whom  now  sit  in  the  House  of 
Peers  as  Earl  Wilton  and  Earl  De  Grey 
and  Ripon.  {Iht^dMs  Baron,  i.  712, 716 ; 
Nicciais  Synopsis ;  &c.) 

OBET,  Hei7ry  (Earl  of  KEirr),  a  lineal 
descendajit  of  the  last-mentioned  John  de 
Grey,  succeeded  to  the  tide  of  Earl  of 
Kent  on  the  death  of  his  father  Anthony 
in  1643,  and  had  not  long  taken  his  seat 
among  the  peers  before  he  was  substituted 
for  the  Earl  of  Rutland  in  the  commission 
from  the  parliament  for  the  custody  of  their 
Great  Sed.  Clarendon  (iv.  340, 403)  calh 
him  a  man  of  far  meaner  parts  than  the 
Earl  of  Rutland,  and  says  that  the  number 
of  lords  who  attended  the  parliament  was 
so  small  that  their  choice  of  the  two  who 
were  to  represent  them  was  very  limited. 


314 


GREY 


The  commissioners  held  the  Seal  from 
November  10,  1G43,  till  October  30,  1646, 
when  it  was  given  to  the  speakers  of  the 
two  houses.     (Journals.) 

In  December  1647  the  earl  was  one  of 
the  lords  commissioners  to  take  the  four 
bills  to  the  king  at  the  Isle  of  Wight,  and 
had  to  bring  them  back  with  the  kind's 
refusal  to  assent  to  the  destruction  of  the 
royal  authority  which  they  involved.  He 
was  renominated  on  March  15, 1648,  chief 
commissioner  of  the  Seal,  in  conjunction 
with  another  lord  and  two  commoners,  who 
continued  in  ofEce  till  the  death  of  the 
king,  not  one  of  them  approving  or  taking 
any  part  in  the  tragic  event.  With  that 
the  power  of  the  lords  who  were  commis- 
sioners virtually  terminated,  but  they  re- 
mained in  office  till  the  Commons,  on 
Februaxv  6,  1649,  voted  the  abolishment 
of  the  House  of  Peers,  and  two  days  after 
put  the  Seal  into  other  hands,  {^miite- 
locke,  283-378.) 

So  ended  the  earl's  political  career.  He 
ilied  in  1651 ;  and  the  title  is  now  merged 
in  that  of  Eari  Pe  Grey  and  llipon. 

OBEY,  William  (Lord  Grky  de 
Werke),  was  advanced  to  this  peerage 
in  1624.  From  the  commencement  of  the 
civil  war  he  was  an  active  partisan  of  the 
parliament,  and  one  of  the  few  peers  that 
remained  in  the  House  of  Lords  while  the 
rest  joined  the  king.  When  Lord  Fairfax 
sufiered  a  defeat  in  the  north,  and  the  par- 
liament were  desirous  to  send  to  the  Scots 
to  assist  them,  Lord  Grey  on  being  named 
one  of  the  deputation  refused  to  go,  and 
was  committed  to  the  Tower ;  but,  making 
his  peace,  he  was  soon  after  selected  by  the 
Lords  as  their  speaker,  in  the  absence  of 
the  lord  keeper.  In  1648  he  was  added  to 
the  commissioners  of  the  Great  Seal,  and 
performed  the  duties  of  the  office  for  nearly 
eleven  months,  the  last  few  days  being 
after  the  king's  death,  in  the  planning  or 
execution  of  which  fearful  event  he  is  not 
charged  with  concurring.  With  the  abo- 
lition of  the  House  of  Lords  of  course  his 
office  ceased,  but  he  consented  to  be  nomi- 
nated on  the  Council  of  State.  (  WTiitelocke, 
295-488  ;  Clarendon,  iv.  153,  368,  415.) 

Ho  survived  the  restoration  of  Chai-les 
II.  more  than  fourteen  years,  and  died 
in  July  1674.  His  title  became  extinct 
in  1706. 

6BEY8T0KE,  Henry  pe,  does  not  appear 
to  have  been  a  member  of  the  baronial  family 
of  Greystoke  in  Cumberland.  He  may 
therefore  have  been  so  called  from  his  being 
bom  in  that  place.  He  was  connected  with 
the  king's  household  or  Exchequer  in  27 
Edward  I.,  as  well  as  several  times  after- 
wards under  Edward  II.  He  acted  as  pay- 
master of  the  forces  in  Nottingham  and 
Derb^,  and  was  appointed  by  the  htter  king 
to  assist  the  Bheriifof  Cumlierland  in  arrest- 


GRIMBALD 

ing  the  Knights  Templars.  Fnmi  16  £d< 
ward  in.  he  neld  the  office  of  castos  of  tbfr 
lands  and  tenements  which  were  reserrod 
for  the  use  of  the  king's  chamber,  and  b 
this  character  various  manorsy  ftc.,  wem 
placed  imder  his  charge ;  and  in  the  pl^ 
liaments  of  25  and  28  fldward  IIL  hem* 
ordered  to  be  present  on  the  hearing  of  peti- 
tions touching  these  lands,  to  ^ve  mfoxma- 
tion  'pur  le  roi  et  au  le  roi.'  Dogdale 
introduces  him  in  the  twenty-seventh  jmt 
as  attorney-general :  but  it  is  probab^  in 
reference  to  these  matters  only,  as  he  doei 
not  appear  to  have  been  otherwise  connected 
with  tne  law.  Though  he  is  described  tt 
a  '  clericus,'  he  could  not  have  taken  that 
grade  in  holj  orders  which  prevented  him 
&om  marrymg ;  for  his  widow  Jane,  the 
daughter  of  Sir  WiUiam  Pickering,  ie  aiid 
to  have  married  Chief  Justice  Gascoi^ 

He  had  a  grant  of  the  French  portum  of 
the  church  of  Mapeldurham,  and  of  a  mes- 
suage and  lands  m  Rescebv  in  Yorkshire 
for  nis  good  services,  and  he  was  nude  a. 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  October  6, 1356, 
30  Edward  IH.,  beyond  which  no  trace  of 
him  remains.  {Pari  WriU,  i.  956,  ilail 
648,  n. ;  N.  Foedera,  ii.  1214 ;  Aih,  EdL 
Orig,  ii.  150-208 ;  Rot,  Pari  ii.  236, 254.) 

OBXHBALD,  Robert,  is  inserted  by  Du^ 
dale  as  a  justicier  in  the  reign  of  HeniylL 
{Orig.  100 ;  Monast.  vi.  425) ;  but  in  the 
multiplicity  of  names  of  iusticiers  in  the 
rolls  of  this  reign,  quoted  by  Madox  and 
others,  that  of  Ilobert  Grimbald  never 
occurs,  although  it  does  fortv  years  after- 
wards in  that  of  Henry  IH.  The  document 
to  which  his  seal  is  attached  is  a  charter 
granting  certain  lands  in  Dimnington  to  the 
priory  of  Osulveston  in  Leicestershire,  and 
there  are  four  others  of  the  same  descnp- 
tion,  in  none  of  which  is  there  any  additun 
to  his  name  at  all  designating  a  jodidsl 
character.  It  appears,  however,  that  he  was 
united  with  Paganus  from  2  to  8  Henxy  XL, 
1150-1162,  in  the  sheriflFalty  of  Cambridge 
and  Huntingdon;  and  this,  recoUectungtne 
judicial  duties  which  appertained  to  that 
office,  may  have  been  the  g^und  of  naming 
him  as  a* justicier.  He  married  BCatilda, 
daughter  and  heir  of  Paganus  de  Hoctoo. 
who  was  probably  the  sheriif  with  whom 
he  was  associated. 

OBIMBALD,  Peter,  is  introduced  in  Ha- 
dox's  List  of  the  Barons  of  the  Exchequer 
(iL  318),  with  a  reference  to  a  writ  tested 
in  25  Henry  HI.,  1241.  There  is  a  man- 
date on  the  Close  Roll  (u.  207)  of  11  Henry 
III.,  1226,  addressed  to  ]\Iag^ter  Philip^ 
Ardem  and  P.  Grimbald,  relative  to  certain 
business  entrusted  to  them  to  traiiMOt  A 
the  bishopric  of  Durham,  a  duty  whkh  W 
likely  to  oLevolve  on  one  connected  irittth* 
Exchequer. 

OSnCBALD,  RoBXBiy  WM  aoi 
bably  a  descendant  of  htt  ~ 


6BIMST0K 

namesake.  He,  as  well  as  the  other,  was 
oextainly  resident  in  Northamptonshire,  and 
in  9  Henij  III.  was  appointed  to  conduct 
the  quinzime  of  that  county  to  Oxford. 
(Bat.  Clous.  iL  74.)  In  the  commission 
for  justices  itinerant  in  1234,  18  Henry 
HL,  he  stood  third  of  those  nominated  for 
Hotland. 

0BI1C8TOV,  Harbottle,  a  descendant 
from  Sylvester,  the  standard-hearer  of  the 
Conqueror^  for  whose  services  the  parish  of 
Grimston  in  Yorkshire,  and  various  other 
manors  in  the  East  Riding,  were  the  reward, 
was  the  son  of  Sir  Harhottle  Grimston, 
created  a  haronet  in  1612,  hy  Elizaheth, 
daughter  of  Ralph  Coppinger,  Esq.,  of  Stoke 
in  Kent. 

He  was  horn  at  Brad£eld  Hall  in  Essex, 
and  was  at  first  intended  for  the  law  and 
entered  at  Lincoln's  Inn.  But  upon  his 
hrother's  death  he  abandoned  the  study,  till 
forming  an  attachment  to  the  daughter  of 
Sir  George  Croke,  the  judge  refused  to  he- 
stow  her  hand  iipon  him  unless  he  resumed 
his  profession,  lie  re-opened  his  law-hooks 
witn  all  the  ardour  of  a  lover,  and  soon  at- 
tained sufficient  legal  knowledge  not  only 
to  satisfy  Sir  George,  but  also  to  obtain  the 
post  of  recorder  of  Colchester,  to  which  he 
was  elected  in  1G38,  being  also  returned 
member  for  that  town  to  the  two  parlia- 
ments of  1040. 

Between  the  two  parliaments  his  father 
died,  and  he  succeeded  to  the  title.     In 
both  of  them  he  was  one  of  the  most  vio- 
lent opposers  to  the  encroachments  of  the 
court,  and  a  powerful  advocate  for  the  li- 
berties of  the  people,  being  no  doubt  insti- 
gated by  the  impiisonment  suffered  by  his 
lather  for  refusing  to  pay  the  loan-money. 
He  was  not  ver^^  choice  in  his  language, 
saying  in  his  ^ech  against  the  advisers  of 
ship-money,  tnat  'he  was  persuaded  that 
they  who  gave  their  opinions  for  the  legality 
of  it  did  it  against  the  dictamen  of  their  own 
conscience,*  and  calling  Secretary  Winde- 
hank  *  the  verv  pander  and  broker  to  the 
whore  of  Babylon. '  Contributing  two  horses 
%&d  twenty  pounds  in  1042  for  the  defence 
of  the  privileges  of  parliament,  he  was  looked 
Upon  as  one  of  the  most  active  among  the 
popular  party;  yet  in  1043  he  refused  to 
euDscribe  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant, 
hod  discontinued  sitting  in  the  house  till 
It  was  laid  aside.     He  then  joined  with 
Holies  and  the  Presbyterian  party  against 
the  Independents,  ana  Cromwell  in  parti- 
cular.    He  was  one  of  the  commissioners 
selected  to  treat  with  the  king  in  the  Isle 
of  Wight   (Notes  and  Queries,  1st  S.  xiL 
358;   WhiUlocke,  334),  when,  though  the 
negotiation  was  unsuccessful,  his  majesty 
was  well  pleased  with  his  conduct,  and  on 
his  return  he  urged  upon  the  house  the 
acceptance  of  the  king's  concessions.     He 
then  began  to  see  the  real  object  of  the 


GRIMSTON 


315 


dominant  faction,  and,  not  consenting  to  their 
determination  to  get  rid  of  the  monarchy^ 
was  with  other  members  excluded  the 
house.  IHs  influence  with  the  army  and 
the  people  was  considered  so  great  that  he 
was  put  into  confinement  before  the  king'a 
trial ;  but  was  discharged  by  an  order  from 
Lord  Fairfax  on  the  very  day  of  the  execu- 
tion, first  entering  into  an  engagement  not 
to  act  nor  to  do  anything  to  uie  disservice 
of  the  parliament  or  the  army. 

Cromwell's  subsequent  forcible  dissolu- 
tion of  the  parliament  made  it  a  matter  of 
prudence  that  Grimston  should  retire  to 
the  Continent.  At  the  same  time  he  re- 
signed the  recordership  of  Colchester. 

Returning  to  England  in  a  few  years,  he 
was  elected  in  Cromwell's  new  modelled 
parliament  in  1050  as  one  of  the  sixteen 
members  for  Essex ;  but,  declining  to  sign 
the  engagement  recognising  Cromwell's 
government,  he  was  refused  admittance  to 
the  house.  He  afterwards  joined  in  the 
remonstrance  of  the  secluded  membei's, 
wliich  protested  against  the  assembly  as 
not  being  the  representative  body  of  Eng- 
land ;  but  no  notice  being  taken  of  it,  he 
(]^uietly  retired  to  the  practice  of  his  profes- 
sion until  more  promising  times.  In  De- 
cember 1059  the  Long  Parliament  was  re- 
stored to  its  functions,  and  having  dissolved 
itself  in  the  following  March,  Sir  Harhottle 
was  appointed  one  of  the  council  of  state. 
Of  the  Convention  Parliament,  summoned 
on  April  25,  he  was  elected  speaker,  and 
distinguished  himself  by  the  peculiar  style 
of  his  oratory.  In  the  addresses  which  he 
made  to  the  king  after  his  return  the  ful- 
some style  of  his  predecessors  in  the  chair 
was  revived,  and  even  exceeded,  with  the 
addition  of  absurd  reiterations.  He  called 
the  actors  in  the  rebellion  ^the  [monsters 
who  had  been  guilty  of  blood,  precious 
blood,  precious  royal  blood;'  and  in  his 
speech,  previous  to  the  dissolution,  he 
exclaimed,  *  We  must  needs  be  a  happy  par- 
liament, a  healing  parliament,  a  reconciling 
and  peaceful  parliament,  aparliament/Trop^ 
exceUentiam,  that  may  truly  be  called  parlia- 
mentissimum  parliamentumj  ( JVkitelocke, 
053 ;  Pari  Hid.  iv.  27, 113,  lOS.^j 

He  had  the  honour  of  entertaining  the 
king  on  June  25, 1000,  at  his  house  in  Lin- 
coln's Inn  fields,  and  soon  received  a  more 
substantial  proof  of  the  royal  gratitude  in 
the  appointment  of  master  of  the  Rolls, 
which  was  given  him  on  November  3, 
though  it  was  said  that  he  gave  Lord 
Clarendon  8000/.  for  the  place.  (^Ch.  Just. 
Lee^s  Memor,  in  Laio  Mag.  xxxviii.  217.) 
He  was  then  sixty-six  years  of  age,  and  he 
held  the  office  tUl  his  death,  a  period  of 
twentj'-three  years.  One  of  his  decrees 
nearly  cost  him  Ms  life.  Nathaniel  Bacon, 
of  Gray's  Inn,  against  whom  it  was  pro- 
noimced,  offered  a  man  100/.  to  kill  him ; 


316 


GRIMSTON 


and  upon  being  convicted  of  the  crime  in 
1664,  was  condemned  to  pay  a  fine  of  1000 
markS;  to  be  imprisoned  three  months,  and 
be  of  good  behaviour  for  life,  and  to  acknow- 
ledge his  offence  at  the  bar  of  the  Chancerv. 
Bacon  was  discharged  as  insolvent  in  1667. 
(1  Siderfin,  230.) 

Sir  ^rbottle  was  also  made  chief  steward 
of  St.  Albans,  where  he  had  purchased  the 
manor  of  Gorhambury  and  other  property, 
and  recorder  of  Harwich.  His  judicial 
position  did  not  prevent  his  sitting  in  par- 
liament, in  whicn  he  continued  to  be  one 
of  the  representatives  of  the  borough  of 
Colchester  till  his  death.  He  at  last  grew 
out  of  favour  with  the  court,  from  his  known 
dislike  to  the  Koman  Catholic  religion, 
which  he  made  no  attempt  to  conceal. 
When  a  bill  was  introduced  in  1667  for 
changing  the  punishment  of  Romish  priests 
and  Jesuits  m)m  death  to  imprisonment 
for  life,  he  indignantly  asked,  '  Is  this  the 
way  to  prevent  Popery  ?  We  may  as  soon 
make  a  good  fan  out  of  a  pig*s  tail  as  a 
good  bill  out  of  this.'  He  asserted  the 
right  of  the  House  of  Commons  to  choose 
their  own  speaker  when  the  king  r^ected 
Mr.  Seymour  in  1679 ;  and  at  the  close  of 
his  life  he  was  compelled  to  dismiss  Burnet, 
the  preacher  at  the  Rolls,  for  a  sermon  on 
the  oth  of  November,  whicn  was  interpreted 
as  levelled  against  the  kiug^s  conduct. 
(Pari  Hist.  iv.  1096;  Burnet,  l  506.) 

He  died  on  January  2, 1685  (LuUrellf  i. 
384;  1  VemoHy  284),  of  natural  decay, 
being  then  above  eighty  years  of  age,  and 
was  Duried  in  St.  Michaers  Church,  St. 
Albans.  Sir  Henry  Chauncy,  his  contem- 
porary, thus  describes  him:  'He  had  a 
nimble  fancy,  a  quick  apprehension,  a  rare 
memory,  an  eloquent  tongue,  and  a  sound 
judgment  He  was  a  person  of  free  access, 
sociable  in  company,  smcere  to  his  friends, 
hospitable  in  his  house,  charitable  to  the 
poor,  and  an  excellent  master  to  his  servants.' 
He  published  the  Reports  of  his  &ther-in- 
law  Sir  George  Croke.  having  first  trans- 
lated them  into  English,  and  is  said  to 
have  greatly  assisted  Burnet  in  his  '  History 
of  the  Reformation.* 

By  his  first  wife,  Mary,  Sir  G.  Croke*s 
daughter,  he  had  six  sons  and  two  daugh- 
ters; by  his  second,  Annie,  daughter  of 
Sir  Nathaniel  Bacon,  niece  to  Lord  Bacon, 
and  widow  of  Sir  Thomas  Meautvs,  he  left 
no  children.  On  the  decease  oi  his  son 
Samuel  in  1700  the  title  became  extinct 
The  estate  of  Gorhambury,  with  large 
landed  property,  he  left  to  his  great-nephew 
William  Lukyn,  who  assumed  the  name  of 
Grimston,  and  in  1719  was  created  a  peer 
of  Ireland  by  the  title  of  Baron  of  Dun- 
boyne  and  Viscount  Grimston.  His  grand- 
son was  created  Baron  Verulam  in  England 
in  1790,  a  titie  which  was  converted  into 
an  earldom  in  1816.    {Croke  Fatmfy,  606- 


GRYMESBf 

13;  Chauncy^s  Herts,  466;  CoUmiiFursgL 
viii.  214.) 

OB08E,  Nash,  was  the  son  of  Edwnd 
Grose,  a  resident  of  London,  where  he  wm 
bom  about  the  year  1740.  He  was  called  to 
the  bar  at  Lincoln's  Lm  in  November  1760^ 
and  took  the  degree  of  seijeant  in  1774, 
soon  commanding  the  leading  busineai  in  ti» 
Common  Pleas,  which  he  retained  tOl  he 
was  raised  to  the  bench.  He  was  appdntod 
a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench  on  FebniiiTfl^ 
1787,  and  received  the  honour  of  kidgiit- 
hood.  After  occupying  the  same  seat  for 
twenty-six  years,  his  infirmities  dbligod 
him  to  resign  it  in  Easter  vacation  lol3. 
His  death  took  place  in  the  following  ymt, 
on  May  81,  wnen  his  remains  were  in- 
terred in  the  Isle  of  Wight,  where  he  bad 
a  beautiful  seat  called  The  Priory.  (Term 
Hep.  651 ;  Oent.  Mag,  1814,  388, 62^) 

both  in  his  private  and  judicial  cha- 
racter he  was  highly  respected ;  but  con- 
temporary critics,  of  course,  differ  as  to  his 
powers  md  efficiency.  By  some  he  w» 
considered  to  have  lost  in  credit  what  ho 
gained  in  rank,  and  this  couplet  was  per- 
petrated against  him : 

Qualis  sit  Grotius  Judex  ono  acdpe  vena; 
Exdamat,  dabitat,  balbatit,  stridet  et  onL 

Lord  Campbell  (CL  Just,  iiL  155)  saji 
that  his  aspect  was  very  foolish,  and  that 
he  had  the  *  least  reputation '  among  hii 
colleagues;  but  he  adds  that  'this suppoeed 
weak  brother,  though  much  ridiculed, 
when  he  differed  from  his  brethren,  irai 
voted  by  the  profession  to  be  right' 

Sir  Isi  ash  married  Miss  Dennett,  of  the 
Isle  of  Wight. 

0BTME8BT,  Edmttnd  se,  was  of  the 
town  of  that  name  in  Lincolnshire,  where 
he  had  considerable  property.  (Abb,  Bet, 
Oriff.  ii.  156,  176.)  lie  was  probably  the 
son  of  Simon  de  Grymesby,  eecheator  to 
the  king,  and  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the 
procurators  to  appear  for  the  abbot  of 
Thornton  in  the  parliaments  of  17  and  18 
Edward  IE.  (Ptirl.  Writs,  ii.  p.  iL  988.) 
In  the  next  year  he  was  parson  of  the 
church  of  Preston.  (Eot.  FtirL  I  437.)  h 
7  Edward  III.,  1333,  he  received  the  »- 
pointment  of  keeper  of  the  rolls  in  the 
Irish  Chancery  (Cal.  Rot,  Pat,  117),  hat 
two  years  afterwards  he  was  sent  to  various 
parties  in  England  to  obtain  loans  for  tiie 
king  to  carry  on  the  war  with  Sootland. 
(N,  Foedera,  ii.  912.)  He  was  no  doabt 
then  a  master  or  clerk  in  the  Eng&h 
Chancery,  in  which  office  he  continned  to 
act  till  the  25th,  and  perhaps  the  27th| 
year  of  the  reign,  being  a  receiver  of  p0^ 
tions  in  all  the  parliaments  assemhlea  iB 
that  interval  (Bot.  Pari  iL  1SS4NL) 
During  this  penod  the  Qreat_8ail«V 
twice  placed  under  hia      ~  ^ 


16, 1340,  to  the  end  of  the  fm^ 
September  2  to  Oetober  8^  IWL 


GUILFORD 

OVZLFOSB,  Lord.    See  F.  North. 

OVLDXFOSB,  Henry  ds.  aettled  at 
Hempeted  in  Kent,  in  26  Edward  I.  was 
appointed  to  perambulate  the  forests  of 
the  northern  counties,  and  two  years  after- 
wards to  perform  the  same  duties  in  the 
oounties  (n  Salop,  StidSTord,  and  Derby.  Li 
S2  Edward  I.  he  appears  at  the  head  of 
the  justices  itinerant  sent  to  Tisit  the  Isle 
of  Jersey,  and  during  the  whole  of  this 
time  he  was  summoned  among  the  justices 
to  parliament.  (lU.  Pari  I  130,  180, 
421?)  Li  November  1305  he  was  con- 
ititated  one  of  the  judges  of  the  Court  of 
Common  Pleas ;  but  ne  was  not  re-appointed 
imder  Edward  U. ;  Hervey  de  Staunton 
iras  placed  there  in  his  steaa. 

He  stiU  continued  to  be  employed  to 
take  assizes,  and  as  a  justice  itinerant  He 
died  in  the  early  part  of  6  Edwud  IL,  his 
last  summons  to  parliament  being  dated  on 
July  8, 1312,  the  first  day  of  that  regnal 
jear.  Several  of  his  descendants  were 
sherifb  of  Kent,  one  of  whom  entertained 
Queen  Elizabeth  at  his  manor-house.  Ro- 
bert, the  last  of  the  name,  was  made  a 
baronet  in  1685  by  King  James  XL,  but, 
leaving  no  issue,  the  title  became  extinct  at 
his  death. 

^  Hugh  de,  at  the  begin- 


GURDON 


317 


ning  of  the  reign  of  Henry  U.,  filled  some 
responsible  office  in  the  Exchequer  or  in 
the  king's  household.  In  1170.  16  Henry 
n.,  he  was  despatched  with  William  Fitz- 
John  to  arrest  Becket,  whose  fate,  how- 
ever, was  sealed  before  their  arrival  at 
Canterbury;  and  in  1172  he  and  Robert 
^tx-Bemard  were  appointed  lieutenants 
imder  Humphrey  de  B<mun  in  the  govern^ 
ment  of  the  ci^  of  Waterford.  He  held  the 
aheriffalty  of  Hampshire  from  16  Henry  IL 
lor  ten  VBars,  that  of  Northamptonshire 
from  21  Henry  U.  for  three  years,  and  that 
of  Devonshire  in  the  24th  and  25th  years 
of  that  rdgn. 

In  20  Henry  H.,  1174,  he  was  appointed, 
hj  writ  of  Richard  de  Luci,  the  cnief  jus- 
ticiaxy,  one  of  the  five  justices  itinerant  to 
fix  the  tallage  of  Hampshire ;  and  he  was 
•elected  in  1176  bv  the  council  of  North- 
ampton as  one  of  the  eighteen  justices 
Itinerant  who  were  sent  round  Imffland. 
His  pleas  while  so  engaged  extendea  over 
the  four  following  years.  {MadoXy  i.  125- 
138w)  He  died  about  the  end  of  this  reign, 
the  Pipe  Roll  of  1  Richard  I.  (213)  re£r- 
lingto  property  which  had  been  his. 

OVSDBT,  Nathaniel,  of  a  Dorsetshire 
iamily,  was  bom  at  Lyme  Regis,  and 
entered  the  Middle  Temple  as  a  member  in 
1720,  but,  after  being  called  to  th^  bar  in 
1725,  removed  to  Lincoln*8  Inn,  and  was 
made  a  king's  cotmsel  in  July  1742.  He  re- 
presented Dorchester  in  his  native  county 
som  1741  till  his  elevation  to  the  bench. 
That  he  was  considered  sldfT  and  pretentions 


by  his  brethren  may  be  presumed  firom  the 
following  character  given  of  him  in  the 
'  Causidicade,'  as  a  supposed  candidate  for 
the  office  of  solicitor-general  vacant  in 
1742  :— 

In  the  fh>nt  of  the  crowd  then  appeared  Bfr. 

Q — nd--T, 
'  To  this  oMce,'  quo'  he,  *  my  pretentions  aie 

randry ; 
Imprimis  my  merit,  e*en  great  as  t*  attract 
His  m— j— 7'8  notice,  so  nice  and  exact. 
As  lately  to  call  me  inside  of  the  bar, 
From  among  the  rear-guard — poor  souls,  how 

the^  stare ! 
Which  is  plain  that  he  meant  me  some  ftuther 

preferment, 
More  worthy  my  learning,  parts,  and  discernment. 
More  claims  I  might  orge,  but  this  I  insist  on 
Is  sufficient  to  merit  the  dice  in  question.' 
Then  the  president  thns,  *  You're   too  fhU  of 

stumises; 
The  man  who  is  stiff,  like  an  oak,  seldom  rises.' 

He  waited  eight  years  for  his  advance- 
ment, when  in  May  1750  he  was  appointed 
a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas.  He  enjoyed 
the  post  less  than  four  years,  dying  on  the 
circuit  at  Launceston  on  March  23,  1754. 
He  was  buried  at  Musbury  in  Devonshire. 
(J?ufcAtiM'«i>orM^,  1249,379:  Gent,  Mag. 
xxiv.  191,  Ixi.  1159.) 

OUNTHOSP,  WiLLiAH,  described  as 
'  clericus,'  probably  held  some  office  in  the 
Treasury  or  Exchequer  before  he  received 
the  responsible  appointment  of  treasurer  of 
Calais,  on  March  20, 1368,  42  Edward  HI. 
This  place  he  held  till  October  26,  1373 
(N.  Faderay  iii.  844,  992),  and  then  was 
made  a  baron  of  the  Excheouer. 

The  latest  mention  of  him  in  that 
character  it  is  9  Richard  IL  (Itot,  Pari  iii. 
204^,  but  up  to  18  lUchard  H.  he  is  re- 
coraed  as  granting  lands  to  the  chantry  of 
the  church  of  St.  Wolstan,  in  Grantham, 
Lincolnshire,  and  to  the  chapter  of  St. 
Marv,  Southwell,  in  Nottixighamshire. 
(Cm.  Inquis,  p.  m.  iii.  162,  187.) 

OUSDOV.  Adak,  son  of  Adam  Gurdon, 
one  of  the  oailiffis  of  Alton  in  Hampshire 
(MadoXj  ii.  304),  married  Custanday  the 
aaughter  and  heir  of  John  de  Venuz,  with 
whom  he  received  extensive  lands  at  Sel- 
borne  in  that  county,  together  with  the 
bailiwick  of  the  king's  forests  of  Wulvermar 
and  Axiholt  He  seems  to  have  been  of  a 
litigious  disposition,  no  less  than  six  entries 
occurring  in  the '  Abbreviatio  Placitorum '  of 
causes  decided  against  him.  He  joined  the 
party  of  De  Montford,  and  even  after  the 
oattle  of  Evesham  raised  an  array  against 
his  sovereign  in  Hampshire.  Prince  Edward 
advanced  against  the  rebels,  and  coming  up 
with  them  between  Famham  and  Alton,  he 
inconsiderately  leaped  over  the  trench  that 
surrounded  their  camp  before  his  forces 
could  follow  him.  Aoam  met  him,  and, 
after  a  severe  fight  hand  to  hand,  was  at 
last  mastered  and  obliged  to  yield  himself 


318 


GURNEY 


prisoner  to  the  prince.  Edward  generously 
gave  him  his  life,  and  eventaally  his  liberty, 
and  thus  secured  the  services  ot  a  brave  and 
grateful  enemy.     (Raping  iii.  170.) 

In  8  Edward  I.,  1280^  Dugdale  places 
him  among  the  justices  itinerant  in  Wilt- 
shire J  but  the  pleas  of  that  iter  were  con- 
iiued  to  the  forest^  and  he  was  no  doubt 
appointed  in  virtue  of  his  bailiwick,  as  he  is 
not  mentioned  upon  any  other  circuit 

He  was  frequently  summoned  to  perform 
military  service,  and  in  23  Edward  I.  was 
nominated  custos  of  the  seashores  of  Ilamp- 
shire,  and  a  commissioner  of  array  in  that 
county  and  in  Dorset  and  Wilts. 

In  *^3  Edward  I.,  1305,  he  was  elected  a 
representative  b^  the  'communitas'  of  Scot- 
land, and  constituted  a  justice  there,  and 
died  in  the  same  vear.  {Rot,  Pari  L  267; 
JPiarL  Writs,  i.  1&,  &c. ;  Col,  Inquis,  p.  m. 
12, 106,  212.) 

Besides  his  first  wife  Custanda,  he  mar- 
ried two  others — viz.,  Almeria,  whom  he 
divorced  after  having  two  sons;  and  Agnes, 
by  whom  he  had  a  daughter,  Johanna,  to 
whom  he  left  hb  property  in  Selbome,  and 
who  married  Kichara  Acnard.  That  estate, 
still  called  Gurdon  Manor,  now  belongs  to 
^Magdalen  College,  Oxford. 

OVBKET,  John.  The  family  of  Baron 
Gumey  may  boast  of  a  legal  pedigree  ex- 
tending over  more  than  a  century  and  a 
half,  inasmuch  as  his  grandfather,  Thomas 
Gumey,  flourishing  from  1706  to  1770,  and 
his  father,  Joseph  Gumey,  were  the  re- 
cognised shorthand  writers,  not  only  em- 
ployed confidentially  by  the  government  and 
in  parliamentary  committees,  but  engaged 
by  authority  in  reporting  the  proceedings 
on  all  the  important  trials  occurring  during 
the  period.  His  mother  was  a  daughter  of 
William  Brodie,  Esq.,  of  Mansfield,  and  he 
was  bom  in  London  on  Febmary  14,  1768. 
His  education  was  commenced  at  St  Paul's 
School,  and  completed  under  the  Eev.  Mr. 
Smith  at  Bottesdale  in  Suffolk.^  Accompany- 
ing his  father  on  his  professional  occupa- 
tions in  the  courts  of  law,  he  naturaUy  im- 
bibed a  predilection  for  that  profession,  and 
for  practice  in  the  art  of  forensic  elo<^uence 
he  frequented  those  debating  societies  in 
which  some  of  the  greatest  orators  had 
made  their  first  essays,  adopting  those 
political  principles  of  freedom  and  reform 
which  then  made  opposition  popular.  Hav- 
ing entered  the  Inner  Temple,  he  was  called 
to  the  bar  by  that  sociefr  in  May  1793. 
He  had  not  long  to  wait  for  employment. 
In  the  very  first  term,  and  the  sittings  after, 
he  was  retained  as  junior  coimsel  to  defend 
Daniel  Isaac  Eaton  for  two  libels ;  and  in 
the  following  February,  in  consequence  of 
the  absence  of  his  semor,  he  led  tue  defence 
of  the  same  indiTidnal  for  another  libel.  On 
that  occasiQn  he  deliyered  an  animated, 
homozousi  and  effisctilTe  qpeech|  which  at 


GURNEY 

i  once  established  him  in  his  piofesoon,  and 

S laced  him  on  a  height  from  which  he  nerer 
escended. 
I  ^^ 

I  The  first  consequence  was  that  he  nm 
engaged  as  assistant  counsel  to  Mem. 
Erskine  and  Gibbs  in  the  memorable  stite 

I  trials  of  Hardy,  Home  Tooke,  and  ThelwiII 
for  hiffh  treason,  in  all  of  which  he  prorad 
himself  a  most  efficient  auxiliary.  Tbm 
occurred  before  he  had  been  two  yean  it 
the  bar,  and  in  all  of  them  verdicte  of  ae- 
quittal  were  pronounced  for  his  cEenti. 
The  same  success  attended  his  efibrte  ai 
counsel  for  Crossfield  and  others,  airaigped 
in  1706  on  what  was  nicknamed  the  rop- 
gun  Plot,  and  for  John  Binns  when  indicted 
with  O'Coigley,  Arthur  O'Connor,  and 
others  for  high  treason  in  1798,  in  lioth  of 
which  he  most  ably  summed  up  the  pri- 
soners' defence.  (lAate  TriaU,  xxii.-xxTiL) 
At  the  London  and  Middlesex  SeaaonSi 
where  he  then  practised,  he  soon  got  a  de- 
cided lead,  and  gradually  acquired  such  a 
footing  in  Westoiinster  Hall  and  on  tiie 
Homo  Circuit  as  warranted  him  in  apply- 
ing for  a  silk  ^wn.  But  his  supposed  pon- 
tics were  agamst  him,  and  it  was  not  till 
he  had  been  three-and-twenty  yeais  at  tha 
bar  that  he  obt^ed  it,  and  tnen  only  in 
consequence  of  the  extiraordinaiy  ahility  ha 
displayed  in  prosecutinfi"  Lord  Cochnae, 
Cochrane  Johnstone,  and  the  other  partial 
implicated  in  propagating^  a  false  stbrj  of 
Bonaparte's  defeat  and  death,  for  the  pa> 
pose  of  speculating  in  the  funds.  Here,  in 
opposition  to  a  whole  phalanx  of  the  moat 
able  counsel  at  the  bar,  he,  almost  unaided, 
gained  a  complete  triumph  in  the  conviction 
of  all  the  defendants.  His  promotion  could 
no  longer  be  delayed,  and  m  1816  he  todr 
rank  as  king's  counsel. 

For  sixteen  years  more  he  continQed  to 
labour  as  an  advocate,  during  the  whde  of 
which  period  he  shared  the  lead  of  tiw 
King's  Bench  with  Sir  James  Scarlett,  Sir 
John  Copley,  and  one  or  two  eminent  mem- 
bers of  the  bar,  and  of  the  Home  Circuit  be 
soon  became  the  acknowledged  head.  It 
fell  to  his  lot  to  lead  the  prosecntian  of 
two  of  the  Cato  Street  conspirators  in  1890, 
who,  with  the  remainder  of  those  tried,  were 
convicted  on  the  clearest  evidence.  (iMi 
xxx.  711, 1341.^ 

He  at  lengtn  met  his  reward.  After 
forty  years  of  continued  success,  thronghont 
the  whole  of  which  he  was  conspicaoua  for 
his  respectful  yet  independent  demeaDonr 
to  the  court,  and  his  kindly  and  oomteooa 
manner  to  all,  and  particularly  for  the  ae- 
knowledged  virtues  of  hb  pnvate  112%  ba 
vras  pif>moted  to  the  bench  on  FebroaiyU^ 
1882,  as  one  of  the  barons  of  the  Ssohafil^ 
when  he  was  knighted. 

For  thirteen  years  Sir  John  Ghn^ldl 
this  judicial  poeitioii ;  and  ibaD|  tal  tt 
advanced  age  and  the  fidlme  ^imimKI^ 


HADFIELD 

"he  resigned  his  seat  in  January  1845;  only 
to  die  on  the  let  of  the  following  March  at 
his  house  in  Lincohi's  Inn  F1el<b.  With- 
out taking  a  high  rank  as  a  deep-read  and 
hlack-letter  lawyer,  he  su|yportea  as  a  judge 
the  reputation  he  had  gained  as  an  advo- 
cate for  discrimination,  acuteness,  and  dis- 
cretioD;  and  his  former  experience  gave  him 
a  recognised  superiority  on  criminal  trials. 
He  was  brought  up  among  Dissenters,  but 
in  his  latter  years  he  conformed  to  the 
€hurch  of  England.  Whatever  were  his 
doctrinal  opinions  at  different  periods  of  his 
life,  as  a  man  he  was  universally  respected, 


HALK 


319 


I  and  his  charities  and  practice  during  the 
whole  of  his  lengthened  existence  were  the 
best  proofs  of  his  having  imbibed  the  spirit  of 
the  Master  whom  he  ever  professed  to  serve. 
By  his  wife,  Maria,  daughter  of  Dr.  Hawes, 
he  left  several  children,  one  of  whom,  Rus- 
sell Gumey,  Esq.,  exhibits,  as  recorder  of 
London,  such  high  judicial  powers  and  such 
deep  legal  knowledge  that  ne  has  been  fre- 
quently called  upon  by  the  government  to 
preside  at  the  assizes  in  the  place  of  judges 
temporarily  incapacitated  by  illness.  He 
is  member  for  Southampton,  and  has  been 
called  to  the  privy  coimcil  of  his  sovereign. 


H 


HAB7IEL]),  Walter  de,  was  one  of  the 
iofltiees  itinerant  who  set  the  assize  on  the 
king's  demesnes  in  Essex  and  Hertfordshire 
in20HenrvU.,1174.  (Madox,i.l24.)  The 
manor  of  Writell  in  Essex  was  granted  to 
Bim  and  John  Fitz- William  in  4  Richard  I., 
1192  (Und,  ii.  167),  between  which  date  and 
1201  he  died.    (ChanceOar^s  Roa,  S  John,) 

HASLOW,  or  HAITSLO,  Nicholas  de,  of 
the  manor  of  Court-at-Street  in  Kent,  was 
I  raised  to  the  bench  about  November  1264, 
and  continued  to  act  up  to  September  1266. 
In  42  Henry  UI.  he  was  one  of  the  three 
who  were  assigned  '  ad  tenendum  Bancum 
Regis  apud  Westm.,'  until  the  king  arranged 
more  fvulj  for  that  court.  (Dugdale's  Cmg< 
43;  JExcerpt.  e  Rot  Fin.  ii.  211-446.)  He 
died  in  1270. 

KAOR,  Geoffret,  in  10  Richard  I.,  1108, 
^rms  associated  with  two  others  as  a  justice 
itinerant  over  Yorkshire  and  the  other  north- 
cm  counties,  to  hear  pleas  of  the  crown. 

He  was  the  eldest  son  of  Bertram  Haget, 
ivho  possessed  considerable  property  in  York- 
shire, and  who  granted  a  hermitage  and 
land  in  the  park  of  Helagh  in  that  county, 
upon  which  QetiStey  afterwards  built  a 
c&nich.    (Monagl.  vi.  437.) 

HA0HIIAV,  or  HAWXAH,  Nicholas, 
"wms  probably  the  son  of  Alan  de  Haghman, 
mnd  Amida  his  wife,  as  in  6  Edward  II., 
1.^13,  he  was  parson  of  the  parish  of  Evers- 
ley  in  Hampshire,  of  the  manor  and  ad- 
TOWBon  of  wnich  Alan  and  Amicia  became 
posaeased  in  6  Edward  L 

He  was  constituted  a  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer on  October  3, 1336, 10  Edward  III. ; 
but  nis  name  was  not  included  in  the  new 
patent  on  January  20,  1341.  {App.  Bat. 
Ong.  L  1©6S  Abb.  Hacit,  191.) 

KALBy  SiMOK  DE,  whose  pnncipal  estate 
was  atoate  in  Yorkshire,  was  sheriff  of 
that  cooiily  laU  8  Henry  lU.    In  the  next 


^ear  he  was  at  the  head  of  the  justices 
Itinerant  appointed  to  no  less  than  ten 
coimties,  ana  in  11  Henry  IH.  to  three 
counties  more.  {Rot.  Claus.  i.  450,  630,  ii. 
4*5-213.)  It  is  manifest,  from  his  being 
placed  at  the  head  of  the  Hsts,  that  he  was 
something  more  than  an  ordinary  justice 
itinerant. 

In  10  Henry  III.  he  was  appointed 
sheriff  of  Wiltshire,  and  his  people  in 
Yorkshire  were  exempted  from  the  rates 
of  the  county  and  hundred  during  his  ab- 
sence. He  IS  last  mentioned  in  1240,  when 
he  again  appears  as  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant  before  whom  a  fine  was  levied 
at  York. 

HALE,  Matthew.  This  eminent  judge, 
whom  all  look  up  to  as  one  of  the  brightest 
luminaries  of  tne  law,  as  well  for  the 
soundness  of  his  learning  as  for  the  ex- 
cellence of  his  life,  descended  from  an  old 
and  respectable  family  in  Gloucestershire. 
His  ^andfather,  Robert  Hale,  a  wealthy 
clothier  at  Wootton-under-Edge,  had  five 
sons,  the  second  of  whom,  also  Robert,  a 
barrister  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  had  by  his  wife^ 
Joan,  daughter  of  Matthew  Poyntz,  Esq., 
of  Alderley,  an  only  son,  the  future  jnd^, 
who  was  left  an  orphan  five  years  after  his 
birth.  He  was  bom  at  Alaerley  on  No- 
vember 1,  1609,  and  on  his  father's  death 
he  was  placed  imder  the  guardianship  of 
his  kinsman,  Anthony  Kingscot,  Esq.,  who 
first  sent  him  to  a  puritanical  grammar 
school  at  Wootton-under-Edge,  and  then 
to  Magdalen  Hall,  Oxford,  intendixig  him 
for  the  clerical  profession.  He  did  not 
stay  long  enough  to  take  a  degree;  but, 
like  most  young  men,  he  was  attracted  by 
the  pleasures  incident  to  his  affe.  ^  He  was 
expeirt  in  athletic  exercises,  and  it  is  related 
of  him  that  one  of  his  masters,  who  was  his 
tenant,  having  told  him  that  ne  was  better 


320 


HALE 


at  his  own  trade  than  himself.  Hale,  proud 
of  the  praise,  promised  him  the  house  he 
lived  in  if  he  could  hit  him  a  hlow  on  the 
head.  The  master  of  course  succeeded  in 
doing  so.  and  gained  possession  of  the 
house,  while  Hale  received  an  early  lesson 
how  to  estimate  a  flattering  tongue.  He 
soon  discarded  the  idea  of  becoming  a 
divine,  and  determined  on  a  soldier's 
life,  an  inclination  which  he  would  pro- 
bably have  followed  had  not  a  family  law- 
suit taken  him  up  to  London  to  consult 
Serjeant  Glanville.  That  learned  man  soon 
observed  his  superior  judgment  and  pecu- 
liar fitness  for  the  study  of  the  law,  and 
advising  him  to  adopt  it  as  his  profession. 
Hale  entered  himself  at  Lincoln  s  Lin,  and 
was  called  to  the  bar  on  May  17, 1630. 

During  tliis  interval  he  forsook  all  his 
former  vanities,  which  had  never  been 
tainted  with  any  vice  or  immorality,  and 
devoted  himself  wholly  to  the  improve- 
ment of  his  life  and  the  study  of  his  pro- 
fession. He  himself  states  that  for  the 
first  two  years  his  application  extended  to 
sixteen  hours  a  day,  which,  nearly  bringing 
him  to  his  grave,  he  was  obliged  to  reduce 
to  eight  hours,  and  acknowledged  that  he 
thought  six  hours,  well  used,  were  suffi- 
cient. {SeivarcPs  AnecdoteSf  iv.  416.^  At 
the  same  time  he  paid  strict  attention  to 
his  religious  duties,  never  once  missing 
attendance  at  church  on  Sunday  for  six- 
and-thirty  years.  As  a  diversion  from  his 
abstruser  studies  he  made  himself  a  pro- 
ficient in  mathematics  and  various  branches 
of  philosophy,  and  acquired  considerable 
skill  in  medical  and  anatomical  knowledge, 
not  neglecting  history,  both  ancient  and 
modem,  nor,  particularly,  the  varied  forms 
of  theological  doctrines. 

Besides  introducing  him  into  many  de- 
sirable friendships,  his  deep  learning  and 
known  industry  soon  insured  him  ^ood 
practice  at  the  bar.  He  was  entirely  a 
loyalist,  though  he  religiously  and  upon 

Snnciple  avoided  taking  any  part  in  the 
isscnsions  of  the  times.  In  1643  he  was 
engaged  for  Archbishop  Laud,  and  is  said 
to  have  composed  the  speech  in  defence 
which  was  spoken  by  Mr.  Heme.  In  1647 
he  was  one  of  the  counsel  appointed  to 
defend  the  eleven  members,  and  he  also 
appeared  for  Lord  Macguire  at  his  trial  in 
tne  King's  Bench  for  high  treason.  (State 
Trials,  iv.  677,  702 ;  miitelocke,  258.) 
According  to  the  statement  of  Burnet,  he 
offered  to  plead  for  the  king  on  his  trial ; 
and  Serjeant  Hunnington  (Edit,  of  Hale's 
Cormnon  Law)  suggests  that  he  furnished 
his  royal  client  with  the  line  of  defence 
which  he  actually  adopted,  in  denying  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  court,  which  of  course 
precluded  the  appearance  of  any  counsel. 
In  the  subseouent  trials  of  the  Duke  of 
Hamilton,  the  Earl  of  Holland^  Lord  Capel, 


HALE 

and  others  for  high  treason  against  the  ptf> 
liament,  he  was  employed  in  thdr  defence, 
and  his  arguments  were  urged  with  lo- 
much  boldness  and  eneivy  that  the  itoi^ 
ney-general  threatened  him  for  nppetring 
against  the  government  Hale  indiffDintlj 
retorted  that  he  was  '  pleading  in  aefenoe 
of  the  laws,  which  tney  professed  thef 
would  maintain  and  preserve ;  and  that  lie 
was  doing  his  duty  to  his  client,  and  wm 
not  to  be  daunted  with  threatenings.' 

Notwithstanding  his  monarchiod  prin- 
ciples, he  deemed  it  his  duty  to  aoquieeoe 
in  the  existing  g^oyemmen£  and  not  \/^ 
eugage  in  any  facnon.  He  therefore  sob- 
scribed  the  engagement  to  be  true  and 
faithful  to  the  Commonwealth,  and  wm 
accordingly  permitted  to  appear  before  the 
High  Court  of  Justice  in  1(551  to  take  ex- 
ceptions to  the  charge  against  the  Preeby- 
terian  Christopher  Love — a  privilege  re- 
fused to  Mr.  Archer  and  Mr.  Waller, 
because  they  had  not  complied  with  that 
formality.  {State  TriaU,  v.  211.)  Thcni^ 
thus  acting  against  them,  the  parliament 
showed  their  estimation  ot  his  lefod  know- 
ledge by  placing  Hale  in  the  next  year  at 
the  head  of  the  committee  for  the  preven- 
tion of  the  delays  and  expenses  of  law  pro- 
ceedings.    (  W%iteiockef  520.) 

When  Cromwell  assumed  absolute  power 
Hale  was  one  of  the  many  who  were  dis- 
gusted at  his  usurpation.  The  protector, 
however,  who  was  no  doubt  sincere  m  hia 
wish  to  strengthen  his  government  by  having 
men  of  known  ability  and  honestf  on  the 
bench,  and  seeing  what  influence  Hale  ex- 
ercised by  his  learning  and  his  courajgre,  re- 
solved to  employ  him  as  one  of  the  jadgea^ 
Hale  naturally  hesitated  to  accept  tlia 
proffered  ofiice,  but  on  the  representatiA 
that  he  would  not  be  required  to  acknow- 
ledge the  usurper^s  authority,  and  at  the 
urgent  solicitation  of  Sir  Orlando  Bridge- 
man  and  other  loyalists,  backed  by  the 
opinion  of  his  cleri(»l  friends,  he  detennined 
to  accept  the  appointment,  upon  the  con- 
viction that  it  was  absolutely  necessary  that 
under  all  governments  property  shoud  he 
secured,  and  j  ustice  impartially  administered. 

Accordingly,  on  Anuaiy  25,  1654,  he 
was  made  a  judge  of  the  Common  Fleas. 
He  altogether  refused  to  try  offenden 
against  the  state,  not  recc^ising  the  pre- 
sent authorities,  and  boldly  andconsci^i* 
tiously  administered  justice  between  man 
and  man,  regardless  of  the  party  to  which 
either  was  attached.  He  convicted  and 
hung  one  of  CromwelFs  soldiers  for  a  foul 
murder  of  a  king*s  man,  and  he  dismiaaed  ft 
jury  because  he  discovered  that  it  had  ban 
returned  by  Cromwell's  order  and  sot  Iqr 
the  sheriff^  The  protector  on  Ui  ntatt 
from  the  circuit  told  him  ^  he  irM  not  ft 
to  be  a  judge,'  to  which  he 
'that  it  was  very  true,' 


J 


HALE 

and  duBfttisfied  Cromwell  might  be,  he 
could  not  afford  to  dismiss  so  popular  a 
man,  and  was  obliged,  perhaps  was  glad, 
to  pasi  over  his  refusal  in  1665  to  assist  at 
the  trial  of  Colonel  Penruddock  at  Exeter. 
Hale  therefore  was  continued  on  the  bench, 
bat  upon  the  death  of  Cromwell  in  Sep- 
tember 1658,  not  even  the  importunities  of 
his  fiiends  and  brother  judges  could  induce 
him  to  accept  a  new  commission  from  the 
Protector  Richard. 

In  the  July  (1654)  after  he  became  a 
judge,  which  did  not  then  disqualify  him 
for  a  seat  in  parliament,  Hale  was  returned 
for  his  native  county.    The  first  business 
of  this  parliament  was  the  consideration  of 
the  system  of  government  to  be  adopted. 
Violent  discussions  followed,  till  Mr.  Justice 
Hale  proposed  an  expedient  that  seemed 
reasonable  to  the  majority.    It  was  to  the 
effect  *  that  the  single  person  in  possession 
flhonld  exercise  the  supreme  magiBtracy, 
with  such  powers,  limitations,  and  qualifica- 
tions as  the  parliament  should  afterwards 
declare.'     But  the  protector,  fearing  lest 
iua  power  should  thus  be  gradually  taken 
from  him,  shut  up  the  house,  and  would 
not  re-admit  the  members  till  each  had 
subscribed  an  unconditioual  recognition  of 
his  authority.    Many  refused  to  sign,  and 
among  them  most  probably  was  Hale,  as 
his  name    does  not  subsequently  appear 
either  as  a  speaker  or  as  a  member  ot  any 
of  the  committees.     He  was  not  elected  to 
the  only  other  parliament  called  by  Crom- 
well, in  1656;  but  in  that  summoned  by  Pro- 
tector Richard  in  January  and  dissolved  in 
April  1650  he  was  chosen  for  the  university 
Of  Oxford,  but  he  seems  to  have  been  silent 
amid  the  dissensions  of  that  short  session. 
Upon  the  election  of  the  Convention  Parlia- 
ment, in  April  1660,  Hale  was  again  re- 
tuzncMd  for  Gloucestershire.    In  that  he  was 
most  active,  being  selected  as  a  manager  of 
the  conference  with  the  Lords  which  led  to 
the  return  of  the  king,  and  as  one  of  the 
committee  to  examine  the  acts  of  govern- 
ment lately  passed,  and  to  report  how  the 
legal  proceedings  that  had  takenplace  might, 
notwithstanding  all  irregularities,  be  con- 
firmed.    (BurtoHj  i.  xxxii.  iii.  142:  Pari. 
Hid.  iv.  24.)    Burnet  says  (i.  88)  that  he 
attempted  to  bind  Charles  to  certain  con- 
ditions, by  moving  for  a  committee  to  look 
into  the  concessions  that  had  been  ofiered 
by  the  late  king  during  the  war,  and  to 
suggest  such  propositions  as  should  be  sent 
over  to  the  king.     This  motion,  leading  to 
a  settlement  which  might  have  prevented 
much    future    mischief,    was    dexterously 
counteracted  by  Monk. 

On  the  arrival  of  Charles,  though  Hale 
was  not  immediately  replaced  in  his  judicial 
position,  he  was  at  once  confirmed  in  his 
degree  of  serjeant,  and  in  that  character  was 
inclnded  in  uie  commission  for  the  trial  of 


HALE 


321 


the  reffiddes.  At  the  termination  of  those 
doleful  proceedings  he  was,  in  spite  of  his 
declared  reluctance,  constituted  chief  baron 
of  the  Exchequer  on  November  7  (1  J^der/in, 
3,  4),  and  so  ffreat  was  his  desire  to  escape 
the  honour  of  knighthood  that  he  avoided 
the  hinges  presence,  until  Lord  Clarendon 
contrived  an  unexpected  meeting  with  his 
majesty,  who  immediately  conferred  upon 
him  the  accustomed  distinction. 

In  every  stage  of  his  career  Hale  was 
accustomed  to  put  into  writing  his  reflec- 
tions on  the  incidents  of  the  time,  and  to 
lay  down  regulations  for  his  conduct. 
Among  many  excellent  rules  for  his  guid- 
ance as  a  ^udge  was  one  'to  abhor  all 
private  solicitations.'  Acting  on  this,  he 
rebuked  a  noble  duke  who  applied  to  him 
about  a  cause  in  which  his  grace  was 
concerned,  who,  complaining  of  his  rough 
reception,  was  told  by  the  kmg  to  be  '  con- 
tent that  he  was  no  worse  used,  for  he 
believed  he  himself  should  have  been  used 
no  better  if  he  had  solicited  him  in  any 
of  his  own  causes.'  Another  of  his  rules 
was  '  not  to  be  biassed  with  compassion  to 
the  poor  or  favour  to  the  rich;'  and  so 
strict  was  he  in  its  application  that  he 
insisted  on  paying  for  a  buck  that  was  pre- 
sented to  him  on  the  circuit  before  he  tzied 
a  cause  in  which  the  donor  was  a  party. 

After  presiding  in  the  Exchequer  for 
nearly  eleven  years,  he  was  promoted  to 
the  chief  justiceship  of  the  Ean^'s  Bench 
on  May  18,  1671.  He  remained  in  that 
dignified  post  for  almost  five  years,  when 
his  bad  health  and  increasing  infirmities 
induced  him  to  resign  it  on  February  21, 
1676,  in  opposition  to  the  wishes  ot  the 
king  and  the  solicitations  of  his  Mends  and 
colleagues.  But  he  felt  that  he  could  not 
conscientiously  retain  a  position  the  duties 
of  which  he  was  not  able  fully  to  perform, 
and  the  near  approach  of  death  made  him 
desirous  of  leisure  for  its  contemplation. 
Sir  Heneage  Finch  speaks  of  him  as  'a 
chief  justice  of  so  indefatigable  an  industry, 
so  invincible  a  patience,  so  exemplary  an 
integrity,  and  so  ma^animous  a  contempt 
of  worldly  things,  without  which  no  man 
can  be  truly  great ;  and  to  all  this  a  man 
that  was  so  absolutely  a  master  of  the 
science  of  the  law,  and  even  of  the  most 
abstruse  and  hidden  parts  of  it^  that  one 
may  truly  say  of  his  knowledge  m  the  law 
what  St.  Austin  said  of  St.  Hierome's 
knowledge  in  divinity — "Quod  Hierony- 
mus  nescivit,  nuUus  mortalium  unquam 
scivit.'"  These  and  other  contemporaneous 
eulogies  have  been  echoed  by  almost  every 
writer  during  the  two  centuries  that  have 
elapsed  since  he  flourished,  and  the  more 
fully  have  been  laid  open  to  the  world  the 
principles  that  guided  him  in  his  judicial 
career,  and  the  daily  practices  and  habits 
of  his  private  life,  the  more  confirmed  has 


32S 


HALE 


been  the  admiration  of  His  character^  so 
that  he  is  scarcely  ever  named  except  in 
terms  of  respect  and  veneration. 

Surving  his  resignation  scarcely  ten 
months.  Sir  Matthew  died  on  Christmas 
Day  1676.  By  his  special  direction  his 
remains  were  interred  m  the  churchyard  of 
Alderley. 

A  list  of  his  numerous  writing  few  of 
which  were  published  during  his  life,  is 
nven  in  most  of  the  memoirs  from  wmch 
tiiis  sketch  is  compiled.  Those  which 
most  will  be  remembered  are  his  '  History 
of  the  Pleas  of  the  Crown; '  his  *  Preface  to 
KoUe's  Abridgement,'  containing  excellent 
advice  for  the  guidance  of  young  students, 
in  whom  he  ever  took  a  special  interest ; 
and  his  'Analysis  of  the  Law,'  which 
formed  the  basis  of  Blackstone's  'Com- 
mentaries.' ]ffis  philosophical  and  religious 
works  eminently  show  nis  varied  learning 
and  his  contemplative  piety,  and  the  MSS. 
wHch  he  beaueathed  to  Lincoln's  Inn  li- 
brary afford  abundant  testimony  of  his  un- 
wearied industry  in  collecting  and  transcrib- 
ing the  valuable  records  of  the  kingdom. 

Of  his  two  wives  he  had  issue  by  the 
first  only.  She  was  Anne,  daughter  of  Sir 
Henry  Moore,  of  Fawley  in  Berashire,  and 
grandchild  of  Sir  Francis  Moore,  the 
famous  seneant-at-law  in  the  rei^  of 
James  I.  Two  only  of  their  ten  children 
survived  the  judge.  Late  in  life  he  mar- 
ried, secondly,  Anne,  daughter  of  Joseph 
Bishop,  of  Fawley,  described  b^  Baxter  as 
'  a  woman  of  no  estate,  but  suitable  to  his 
disposition,  to  be  to  him  as  a  nurse.'  She 
survived  him  for  many  years,  and  is  spoken 
of  in  his  will  in  the  most  affectionate 
terms.  The  male  line  of  his  family  has 
been  long  extinct 

HALS,  Bebnabd,  was  bom  in  1677  at 
King's  Walden  in  Hertfordshire,  an  estate 
which  had  been  in  the  possession  of  the 
family  since  the  time  of  Queen  Elizabeth. 
He  was  the  eighth  son  of  William  Hale, 
who  represented  the  county  in  1661  and 
1678,  and  of  Mary,  daughter  of  Jeremiah 
Elwes,  Esq.,  of  Koxby  in  Lincolnshire. 
Having  entered  the  society  of  Gray's  Inn, 
he  tooK  his  depee  of  hamster  in  February 
1704.  He  gained  so  considerable  a  repu- 
tation as  an  able  lawyer  that  on  June  28, 
1722,  he  was  constituted  chief  baron  of 
the  Irish  Exchequer,  where  he  remained 
for  nearly  three  years.  From  this  position 
he  was  removed  on  June  1,  1725,  to  the 
I^glish  Court  of  Exchequer  as  one  of  the 
puisne  barons,  when  he  was  knighted.  He 
sat  there  little  more  than  four  years,  and 
died  on  November  7,  1729,  at  Abbots 
Langley,  in  the  church  of  which  his  re- 
mains are  interred. 

He  married  Anne,  daughter  of  J. 
Thoreeby,  Esq.^  of  Northamptonshire;  and 
left  a  large  &niily. 


HALEB 

HALS8,  Christopheb,  derived  bis  mas 
from  a  place  so  called  in  Norfolk,  whtn 
Roger  de  Hales  possessed  proMrtyintts 
reign  of  Henry  II.  Before  tne  den  of 
Edward  in.'s  reign  the  fiunily  had  »- 
moved  into  Kent  and  was  settled  at  HiUn, 
near  Tenterden.  The  m^rtanate  Bobot 
de  Hales,  prior  of  St.  John  of  Jeranhn 
and  treasurer  of  England  wadet  Bidttii 
n.,  who  was  barbarously  mordered  bjrffe 
rebels  in  1381,  was  of  this  family,  ni 
from  his  brother  Sir  Nicholas  dcjcended 
no  less  than  three  eminent  lawyers  iHio 
graced  the  judicial  bench — Christoplierni 
John  in  the  reign  of  Henry  VHL,  and  JaaM 
in  that  of  Edward  VL 

Christopher  Hales  was  the  son  of  Thonai^ 
the  younger  brother  of  the  father  of  Jolo, 
so  tnat  the  two  jud^  were  first  eoami. 
His  mother  was  Alicia,  daughter  of  Hum- 
phrey Eveas.  Receiving  his  legal  ednei* 
tion  at  Gray's  Inn,  he  rose  to  be  an  ancuil 
in  1616,  and  reader  in  1624.  On  Angnit 
14^  1626,  he  became  solicitor-general,  nd 
attorney-general  on  Juie  3, 1629.  Donig 
the  seven  years  that  he  filled  this  offics  la 
had  to  conduct  the  proceedings  agioit 
several  illustrious  persons  who  had  inami 
the  king's  disj^leasure.  He  proflecotoi 
Wolsey  oy  an  indictment  to  whidi  tke 
cardinal  made  no  defence ;  he  apneared  ibr 
the  king  against  Sir  Thomas  More  nft 
Bishop  fisher  on  their  last  arraipmuDk; 
and  the  trials  of  Queen  Anne  Boleyn  nl 
those  charged  with  being  implicated  inA 
her  occurred  during  the  last  few  numtlii  of 
his  official  tenure  (State  Triak^  L  37(\ 
389) ;  but  history  charges  him  widi  u 
harshness  in  performing  uie  delicate  dutiai 
thus  devolving  upon  hmi. 

He  succeeded  Thomas  Cromwdl  M 
master  of  the  Rolls  on  July  10, 163^  sal 
retained  the  place  for  the  five  remaumg 
years  of  his  lite. 

He  died  in  June  1641,  and  was  hvM 
at  Haddngton,  or  St  Stephen's,  near  Gm- 
terbury.  His  large  possessions,  manj  d 
which  were  granted  to  him  by  the  king  oa 
the  dissolution  of  the  monasteries,  wen 
divided  amongthe  three  daughters  he  kid 
by  his  wife  Mizabeth,  the  dau^ter  d 
John  Caunton,  an  alderman  of  London. 
{Weever,  260;  HaOed) 

HALES,  John,  is  described  by  WotUa 
(\,  219)  to  have  been  the  first  couon  d 
Uhristopher,  but  Hasted  makes  him  tbt 
uncle  01  Christopher,  representing  him  ii 
the  elder  brother  of  Christoph^a  ^''^ 
instead  of  the  son  of  that  elder  brother.  II 
Hasted  is  ri^ht,  John's  father  was  HflOQ 
Hales,  and  ms  mother  Julian,  danrttf « 
Richard  Capel,  of  Lenden,  near  Tamte 
if  Wotton  IS  right,  Henry  ma  Ui  tHii 
fiither,  and  another  John  was  Ua  flniKi 

There  is  a  cnriona  enttjvM  mhII 
them  in  thebookBor  GagllifiH^ifflMI 


HALES 

ibey  both  were  members,  by  whicli  it 
.^pean  that  in  July  1529  JohD  Hales 
oommmiicated  to  the  society  that  Sir 
Tthomas  Nevill  would  accept  Christopher 
Hales,  then  attorney-general;  to  be  his 
l)edfe]low  in  his  chamber  there. 

John  Hales  became  a  reader  in  that  house 
in  1514^  and  again  in  1520.  Residing  at 
the  manor  of  the  Dungeon,  or  Dane  John, 
near  Canterbury,  he  was  the  acting  steward 
of  the  abbey  of  St.  Augustine.  As  he  does 
not  appear  as  an  advocate  in  the  Reports, 
lie  probably  held  an  office  in  the  Exchequer, 
the  barons  of  that  court  being  at  that  time 
usoally  selected  from  among  those  who 
were  conversant  with  that  department 
He  attained  the  place  of  third  baron  on 
October  1, 1522,  and  was  promoted  to  be 
second  baron  on  May  14,  1628.  He  still 
held  this  noeition  on  August  1,  1539,  as 
John  Smitn  then  received  a  grant  of  the 
office  in  reversion  on  his  dea&  or  retire- 
ment (Oriff,  273,  292  j  Hymer,  iii  788.) 
He  probably  died  shortly  afterwards,  John 
Smith  taking  his  place  in  the  next  IMichael- 
mas  Term. 

By^  his  wife  Isabel,  daughter  of  Stephen 
Harris  (Harvey,  according  to  Hasted),  he 
had  four  sons.  His  eldest,  James,  is  the 
next-mentioned  judge,  and  the  descendants 
of  two  of  the  others  respectively  were 
raised  to  baronetcies  in  lull  and  16C0 ; 
but  both  have  become  extinct  (  WottoHf 
I  219,  iii.  96,  162.) 

HALB8,  James.  James  Hales  was  the 
eldest  son  of  the  above  John  Hales,  by  his 
wife  Isabel  Harris,  or  Harvey.  lake  his 
&ther,  he  studied  the  law  at  Gray's  Inn, 
where  he  was  three  times  reader — in  1532, 
in  1537,  and  in  1540,  when  he  assumed  the 
decree  of  the  coif.  In  1544  he  was  made 
one  of  the  king's  Serjeants,  and  soon  after 
had  a  grant  from  Henry  VIH.  of  the  manor 
of  Clavertigh,  with  lands  called  Monken 
Landa  in  Eleham,  Kent.  (Haded,  viii.  106.) 

At  the  coronation  of  Edward  VI.  he  was 
one  of  the  forty  who  were  made  knights  of 
the  Bath.  He  was  selected  in  1549  as  one 
of  the  commissioners  '  super  hseretica  pra- 
vitate'  {Rymer,  xv.  181,  250)  ;  and  having 
on  the  10th  of  May  following  been  advanced 
to  the  bench  by  Edward  VI.  as  a  justice  of 
the  Common  Pleas,  he  sat  there  during  the 
rest  of  the  reign.  He  was  one  of  the  j  ud^es 
who  pronoimced  the  sentence  of  deprivation 
against  Bishop  Gardiner  {State  Trials^  i. 
630)  in  February  1551,  and  had  reason  to 
find  that  that  prelate  when  he  attained 
power  did  not  forget  those  before  whom  he 
was  arraigned. 

Although  firmly  attached  to  the  doctrines 
of  the  Reformation,  and  conscious  as  he 
must  have  been  of  the  danger  of  a  revul- 
sion, should  a  princess  who  had  even 
through  persecution  refused  to  renounce 
the  ancient  ritual  succeed  to  the  throne. 


HALES 


323 


Sir  James  Hales,  when  called  upon  by  the 
Duke  of  Northumberland  to  join  the  other 
judges  in  authenticating  the  instrument  by 
which  the  succession  was  to  be  changed 
and  the  crown  was  to  be  placed  on  a  Pro- 
testant head,  boldly  refused  to  affix  hia 
signature,  declaring  the  attempt  to  be  both 
unlawful  and  unjust 

The  same  firmness  he  had  thus  shown 
in  supporting  the  succession  according  to 
law,  he  exhioited  immediately  afterwards 
at  the  assizes  in  Kent  in  reference  to  the 
statutes  relative  to  religion.  Some  indict- 
ments having  been  brought  before  him 
against  certam  persons  for  nonoonformity, 
he  in  his  charge  to  the  ^nd  jury,  regard- 
less of  the  changes  which  might  be  ex- 
pected under  tne  present  government, 
courageously  pointed  out  what  the  law 
then  actually  was,  and  what  it  devolved 
upon  them  m  the  exercise  of  their  duty 
to  do.  Although  this  was  certainly  not 
the  way  to  'stand  well  in  her  grace's 
favour,  yet  the  queen  appointed  him  one 
of  the  commission  to  try  Sir  Andrew  Dud- 
ley and  others  for  high  treason  in  August, 
and  on  October  4  granted  him  his  new 
patent  in  the  Common  Pleas,  thus  appa- 
rently overlooking  his  neglect  of  her  known 
wishes,  and  doing  justice  to  the  honesty  of 
his  principles.  But  this  would  not  satisfy 
the  bigoted  chancellor  Bishop  Gardiner, 
before  whom  two  days  afterwards  he  came 
with  his  fellows  to  take  his  oath  of  office. 
On  that  occasion  the  harsh  prelate  required 
him  '  to  make  his  puliation,'  and  a  '  col- 
loquy '  took  place,  in  which  the  judge  justi- 
fied his  conduct,  speaking  plainly  of  hia 
intentions  to  support  the  queen  and  the 
law,  but  at  the  same  time  to  adhere  to  his 
religion,  while  the  bbhop  taunted  him  with 
his  '  lacking  no  conscience,'  and,  after 
threatening  but  not  moving  him,  dismissed 
him  without  his  oath. 

Within  a  few  days  the  bishop,  in  a  true 
persecuting  spirit,  had  him  committed  to 
prison,  where  nis  incarceration  lasted  several 
months,  during  which  many  attempts  were 
made  to  induce  him  to  embrace  the  Popish 
doctrine,  not  only  by  working  on  his  iears 
of  the  torments  prepared  for  those  who 
persisted  in  their  heresy,  but  by  the  earnest 
persuasions  of  Foster,  a  Hampshire  gentie- 
man  sent  for  the  purpose,  ot  Bishop  Day, 
and  of  his  brother  jud^  oir  William  Port- 
man.  He  was  at  last  overcome,  but  his 
recantation  had  such  an  effect  upon  his 
mind  that  he  attempted  in  the  absence  of 
his  servant  to  kill  himself  with  his  pen- 
knife. The  servant's  return]  saved  his  life, 
and  being  discharged  from  confinement,  he 
was  '  brought  to  the  queen's  presence,  who 
gave  him  words  of  great  comfort'  His 
release  took  place  about  April  1554,  but 
his  mind  was  not  at  ease,  ana  in  the  course 
of  the   next  year,  while  staying  at  hi^ 

t2 


324 


HALS 


nephew^B  house  at  Thanington,  near  Csnter- 
1)017,  he  in  a  fit  of  despondency  drowned 
himself  in  a  xiver  in  the  parish  of  St 
Mildred. 

There  is  another  account,  that  Sir  James's 
death  was  occasioned  hy  his  crossing  the 
liyer  over  a  narrow  hridge,  from  which  he 
accidentally  fell  and  was  drowned,  at  the 
^e  of  eighty-five.  {Hdinshed,  iy.  8 ;  State 
TridU,  i.  714;  Haded,  Burnet.)  Which- 
ever of  these  stories  is  the  true  one,  it  is 
certain  that  a  verdict  of  felo  de  se  was 
pronounced  hy  the  coroners  inquest;  for 
there  are  two  cases  reported — ^Tne  Bishop 
of  Chichester  v,  Webh  (2  Dyer,  107),  and 
Lady  Margaret  Hales  v.  Petit  (Plowden, 
253]i--the  arguments  and  Judgments  in 
which  proceeaed  on  that  midinjg^  by  the 
jury.  The  hair-splitting  subtleties  urged 
in  these  cases  are  supposed  to  have  sug- 
jrested  the  argument  which  Shakspeare  puts 
mto  the  gravedigger's  mouth  in  Hamlet. 

The  name  of  Sir  James's  wife  was  Mar- 
garet ;  but  whether  she  was  the  daughter 
and  heir  of  Thomas  Hales  of  Henley-upon- 
Thames,  or  one  of  the  daughters  and 
coheirs  of  Oliver  Wood,  called  by  Hasted 
a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  under  Henry 
Vllirrthere  being  no  such  judge),  Hasted 
and  Wotton  differ;  but  both  authors  agree 
that  the  judge  left  an  only  son  Humphrey, 
and  that  the  line  became  extinct  in  16C5. 

HALS,  John,  had  a  seat  at  Kenedon,  in 
the  parish  of  Sherford,  in  Devonshiro.  His 
name  appears  in  the  Year  Books  from  11 
Henry  Iv.,  1409,  and  he  was  appointed  one 
of  the  king's  seneants  in  1413.  On  May  5, 
1423, 1  Heary  Yl.,  he  was  made  a  judge 
of  the  Common  Pleas,  and  on  January  21, 
1424,  was  removed  to  the  King's  Bench. 
But,  notwithstanding  the  latter  appointment, 
he  seems  to  have  continued  to  act  in  the 
Common  Pleas  also  till  Hilary  1425,  a  fine 
having  been  levied  before  him  in  that  term. 
(Or^.  46;  Acts  Privy  Council,  iv.  71,  172.) 
His  name  occurs  in  the  Year  Books  till 
Hilary  1434,  in  which  year  he  probably 
died,  as  a  new  judge  of  tlie  King  s  Bench 
was  appointed  in  the  following  July. 

Ho  married  the  daughter  of  —  Mewy, 
of  Whitchurch,  and  his  second  son  John 
afterwards  became  Bishop  of  Lichfield  and 
Coventry. 

HALTOFT,  Gilbert,  is  stated  by  Dugdale 
to  be  dead  on  November  30, 1458, 37  Ilenry 
YL,  but  he  gives  no  information  when  ho 
entered  on  the  ofiice  of  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer. The  Exchequer  list,  however, 
dates  his  admission  in  Michaelmas  1447; 
and  in  the  act  of  resumption  of  the  crown 
srants,  which  passed  in  the  parliament  of 
November  1449,  he  is  describea  as  secondary 
baron,  and  20  marks  out  of  40/.  yearly,  which 
had  been  granted  to  him  by  letters  patent 
for  life  out  of  the  forms  of  London  and 
Middlflseo^  wero  specially  excepted.    In  31 


HAMIX.TON 

Henry  YL  he  received  a  ftufher  gmt  of 
20/.  yearly  for  life,  which  also  was  excepted* 
from  anouier  act  of  resumption  paand  Vam 
years  after.  The  last  mentian  lAoA  k 
found  of  his  name  is  in  the  latter  jear.wlMi 
the  Commons  prayed  that  he  mi^t  be  ip- 
pointed  one  of  tne  administrators  ^  thepo- 
perty  of  Humphrey,  Duke  of  GlouoeitKi 
(Jlot.  Pari  V.  196,  817,  339.)  In  the  fcv 
last  years  of  his  life  Bishop  Grey  appoinnd 
him  one  of  the  judges  of  the  Isle  of  E^. 
(Co/c'«i»f5».xxv.  47.) 

HAKBITBT,  Henbt  se,  was  one  of  te 
sons  of  Geofirey  de  Hambury,  who  leaded 
at  Hambury,  or  Hanbury,  a  parish  in  W<iw 
cestershire.  (Par/.  Writs,  li.  p.  iL  38i) 
He  was  made  one  of  the  judges  of  the  Eoigi 
Bench  in  Ireland  in  17  Edward  IL,aDdirifr 
raised  to  the  ofiice  of  chief  justice  of  file 
Common  Pleas  there  in  the  following  yen; 
(jCal.  Bot.  Pat.  94, 96.)  He  was  soon  ste- 
wards removed  from  that  countir,  beiii^ 
appointed  a  judge  of  the  King's  fienchia 
^gland  in  2  Edward  HI.,  1328.  (JOk 
Rot.  Oria.  ii.  24.)  The  cause  of  his  elera^ 
tion  to  the  bench  may  have  be^i  his  coo- 
nection  with  Thomas,  £arl  of  Lancaster,  Ir 
his  adherence  to  whom  he  had  received  a 
pardon  in  12  Edward  H.  He  is  mentioned 
as  being  aliVe  in  26  Edward  HL.  in  tfct- 
herald's  visitation  of  Worcestershire,  Imt 
he  must  have  Ion?  retired  firom  the  beod^ 
as  the  Liberate  lloll  does  not  name  Idm 
among  the  judges  in  12  Edward  HL 

IBs  lineal  descendants  are  divided  into 
several  opulent  branches,  two  of  which  hn* 
been  recently  ennobled — one  having  bees 
created  Baron  Bateman,  of  Shobden  m  the 
county  of  Hereford ;  and  the  other,  Bazot 
Sudely,  of  Toddington  in  the  county  of 
Gloucester. 

HAXILTOK,  William  de,  had  property 
in  Cambridge,  and  his  name  is  first  re- 
corded as  a  justice  itinerant,  but  for  d^ 
of  the  forest  only,  in  Hampshire  and  mlt- 
shire  in  8  Edward  L,  1280.  In  10  Edwud 
T.  he  was  custos  of  the  bishopric  of  Win- 
chester, and  of  the  abbey  of  Hide.  (M, 
Rot.  Orig.  i.  401.)  He  seems  afterwerdi 
to  have  become  a  clerk  in  the  ChancerVr  ei 
it  was  probably  in  that  capacity  that  die 
Great  Seal  was  occasionally  placed  under 
his  care.  There  is  one  letter  addressed  to 
him  as  the  king's  vice-chanceUor,  dated 
November  12,  128(;  (7  RvpoH  Pub.  -8te, 
App.  xii.  242,  2ol) ;  and  anotiier  from  the 
regent  Edmund,  Earl  of  Cornwall,  with 
directions  relating  to  the  Chancery.  Oft 
Bishop  Burners  death,  October  26,  IM, 
tlie  Great  Seal  was  delivered  into  te 
wardrobe  under  William  de  HandltoD^ 
seal ;  and  the  record  expressly  stilM  tUt 
he  sealed  the  writs  therewith  fiv  Hhe  ftnr 
days  that  intervened  before  Ut  lOOOB^ 
panying  the  chanceUor's  remlBi  to  Wtb 
as  one  of  his  executors.    (JML IMLL  lU) 


HANKFOBD 

Dmiiig  the  absences  also  of  the  next  chan- 
caUoTi  John  de  Langton,  from  March  4  to 
^,1297)  and  from  Iidbruanr  20  to  June  16, 
1^9,  he  held  the  Seal  and  performed  the 
seoeamy  duties  in  the  meantime. 

He  xeoeiyed  the  usual  ecclesiastical  pre- 
foxnents  which  were  conferred  on  this  class 
•df  offioersy  bein^  in  1292  made  archdeacon 
<ji  the  West  Riding  of  York,  and  in  De- 
cember 1208  apnointed  dean  of  York.  He 
was  also  dean  ot  the  church  of  St.  Burian 
in  Cornwall  (Le  Neve,  313,  322 ;  Cole's 
DocununU,  421.)  On  December  29, 1304, 
the  king  named  him  chancellor ;  but,  being 
then  absent,  the  Seal  was  ordered  to  be 
depoated  in  the  wardrobe  till  his  arrival, 
and  it  waa  delivered  to  him  on  January  16. 
1305.  He  held  it  till  his  death,  on  April 
30,1307.    {Madox,L74.) 

KAnPOSD,  William,  was  bom  at  a 
place  of  that  name  at  fiulkworthy,  in  the 
pariah  of  Buckland  Brewer,  in  Devonshire, 
and  was  the  second  son  of  Richard  Hank- 
lord,  of  an  ancient  and  wealthy  fEimily,  to 
whose  l£^[go  estates  he  eventually  suc- 
ceeded. I^e  first  mention  of  him  is  as 
one  of  the  king*s  serjeants-at-law  in  14 
Bichaid  U.,  1390.  In  January  1398  he 
gave  his  opinion,  by  desire  of  the  parlia- 
ment^ on  the  answers  made  by  the  judges 
to  the  questions  propounded  to  them  by 
Chief  Justice  Tresilian,  which  he  declared 
to  be  good  and  loyal,  and  such  as  he  him- 
self would  have  given  under  the  circum- 
itanoes.  (Bot,  Pari  iii.  358.)  It  is  to  be 
hoped  that  this  opinion  was  prompted 
ataer  by  his  fears  of  the  danger  that 
hong  over  him  had  he  pronounced  any 
other,  than  by  the  temptation  of  being 
laiaed  to  the  seat  on  the  bench  of  the 
Common  Pleas  then  vacant.  He  was, 
however,  appointed  to  fill  it  on  the  6th 
of  May  following.  Henry  IV.  renewed 
Ui  natent  on  the  very  dfay  he  assumed 
the  toxone,  feeline  it  a  point  of  policy  not 
to  intex^bre  so  eany  in  the  judicial  appoint- 
aanta ;  and  Hankford  was  made  a  Imight 
of  the  Bath  at  the  coronation. 

He  continued  in  the  Court  of  Common 
Pleas  throughout  that  reign,  and  on  the 
aceesflion  of  Henry  V.  he  was  removed 
from  the  Common  Pleas  to  the  head  of 
die  Court  of  King's  Bench,  his  patent  being 
dated  March  29, 1413,  eight  days  after  the 
death  of  Henry  lY.  He  presided  in  the 
court  during  the  whole  of  the  reign,  and 
was  re-apjKunted  at  the  commencement  of 
that  of  fienry  VI.,  being  the  fourth  king 
uider  whom  he  had  held  a  judicial  seat. 
In  a  very  few  months,  however,  his  career 
was  closed,  his  death  occurring  on  De- 
eember  20, 1422,  not  four  months  after  the 
accession.  lie  was  buried  in  the  church 
of  Monkleigh.  He  had  a  high  reputation 
both  in  his  moral  and  legal  character. 

A  Texy  improbable  account  of  his  death 


HANliEMEBE 


325 


is  nven  by  his  biographers.  .  He  is  stated 
to  have  become  weary  of  his  life,  and,  with 
an  intention  of  gettmff  nd  of  it,  to  have 
given  strict  orders  to  his  keeper  to  ahoot 
any  person  found  at  night  in  his  park  who 
would  not  stand  when  challenged,  and 
then  to  have  thrown  himself  in  his  keeper's 
way,  and  to  have  been  shot  dead  in  pur- 
suance of  his  own  commands.  The  cause 
of  this  suicidal  conduct  u  represented  to 
have  been  his  'direful  apprehensions  of 
dangerous  approaching  e^ms^*  which  could 
only  have  arisen  from  a  diseaaed  imagina* 
tion,  as  there  was  nothing  at  that  time  in 
the  political  horizon  to  portend  the  disasters 
of  thir^  years'  distance.  Holinshed  intro- 
duces this  event  as  happening  in  1470, 10 
Edward  IV.,  very  nearly  fifty  years  after 
the  death  of  the  chief  justice.  The  story, 
however,  was  long  behev^  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  his  seat  at  Annery,  in  Monk- 
leigh, and  an  old  oak  bearing  his  name 
was  shown  in  the  park,  where  it  was  said 
he  had  fallen.  As  Chief  Justice  Danby  did 
actually  disappear  about  that  time,  it  is  not 
improl)able  that  the  story  applies  to  him, 
Holinshed  having  mistaken  tne  name. 

He  left  two  sons,  Richard  and  John,  the 
first  of  whom  had  a  daughter  Anne,  who 
married  the  Earl  of  Ormond :  and  their 
daughter  Margaret,  marrying  Sir  William 
Boleyn,  was  the  grandmoUier  of  Anne 
Boleyn,  the  mother  of  Queen  Elizabeth. 

HAHKEMSBE,  Dath),  was  the  grand- 
son of  Sir  John  Mackfel,  constable  of  Car- 
narvon Castie  in  the  reign  of  Edward  L, 
who  assumed  the  name  of  Hannemere  from 
the  town  so  called  in  Flintshire,  which 
belonged  to  him.  Philip,  the  youngest  of 
his  three  sons,  was  ultimately  his  sole  heir, 
and  by  his  wife  Agnes,  daughter  and  heir 
of  David  an  Rice  ap  Evans  ap  Jones,  had 
several  children,  of  whom  this  David  was 
the  elder.  His  name  appears  as  an  advo- 
cate in  the  Year  Books  from  45  Edward 
IIL,  and  on  the  accession  of  Richard  H.  he 
was  appointed  one  of  the  king's  Serjeants, 
and  'narrator'  in  all  the  courts.  (Cai, 
Hot.  Pat.  197.)  On  February  26, 1383,  he 
was  constituted  a  judge  of  the  Kinjg^s 
Bench,  and  from  that  time  till  the  parba^ 
ment  of  October  1386  he  was  among  the 
triers  of  petitions.  As  his  successor  in  the 
King's  Bench  was  named  in  the  following 
year,  he  probably  died  in  the  interval. 

By  his  wife  An^haiad,  daughter  of  Lhv- 
velin  Dhu  an  Griffith  ap  Jorworth  Voell, 
he  had,  besiaes  a  daughter  Margaret,  who 
married  the  renowned  Owen  Glendower,  two 
sons,  Griffith  and  Jenkin,  from  the  latter  of 
whom  sprang  a  long  succession  of  knightiy 
descendants.  Two  of  these  were  created 
baronets,  one  of  them  in  1620,  now  ex- 
tinct by  the  death  in  1746  of  Sir  Thomas 
Himmer,  who  was  speaker  of  the  House  of 
Commons  in  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne,  and 


326 


HANKEN 


diBtiiigaislied  by  his  elegant  and  correct 
edition  of  the  woriis  of  Sbakspeare;  and  the 
other  granted  in  1774,  by  whose  descendant 
the  tiUe  is  now  enjoyed*  (  WoUoUf  i.  411.) 
HAVVSV,  Jamis,  one   of  the  present 

i'udges  of  the  Queen's  Bench,  is  the  sou  of 
Tames  Hannen,  Esq.,  of  London,  and  was 
bom  in  1821.  After  receiving  the  earlier 
part  of  his  education  at  St  Paul's  School, 
ne  finished  it  at  the  university  of  Heidel- 
berg. Adopting  the  legal  profession,  he 
was  called  to  the  bar  at  the  Middle  Tem- 
ple on  January  14,  1848,  and  joined  the 
Home  Circuit  During  tiie  twenty  jeors 
that  he  practised  in  the  courts  he  distin- 
guished himself  by  the  solidity  of  his 
advice,  and  the  readiness  and  abifity  of  his 
advocacy.  Though  he  never  accepted  the 
silk  gown,  which  has  become  a  common 
aspiration,  nor  was  ever  in  parliament,  yet, 
notwithstaridin^  he  was  well  known  as  a 
liberal  in  politics,  he  was  selected  solely 
for  his  legflui  acquirements  by  a  conservative 
government  to  fill  the  vacancnr  in  the  Court 
of  Queen's  Bench  occasioned  oy  the  death  of 
Mr.  Justice  SheeJ  He  was  appointed  on  Fe- 
bruary's, 1868,  and  was  soon  after  knifflited. 

He  married  Mary  Elizabeth,  daughter  of 
N.  Winsland,  Esq. 

EAHHIBAL,  THOius,  in  1504  entered 
the  imiversity  of  Cambridge,  where  he 
took  the  degree  of  Doctor  of  Laws  in  1514. 
At  the  former  date  he  received  a  prebend 
in  the  church  of  York,  and  at  the  latter 
became  chancellor  of  the  diocese  of  Wor- 
cester. In  1522  both  he  and  Dr.  John 
Clerke  were  engaged  at  the  Roman  court 
in  the  double  capacity  of  King  Henry's 
orators  and  private  agents  for  Cardinal 
Wolsey.  Both  of  them  were  rewarded  in 
succession  with  the  mastership  of  the 
Rolls,  Hannibal  following  Clerke  in  that 
office  on  October  0,  1523,  and  retaining  it 
till  June  26, 1527,  when  he  voluntarily  sur- 
rendered it.  In  1524  he  presented  to  the 
king  a  rose  of  goldsent  by  the  pope.  (Jiumer, 
xiv.  10?  Aihm.  Oxan,  u.  735, 771;  Fasti,  i.  39.) 

HABCOITBT,  Simon  (Lord  Harcourt), 
was  directiy  descended  from  Bernard,  of 
the  royal  blood  of  Saxony,  who  wi^  other 
lordships  received  that  of  Harcourt,  near 
Fakuse,  from  Rollo  on  his  settlement  in 
Nonnandy.  His  descendant,  Robert  de 
Harcourt,  accompanied  William  on  his 
invanon  of  England,  and  his  family  had 
flonrished  during  the  succeeding  period  in 
knightly  distinction,  and  had  been  resident 
dunng  the  twelfth  century  at  Stanton,  near 
Oxford,  from  that  time  called  Stanton- 
Harcourt.  The  chancellor  was  the  son  of 
Sir  Philip  Harcoort,  by  his  first  wife,  Anne, 
daughter  of  Sir  Wilbam  Widler,  the  par- 
liamentaiy  generaL  The  family  estate, 
by  one  side  or  the  other  in  the  previous 
troubles,  had  been  seriously  dinunished  at 
the  time  of  the  Bartoration. 


HARCOURT 

Simon  Harcourt  was  bom  in  1660.  an} 
while  receiving  his  education  at  ^emfarob 
College,  Oxfora,  was  admitted  in  1676  is 
a  member  of  the  Inner  Temple.  He  wis 
called  to  the  bar  in  1683,  and  in  1688  hs 
was  elected  recorder  of  Abingdon.  (Jikau. 
Oxen.  iv.  214.)  That  borough  retonei 
him  to  parliament  in  1090,  and  in  all  tb 
future  parliaments  of  King  X^Hlliam's  leigD. 
That  he  was  strongly  imbued  with  toij 
principles  he  evinced  on  his  first  entnnos 
mto  tne  house,  by  the  objections  he  then 
raised  in  the  oiscussions  on  the  bills  fbr 
the  settlement  of  the  government,  and 
afterwards  in  1090  by  powerful  speedus 
in  opposition  to  the  bill  of  attainder  against 
Sir  John  Fenwick,  as  a  proceeding  both 
unconstitutional  and  unjust  He  carried 
his  p&rty  feeling  so  far  that  he  declined  in 
the  nrst  instance  to  subscribe  the  Assodt- 
tion  of  the  Commons  on  the  disoovexy  of 
the  assassination  plot 

The  tide  of  party  turned,  however,  to- 
wards the  latter  end  of  King  Willism^s 
reign.  The  consequence  of  tms  was  fizst 
the  removal,  and  then  the  impeachment^ 
of  Lord  Somers,  the  duty  of  carrying  up  ths 
charge  against  whom  to  the  House  oIL  Loids 
was  entrusted  to  Harcourt,  to  whose  manage- 
ment or  mismanagement  (as  it  may  N 
variously  considered)  may  probably  be 
attributed  the  non-appearance  of  the  pro- 
secutors at  the  trial.  {State  TridUj  v.  o82- 
1314.^  At  this  time  he  had  acquired  t 
complete  ascendency,  not  only  in  the  hoos^ 
but  in  general  estimation.  His  wit  and 
eloquence,  in  addition  to  his  legal  abilit^y 
were  so  universally  acknowledged  that  ur 
after-years  they  were  specially  brought  for- 
ward in  the  preamble  to  his  patent  of  peer- 
age as  a  principal  reason  for  his  advancement 

With  the  accession  of  Queen  Anne  tbe 
tories  were  established  in  power,  and 
Harcourt  was  at  once  admitted  to  partalcff 
it,  being  made  solicitor-general  on  June  1, 
1702,  and  knighted.  In  the  first  parliament 
of  that  reign  he  was  again  returned  for 
Abingdon,  but  in  the  second  and  third  he 
sat  for  Bossiney  in  Cornwall.  He  supported 
the  extraordinary  claims  of  the  Commons  to 
decide  on  the  rights  of  electors  in  tbe 
famous  Aylesbury  case,  and  has  the  credit 
of  drawing  the  bill  for  the  Union  witii 
Scotland  in  such  a  manner  as  to  prevent  t 
discussion  of  the  articles  upon  which  the 
commissioners  had  agreed.  While  solicito^ 
pneral  he  acted  as  chairman  of  the  Bodc- 
inghamshire  quarter  sessions,  and  of  Ids 
charges  to  the  grand  jury  there  are  nann- 
script  notes  in  the  British  MusenoL  Ik 
Apnl  1707  he  succeeded  to  the  post  « 
attorney-general,  but  before  a  yev  ei^Md 
he  resigned  i^  in  February  1706^  en  fl* 
change  of  ministry  and  the  ndmfwtaa  of  te 
whiffs  into  the  caUnet.  tk  tlii  W* 
parlmment  called  in  Nonribw  dF  1W 


HARCOUBT 

jBKt  he  was  returned  again  for  Alungdon, 
oot  on  a  petition  against  him  by  his  whig 
opQcmenty  the  house,  notwithstanding  the 
majority  of  legal  votes  at  the  dose  of  the 
ekction  were  palpably  in  his  favour,  decided 
against  him.  ^  He  thus  became  the  victim 
m  an  iniquitous  system  he  had  himself 
eoootiraged  when  in  power  in  former  parlia- 
ments, by  which  the  taction  in  the  ascendant 
decided  on  all  petitions  in  favour  of  their 
oim  partisan.  Ihe  Duke  of  Marlborough 
soon  after  removed  him  from  the  stewara- 
•hip  of  the  manor  of  Woodstock,  which  he 
baa  held  for  some  time.  (Burnet^  v.  10, 48, 
287,  S45 ;  Pari  Hist,  vi.  264,  778  j  LvHreU, 
▼L442.) 

Before  the  close  of  that  parliament  he 
was  elected  member  for  Cardigan,  but 
during  his  recess  from  the  house  the  absurd 
impeachment  of  Dr.  Sacheverell  was  re- 
solved on,  and  Sir  Simon  was  thus  enabled 
to  appear  as  his  leading  counsel  at  the  bar 
of  tiie  House  of  Lords,  and  by  a  powerful 
argument  to  expose  the  foUv  of  prosecuting 
his  vain  and  silly  client.  This  prosecution 
was  the  deathblow  of  the  whigs.  The 
tories  were  restored  to  power,  and  Sir 
Simon  on  September  19, 1710,  resumed  his 
office  of  attorney-general.  He  was  returned 
to  the  new  parliament  for  Abingdon,  but 
before  it  met  the  Great  Seal  was  delivered 
into  his  hands  on  October  19,  with  the 
tide  of  lord  keeper.  He  then  took  up  his 
residence  in  Powis  House,  Lincoln's  Inn 
Fields.  {State  Trials,  xv.  196 ;  LtdtreUy  vi. 
620, 630, 644.) 

Before  he  was  solicitor-general  his  name 
only  once  occurs  in  the  ^  otate  Trials,'  and 
aft«r  he  obtained  office  there  are  only  three 
catee  in  which  he  acted  besides  that  of  Dr. 
Sacheverell.  (State  Trials,  xiii.  1084, 
xiv.  661,  989, 1100,  xv.  196.) 

The  new  lord  keeper  presided  in  the 
House  of  Lords  for  nearly  a  year  without  a 
tide,  but  on  September  3,  1711,  he  was 
nosed  to  the  peerage  as  Baron  Harcourt  of 
Stanton-Harcourt.  On  April  7,  1713,  the 
queen  changed  his  title  of  lord  keeper  to 
lord  chancellor,  which  he  retained  till  her 
death  on  August  1, 1714,  steering  cautiously 
amidst  the  dissensions  in  the  cabinet  and 
through  the  agitating  scenes  by  which  the 
last  months  of  her  reign  were  troubled. 
Although  as  chancellor  he  was  forced  to 
take  the  formal  proceedings  necessary  for 
proclaiming  the  Hanoverian  king,  there  was 
too  much  reason  for  believing  that  he  had 
raeviously  joined  in  the  intrigue  with 
Bolinspbroke  and  Atterbury  to  restore  the 
exiled  family. 

The  lords  justices  however  replaced  him 
in  his  position  as  lord  chancellor ;  and,  not- 
withstanding the  suspicion  attaching  to 
hnn,  he  escaped  the  consequences  with 
which  his  colleagues  were  visited,  and  re- 
ceived no  other  punishment  than  an  imme- 


HARDRES 


327 


diate  discharge  from  his  office  on  the  arrival 
of  George  L  The  king  nuide  his  first  entry 
into  London  on  September  20,  and  on  the 
next  day  he  sent  to  Lord  ELarcourt  for  the 
Seal,  wnich  was  delivered  to  Lord  Cowper. 
Tonvards  his  old  coadj  utors  he  acted  a  friendly 
part,  managing  to  defeat  the  impeachment 
of  Oxford,  and  procuring  a  qualined  pardon 
for  Bolingbroke.  (Lord  Kaymond.  1318: 
Pari  Hist.  viL  486.) 

After  some  years,  when  the  Hanoverian 
succession  was  recognised  by  the  great  ma- 
jority of  the  peopk,  he  joined  the  whig 
party  under  Sir  Kobert  Walpole.  which 
procured  him  from  his  old  allies  tne  nick- 
name of  the  Trimmer.  His  chanffe  of  poli- 
tics was  accompanied,  on  July  2^  1721,  by 
an  advance  in  the  peerage  to  the  dignity 
of  viscount,  and  an  mcrease  of  his  retiring 
pension  from  two  to  four  thousand  a  year. 
To  that  administration  he  continued  Io^a 
support  through  the  remainder  of  the  reign, 
though  he  never  held  any  other  official  posi- 
tion than  that  of  one  of  the  lords  justices 
during  the  king's  occasional  visits  to  his 
German  dominions.  He  survived  George  L 
not  quite  two  months,  when,  being  seized 
with  paralysis,  he  died  at  his  house  in  Car 
vendish  Square  on  July  28,  1727,  and  was 
buried  at  Stanton-Harcourt 

With  undoubted  abilities  and  a  power  of 
eloquence  imiversally  acknowledged.  Lord 
Haroourt's  reputation  as  a  judffe  is  not  very 
great,  nor  are  his  decisions  held  in  high 
estimation  at  the  present  day.  That  he  was 
kind  and  amiable  in  his  disposition,  polished 
in  his  manners,  and  of  social  haoits  may 
be  inferred  from  the  number  of  friends  that 
circled  around  him,  from  his  being  a  fre- 
quenter of  several  literary  and  political  clubs, 
and  from  his  intimate  association  with  Pope, 
Swift,  Philips,  Gay,  and  the  other  wits  by 
which  that  age  was  distinguished. 

Lord  Harcourt  was  married  three  times 
— first,  to  Rebecca,  daughter  of  Mr.  Thomas 
Clark ;  secondly  to  Ehzabeth,  daughter  of 
Richard  Spencer,  Esq.,  and  widow  of  lU- 
chard  Anderson,  Esq. ;  and  lastly,  to  Eliza- 
beth, daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Vernon,  of 
Twickenham  Park,  and  widow  of  Sir  John 
Walter,  of  Saresden  in  Oxfordshire,  Bart. 
He  had  issue  b^his  first  wife  only,  and,  his 
son  Simon  havmg  died  before  him,  he  was 
succeeded  by  his  grandson,  to  whose  other 
titles  an  earldom  was  added  in  1749.  These 
honours  became  extinct  in  1830. 

KAHBHIW,  Robert  se,  was  in  1185  one 
of  the  custodes  of  the  see  of  Coventry,  then 
vacant,  and  possessed  of  property  at  Had- 
leigh  in  Sufiblk.  (iJfo^x,  1. 1 16,  309.J)  He 
was  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  m  the 
county  of  Lincoln  in  1  and  8  Richard  L, 
1189-90.    (Ibid,  704 ;  Pipe  HolL  69.) 

He  held  the  prebend  of  Lochton  in  the 
church  of  Lincoln,  and  died  about  9  John. 

He  derived  his  name  from  Haidres,  a 


328 


HABDWICKE 


parish  near  Canterbury,  and  was  no  doubt 
a  brandi  of  tbe  fitmily  who  held  the  manor 
there  under  the  Earls  of  Clare.  They  as- 
sumed the  name  about  1180,  and  several  of 
them  held  a  high  position  during  the  fol- 
lowing reigns.  One  of  their  descendants 
was  uierin  of  the  county  in  the  reign  of 
Elizabeth,  and  another  was  created  a  beronet 
by  Charles  I.  in  1642.  The  title,  however, 
became  extinct  in  the  early  part  of  the  reign 
of  George  m.    (Hatted,  m.  7SQ,) 

SAXDWIOKS,  Eael  of.    See  P.  YoRXE. 

HABS^  Nicholas,  traces  his  descent  in 
England  to  Jervis,  Earl  of  Hare-court,  or 
Harcourt,  who  accompanied  William  the 
Conqueror  in  his  invasion  of  this  island. 
He  was  the  eldest  son  of  John  Hare,  of 
Homersfield  in  Suffolk,  and  Elizabeth  For- 
tescue  his  wife.  Educated  at  Cambridge, 
he  entered  the  Inner  Temple,  where  ne 
became  reader  in  1532.  He  received  the 
honour  of  knighthood  about  the  year  16S9, 
and  on  April  28,  1540,  he  was  elected 
speaker  of  tne  House  of  Commons,  to  which 
he  was  returned  as  member  for  Norfolk. 
He  predded  also  in  the  following  session, 
his  speech  at  the  close  of  which  affords  a 
curious  specimen  of  the  inflated  oratory  of 
the  period.    (Pari  Hist,  i.  546.) 

In  September  1540  he  was  one  in  a  com- 
misdon  mto  Wales  to  examine  what  jewels, 
plate,  and  ornaments  were  embezzled  from 
the  shrine  of  St.  David's.  (Acts  Privy 
Cmencilf  vii.  46,  85.)  At  this  time  he  was 
chief  justice  of  Chester,  and  he  was  soon 
after  made  master  of  Requests,  which  he 
held  during  the  remainder  of  Henry's  and 
the  whole  of  Edward's  reign.  Fortunately 
for  himself,  he  was  not  cidled  upon  to  wit- 
ness 'the  wiU  of  the  latter,  and  was  not 
implicated  in  the  measures  taken  to  place 
Lady  Jane  Grey  on  the  throne.  On  Sep- 
tember 18, 1553,  he  was  appointed  master 
of  the  Rolls ;  but  it  would  appear  that  his 
judicial  position  did  not  prevent  him  from 
onporing  the  queen's  marriage  with  Philip 
01  Spain,  since  Sir  Nicholas  Throckmorton 
justifies  his  '  misliking '  of  that  connection 
by  the  reasons  for  it  which  he  had  learned 
from  '  Master  Hare '  and  others  in  parlia- 
ment If  he  had  offended  by  this,  he 
amply  redeemed  himself  in  the  eyes  of 
the  court  by  his  harsh  endeavours  to  pro- 
cure Throckmorton's  conviction.  (State 
TVials,  i.  875-806.)  His  severity  however 
at  the  trial  overstepped  its  object,  since  it 
is  not  improbable  tnat  his  refusal  to  ex- 
amine a  witness  called  by  Throckmorton  and 
to  refer  to  a  statute  cited  by  him  tended 
materially  to  the  acquittal  of  the  prisoner. 

Sir  Nicholas  died  as  master  of  the  Rolls 
on  October  81, 1557,  and  was  buried  in  the 
Temple  Church.  By  his  wife,  Catherine, 
daugnter  of  Sir  John  Bassingboum,  of 
Woodhall  in  Hertfordshire,  he  had  three 
•oma,  all  of  whom  dying  without  issue,  the 


HABT 

estate  went  eventually  to  his  yoangirln- 
ther  John,  one  of  i^idae  sons  wtt  aiMMkar 
of  Sir  Ralph  Haie,  of  Stow  BiidoUh,  who 
was  created  a  baronet  in  1641,  but  the  tUfo 
became  extinct  in  1764.  It  wis  hamsm 
revived  in  1818,  and  the  title  is  now  c»> 
joyed.  Another  son  was  the  fiither  of 
Hugh,  who  was  created  Lord  Ooleniie 
in  Ireland  in  16S5,  but  this  title  is  iho 
now  extinct  (OmM  ami  DymmU  lU- 
^Aam,  30,  81 ;   Wattm's Bartm0t.^m) 

EASJDIO,  Ralph,  was  a  jostieier  m 
early  as  10  John,  and  fines  were  leiiad 
before  him  as  late  as  8  Heniy  IIL  Hs 
is  mentioned  as  seneschal  or  stowud  of 
Thomas  de  St.  Valerico  in  8  JohiL  aal 
that  he  was  then  advancing  in  the  Joiig'i 
favour  appears  by  the  committal  to  lib 
custody  ottiie  two  churches  of  CesteAton 
and  Mixebir,  of  which  his  son,  Jordan,  Ind 
been  deprived  on  account  of  the  inteniet 
(Rot.  Oaus.  I  82, 114) ;  and  in  len  Oa 
two  years  he  was  employed  in  a  jndidil 
capacity.  In  17  John  he  was  appoiated 
sheriff  of  the  united  counties  of  Baddni^ 
ham  and  Bedford,  and  in  the  following 
vear  he  was  speciallv  employed  by  the 
king,  and  the  constables  of  the  casttas  of 
Wallingfbrd,  Oxford,  and  Windsor  w» 
commanded  to  give  him  safe  oonduot  oa 
his  mission.     (Pot,  Pat.  146,  192.) 

From  the  first  year  of  the  next  reifB 
there  are  frequent  entries  of  his  judieMl 
employment,  and  of  marks  of  royal  doob^ 
accorded  to  him.  (Pot.  Clous.  L  294-4BB.) 
He  died  about  1230. 

HAEPT7X,  Richard^  was  the  son,  or 
grandson,  it  is  uncertam  which,  of  Henfr, 
the  third  son  of  Sir  John  Harpur,  of  Riua- 
all  in  the  county  of  Stafford,  deaoendid 
from  a  very  ancient  Warwickshire  haaij, 
which  had  flourished  from  the  time  flC 
Henzy  I.  He  was  a  student  at  Banaid'i 
Inn,  whence  he  removed  to  the  Isatt 
Temple,  where  he  was  elected  reader  ia 
1554.  In  1558  he  was  nominated  seqeMty 
and  in  May  1567  he  succeeded  as  a  jodgt 
of  the  Common  Fleas.  He  died  on  Jasiniy 
29, 1577,  and  was  buried  in  the  chordi  sfc 
Swarkestone  in  Derbyshire,  under  a  rnoBO* 
ment  finely  represenfing  him  in  fiiU  kol 
costume,  to  wnich  the  sculptor  has  added 
unaccountably  a  collar  of  SS.  By  his  wife^ 
Jane,  daughter  of  George  Findem,  of  FIb- 
dem  in  tne  same  county,  he  left  sefsisl 
children,  the  eldest  of  whom.  Sir  Joln^ 
was  father  of  Henry  Harpur,  of  Calka  n 
Derbyshire,  who  was  created  a  baroBStit 
1626.  The  seventh  possessor  of  the  tidi 
assumed  the  name  of  Crewe  in  additioa  19 
hb  own,  and  the  present  baronet  benttaA 
names.  (Wotton's  BaroneL  iL  8;  M^ 
holt's  Costumes,  278.) 

HABT,  Ajtthokt,  a  native  of  St  BMk 
in  the  West  Indies,  was  bom  akooIlM 
He  was  educated  atTanbridgaadhiJLM^ 


1 


HABYBY 

stadying  for  the  legal  profession,  was  called 
to  the  oar  in  1781,  ana  practised  through- 
cot  his  life  in  the  courts  of  equity.    Sound 
m  a  lawyer,  dear  in  his  statements,  fluent 
if  not  forcible  in  his  langua^,  and  indus- 
taoaa  and  painstaking  for  his  clients,  he 
dbfCainedy  both  before  and  after  he  received 
a  mXk  gown,  a  very  considerable  share  of 
boflineaa.    He  laboured  before  the  equity 
judges  with  indomitable  perseverance  for 
mrtj-six  years,  before  his  extensive  legal 
knowledge  gained  him  promotion;  but  in 
Mvf  1827  he  was  appointed  vice-chancellor 
of  foigiand.    His  merits  were  then  so  mudi 
better  appreciated  that  on  the  retirement 
of  Lord  Manners,  in  the  following  October, 
lie  "was  raised  to  the  lord  chancellorship 
cf  Ireland.    One  of  Lord  Norbury's  in- 
numerable jokes  was  made  on  this  appoint- 
ment :  *  That  the  government  had  treated 
the   Irish  with   their    wpnted    injustice ; 
deprived  them  of  what  they  needed,  and 
^▼en  them  what  they  already  possessed — 
taken  awit^rifaim^rf,  and  given  tnem^ear^.' 

His  ju^fgments  were  much  admired,  and 
bis  ^laracter  was  plain,  unostentatious,  and 
kind.  He  gave  such  universal  satisfaction 
that  his  removal  in  December  1830  was  a 
oubject  of  sincere  regret  to  the  members  of 
hia  ooort,  which  was  shown  in  a  most 
a;&ctin^  scene  at  his  departure.  He  sur- 
▼ived  his  retirement  only  one  year,  and  died 
in  December  1831. 

KAXTET,  Frakcis, commencing  his  legal 

studies  at  Barnard's  Inn,  completed  them 

At  the  Middle  Temple,  where  he  was  called 

to  the  bar,  and  became  reader  in  1611.    In 

I>eceinber  1612  (at  which  time  he  resided 

ttt  Northampton)  he  was  chosen  recorder 

Off  Leicester;  and  in  1614  he  attained  the 

degree  of  the  coif    On  October  18,  1624, 

be  was  constituted  a  judge  of  the  Common 

Heas.    On  one  of  his  circuits  he  fined  a 

-"whole  jury  10/.  apiece  for  giving  perverse 

mad   wrongful  acquittals  in  four  oifferent 

inal  cases ;  and  in  another  he  showed 

indignation  on  hearing;  an  assize  ser- 

at  iNorwich,  in  which  the  preacher 

allnded  to  the  corruption  of  judges,  saying 

in  his  charge  to  the  grand  jury,  'It  seems 

hr  the  sermon  we  are  all  corrupt ;  but  know 

that  we  can  use  conscience  in  our  places  as 

-well  asthebestclergvmanof  all.'  {Borough 

IfSS.    Zeiceater,)    tie  remained  in    that 

coort  till  his  death,  which  took  place  at 

Northampton  in  August   1632.     (Croke, 

Car,  268.) 

HABWEDOK,  Robert  de,  who  held  land 
in  the  forest  of  Bemewood,  was  one  of  the 
foor  justices  of  trail bat^ton  for  Gloucester- 
afaire  and  ten  other  counties,  dated  on  April 
6,  1305,  33  Edward  I.  (K  Fcedera,  i. 
ir70 ;  Jta.  Pari.  ii.  215.)  He  acted  as  de- 
puty to  Hugh  Ic  Deepeuser,  the  justice  of 
the  forests  south  of  Trent  in  the  next  reign, 
in  the  fifth  year  of  which  the  custody  of 


HATTON 


329 


the  manor  of  Rokele  in  Wiltshire,  belong 
ing  to  the  Templars,  was  committed  to  him 
at  an  annual  rent  of  eleven  pounds,  ten 
shillings,  and  fourpence.  {Ibid,  i.  321; 
Abb.  Hot.  Oriy.  i.  184;  Cd.  Hot.  PaL  78.) 

HATHEBLET,  Lord.    See  W.  P.  Wood. 

HATSEL,  Hekrt,  the  son  of  CaptaxD 
Heniy  Hatsel,  of  Saltram,  near  Plymouth 
(who  took  a  s^ong  nart  in  the  Great  Rebel- 
Uon),  was  bom  in  March  1641.  and,  being 
admitted  a  member  of  the  Middle  Temple, 
was  called  to  the  bar  in  1667,  and  in  1688 
was  summoned  to  take  the  degree  of  the 
coif  In  another  eight  years  he  was  con- 
stituted a  baron  of  tne  Exchequer  on  No- 
vember 23,  1697,  and  knighted.  He  filled 
the  seat  during  the  remainder  of  William's 
reiffn,  and  was  re-appointed  on  the  accession 
of  Queen  Anne,  on  March  2,  1702.  But  on 
the  4th  of  the  following  June  he  suddenly 
received  a  message  from  Lord  Keeper 
Wright,  informing  him  that  he  miffht  for- 
bear sitting  the  next  morning,  the  first  day 
of  term,  her  majesty  designing  his  quietus. 
His  conduct  at  the  Surrey  A^ssizes  on  the 
extraordinary  trial  of  Spencer  Cowper, 
charged  with  the  murder  of  Sarah  Stou^ 
and  acG^uitted,  does  not  tell  much  in  favour  of 
his  judicial  capacity.  He  lived  twelve  years 
after  his  discharge,  and  died  in  April  1714. 

He  married  .Hidith,  daughter  of  Josiah 
Bateman,  merchant  of  London,  and  widow 
of  Sir  Richard  Shirley,  Bart  (Lord  May- 
mond,  260,  708 ;  LuUreU,  iv.  309,  v.  181  j 
State  Trials,  xiii.  1106.) 

HATTON,  Chbistopheb.  Something  less 
than  justice  has  been  done  to  the  character 
of  Sir  Christopher  Hatton.  He  has  been 
looked  upon  less  as  a  grave  counsellor  than 
as  an  accomplished  courtier,  and  the  popular 
impression  with  regard  to  him  is  more  con- 
nected with  his  youthful  graces  than  with 
his  mature  services.  The  prevalence  of 
this  feeling  is  in  a  considerable  degree  to 
be  attributed  to  the  jocose  stanzas  of  our 
poet  Gray  in  his  fanciful  account  of  the 
mansion  at  Stoke-Pogeis,  which  he  erro« 
neously  supposes  to  have  been  occupied  by 
Sir  Clmstopher : — 

Full  oft  within  the  spacious  walls. 
When  he  had  fifty  winters  o'er  him. 

My  grave  lord-keeper  led  the  brawls, 
The  Seal  and  maces  danc'd  before  him. 

His  bushy  beard  and  shoe-strings  green, 
Ilis  high-crown'd  hat  and  satin  doublet, 

Mov'd  the  stout  heart  of  England's  queen, 
Tho'  Pope  and  Spaniard  could  not  trouble  it. 

It  is  difficult  to  reverse  the  sentence  of  a 
poetical  judge,  especially  when  the  decree 
IS  pronounced  in  quotable  phraseology ;  but 
truth  in  the  end  will  triumph,  and,  what- 
ever may  have  been  the  recommendations 
which  introduced  him  at  court,  it  wiU  be 
acknowledged  that  ho  prei^erved  his  position 
there,  and  obtained  his  elevation,  by  quali- 
ties more  solid  and  accomplishments  more 


330 


HATTON 


serviceable  tlxan  an  elegant  address  or  a 
flattering  tons^e. 

Although  tneson  ofa  private  country  gen- 
tleman, his  lineage,  as  is  usual  with  tne  li- 
neage of  all  men  who  become  great,  was  satis- 
fauctorilv  traced  to  a  Norman  nobleman,  whose 
desc^anaants  were  long  settled  in  Cneshire 
until  a  younger  son  ofone  of  them  married 
the  heiress  of  Holdenby  in  Northampton- 
diire.  William  Hatton,  the  grandson  of  this 
genUeman,  was,  by  his  wife  Alice,  daughter 
of  Robert  Saunders,  of  Harringworth,  father 
of  three  sons,  the  youngest  of  whom  was 
Sir  Christopher,  who  by  the  early  death  of 
his  brothers  succeeded  to  the  patenial  estate. 

Bom  in  1540,  at  Holdenby,  he  became  a 
gentleman  commoner  at  St.  Mary*s  Hall, 
Oxford,  but  took  no  degree  (Athm,  Oxon, 
i.  683^ ;  and  on  Mav  20,  1600,  he  was  ad- 
mitted a  member  of  the  Inner  Temple.  It 
is  uncertain  whether  Hatton  took  the  degree 
of  a  barrister,  because  the  Inner  Temple 
registry  of  cslls  to  the  bar  does  not  com- 
mence till  1667,  three  or  four  jears  after 
ho  had  entered  into  the  service  of  the 
queen  ;  but,  as  he  was  clearly  a  member  of 
tne  Temple  in  the  following  year,  the  pro- 
bability IS  that  he  would  not  have  remained 
in  the  house  for  eight  years  merely  in  the 
character  of  a  student.  All  that  is  known 
of  his  early  residence  in  the  inn  is,  that  in 
the  Christmas  of  his  second  year,  1661,  the 
prominent  ofHce  of  *  master  of  the  same ' 
was  assigned  to  him  in  that  celebrated 
masque  at  which  Lord  llobert  Dudley, 
afterwards  Earl  of  Leicester,  was  the  chief 
persona^.     (Dugdale^s  Orig.  160.) 

The  date  of  his  introduction  to  court  is 
established  by  Sir  Harris  Nicolas*s  disco- 
very of  a  warrant,  dated  June  30,  1604,  for 
'  one  armour  fit  for  the  body  of  our  well- 
beloved  servant  Christopher  Hatton,  one  of 
our  gentlemen-pensioners,'  which,  how- 
ever, is  onlv  to  be  'delivered  to  him  on 
his  paying  the  iust  value  thereof.'  (Co/. 
State  Papers  [1547-80],  242.)  It  may  be 
presumed,  therefore,  that  he  had  previously 
attracted  the  queen's  notice. 

In  1508  he  and  four  other  gentlemen  of 
the  Inner  Temple  composed  a  tragedy 
called  '  Tancred  and  Gismund,'  which  was 
acted  before  the  queen,  each  of  them  taking 
a  part  in  the  performance.  Hatton  con- 
triouted  the  fourth  act  It  is  plain  that  bv 
this  time  he  had  ingratiated  himself  with 
Elizabeth,  as  in  that  year  he  was  appointed 
keeper  of  Eltham  Park  and  the  Park  otHome, 
ana  had  effected  an  exchange  of  his  manor 
of  Holdenby  for  the  site  of  the  abbey  and 
demesne  lands  of  Sulby  with  her  majesty, 
who  at  the  same  ^ranted  him  a  lease  of 
his  paternal  manor  for  forty  ^rears.  During 
the  next  Uiree  years  he  received  continuea 
marks  of  ro^  &vonr,  among  which  were 
his  nomination  as  one  of  the  gentlemen  of 
the  privy  chamber,  and  tJie  revernon  of 


HATTON 

the  office  of  queen's  rememlniDeer  m  tht 
Exchequer. 

Hitherto  he  had  taken  no  appannt  flit 
in  politics ;  but  he  was  elected  mflmber  te 
Higham  Ferrers  in  the  parliament  of  VSd^ 
and  for  the  county  of  Northampton  in  tbt 
of  1572.  In  the  latter  he  was  one  of  tti 
committee  appointed  to  confer  with  tka 
Lords  '  on  the  great  matter  touchuig  ths 
Queen  of  Scots ; '  but  he  does  not  appeir 
to  have  spoken  in  the  house  till  Marca  M^ 
1676,  when  he  presented  a  mesaagefron 
the  aueen  recommending  the  enlaigemest 
of  Blr.  Wentworth,  who  had  been  com* 
mitted  to  the  Tower  for  an  offendve  speeeL 
At  this  time  he  is  described  as  cwtain  of  tiis 
queen's  ^ard,  having  succeeded  Sir  ftuea 
Knollys  in  1672.  In  1678  he  narrowlv  es- 
caped assassinaUon  from  the  hands  of  PsteB 
Byrchet,  a  fanatic  who  was  hanged  for  the 
murder  of  another  person^  whom  hebelisvBi 
to  be  Hatton.  Her  majes^  save  him  fhs 
affectionate  nickname  of  '  iiddes,'  snd  he 
addressed  her  in  the  warmest  terms  of  lois. 
Scandal  indeed  was  busy  as  to  the  naUin 
of  his  intercourse  vrith  the  queen,  andtkt 
reports  were  not  limited  to  the  comnon 
herd  of  calumniators,  but  were  boldly  n- 
peated  to  Elizabeth  herself  by  Queen  Maiy, 
and  were  believed  by  Cathenne  de  M^dicM 
and  others.  The  letter  written  by  Dyer  to 
Hatton,  advising  him  what  conduct  to  pur- 
sue in  consequence  of  a  temporanr  kM  of 
favour  at  the  end  of  1672,  and  his  own 
letters  to  the  queen  in  the  folloininff  yeir, 
when  he  was  sent  to  Spa  for  his  hesUli 
(preserved  in  Sir  Harris  r«ioolaa's  vahuUs 
'  Life  and  Timesof  Sir  Christopher  HattonOy 
all  contain  expressions  which  are  very  dim- 
cult  to  interpret  imder  any  other  suppos- 
tion  than  that  an  intimacy  existed  hetwea 
him  and  the  queen  which  would  have  been 
fatal  to  the  cbsracter  of  any  less  elevtted 
female.  {^IM,  463,  401-0.)  To  what  a- 
tent  that  mtimacy  was  carried  it  would  be 
as  unseemly  as  useless  to  attempt  to  pene- 
trate ;  but  seeing  that  the  royal  favour  b^ 
gan  when  he  was  about  five-and-twentf, 
and  ended  but  with  his  life,  extending  ora 
a  period  of  twenty-six  years,  and  mt  it 
vTas  unbroken  butoy  a  few  of  those  ammr 
Hum  ircB  which  rather  proved  its  potencj 
than  caused  any  real  intemrption,  it  is  im- 
possible not  to  give  him  credit  for  a  discie- 
tion  most  uncommon  in  that  age,  and  ffx 
so  extraordinary  a  degree  of  prudence  ud 
modest  demeanour  as  to  subdue  the  effoiti 
of  rival  claimants,  and  to  secure  the  esteem 
and  confidence  of  the  wisest  counsellon  d 
the  crown. 

During  this  period  he  frequently  midtl 
at  the  house  in  Eltham  Parkjj^panitilf 
keeping  up  great  hospitality.  Tbtahnri^ 
wanien's  accounts  for  1576 


entry,  '  Payd  for  brede  and  ^Sf*'^  ^ 
y«  Quenes  Graase  dyned  «ft  BAm^ 


HATTON 

lingixig.  xx*'*^  *  her  majesty's  host  being 
BO  doaot  Sir  Christopher.  (Archteologia, 
xzzIt.  60.) 

Between  1574  and  1677  Hatton  obtained 
poonesion  of  the  Bishop  of  £ly*s  house  in 
HoHbom,  after  an  effort  by  the  latter  to  fly 
fitom  a  contract  made  between  them,  which 
was  speedily  silenced  by  the  interference  of 
the  queen  in  the  following  well-known 
letter: — 

Proud  PreUt6  !  I  nnderatand  yon  are  backward 
in  eomplyiiig  with  your  agreement ;  bat  I  wonld 
hmTe  yon  know  that  I  who  made  you  what  you 
mwrn  can  nnmake  3'oa ;  and  if  you  do  not  forthwith 
ftilfil  your  engagement,  by  God  I  will  immediately 
you.  Elizabeth. 


HATTON 


331 


In  1576  he  obtained  an  act  for  the  assur- 
of  his  lands,  and  was  gratified  with  a 
pension  of  400/.    a   year  for   life,    with 
monopolies,  and  with  special  adyances  for 
the  payment  of  his  debts.     After  haying 
been  connected  with  the  court  for  thirteen 
years  with  no  higher  position  than  that  of 
gentleman  of  the  queen's  privy  chamber 
and  captain  of  her  guard,  he  was  raised  on 
N'oTember  11,  1577,  to  the  office  of  vice- 
cliainberlain,  and  was  sworn  of  the  privy 
oooncil,  and  as  appears  from  the  Diary  of 
Dr.  Dee  the  astrolo^r  (p.  4),  with  whom 
he,  like  most  of  his  contemporaries,  con- 
ferred, he  was  knighted  on  December  1. 
From  this  time  his  devotion  to  state 
is  apparent  from  the  letters  between 
and  tne  principal  ministers,  who  ad- 
with  him  on  all  important  matters, 
both   forei^  and  domestic,  and  evidently 
xegazded  his  opinion  with  a  deference  which 
a  mere  favounte  could  not  command.  Still 
repreeenting  the  county  of  Northampton,  he 
appears  to  have  been  the  queen's  organ  of 
oommnnication  with  the  parliament.    In 
1581  he  conveyed  her  reprimand  to  the 
houie  for  presuming  to  appoint  a  public 
fast  yrithout  her  authority ;  m  1585  he  pre- 
sented the  queen's  answer  to  the  address  of 
thanks,  and  communicated  her  desire  that 
thejr  Miould  adjourn  for    the    Christmas 
hohdays.    On  this  occasion  he  made  the 
vnnenal  motion  that  the  house  should  join 
in  prayer  for  her  majesty's  preservation,  and 
acoonungly  every  one  knelt  down  while 
Kr.  Vice-Ohamberlain  read  a  prayer  ^  de- 
vised and  set  down  by  an  honest,  godly,  and 
learned  man.'     {Pari  Hid.  i.  812,  827.) 

In  the  trials  of  Babington  and  the  other 
eonapirators  relative  to  Mary,  Queen  of 
Scots,  which  took  place  in  September  1586, 
St  Christopher  took  a  prominent  part, 
and,  if  a  juagment  is  formed  from  modem 
proeecations,  not  an  impartial  one.  But, 
prejudiced  as  he  could  not  but  be  by  the 
confeetions  he  had  heard,  there  was  more 
of  indiscretion  than  unfairness  in  the  re- 
marks he  interposed ;  and  the  kindness  of 
his  nature  was  manifested  by  his  promise 
to  pay  ^e  debts  of  one  of  the  accused,  of 


whose  guilt  there  is  no  doubt.  {SUU& 
TriaU,  i.  1127-63.) 

The  trial  of  Queen  Mary  immediately 
followed,  Hatton  being  one  of  the  com- 
missioners, and  her  consent  to  plead,  which 
she  at  first  refused,  was  at  length  yielded, 
'  persuaded,'  as  she  declared,  *  by  Hatton'e 
reasons,'  which  he  had  delivered  with  force* 
and  eloquence  the  day  before.  In  th& 
parliament  which  was  called  in  the  next 
month  he  took  the  lead  in  urging  her  ex- 
ecution,  expressing,  as  plainly  appears  from 
the  whole  proceeding,  the  universal  wish 
of  all  parties  in  both  houses.  The  queen'a 
answer  to  their  joint  petition  was  delivered 
on  November  12  j  and  the  warrant,  after  an 
affected  hesitation,  was  signed  on  Februaij 
1, 1587,  Secretary  Davison,  to  whom  it 
was  given,  having  resolved  not  to  act  on  hia 
own  responsibility,  the  privy  council  was 
summoned,  and,  in  consequence  of  their 
decision,  the  warrant  was  forwarded  to 
Fotheringay.  Notwithstanding  this,  all  the 
counsellors  escaped  public  censure,  except 
the  unfortunate  secretary,  who  was  no  more 
euilty  than  the  rest,  if  guilt  there  was. 
tout  the  queen  wanted  a  pretence  to  excuse 
herself,  and  Davison  was  sacrificed  to  her 
hypocrisy  by  a  severe  sentence  of  fine  and 
imprisonment  Had  there  been  any  sinceritjr 
in  the  queen's  complaint,  the  whole  council 
would  have  felt  the  weight  of  her  indigna- 
tion, but  there  is  nothing  to  show  that  any 
other  member  of  it  suffered  from  her  frowns. 
On  the  contrary.  Sir  Christopher  Hatton, 
whom  she  must  have  known  to  have  been 
anxious  to  release  her  from  all  fears  about 
the  Scottish  queen,  and  to  have  been  present 
when  the  warrant  wns  forwarded,  was,  with- 
in a  month  after  the  unjust  proceedings 
against  Davison,  rewarded  with  the  highest 
civil  rank  in  the  state,  by  being  promoted  to 
the  office  of  lord  chancellor  on  April  29. 

That  Hatton's  elevation  to  this  high  wid 
important  office  occasioned  some  surprise 
cannot  be  doubted,  for  the  public  would 
naturally  consider  him  a  mere  courtier,  and 
would  have  forgotten  that  he  had  received 
a  legal  education.  But  he  had  now  been 
known  to  the  ruling  powers  more  than 
twenty  years,  during  the  last  ten  of  which 
he  had  oeen  one  of  the  queen's  most  secret 
counsellors,  advised  witli  not  only  by  her, 
but  by  her  leading  ministers  on  all  occasions. 
They  thus  had  a  full  onportunitjr  of  judmng 
of  his  talents  and  abilities,  and  their  high 
appreciation  of  them  is  sufficiently  evidenced 
by  the  correspondence  which  Sir  Harris 
Nicolas  has  published.  Although  his 
early  call  to  a  court  life  prevented  him 
from  pursuing  the  practice  of  the  law,  it  is 
to  be  rememberea  that  in  his  youth  he 
spent  some  years  in  the  study  of  it,  and 
also  that  he  had  been  long  accustomed  aa  a 
privy  councillor  to  sit  in  the  Star  Chamber. 
That  these  advantages  were  not  wholly  un- 


332 


HATTON 


productive  of  fruit  is  proved  by  the  judidal 
character  he  acquired  for  care  and  industrjr 
in  acquainting  himAelf  with  the  rules  of  his 
court,  and  for  wisdom  and  impartialitj  in 
the  judgments  he  pronounced.  He  had  the 
caution  to  require  the  attendance  of  four 
masters  in  Cnancerv  when  he  sat  in  court, 
and  two  when  he  heard  causes  in  his  own 
house.  (EperUmPi^terSf  126.)  One  of  these 
was  Sir  Kichard  Smale,  whose  advice  he  is 
reputed  to  have  followed  in  all  matters  of 
moment  Fuller  says  Hhat  some  sullen 
Serjeants  at  the  first  refused  to  plead  before 
bim/  forffetting  that  his  court  was  not 
their  usuid  arena,  but  adding  that,  *  partly 
by  his  power,  but  more  by  his  prudence,  he 
convinced  them  of  their  eirors  and  his 
abilities.'    His  supposed  incompetency  to        „  „ 

his  judicial  duties  does  not  seem  to  have  {  charge  against  him,  the  respect  and  friend- 
weighed  so  heavily  upon  him  as  to  prevent ;  ship  of  Uie  great  and  good  men  of  Ids  dnri 
his  enlivening  the  bench  with  a  joke.  In  a  ana  the  amicable  relations  in  which  ns 
cause  relative  to  the  boundaries  of  some  lived  with  bis  competitors  for  the  qoee&'i 
land,  the  counsel  for  the  plaintiffhavingsaid, '  personal  &vour,  all  prove  that  he  wMamtt 


HAU0H 

bis  last  illness  was  probably  avudenttttdk 
of  his  old  disease,  its  termination  bdwMi* 
belHshed  with  the  stoiy  of  the  broken  OBOt 
Bat,  whatever  may  have  been  the  real  euai 
of  his  illness,  one  fact  is  inconfxovatiklr 
proved,  that  to  the  last  moment  of  his  n 
the  queen*s  regard  for  him  was  undimimilMl 

£^  was  buried  with  great  ponm  in  8L 
Paul's  Cathedral,  where  a  splendia  moin- 
ment  was  erected  to  his  memory  bj  lui 
nephew.  Sir  William  Hatton. 

Surrounded  as  he  was  by  statetmn  of 
unrivalled  talent,  an  acknowledged  frtTomitB 
among  many  rivals,  honoured  imd  rewiiM 
above  his  compeers,  and  holding  promiiHit 
positions  in  the  council  and  the  oomt  during 
a  long  series  of  vears,  the  absence  of  tnj 
weighty  and  the  failure  of  every  maliriflm 


you  lie  on  both  sides,  whom  will  you  have    by  arrogance,  nor  using  his  known  inflwiWft 


me  to  believe  P '  (Bacon's  ApopJUhegmSf  07.)  ,  to  the  injury  of  others.  His  principal  mal 
During  the  remaining  four  years  and  a  i  in  the  queen's  affections,  the  Earl  of  Lei- 
half  of  his  life  he  continued  to  perform  the  j  cester,  oJled  him  in  his  will  his  ^owndoir 
duties  of  the  chancellorship,  in  such  a  manner  I  friend,'  and  bequeathed  to  him,  besides  other 
as  to  escape  condemnation  from  his  legal  '•  valuable  gifts,  his  George  and  Gartnr,  'not 
contemporaries  and  to  retain  the  favour  of   doubting  that  he  shall  shortly  enjoy  the 

wearinff  of  it'    His  love  of  literature  hes 


his  sovereign.  In  April  1588  he  was  ho- 
noured with  the  order  of  the  Garter,  and  on 
the  death  of  the  Earl  of  Leicester  he  sought 


weanng 

not  been  denied,  and  of  his  encouragement 

of  the  learned  many  evidences  remain.   le 


for,  and  attained  on  September  20,  no  doubt ;  the  religious  contests  of  the  time  he  alwtyi 
bvthe  queen's  encouragement  and  influence, .  took  the  part  of  a  moderator;  andthongli 
me  honourable  position  of  chancellor  of  the  '  suspected  of  being  &vourable  to  the  Catiio- 
university  of  Oxford,  having  been  elected  i  lies,  he  endeavoured  to  intercept  the  ligoor 
two  days  before  high  steward  of  the  sister  of  the  law  a^jainst  the  PurituiSp  bein^  of 
univer^ty.  It  is  thus  apparent  that  she  did  \  opinion  that '  m  the  cause  of  religion  neiAer 
not  even  resent  the  courage  he  had  recently  •  searing  nor  cutting  was  to  be  used.' 
displayed  in  remonstrating  with  her  against  SLrChristopher  dying  unmarried,  hii  ee- 
affixing  the  Great  Seal  to  letters  patent    '  '      '      '  "  '        «•_  iTrnn— 


granting  to  the  earl  the  unconstitutional 
post  of  Lieutenant  of  England  and  Ireland. 
He  only  presided  over  one  parliament,  which 
met  on  February  4, 1580,  and  was  dissolved 
on  March  20.    {ParL  Hist.!.  86^-8.) 

No  further  event  of  any  importance  in 
the  chancellor's  history  is  recorded  before 
his  death  on  November  20,  1501.  Fuller 
( Worthies,  i.  165)  states  that  '  it  broke  his 
heart  that  the  queen  (which  seldome  gave 
boons,  and  never  forgave  due  debts)  rigor- 
ously demanded  present  payment  of  some 
arrears  which  he  did  not  hope  to  have  re- 
mitted, but  did  only  desire  to  be  forbom ; 
failing  herein  in  his  expectation,  it  went  to 
his  heart,  and  cast  him  mto  a  mortal  disease. 
The  queen  afterwards  did  endeavour  what 
she  could  to  recover  him,  bring^g,  as  some 
say,  cordial  broths  unto  him  with  her  own 
hands.'  On  several  occadons  there  are  ac- 
counts of  his  suffering  from  sickness,  and 


tates  devolved  on  his  nephew,  Sir  WiSiini 
Newport,  the  son  of  his  sister.  This  gen- 
tleman, who  took  his  uncle's  name,  manied 
twice,  and  his  second  wife  afterwards  be- 
came the  wife  of  Sir  Edward  Coke.  The 
chancellor's  estates  descended  on  Sir  Chrii- 
topher  H&tton,  the  grandson  of  a  yo(iBf|V 
brother  of  the  chancellor*s  father,  ffis 
son  was  created  Baron  Hatton  of  Kerb?  in 
Northamptonshire  in  1643,  and  the  seoood 
baron  was  advanced  to  the  visoouiitypi 
Hatton  of  Gretton  in  the  same  ooanft|m 
1682 ;  butboth  titlesbecame  extinctin  iW- 

The  name  of  Hatton  still  survives  in  the 
peerage,  having  been  assumed  by  the  pnMot 
Earl  of  Winchilseaand  Nottingham's  gaud- 
father,  whose  mother  was  only  da:^[U^p 
and  eventually  heiress,  of  the  fint  Vkooint 
Hatton.   (Nicolai^B  JUfe  of  Sir  a^rUk/kr) 

HAVOH,  JoHir,  whose  portnit  in  ft^gy 
dow  of  thechuroh  of  Long  McUbdlliA^ 
folk  is  the  only  remaining  indiartini  of  tti 


HAUNSAKD 

in  wMch  he  was  bom  or  Teeided,  was 
a  m«p«^>*»  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  uf  which  sode^ 
te  wms  reader  in  1469,  and  again  in  1478. 
He  was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Common 
in  EQlaiy  1487, 2  Henry  Vn^  and  he 
to  act,  whether  by  death  or  other- 
after  Trinity  1489.  {Dugdaie's  Orig. 
47-256.)  He  married  Joan,  daughter  and 
coheir  of  Thomas,  son  of  Chief  Justice  Sir 
Thomas  Hlling. 

HAimSAXB,  WiLLiAK  DE,  was  one  of 
the  juitices  itinerant  appointed  for  Surrey 
in  9  Heniy  HI.,  1225 ;  and  in  the  two  fol- 
lowing Tears  he  assessed  the  quiuzime  and 
Hie  tallage  in  that  county.  (Bot,  Clam, 
iL  76, 146, 208.) 

HAITTSYK,  Hamon,  no  doubt  named 
from  a  manor  called  Hauteyn's  in  the  parish 
of  Bonham-Broom  in  Norfolk,  held  some 
office  in  the  Exchequer,  and  was  entrusted 
wiUi  the  sheriffalty  of  Lincolnshire  in  44 
and  45  Henry  lU.,  during  which  he  was 
either  so  negligent  or  corrupt  as  to  incur  an 
amercement  of  ten  marks  for  delaying  the 
execution  of  a  writ  till  it  was  too  late  to 
act  npon  it.    {Abb,  Hacit,  152.) 

In  1  Edwarid  L  he  was  one  of  the  jus- 
tioee  of  the  Jews,  and  acted  as  assessor  in 
London  and  Middlesex  of  the  fifteenth 
sranted  in  3  Edward  I.  {Pari  Writs,  i. 
4.)  He  also  sat  with  Kalj^h  de  Hengham 
and  others  as  a  justice  itinerant  for  the 
connly  of  Suffolk  in  1285,  13  Edward  I. 
{Abb.  Flacit.  277.)  In  the  next  year,  how- 
erer,  being  called  to  account  by  the  trea- 
surer and  barons  of  the  Exchequer,  and 
conricted  of  various  misdemeanours,  he 
wae  suspended  from  his  office  of  justice  of 
the  Jews  in  Trinity  Term  1286.  {Madox, 
L  254,  ii.  321.) 

HATA,  Robert  de,  was  of  the  same 
name  and  flourished  at  the  same  time  as 
the  noble  Scotch  family  now  represented 
by  the  Marquis  of  Tweeddale.  In  7  John 
he  commanded  the  king's  galleys  Mn  in- 
anHs '  (Hot.  Pat.  03) ;  and  in  24  Henry 
in.,  1240,  he  was  one  of  the  justices  itine- 
rant for  York ;  and  being  then  sheriff  of 
Bedfordshire  and  BuckiDgnamshire,  he  had 
permission  as  long  as  he  was  on  that  iter 
to  pass  his  accounts  at  the  Exchequer  by 
means  of  a  substitute.     (MadoXy  ii.  177.) 

HATES,  Geoboe,  was  the  last-appointed 
and  the  last-deceased  judge  of  the  ^ueen*s 
Bench,  receiving  his  patent  on  August  25, 
1868,  as  one  of  the  three  added  to  tne  seve- 
ral courts  in  futherance  of  the  recent  act  re- 
mitting the  trial  of  election  petitions  to  the 
judges,  and  within  fifteen  months  dying 
almost  in  the  exercise  of  his  judicial  duties. 

He  was  bom  on  June  19, 1805,  and  was 
the  son  of  Sheedy  Hayes,  Esq.,  of  Judd 
Place,  a  West  India  proprietor.  Educated 
first  at  Highgate,  and  then  at  St.  Edmimd's 
Boman  Catholic  College  at  Ware,  he  en- 
tered the  Middle  Temple,  where  on  Janu- 


HEATH 


333 


ar^  29, 1830,  he  was  called  to  the  bar.  He 
jomed  the  Midland  Circuit,  of  which  he 
eTentually  became  the  leader.  In  1856  he 
took  the  dej;ree  of  serjeant-at-law,  to  which 
was  added  m  1860  a  patent  of  precedence, 
and  about  the  same  time  he  was  appointed 
recorder  of  Leicester.  Whether  as  junior, 
or  senior,  or  as  recorder,  he  distinguiBhed 
himself  as  a  soimd  lawyer ;  and  it  was  only 
his  legal  reputation,  for  he  never  entered 
into  party  politics  nor  ever  sat  in  parlia* 
menl^  that  pointed  him  oat  as  an  eligible 
rednient  of  the  honour  of  the  ermine. 

Tnis  selection  was  most  acceptable  to  hia 
brethren  of  the  bar,  for  he  was  highly 
po|>ular  among  them^  being  of  the  most 
amiable  disposition,  jomed  to  a  j ovial  power 
of  enlivening  his  companions.  He  was,  in 
fact,  a  man  of  <  infinite  jests,'  and  if  there 
had  been  an  album  ke]^t  in  Westminster 
Hall,  to  record  the  wittidsms  of  the  bar, 
many  would  have  been  the  pa^es  devoted  to 
his  witty  pleasantries  and  wlumsical  pieces. 

His  judicial  career  was  lamentably  short 
While  unrobing  at  Westminster,  after 
hearing  a  cause  at  Nisi  Prius,  he  was  seized 
withja  severe  attack  of  paralysis,  which  ter- 
minated in  his  death  on  November  25, 1869. 

He  married  Sophia  Anne,  daughter  of 
Dr.  John  Hill,  of  Leicester,  and  has  left  a 
large  family. 

HEATH,  Nicholas  (Archbishop  op 
York),  was  of  a  family  seated  at  Apsley  in 
the  parish  of  Tamworth  in  Warwickshire, 
but  VTas  bom  in  London.  After  attending 
St.  Anthony's  School,  in  which  Sir  Thomas 
More  had  been  a  pupil,  he  was  entered  of 
Corpus  Christi  College,  Oxford ;  from 
whence  he  was  transplanted  to  Christ's 
College,  Cambridge,  where  he  took  his 
degree  of  M.A.  in  1521,  being  soon  after 
elected  a  fellow  of  Clare  Hall  there.  He 
is  said  to  have  been  maintained  while  at 
college  by  Queen  Anne  Boleyn  and  her 
father  and  brother,  and  to  have  been  in  the 
first  instance  a  favourer  of  the  new  Protest- 
ant doctrines.  (Strype's  Mem.  i.  ^79.) 
Though  his  assistance  to  Cranmer  in  his 
translation  of  the  Bible  seems  to  warrant 
this  report,  his  opinions  must  have  under- 
gone great  change.  Taking  holy  orders,  he 
was  instituted  into  the  church  of  Hever  in 
Kent  in  1531,  and,  having  proceeded  doctor 
in  divinity  in  the  meantime,  into  those  of 
Bishopsboumand  SouthmalUng  in  1537,  and 
of  Shoreham  in  1538,  to  which  was  added 
the  rectory  of  ClilF.  In  the  following  year 
he  became  archdeacon  of  Stafford,  and  was 
made  almoner  to  the  king  {Rynier^  xiv. 
648),  who  promoted  him  to  the  bishopric 
of  Kochester  on  March  26,  1540. 

After  remaining  in  this  diocese  for  nearly 
four  vears,  he  was  translated  to  Worcester, 
to  which  he  was  elected  on  December  22, 
1543 ;  and  he  sat  there,  quietly  performing 
his  episcopal  functions,  for   the  rest   of 


334 


HEATH 


Henry's  reign,  and  tlie  first  four  years  of 
that  of  Edward  YI.  The  act  for  t£e  adop- 
tion of  the  new  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
having  been  passed  about  that  time,  ne, 
although  he  had  voted  against  it,  was  ap- 
pointed one  of  the  commissioners  for  carry- 
ing it  into  effect.  Kefusing  to  sign  the 
form  prescribed  for  the  ordination  of 
bishops,  &c,  he  was  committed  to  the 
Fleet  m  December  1650  (Chron,  Grey 
JHars,  68),  and,  bein^  proceeded  agunst 
for  contempt,  was  deprived  of  his  bishopric 
in  the  ensuiriff  October.  His  imprisonment 
in  Bishop  Bidley's  house,  to  which  he  was 
removed  in  July  1552,  was  alleviated  by 
the  kindness  and  liberal  hospitality  of  that 
prelate,  of  whom  Heath  used  always  to 
speak  as  the  most  learned  of  the  Protestant 
party. 

Cm  the  accession  of  Queen  Mary  the 
sentence  against  him  was  reversed,  and  he 
recovered  possession  of  his  see.  One  of  the 
first  uses  which  Maiy  made  of  him  was  to 
attempt  the  conversion  of  the  Duke  of 
Northumberland,  in  which  he  showed  so 
much  dexterity  as  to  induce  the  duke, 
either  out  of  weakness  or  hope  of  life,  to 
make  a  public  profession  of  Romanism  on 
the  scanold.  (itobertsonU  HeyUn,  ii.  85.) 
The  royal  favour  was  further  exhibited  to- 
wards Heath  by  making  him  President  of 
Wales,  and,  on  the  deprivation  of  Arch- 
bishop Holgate,  by  translating  him  to  York. 
The  congS  dilire  is  dated  February  19, 
1555 ;  and  the  death  of  Bishop  (Gardiner  in 
the  same  year  leaving  the  omce  of  chan- 
cellor vacant,  the  Great  Seal  was  delivered 
to  him  with  that  title  on  January  1,  1556. 
Although  the  fires  of  Smithfield.  begun  by 
Gardiner,  continued  to  rage  auring  the 
chancellorship  of  Archbishop  Heath,  there 
is  no  evidence,  and  indeed  no  charge,  that 
he  assisted  in  feeding  them. 

On  the  day  of  Queen  Maiy's  death,  No- 
vember 17,  1558,  the  parliament  being 
then  sitting,  he  communicated  the  event  to 
the  Lords  and  Commons,  and  declaring 
that  the  right  and  title  of  the  Lady  Eliza- 
beth was  free  firom  all  question  and  doubt, 
he  directed  her  immediate  proclamation. 
This  prudent  activit}',  which  anticipated 
all  pretenders  and  procured  her  a  peaceful 
accession  to  the  throne,  could  not  but  be 
gratefully  felt  by  the  new  queen,  who, 
though  she  did  not  again  entrust  him  with 
the  Great  Seal,  continued  him  in  her  privy 
council. 

He  joined  with  the  other  English  pre- 
lates in  refusing  to  assist  at  the  coronation 
of  Queen  Elizabeth ;  but  one  of  the  num- 
ber, Oglethorpe,  Bishop  of  Carlisle,  was  at 
last  prevailed  upon  to  perform  the  cere- 
mony on  January  15, 1559,  on  her  agreeing 
to  tiUce  the  accustomed  oath.  The  parliar 
ment  met  on  the  25th,  and  one  of  its 
earliest  debates  was  with  reference  to  an 


HEATH 

act  for  restoring  the  sapremaejr  of  the 
crown.  To  this  bill  Heath  and  eight  ate 
bishops  were  vigorous  opponent!^  and  tiie 
speech  which  he  addressed  to  the  houMoa 
toe  occasion  has  been  published.  U  ii 
firm  and  temperate  and  learned,  bat  iti 
arguments  did  not  prevail.  The  bill  paaad 
into  a  law  on  Marcn  22,  and  the  azchDiahop 
and  the  opposing  bishops  refusinff  to  tib 
the  oath,  they  were  deprived  of  tlwir  imi^ 
and  the  queen's  licence  to  elect  a  newii^ 
bishop  was  issued  on  July  35, 1560.  (i^ 
mer,  xv.  699.)  In  the  preceding  mondi 
Heath  had  been  committed  to  the  Tower, 
and  in  the  following  February  sentence  oc 
excommunication  was  pronounced  tgdnit 
him.    (Machyn'8  Dion/,  238,  249.) 

The  deprived  archbishop  was  move  fix^ 
tunate  thim  some  of  his  colleagues,  for  Idi 
imprisonment  was  of  short  duration,  he 
bemg  allowed  after  two  or  three  montbi' 
confinement  to  retire  to  his  own  property 
at  Chobham  in  Surrey.  For  this  comptis* 
tive  clemency  he  no  doubt  was  indebted  ei 
much  to  the  queen's  gratitude  for  his  eoi^ 
exertions  in  her  behalf,  as  to  her  admii^ 
tion  of  his  learning  and  amiable  c^^#*yf<y, 
and  she  showed  her  continued  kindneei  lij 
an  occasional  visit  to  him  in  hisretirenieBt 
There  he  lived  for  many  years,  pnming 
uninterruptedly  and  with  patient  derotiaa 
the  studies  which  had  first  interested  bin, 
and  there  he  died  in  the  year  1579,  and  mi 
buried  in  the  chancel  of  die  parish  chnrcL 
Such  is  the  history  of  his  last  yein 
which  all  his  biographers  have  written; 
but  a  story  is  ventilated  by  Miss  Strick- 
knd  (Elisabeth^  155)  as  to  a  NidiolM 
Hethe's  imprisonment  in  1565,  which  the 
applies  to  the  archbishop.  The  tale,  how- 
ever, is  of  itself  highly  improbable,  the 
identification  of  the  two  wholly  fails,  idule 
a  letter  from  the  archbishop  to  Lonrd  Ba^ 
leigh,  dated  at  Chobham,  September  SS, 
1573,  wherein  he  expresses  his  gratitude  'for 
having  lived  many  years  in  great  quietnea 
of  mind,'  confinns  the  originid  aoooont 
{CaL  State  Papers  [1547-80],  467.) 

During  his  presidency  over  the  proriim 
of  York,  Queen  Mary  gave  to  him  and  his 
successors  as  a  residence  in  the  metropdlU) 
instead  of  York  House,  which  had  oeen 
appropriated  by  Heniy  VUL.  Suffolk 
House,  near  St.  George's  Church  m  South- 
wark.  This  he  was  permitted  to  sdl,  and 
to  purchase  in  its  stead  Norwich  Hoqm^ 
near  Charing  Cross,  which,  changing  its 
name  to  York  House,  Ion?  contmuM  ia 
the  possession  of  the  archbishops,  bat  ms 
commonly  let  by  them  to  the  keepen  of 
the  Great  Seal.  After  Lord  Chiiieslkr 
Bacon's  disgrace,  the  Duke  iifTtiiihi^hiM 
obtained  it,  ^ving  other  luidsin  ~~'^ — 
and  the  site  is  now  occupied  bj 
which  bear  his  name  ana  t"* 
Writers  of  all  parties 


i 


HEATH 

lifailiop  Heath  as  a  man  distinguished  by 
Ui  pnmte  Tirtuee,  of  great  abilities  and 
iuteffiity,  of  ^tle  temper  and  prudent 
eonduety  finn  in  his  piindoles  and  mod^ 
Tate  amidst  the  bigots  of  both  parties. 
iOodwmj  470,  5S7,  710 ;  Athen.  Oxon,  iL 
S17 ;  Lmgard:  Hmfward:  BwiieL) 

KXA.TH.  RoBKRT,  son  of  Robert  Heath, 
-of  Brasted  in  Kent,  and  Jane,  his  wife, 
daughter  of  Nicholas  Poner,  was  bom 
•^  uppon  the  20th  day  of  May  in  the  year 
15/5,'  says  the  chief  justice  in  a  short 
inemoir  of  hb  life  written  a  few  months 
before  his  deatii.  He  was  educated  at  the 
fiee  grammar  school  of  Tunbridge,  and  at 
St.  John's  College,  Cambridge,  where  he 
remained  for  three  years.  He  was  then 
mdmitted  of  Clifford^  Inn,  whence  he  re- 
-mored  to  the  Inner  Temple,  where  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  in  1603.  In  1607  he  was 
selected  to  be  reader  of  Clifford's  Inn,  and 
l>ecame  a  bencher  in  1617,  filling  the  post 
-of  reader  there  in  1619,  and  that  of  tresr 
enxer  in  1625.  (DuffdMs  Onff,lQ7, 171,) 
He  had  the  fortune  to  be  a  fayourite  of  the 
faTOurite  Buckingham,  for  whose  use  he 
Teceiyed  by  patent  the  profits  of  the  King's 
Bench  and  Common  Pleas  offices,  and  thus 
ingratiated  himself  with  the  frequenters  of 
the  court  On  Noyember  10, 1618,  he  was 
elected  recorder  of  London  in  opposition  to 
James  Whitelocke.  On  his  nomination  as 
solicitor-general  on  January  22,  1621,  he 
Teeigned  the  recordership,  but  was  elected 
by  ue  citizens  to  represent  them  in  the 
pariiament  of  that  year.  In  it  he  was  a 
mqnent  debater,  taring  to  accommodate 
matters  for  the  king,  who  knighted  him, 
and  retained  him  in  his  office  during  the 
Test  of  his  reign. 

Soon  after  Charleses  accession,  Heath  on 
October  31,  1625,  was  promoted  to  the 
attorney-generalship.  In  the  following 
May  he  had  to  bring  articles  of  impeach- 
ment against  the  Earl  of  Bristol  (Pari 
JSut.  iL  80),  in  the  nature  of  a  cross-bill 
to  the  charges  which  the  earl  had  made 
against  the  Duke  of  Buckingham,  who  at 
the  same  time  was  also  impeached  by  the 
House  of  Commons.  All  these  proceedings 
irere  stopped  by  the  sudden  and  intempe- 
Tate  dissolution  of  the  parliament.  In  the 
next  year  he  had  the  invidious  task  of 
cppoamg  the  release  of  the  knights  who, 
haying  refused  to  contribute  to  the  loan, 
had  been  committed  to  prison,  and  in  this 
difficult  duty  he  displayed  much  learning, 
ingenuity,  and  eloquence.  In  1628,  when 
the  judges'  refusal  to  bail  or  discharge 
them  was  taken  up  by  parliament.  Sir 
Robert  Heath  had  again  almost  single- 
handed  to  maintain  the  argument  agamst 
antagonists  so  powerful  as  Sir  Edward 
Coke,  Littelton,  Selden,  and  Noy,  and  he 
did  it  with  such  ability  and  courage  that, 
though  defeated,  he  lost  no  credit  by  his 


HEATH 


335 


exertions.  (State  Trials,  uL  SO,  183.)  The 
yiolent  termination  of  this  parliament  in 
March  1629,  and  the  imprisonment  of  the 
members  who  forcibly  detained  the  speaker 
in  the  chair  at  its  close,  led  to  other  pro- 
ceedings in  which  Sir  Robert  Heath  took 
a  yery  prominent  part  By  the  king*s 
commana,  he  obtained  priyate  opinions  of 
the  judges  upon  certain  abstract  questions^ 
and  upon  the  answers  he  obtained  filed  in- 
formations against  the  offending  members^ 
and,  on  their  refusing  to  plead,  judgment  of 
fine  and  imprisonment  was  pronounced 
against  them.  When  the  conauct  of  the 
judges  in  this  matter  came  to  be  canyassed 
by  the  Long  Parliament,  Sir  Robert  Heath 
seems  almost  to  haye  escaped  censure,  as 
merely  performing  the  duty  which  de- 
yolyed  upon  him  as  the  seryant  and  adyo- 
cate  of  tne  crown.  In  the  exercise  of  his 
functions  as  attorney-general  he  was  so 
zealous  and  actiye  a  partisan  of  the  court 
that  the  king  constituted  him  chief  justice 
of  the  Common  Pleas  on  October  26,  1631. 
(Hvmer,  xix.  346.) 

On  September  14,  1634,  he  was  dis- 
charged from  his  place  without  any  cause 
being^  assigned.  His  remoyal  may  perhaps 
owe  its  origin  to  his  opposition  to  Lauo^ 
and  his  disinclination  to  the  extreme  yiews 
which  that  prelate  adopted  in  ecclesiastical 
matters.  It  was  generally  beUeyed,  how- 
eyer,  that  the  question  of  ship-money,  the 
writs  to  collect  which  were  issued  four 
days  after  the  appointment  of  Sir  John 
Finch  as  Heath's  successor,  had  some  con- 
nection with  the  change.  (Ruthworth,  iL 
253.)  Anthony  Wood,  in  his  account  of 
Noy,  casually  says  that  Sir  Robert  Heath 
was  'removed  firom  the  chief  justiceship  of 
the  Em^s  Bench  for  bribery ; '  but  in  his 
account  of  Heath  himself  he  alludes  in  no 
way  to  his  dismissal,  and  makes  such  mis- 
takes in  the  courts  to  which  he  was  ap- 
pointed as  to  deprive  his  record  of  any 
yalue.  (Athen.  Oxon,  ii.  584;  Fadi,  ii. 
45.)  Wnitelocke,  who  was  not  his  Mend, 
would  not  have  omitted  all  notice  of  his 
removal  could  he  have  alleged  sudi  an 
imputation  as  the  cause.  Upon  the  foun- 
dation of  Wood's  loose  statement  merely, 
for  no  other  can  be  cited.  Lord  Campbell 
(CA.  Just,  i.  415)  makes  this  assertion: 
'  The  truth  seems  to  be  that  he  [Heath] 
continued  to  enjoy  the  favour  and  confi- 
dence of  the  government,  but  that  a  charge 
had  been  brought  against  him  of  taking 
bribes,  which  was  so  strongly  supportea 
by  evidence  that  it  could  not  be  ovenooked, 
although  no  parliament  was  sitting,  or  ever 
likely  to  sit ;  and  that  the  most  discreet 
proceeding,  even  for  himself,  was  to  remove 
nim  quietly  from  his  office.*  Historians 
will  be  anxious  for  information  of  his  lord- 
ship's authority  for  this  statement;  for 
they  will  be  unwilling  to  suppose  it  to  be 


336 


HEATH 


HKATBf 


giBtuitous  scandal,  although  it  seems  to  be  '  being  judges, '  as  though  they  w«k  deid 


contradicted  by  the  very  act  of  the  goyem- 
ment  that  displaced  him.     In  the  next 
term  after  he  was  ousted  from  the  bench 
he  resumed  his  practice  at  the  bar  as  junior 
Serjeant  {Crohe,  Car,  376).  a  privilege  that 
the  king  would  scarcely  nave  granted,  or 
that  the  fallen  judge  would  have  had  the 
effrontery  to  ask,  if  his  disgrace  had  been 
so  notonous  'that  it  could  not  be  over- 
looked.'   That  he  was  actually  replaced 
on  the  bench,  when  the  '  parliament  was 
sitting* — a  parliament,  too,  that  was  ready 
enough  to  nnd  any  blot  in  the  king's  ap- 
pointments,— sufficiently  shows  the  incon- 
sistency of  the  charge.    The  chief  justice 
himself  says,  in  his  memoir  before  cited, 
written  when  he  was  in  sorrow,  and  just 
before  his  own  death :  '  At  the  end  of  three 
years  I  was  on  a  sudden  discharged  of  that 
place  of  chief  justice,  noe  cause  oeing  then 
nor  at  any  time  since  shewed  for  my  re- 
moyal.'    In  the  next  year  (1G35)  the  kinff 
required  his  presence  at  the  council  board 
to  near  a  certain  cause  (Co/.  State  Ptqpers 
[1634-5],  87) ;   and  in  tne  following  year 
ne  was  again  taken  into  the  actual  service 
of  the  crown,  his  patent  as  king*s  serjeant 
being  dated  October  12,  1630.    He  con- 
tinued at  the  bar  for  four  years  more,  when 
he  was  replaced  on  the  judicial  seat  on 
January  23, 1641,  as  a  judge  of  the  King's 
Bench ;  and  was  further  favoured,  on  I&y 
13,  with  the  office  of  master  of  the  Court 
of  Wards  and  Liveries,    (liytner,  xx.  448, 
617.)    When  the  king  retired  to  York,  Sir 


and  by  another  vote  of  October  S4^  164k 
they  ordered  that  he  diould  be  euml 
tram  pardon.  (WkUeioeke;  AriJffi^E 
285.)  His  estate  was  sequeeteted,  bat  me 
recovered  by  his  son  Edward  at  the  B«> 
storation.  According  to  his  own  lelilioiy 
the  parliament  ^ve  him  lib^ty  'eitliBr 
to  exile  himself  mto  a  foreign  coontiy,  cr 
to  run  the  hazard  of  further  danffer.'  Of 
course  he  never  took  his  seat  as  cnief  ju> 
tice  in  Westminster  HaiH;  and  the  |nh 
thonotaries  of  the  King's  Bench,  Heobf 
and  Whitwick,  took  advantage  of  the  di^ 
tractions  of  the  times  to  apmopritte  t9 
themselves  the  fees  received^lbr  his  ua 
The^  were  brought  to  account  l^  the  diiif 
justice's  son  in  1663,  when,  notwith- 
standing they  pleaded  the  Statute  d 
Limitations,  tney  were  forced  by  adeem 
in  Chanceiy  to  refund  the  whole  anumnt 
(  W.  Neiaonfa  BepwU,  75.) 

Sir  Robert  fled  into  France  in  1646)  ani 
survived  his  royal  master  just  seven  montfa^ 
dying  at  Calais  on  August  30, 1648.  Hii 
body  was  brought  to  Engluid  and  sb- 
tombed  with  that  of  his  wife^  under  t 
stately  monument,  in  Brasted  Church. 

Among  his  nepers,  now  in  the  poeseniai 
of  his  noble  descendant,  has  been  found  t 
jeu  d^eaprit  on  the  twenty-four  links  of  the 
collar  of  SS.,  each  link  representing  some 
judicial  attribute  commencing  with  the 
letter  S.  It  is  wholly  in  his  handwritiDg^ 
and  was  probably  composed  as  an  amun- 
ment  of  his  exile.    It  not  only  shows  greit 


Robert  joined  him  there,  and  on  Jime  10,    ingenuity,  but   exhibits  in  the  strongest 
1642,  addressed  a  letter  to  the  House  of   light  with  what  solemn  responsibility  the 


Lords,  informing  them  that  he  had  '  left 
the  parliament  to  go  to  the  king  at  York 
as  by  oath  and  duty  bound ; '  whereupon 
they  resolved  to  the  contrary,  and  that  nis 
staying  at  t^o  parliament,  being  sent  for 
from  them,  was  not  against  his  oath. 
(Parry^s  ParUaments.)  On  February  7, 
1643,  he  was  created  Doctor  of  Civil  Law 
by  the  university  of  Oxford,  and  a  few 
mouths  later  the  king,  bein^  then  in  that 
city,  appointed  him  chief  justice  of  the 


writer  regarded  the  qualifications,  the  tit- 
tues,  and  the  duties  of  a  judge.  (Abto  mi 
Queries,  1st  S.  x.  357.)  His  short  memoir 
also,  written  undoubtedly  during  his  exik^ 
gives  pleasing  evidence  of  an  amiiUa 
and  pious  mind.  He  married,  while  yet 
a  student,  Margaret,  daughter  of  JohB 
Miller,  and  by  her  he  left  several  childicn. 
HEATH,  Richard,  was  called  to  the  bir 
of  the  Inner  Temple  in  November  1660,  ud 
was  elected  a  bencher  in  October  1677.  He 


King*8  iiench,  and  in  a  letter  dated  July  4,  {  was  summoned  to  take  the  coif  in  1683,  ind 
164*3,  authorised  him  in  the  summer  assizes  •  promoted  to  the  bench  of  the  Exchequer 
*  to  forbear  those  places  whither  you  con-  on  April  21, 1686.  Of  his  subserviency  to 
ceavo  you  may  not  goo  with   convenient  .  the  court  there  is  manifest  proof  in  his  ood- 


not  goo  with   convcment 
safety .*^  (Notes  and  Queries,  Ist  S.  xii.  259.) 
SoveraJ  complaints  wore  made  to  the 
parliament  against  Chief   Justice  Heath 
and  other  judges  who  acted  with  him  on 
the  circuit.     On  these  charges,  and  for 
adhering  to  the  king,  then  in  arms  against 
the  paruament,  the  Commons  impeached 
them  on  July  24, 1644 ;  but  as  the  chief 
justice  never  put  himself  in  their  power,  he 
escaped  trial    This,  however,  did  not  pre- 
vent them  from  yentine  their  enmity.    On 
November  35,  1645,  tney  passed  an  ordi- 
nance disabling  him  and  four  otheze  from 


curring  with  his  colleagues  in  favour  of  the 
king's  dispensing  power,  and  in  his  coodact 
with  regfljd  to  the  seven  bishops.  Arch- 
bishop Sancroft  thus  relates  it  to  Eiag^ 
James,  when  called  before  him  on  NoTem- 
ber  6,  1688,  after  the  invasion  of  the  Frinofr 
of  Oran^ :  '  I  wiU  particularly  ao^miBt 
your  maiesty  wil^  what  one  of  your  jodM 
baron  H.  by  name,  said  coming  fton  vt 
bench^  where  he  had  declared  oar  plita 
to  be  a  factious  libeL  A  geoflaMB  cf' 
quality  asking  him  how  he  oooldfaMeA* 
conscience  to  say  ao^  when  the  UAofiU 


^ 

J 


HEATH 

legally  diachaiffod  of  it,  he  answered, 
'*  You  need  not  trouble  yourself  with  what 
I  aaid  on  the  bench :  I  have  instructions  for 
iHuit  I  said,  and  I  had  lost  my  place  if  I 
had  not  said  it"'  He  did  lose  nis  place 
ahortlT  after,  being  superseded  by  James 
himmf  in  the  beginning  of  Decemlier.  No 
ircxDder  therefore  that    he  was  included 


HEIGHAH 


837 


monff  thoee  who  were  excepted  from  the 
bill  <n  indemnity  at  the  revolution.  He 
died  in  July  1702.  His  wife  was  Ejithe- 
zine,  daughter  of  Henry  Weston,  of  Ock- 
haat  and  Sende,  Esq.,  sheriff  of  Surrey 
and  Sussex.  (2  Shower,  459 ;  State  Triais, 
xii.  603;  Fori  Hid.  t.  334;  Ltdtrdl,  i 
482,  T.  198.) 

HXATE,  John,  was  the  son  of  Thomas 
Heath,  an  alderman  of  Exeter,  and  the 
nephew  of  Benjamin  Heath,  town-derk 
and  a  lawyer  of  eminence  in  that  city,  who 
*was  the  father  of  Dr.  Benjamin  Heath,  the 
head-master  of  Eton.  He  himself  for  a 
lime  filled  the  office  of  town-clerk  of  his 
natiTe  city. 

A  member  of  the  Inner  Temple,  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  in  June  1762,  and  in  1775 
he  'wvs  graced  with  the  dignitjr  of  the  coif. 
On  July  19, 1780.  he  was  appomted  a  judge 
of  the  Common  Fleas,  and  in  that  court  he 
continued  to  sit  for  nearly  thirty-six  years. 
He  died  at  the  age  of  eighty  on  Janu- 
ary 16, 1816,  and  was  buried  at  Hayes  in 
Middl^ex. 

That  he  was  somewhat  eccentric  may  be 
suimised  from  his  refusal  to  accept  the 
honour  of  knighthood,  at  that  time  and 
now  almost  invariably  conferred  on  the 
occupiers  of  the  judicial  bench,  declaring 
that  he  would  die  'plain  John  Heath* — a 
resolution  to  whicn  he  firmly  adhered. 
But  his  excellence  in  performing  the  func- 
tions of  a  jud(^  is  allowed  by  all  who  were 
witnesses  of  his  career.  Lord  Eldon,  who 
was  part  of  the  time  chief  justice  of  that 
court,  took  occasion  to  remark  with  admi- 
ration and  surprise  on  the  extent  of  his 
professional  knowled^.  Many  also  are  the 
testimonies  to  his  private  wortn,  and  to  the 
uniTersality  and  accuracy  of  his  general 
knowledge.  He  was  considered  a  severe 
judge,  and,  though  capital  punishments  were 
then  carried  to  an  outrageous  extent,  the 
failure  of  the  ticket-of-leave  system  which 
too  frequently  follows  the  penalties  since 
substituted  forcibly  confirms  the  judge's 
opinion  that '  the  criminal  is  soon  thrown 
upon  you  again,  hardened  in  guilt.'  Yet 
in  his  private  intercourse  he  was  kind, 
charitable,  and  good-natured.  He  died 
unmarried.  (N<£bs  and  Queries,  3rd  S.  ii. 
11,  &c.) 

HSOHAX,  RooEB  DE,  was  of  a  Kentish 
family,  and  probablj  the  son  of  Robert  de 
Hegham,  whose  widow,  Matilda,  paid  for 
an  assize  in  that  county  in  5Q  Henry  IH., 
1272.    (Excerpt,  e  Rot.  Fin.  ii.  671.)    In 


21  Edward  I.  he  acted  on  the  part  of  the 
king  on  a  quo  warranto  at  Yoix.    (Arth. 
Inet.  York,l64t.)    In  25  and  26  Edward  L 
he  assessed  the  tallage  of  London,  and  in 
the  latter  year  he  was  appointed  to  peram- 
bulate the  forests  of  five  counties.    At  the 
end  of  the  same  vear  he  is  mentioned  on 
the  records  as  a  baron  of  the  £^chequer 
(MadoT,  i.  467,  ii.  236 ;  Pari  Write,  i.  897), 
although  Du^ale  does  not  introduce  him 
into  his  list  till  two  years  afterwards.    In 
34  Edward  I.,  having  been  grossly  insulted 
by  one  WiUiam  de  Briwes,  against  whom 
he  had  pronounced  a  judgment,  the  delin- 
quent was  ordered  to  make  an  apology  in 
mil  court,  and  to  be   committea   to  the 
Tower,  there  to  remain  at  the  will  of  the 
kinff.     (Abb.  Placit.  266.)    In  the  last  year 
of  that  reign  he  acted  as  a  justice  of  assize 
in  Durham,  and  was  one  of  the  justices  of 
trailbaston  for  the  home  counties.     (Hot, 
Pari  i.  198,  218,  267.) 

On  the  accession  oi  Edward  H.  he  was 
re-appointed  to  his  seat  in  the  Exchequer, 
and  aied  about  the  middle  of  the  second 
year,  in  January  or  February  1309. 

EEIOHAX,  CLEME27T,  whose  family  waa 
so  called  from  a  villiufe  of  that  name  in 
Sufiblk,  was  the  son  of  Clement  Heigham, 
of  Lavenham,  and  Matilda,  daughter  of 
Lawrence  Cooke.  Admitted  into  Lincoln's 
Inn  in  1617,  he  became  reader  in  1638,  and 
again  in  1647.  At  an  early  period  of  his 
career  the  monasterv  of  St.  JBomunds  Burj 
appointed  him  chief  bailiff  of  the  liberty  of 
St.  Edmund,  but  there  is  no  appearance  of 
his  practising  in  the  courts  at  VV  estminster,  . 
his  name  being  nowhere  mentioned  in  the 
Reports.  This  may  have  arisen  in  some 
measure  from  his  being  a  Roman  Catholic, 
a  sufiicient  impediment  to  any  professional 
advancement  in  the  reign  of  Edward  VI. 
He  was  soon  engaged  in  Marjr's  service  as 
a  privy  councillor,  and  sat  m  parliament 
successively  for  Rye>  Ipswich,  West  Looe, 
and  Lancaster.  After  the  queen's  marriage 
with  King  Philip  he  was  selected  as  the 
speaker  of  the  parliament  that  met  on 
November  11, 1664,  in  which  the  attainder 
of  Cardinid  Pole  was  reversed,  and  the 
supremacy  of  the  pope  restored.  The  re- 
vival of  the  acts  against  heresy  induced 
nearly  forty  members,  whose  names  are 

E reserved  bv  Sir  Edward  Coke,  to  leave  the 
ouse  in  disgust  at  the  obsequiousness  of 
the  majority  to  the  ruling  powers.  (Pari. 
Hist.  i.  617-626.)  The  parbament  was  dis- 
solved on  January  16,  and  eleven  days 
afterwards  Heigham  received  the  honour  of 
knighthood  f^m  the  hands  of  King  Philip. 
{MacJwn's  Diary,  342.) 

On  March  2,  1668,  he  was  promoted  to 
the  office  of  lord  chief  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer ;  but,  though  on  the  accession  of 
Queen  Elizabeth  he  received  a  new  patent, 
he  was  removed  on  January  22, 1669. 

z 


338 


HELYNN 


Sir  Clement  then  retired  to  his  seat^ 
Barrow  HaU  in  Suffolk,  where  he  spent 
the  remainder  of  his  life,  heloyed  for  his 

Eiety  and  benevolence,  and  for  the  readiness 
e  always  evinced  in  accommodating  the 
differences  of  his  neighbours,  showing 
himself  in  all  respect  a  loyal  subject,  ana 
making  himself  so  little  obnoxious  by  his 
religious  opinions  that  the  lord  keeper,  Sir 
Nicnolas  ^acon,  was  a  visitor  in  his  house. 
He  died  there  on  March  9,  1670,  and  was 
buried  in  Thumin^  Church  in  Norfolk. 

He  married  twice.  His  first  wife  was 
Anne,  daufrhter  of  John  de  Moonines,  of 
Seamer  Hail  in  Suffolk;  and  his  second  was 
Anne,  daughter  of  Sir  George  Waldegrave 
of  Smalbndge,  and  widow  of  Henry  Bures 
of  Acton  in  the  same  county.  By  each  he 
had  children,  and  hb  representatives  have 
preserved  the  honour  of  the  family  from 
that  time  to  this.  (Burgon^s  Oreshantf  ii. 
108 ;  ISttter's  Worthies,  ii.  350. J 

HELYVK,  Walteb  de,  is  aescribed  in 
the  Patent  Roll  of  52  Henry  HI.  as  '  jus- 
ticiarius  noster,'  and  there  are  continual 
entries  of  payments  for  assizes  to  be  held 
before  him  to  the  end  of  the  reign.  (Ex- 
cerpt, e  JRot,  JFVn.ii.  460-574.)  He  is  called 
'  one  of  the  king's  justices  appointed  to  hold 
the  pleas  of  the  lord  the  long'  in  1  £d- 
wara  L  ;  and  in  the  fourth  year  he  was  paid 
twenty  pounds  for  his  expenses  in  visiting 
'  eleven  places  to  expedite  the  king's  busi- 
ness.' (j)evon'8  Issue  HoU,  81,  06.)  It 
would  appear  that  he  was  removed  to  the 
Common  Fleas  in  6  Edward  I.,  as  from 
that  year  till  Trinity,  9  Edward  I.,  1281, 
fines  were  levied  before  him.  (Dugdale's 
Orig.  44.)  There  is  no  later  mention  of 
him  after  1284,  when  a  special  commission 
was  directed  to  him  and  Giles  de  Berkeley. 
(SwmfiMs  BoUf  182.)  He  was  seated  at 
Much-Marcle,  near  Ledbury,  in  Hereford- 
shire. 

HEIONOTON,  Richard  de,  was  pro- 
fessionally engaged  in  the  courts,  ana  in 
35  Henry  III.,  1251,  appeared  before  the 
king  at  Windsor  on  the  part  of  John  de 
BaHioll  who  afterwards,  in  52  Henry  HE., 
proceeaed  against  him  for  delivering  up  his 
castle  of  Fotheringav  to  Baldwin  Wake, 
the  king's  enemy  ana  his,  without  his  as- 
sent    (Abb.  Hacit.  165.) 

He  performed  the  duties  of  a  iustice 
itinerant  in  46  and  47  Henry  III.,  1202-3, 
and  the  Fine  Roll  proves  that  he  was  a  re- 
gular justicier  till  near  the  end  of  the  reign, 
the  last  entry  of  payments  for  writs  of 
assize  to  be  held  before  him  being  in  Oc- 
tober 1270.  (Ibid.  178 ;  Excerpt,  e  Bot  Fin. 
ii.  410-624.) 

HEHDSV,  Edwabd,  was  descended  from 
a  branch  of  the  old  Kentish  fiEunily  of  the 
HendenSj  originally  residing  on  an  estate 
bearing  its  name  in  the  parish  of  Wood- 
chuich  in  Eenty  but  afterwards  removed  to 


HKNGHAaC 

Benenden  in  its  neighbourhood,  where  thej 
were  clothiers  in  great  repute. 

Entering  at  Graj's  Inn  in  1586^  he  be- 
came reader  there  m  1614,  and  in  the  nae 
vear  sat  in  parliament  for  Rye.  Hiriw 
Deen  in  1616  called  to  the  degree  of  t]>eooi( 
for  the  next  two-and-twenty  yean  he  bid 
an  extensive  practice,  and  on  Jannaiy  8S^ 
16S9,  he  was  constituted  a  baron  of  the  fii- 
chequer  {Rymer,  xx.  306)  and  knigbtei 

When  the  parliament  entered  uefieli 
against  the  king  they  passed  an  ordimiitt 
assessing  all  who  had  not  voluntarily  ooi- 
tributed  to  the  army,  in  such  sum  si  tbe 
committee  meeting  at  Haberdashen^  HiO 
should  deem  reasonable,  not  exceeding  t 
twentieth  part  of  their  estate.  In  Deeem- 
her  1643  the  Commons  applied  to  ^ 
Lords  to  rate  Baron  Henden,  as  an  anitiit 
to  their  lordships,  who  accordinglr  M- 
sessed  him  at  2000/.  for  the  twentieth  pert 
of  his  estate,  to  be  employed  for  the  denbee 
of  Poole  and  Lvme.  The  baron  not  ober- 
ing  this  order,  tbe  house,  on  the  2did  of  tii 
same  month,  directed  proceedings  sgiinit 
him ;  but^  as  he  was  ill  at  the  time,  it  warn 
that  they  were  not  then  taken,  and  thit  be 
died  in  the  following  February.  {LoHi 
Journals,  vi.  324,  436.^  He  was  buried  ia 
the  chancel  of  Biddennam  Church. 

HEK6HAX,  William  de,  was  a  reodat 
in  Norfolk,  and  was  probably  a  brother  of 
Andrew,  the  father  of  Ralph  de  Henghie. 
He  was  one  of  four  who,  in  9  Henr^  IH, 
1124,  were  appointed  to  take  an  aisixe  of 
novel  disseism  in  Norfolk ;  and  in  1126  he 
was  sent  with  three  others  to  trycertiii 
prisoners  in  the  custody  of  the  Bishop  of 
Ely,  who  were  charged  with  muidir' 
{Hot.  Claus.  ii.  78, 159.) 

HEKOHAX,  Ralph  de,  was  the  soa  of 
Sir  Andrew  de  Hengham,  of  a  knigbtlf 
family  seated  at  St.  Andrew*s  ICanor  li 
Hengham  in  Norfolk.  He  was  brouffbtvp 
to  the  then  commonly  united  profesaoos  « 
the  Church  and  the  law,  in  the  former  of 
which  he  held  a  canonrv  in  St  Paol'i  end 
the  chancellorship  of  £xeter,  to  whidtbe 
was  collated  in  1^75,  but  resigned  it  witfais 
three  years  and  a  half.    {Le  JVeve,  89.) 

As  a  lawyer,  the  payment  for  asflixei  to 
be  held  before  him  commences  in  Jinairf 
1270,  54  Henry  III.,  which  was  probiNf 
the  date  of  his  appointment  as  a  josdoe  « 
the  King's  Bench.  These  entries  of  afli«* 
before  him  are  veiy  numerous,  end  tte 
rapidity  with  which  he  established  lui 
reputation  in  the  court  is  evinced  bjbii 
standing  at  the  head  of  the  circuits  daoiK 
the  next  two  years  till  the  end  of  the  ieig>> 
(Excerpt,  e  Hot.  Fin.  ii.  504-584.) 

Tha^  on  the  accession  of  Edwiid  L  bi 
was  immediately  removed  to  tlie  OaoHift 
Pleas  appears  firom  a  fine  hwlgg  fctg 
levied  before  him  in  NovemlMr  ]lA|  v 
that  hia  elevation  as  chief  hmUm  m  Hi 


HEK6HAM 

ISmffB  Beoeh  must  have  been  between 
Novewher  1273  and  September  1274 
^thou^  Dngdale  does  not  name  him  in  that 
diameter  tm  1278)  is  proved  hj  an  entry 
of  pleas  'coram  domino  re^  et  R.  de 

Umnghnn  ^  JOCMf  wis,  jUSticUB  do  BonCO 

dtmum  rtffiSj  in  Octabis  S.  Michaelis,  anno 
regno  &c  secondo,  indpiente  tercio,  apud 
Westm.'     (Ahb.Flae&.m.) 

In  18  Edward  L  he  was  removed  from 
his  office  and  fined,  but  what  was  the  nre- 
dse  charge  against  him  is  nowhere  recoraed, 
and  the  amount  of  the  fine  is  variouslj 
stated.  It  has  been  generally  fixed  at 
7000  marks;  but  the  complamts  against 
Mm  in  the  next  parliament  were  palpably 
too  sUght  to  warrant  such  a  punishment, 
and  probably  were  merely  maae  by  those 
mean  spirits  who  are  too  ready  to  press  a 
Idling  nmn.  One  was,  that  the  chief 
justice  had  confirmed  a  false  judgment 
pronounced  by  Solomon  de  Rochester,  the 
iQstice  itinerant ;  and  another,  that  a  man 
had  been  arbitrarily  imprisoned  by  him. 
(MaL  Flarl.  i.  48,  520  I'bera  is  much 
more  probability  that  tne  fine  did  not  ex- 
ceed otX)  marks,  according  to  the  tradition 
in  the  reign  of  Richard  IIL,  which  at- 
tributed its  imposition  to  Heiu^ham^s  pity 
for  a  poor  man  having  induced  him  to  erase 
£om  the  roll  a  fine  of  13«.  4d,  and  sub- 
stitute 6s.  Sd.  for  it  The  story  went  on  to 
inert  that  with  this  fine  the  clockhouse 
at  Westminster  was  erected,  and  a  clock 
placed  in  it  which  could  be  heard  in  the 
klL  (4  Lut.  256.)  This  tradition  has 
lieen  frequently  referred  to  by  judges  who 
luive  been  urged  to  alter  a  record.  That 
Hengham*s  onence  could  not  have  been  a 
Tery  grievous  one  is  sufficiently  proved  by 
Ids  restoration  to  the  bench  at  a  fater  date. 

His  retirement,  however,  was  of  ten 
Tears*  continuance,  and  his  return  seems  to 
We  been  gradual.  His  name  is  introduced 
nearly  at  the  bottom  of  the  list  of  judges 
and  other  officers  who  were  sunmioned  to 
the  parliament  of  March  1300,  28  Edward 
I,  as  if  among  the  justices  itinerant  In 
the  following  April  he  was  the  first  named 
of  those  appomted  to  perambulate  the 
forests  of  Easex,  Buckingham,  and  Oxford 
{Pari  Writs,  L  664);  and  it  was  not  till 
dghteen  months  afterwards — viz.,  on  Sep- 
tember 14, 1301 — that  he  was  restored  to 
the  bench,  and  constituted  chief  justice  of 
Ihe  Conmion  Pleas.  In  this  office  he  con- 
tinued till  the  end  of  the  reign,  and  was  re- 
appointed by  Edward  II.  He  served  that 
king  for  a  very  short  time,  his  death  occur- 
mg  in  1309.  (Ibid.  ii.  905.)  He  was 
buried  in  St  Foul's  Cathedral,  and  Weever 
(p.  367)  gives  his  epitaph,  in  which  he  is 
called  'floe  Anglorum'  and  'vir  benedictus.' 

Besides  the  '  Registrum  Brevium,'  which 
Coke  calls  '  the  most  ancient  book  of  the 
law/  he  left  two  works  of  note  called '  Heng- 


HENLEY 


339 


ham  Magna '  and  'Henffham  Parva,*  which 
have  been  published  wiUi  notes  bv  Mr.  Sel- 
den,  and  are  printed  at  the  end  of  his  edition 
of  *  Fortescue  de  Laudibus  AngHce'  (1741). 

HEHLXT,  Robert  (Earl  of  Northhto- 
tok).  The  family  fi*om  which  he  descended 
was  originally  established  at  Henley  in 
Somersetshire,  of  which  county  some  mem- 
bers of  it  were  sherifis.  Its  elder  branch 
was  honoured  with  a  baronetcy  in  1660, 
which  expired  in  1740.  His  great-grand- 
father. Sir  Robert  Henley,  master  of  the 
Court  of  King's  Bench  in  the  reiffn  of  Charles 
I.,  having  acquired  the  estate  of  the  Grange 
in  Hampshire,  employed  Inigo  Jones  to 
erect  a  considerable  mansion  on  it.  His 
third  son.  Sir  Robert,  and  his  grandson, 
Anthony,  were  both  successively  members 
of  parliament  for  Andover,  and  the  latter 
was  afterwards  representative  for  Wey- 
mouth till  his  death  m  1711.  This  Anthony, 
who  was  one  of  the  most  accomplished  wits 
of  his  day,  bv  his  marriage  witn  Mary,  the 
daughter  ana  coheir  of  the  Hon.  Peregrine 
Bertie,  second  son  of  the  Earl  of  Lindsey, 
became  the  father  of  three  sons,  of  whom 
this  Robert  was  the  second.  He  was  bom 
about  1708,  and  was  educated  at  West- 
minster, and  St  John's  College,  Oxford,  and 
was  elected  a  fellow  of  All  Souls*  in  1727. 
Being  then  admitted  to  the  Inner  Temple, 
he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1732. 

As  a  youn^  man  he  was  jovial  and 
hilarious,  and  indulged  so  much  in  the  pre- 
vailing vice  of  drinking  that  he  laid  the 
foundation  of  that  goutv  habit  from  which 
he  subsequently  sunered.  But  he  evidently 
acquired  an  early  practice  in  the  Court  of 
Chancery,  which  increased  so  much  that  he 
was  compelled  in  1745  to  take  chambers  in 
Lincoln's  Inn,  where  equity  lawyers  ^  most 
do  congregate.'  For  this  purpose  he  was 
also  then  sdmitted  a  member  of  that  society. 
It  was  at  that  time  the  custom  for  Chancery 
barristers  to  attach  themselves  to  a  circuit, 
and  thus  to  obtain  some  insight  into  the 
course  of  the  common  law  and  criminal 
courts  (a  practice  which  had  not  been  al- 
together discontinued  at  the  beginning  of 
the  present  centurj^),  and  Mr.  Henley  chose 
the  Western  Circuit,  his  connections  being 
resident  within  it.  Here  his  rough-and- 
ready  advocacy  soon  procured  him  a  lead ; 
and  a  curious  story  is  told  of  his  being 
obliged  to  apologise  to  a  Quaker  of  Bristol 
named  Reeve  for  some  indecent  liberties  he 
had  taken  with  him  in  cross-examination. 
It  speaks  well  for  both  that  the  Quaker 
was  afterwards  employed  by  the  chancellor 
to  pay  the  freight  of  some  wine  consigned 
to  nim,  and  that  the  chancellor  inviteof  his 
old  antagonist  to  dine  at  his  table,  and  good- 
humouredly  related  to  the  company  the 
particulars  of  their  early  fracas. 

He  was  elected  recorder  of  Bath,  where 
he  resided  do^ig  his  vacations^  and  wheze 

z2 


340 


HENLEY 


he  fonned  a  Tomantic  attachment  to  Jane, 
the  beautiful  dau^ter  and  one  of  the  co- 
heireeses  of  Sir  Hugh  Huband,  of  Ipsley, 
baronet  She  had  at  that  time  entirely  lost 
the  use  of  her  limbs,  but  on  her  recovery 
they  were  united  in  1748.  Bath  elected 
him  its  representatiTe  in  the  parliament  of 
1747,  and  ne  continued  its  member  till  his 
elevation  to  the  e(][uity  bench.  Attaching 
himself  to  the  Leicester  House  party,  he 
was  an  active  debater  in  support  of  its  line 
of  politics.  After  the  death  of  the  Prince 
of  Wales  he  continued  his  adherence  to  the 
princess,  and*on  the  establishment  of  the 
nousehold  of  the  young  prince  (afterwards 
Geoi^  ni.),  in  1761,  he  was  appointed  his 
solicitor-general,  and  in  1754  his  attorney- 
general,  being  on  the  former  occasion  ad- 
mitted within  the  bar  as  one  of  the  king's 
counsel,  and  elected  a  bencher  of  the  Inner 
Temple.  On  November  6,  1756,  he  was 
appomted  king's  attorney- general,  and 
Imighted;  and  on  the  coalition  ministry 
being  formed  in  the  following  year,  Sir 
Kobert,  after  ineffectual  offiers  of  uie  Great 
Seal  had  been  made  to  Lords  Ilardwicke 
and  Mansfield,  Sir  Thomas  Clarke,  and 
Chief  Justice  WUles,  was  nominated  lord 
keeper  on  June  30, 1757. 

So  unacceptable  was  he  to  Georce  U., 
from  his  connection  with  Leicester  House, 
that  he  was  allowed  to  preside  in  the  House 
of  Lords  for  nearly  three  years  without  a 
title ;  but  the  necessity  of  appointing  him 
lord  high  steward  for  the  trial  of  the  Earl 
of  Ferrers  for  the  murder  of  his  steward, 
and  the  impropriety  of  a  commoner  holding 
that  high  office,  obliged  the  king  on  March 
27,  1760,  to  create  him  a  peer  as  Baron 
Henley  of  the  Grange.  At  that  trial,  j  udging 
from  the  printed  account,  his  conduct  was 
simple  and  unaffected,  and  the  ill-natured 
and  prejudiced  assertion  of  Horace  Walpole 
that  it  wanted  dignity  is  fully  refuted  by 
the  grave,  appropriate,  and  affecting  ad- 
dresses delivered  by  nis  lordship  to  the 
noble  prisoner,  both  on  his  arraignment  and 
his  condemnation. 

George  U,  died  six  months  afterwards, 
and  soon  after  the  accession  of  George  HI. 
Lord  Henley's  title  of  lord  keeper  was  con- 
verted into  that  of  lord  chanceUor.  He  was 
the  lost  person  who  was  designated  by  the 
former  title,  the  single  holder  of  the  Great 
Seal  being  ever  since  that  time,  now  more 
than  a  century,  distinguished  by  the  latter. 
It  is  difficult  to  account  for  the  unmeaning 
imposition  of  the  two  titles  since  the  time 
of  Queen  Elizabeth,  when  an  act  of  parlia- 
ment took  away  every  essential  difference 
that  might  have  existed  previously,  and  de- 
clared them  to  be  equal  m  power,  jurisdic- 
tion, and  diflnity. 

On  May  19,  1764,  he  was  created  Earl 
of  Northington  (the  hamlet  in  which  the 
Grange  estate  was  ntoate),  and  in  the  fol- 


HENET 

lowing  August  he  was  madejoid  lieatenint 
of  his  county.  Though  Lord  Northing 
owed  his  appointment  of  lord  keeper  toMr. 
Pitt,  he  still  retained  the  Great  Seal  ^e& 
that  minister  was  succeeded  by  Loid  Bute, 
and  also  during  the  two  subeequent  tdnd* 
nistrations  headed  by  the  Duke  of  Bedfind 
and  the  Marquis  of  Rockingham.  From 
several  points  in  the  policy  of  the  last  1m 
differed  so  materially  that  he  induced  his 
majesty  to  submit  the  guidance  of  the  stite 
to  his  old  patron,  Mr.  Pitt,  upon  theformi- 
tion  of  whose  administration  ne  retiied  fiom 
the  post  of  loid  chancellor  on  Jvlj  30, 1766, 
and  took  the  less  onerous  position  of  loid 

S resident  of  the  council.  His  principal  in- 
ucement  for  making  this  sacnfice  was  the 
impossibility  he  found  of  perfoiming  the 
duties  of  the  office  of  chancellor,  enfeehled 
as  he  was  by  repeated  attacks  of  the  gout 
The  same  cause  obliged  him  eighteen  months 
after  to  resign  his  new  office ;  and  from  De- 
cember 1767  he  retired  wholly  frompuhlie^ 
life.  He  died  on  January  14,  1772,  tod 
was  buried  at  Northington,  where  a  hand* 
some  mural  monument  has  been  erected. 

In  the  j  udgment  of  Lord  Eldon,  *  he  i»ii 
a  great  lawyer,  and  very  firm  in  delivain? 
his  opinion,'  an  authority  which  few  wm 
dispute.  Its  justice  will  receive  confiimi- 
tion  from  a  collection  of  his  decisions,  printed 
from  his  own  manuscripts  byhis  grandno, 
Robert  Eden,  second  Lord  Henley  of  that 
name,  who  afterwards  published  a  memoir 
of  his  life.  He  retained  to  the  end  of  his 
life  his  love  of  classical  literature,  and  m  ^ 
domestic  circle  he  kept  up  the  conviriaHtj 
which  distinguished  him  m  his  early  yeani 
tinctured  rather  too  much  ^^th  warmtn  and 
irritability,  and  with  the  common  uae  d 
profane  expressions,  a  vulgar  and  unmean- 
ing habit  which  then  unhappily  prevailed, 
adopted  more  with  the  view  of  giving 
strengtii  to  expressions  than  with  say 
thought  or  intention  of  being  blasphemon& 
Though  he  was  undoubtedly  coarse  and  care- 
less in  his  language,  he  has  not  been  chaiged 
with  being  incorrect  or  immoral  in  his  coo- 
duct,  and  the  two  beautiful  prayers  which 
Lord  Henley  informs  us  he  composed  for 
the  use  of  his  wife  leave  the  impresaon 
that  he  was  imbued  with  deeper  religioin 
feelings  than  he  had  the  credit  of  ent«- 
taining. 

His  wife  bore  him  several  children.  The 
only  son  who  survived  him,  Robert,  wis 
the  second  and  last  earl,  dying  in  1788  un- 
married.  One  of  his  daugiiters,  Elixabeth, 
married  Sir  Morton  Eden,  K.B.,  who  w>i 
created  in  1799  Lord  Henley  of  ChwdstocK 
in  the  peerage  of  Ireland,  a  title  wludi  w 
exists. 

HSmtT,  DuxE  OF  (NoBXAMmr^  nW' 
wards  Eutg  Hstbt  XL,  was  ttl  dM- 
son  of  Geoffrey,  Earl  of  AmcvJbgrttlBB- 
preas  Matilda,  daughter  of  XpgHtfyl* 


HEPPECOTES 

Seing  born  in  March  1133,  he  was  but 
mn  ixi£uit  daring  the  contest  between  his 
mother  and  King  Stephen.    On  the  death 
of  his  father  in  1160  he  succeeded  to  the 
«aridom  of  Anjou,  and  by  consent  of  his 
mother  assumed  the  title  of  Duke  of  Nor- 
mandy.   Having  then  attained  the  age  of 
oxteen,  he  resolved  to  recover  the  English 
throne  which   his   mother  had  lost    He 
accordingly  received  the  honour  of  knight- 
hood &om  his  unde  David,  King  of  Scot- 
land, and  strengthened  himself  b^  a  politic 
mairiage  with    Eleanor   of  Poictou,  the 
divorced  wife  of  Louis,  King  of  France, 
acquiring  with  her  the  extensive  duchy  of 
Aquitaine.     On  his  landing  in    England 
ahortly  after,  his  standard  was  join^  by 
auch  of  his  mother's  former  adherents  as 
survived,  and    by    all    those    who    were 
desirous  of  terminating  the  state  of  anarchy 
which  prevailed  throughout  the  kingdom. 
The  contending  armies  met  at  Wallingford, 
but   by  the  intervention  of   wise  coun- 
^ellorsthey  parted  without  bloodshed,  and 
an     arrangement    was    effected    between 
Stephen    and   Henry,    by  which    it  was 
agreed  that  the  former  should  not  be  dis- 
turbed in  his  rule  during  his  life,  and  that 
Henry  should  succeed  him  at  his  death. 
This  treaty  was  concluded  on  November  7, 
1153,  when  Stephen  is  said  to  have  con- 
stituted Hemy  Chief  Justiciary  of  Eng- 
land under  him.     He    did  not,  however, 
long  perform  the  duties  of  this  office,  as  he 
returned   to   Normandy  at  the  following 
Easter,    and    remained    there     till    after 
Stephen's  decease,  which  occurred  on  the 
25tn   of   the    ensuing   October.     After   a 
reign  of  more  than  thirty-four  years,  he 
died  at  Chinon  on  July  5,  1189. 

HSFPSCOTES,  Thomas  de,  was  one  of 
those  who  were  appointed  to  supply  the 
place  of  the  judges  removed  on  the  King*s 
return  from  Toumay.  His  patent  is  dated 
January  8,  1341, 14  Edward  III.,  but  his 
death  occurred  before  the  end  of  the  year. 
He  was  probably  a  native  of  Northumber- 
landf  where  there  is  a  hamlet  called  Heps- 
cott  in  the  parish  of  Morpeth.  {DugdcUe^s 
Orig,  46 ;  Rot,  Pari.  ii.  126.) 

HSRBEBT,  Edward,  was  the  first  cou- 
ain  of  the  famous  Lord  Herbert  of  Cher- 
bury,  bein^  the  son  of  Charles  Herbert  of 
Aston  in  tne  county  of  Montgomery,  third 
brother  to  the  father  of  his  lordship. 
Admitted  to  the  society  of  the  Inner  Tem- 
ple, he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1618,  and 
became  reader  in  1637.  He  had  before 
this  time  acquired  a  seat  in  parliament, 
and  in  1626  was  one  of  the  managers  of 
the  impeachment  of  the  Duke  of  Bucking- 
ham. (  Whitclockey  6;  Pari.  Hid.  iii.  719.) 
He  was  not  in  the  next  parliament  of  1628, 
but  after  its  dissolution  he  was  one  of  the 
counsel  employed  by  Selden  in  the  prose- 
cution   against   him.     (CW.  State  Papers 


HERBERT 


341 


[1628-91,  556,)  His  opposition  to  the 
court  did  not  last  long,  for  in  1633  he  was 
selected  by  the  Inner  Temple  as  a  manager 
of  the  famous  masque  designed  by  the  four, 
inns  of  court  as  a  compliment  to  the  Inng 
and  queen  in  confutation  of  Prynne's  tirade 
against  players  in  his  '  Histrio-Mastiz.*. 
(Whtielocke,  19.)  In  January  1635  his 
devotion  to  the  court  was  confirmed  by  his 
appointment  as  attorney-general  to  the 
queen,  and  in  1637  he  was  employed  on 
tne  part  of  the  crown  in  the  prosecution 
of  Burton,  Bastwick,  and  Prynne.  (State 
Trials^  iii.  719.)  Having  been  soon  after 
knighted,  his  next  step  was  to  the  solicitor- 
generalship,  which  he  obtained  on  January 
25,  1640,  and  in  that  character  he  sat  in 
the  parliaments  of  the  following  April  and 
November  for  New  Sarura.  He  continued 
a  member  till  January  29, 1641,  when,  on 
his  beinff  created  attorney-general,  and 
thereby  becoming  an  assistant  to  the 
House  of  Lords,  he  was,  according  to  the 
practice  of  the  time,  incapacitated  from 
sitting  in  the  Commons.  (Rymerj  xix. 
606,  XX.  380,  448 ;  PaH.  Hist.  ii.  662,  623.) 
This  removal  from  a  scene  of  daily  con- 
tention was  peculiarly  acceptable  to  him. 
for,  according  to  Clarendon,  he  was  '  awea 
and  terrified '  with  the  temper  of  the 
Commons,  and  glad  to  be  '  out  of  the  fire.' 
On  January  3,  1642,  he,  by  the  king's 
command,  brought  an  accusation  in  the 
House  of  Lords  against  Lord  Kimbolton 
and  five  members  of  the  Commons  for  high 
treason,  and  the  king  on  the  next  day 
committed  the  imprudence  of  going  to  the 
latter  house  and  demanding  their  arrest. 
The  Commons,  highly  resentins^  this  pro- 
ceeding, voted  it  a  breach  of  privilege,  and 
impeached  Herbert  for  exhibiting  the  ar- 
ticles. Sir  Edward  put  in  his  answer 
justifying  himself  as  acting  under  his 
majesty's  express  personal  commands,  and 
without  anv  advice  from  himself,  and 
thereupon  the  trial  commenced  on  March 
8.  Two  of  the  counsel  assigned  for  his 
defence  were  committed  for  contempt  in 
refusing  to  plead,  and  the  excuses  of^two 
others  were  allowed,  all  four  being  intimi- 
dated by  the  threats  of  the  Commons.  Mr. 
Heame  and  Mr.  Chute,  however,  boldly  and 
ably  exonerated  the  attorney-general.  Yet 
the  Lords,  influenced  in  some  measure  by 
the  same  fear,  found  him  guilty  of  the 
facts,  but  at  the  same  time  showed  their 
estimate  of  the  imputed  crime  by  succes- 
sively negativing  motions  that  he  should 
be  punished  by  the  loss  of  his  office,  by 
fine,  by  imj)risonment  in  the  Tower,  or  by 
mulcting  him  in  damages  to  the  accused 
members.  More  than  a  month  after,  their 
lordships^  being  compelled  by  the  Com- 
mons to  inflict  some  punishment,  contented 
themselves  with  merely  committing  him 
to  the  Fleet  during  pleasure,  and  dedaii^ig 


342 


HERBERT 


ham  incapable  of  any  other  place  tlian  that 
of  attornej-general.  which  ne  held.  His 
incaiceiation  lasted  only  dghteen  days, 
from  April  23  to  May  11,  when  Sir  Edward 
was  permitted  *  for  his  health '  to  go  to 
any  of  his  houses  within  a  day's  joumejr  of 
London^  but  not  to  come  to  London  with- 
out the  order  of  the  house.  On  July  4  the 
warden  of  the  fleet  was  ordered  to  bring 
him  up,  but,  as  was  no  doubt  intended,  he 
had  taken  the  opportunity  to  escape  and 
join  the  king  at  York.  (BarL  Mist,  ii. 
1089,  1121-79 ;  Lords'  Journals,  v.  177.) 
Venturing  some  time  after  to  London, 
he  seems  narrowly  to  have  escaped  the 
clutches  of  the  parliament,  by  whom  an 
order  was  made  on  March  6, 1646,  that  he 
should  be  apprehended  and  brought  to  the 
bar.    (WJUMockey  im,) 

Ckiendon  (Lifef  i.  212),  who  did  not 
like  him,  states  that  his  *  greatest  faculty 
was,  and  in  which  he  was  a  master,  to 
make  difficult  things  more  intricate  and 
perplexed,  and  very  easy  things  to  seem 
more  hard  than  they  were ; '  and  givee  an 
amusinf^  account  of  certain  conferences  at 
Oxford  in  1643,  on  the  subject  of  the  pro- 
posed proclamation  for  dissolving  the  paiv 
iiament,  which  seems  fully  to  justify  his 
opinion. 

The  ground  that  he  lost  with  the  king 
on  that  occasion  he  did  not  regidn.  In  a 
letter  to  Mr.  Secretary  Nicholas  dated  from 
Newark,  October  16,  1646,  his  majesty 
savs :  '  For  Mr.  Attumy,  tell  him  if  the 
rebelles  never  did  but  justice,  or  what 
they  had  lawful  power  to  do,  then  his 
answer  good,  otherwais  it  is  not  [worth  a 
button ;  wherefor  if  he  confeese  my  power 
lett  him  accept  my  offer,  otherwais  I  shall 
know  what  I  have  to  do.'  {Evdm's  Me^ 
moh-a,  V.  154.)  The  offer  alluded  to  was 
probably  that  of  the  lord  keepership,  then 
vacant  oy  the  death  of  Lord  Lvttelton. 
The  result  of  this  letter  was  that  the  Great 
Seal  was  entrusted  to  Sir  Richard  Lane  on 
October  25,  and  that  Sir  Edward  Herbert 
was  discharged  from  his  office  on  Novem- 
ber 1.     (Docguets  at  Oxford.) 

Sir  Edwani  seems  to  have  been  rein- 
stated in  his  office  by  King  Charles;  for 
in  1648  Clarendon  speaks  of  him  in  that 
character,  as  accompanying  the  Prince  of 
Wales,  and  as  a  great  favourite  with  Prince 
Rupert,  describings  him  as  always  interfer- 
ing wi^  his  advice,  and  as  bemg  ^  of  all 
men  living  most  disposed  to  make  discord 
and  disagreement  among  men,  all  his  facul- 
ties being  resolved  into  a  spirit  of  contra- 
dicting, disputing,  and  wrangling  upon  any- 
thing that  was  proposed.'  If  reliance  is  to 
be  pL&ced  on  the  noble  author's  account  of 
Sir  Edward's  subsequent  conduct  at  the 
Hagpue,  hia  intrigues  and  indiscretion  well 
merit  the  censure;  but  the  jealousy  of  a 
rival  for  court  favour  may  account  for  some 


HEBBEBT 

exaggeration  of  the  facts,    (^CSarmtbmf  vL 
63,  82, 127-aO,  140.) 

After  the  death  of  Charles  L  Sir  Edwaii 
is  still  mentioned  with  his  affidal  title. 
He  attended  the  new  king's  court  at  th9 
Hague,  and  afterwards  was  with  the  Duke 
of  York  at  Paris,  bein^  one  of  this  prince's 
private  and  confidential  advisers,  recom- 
mending and  accompanying  him  on  that 
inauspicious  visit  to  Flanders  and  HoDaiid 
in  the  following  year.  The  regular  cooii- 
cillors  of  the  duke  represented  him  '  as  a 
man  of  that  intolerable  pride  that  it  im 
not  possible  for  any  man  to  convenw  with 
him ;  .  .  .  yet,  by  the  knack  of  his  talk, 
which  was  the  most  like  reason  withoot 
being  it,  he  retained  stiU  too  much  credit 
with  the  duke,  who,  being  amused  andooo- 
founded  with  his  positive  discourse, thou^t 
him  wiser  than  those  who  were  mooreeaiuj 
understood.'    (Ibid,  SQl,  474,  48S.)  i 

Unless  Sir  Richard  Lane  was  conturaed  J 
after  the  decapitation  of  the  late  king  ai  ^ 
nominal  lord  keeper  till  his  death  in  166(^ 
of  which  there  is  no  evidence  except  tfait 
on  his  widow's  tomb,  that  office  had  not 
hitherto  been  filled byCharles H. ;  indeed, 
since  the  battle  of  Worcester  there  bal 
been  no  Great  Seal  to  keep.  But  in  166S 
the  king,  having  provided  himself  with  a 
new  Seal  at  Pans,  entrusted  it,  against  hie 
own  inclination,  but  at  the  urgent  8olidti> 
tion  of  the  queen-mother  (JESii^  v.  S84,. 
288),  to  Sir  Edward  Herbert  in  April  of 
that  year.  The  duties  of  the  office,  judicial 
or  political,  could  not  have  been  very  ooer- 
ous;  and  his  time  is  described  as  hdng' 
principally  employed  in  endeavouring  ta 
effect  the  ruin  of  Sir  Edward  Hyde,  of 
whose  ascendency  over  the  kinff  he  was  in* 
ordinately  jealous.  He  showed  his  enmity 
on  every  occasion,  and  was  met  vrith  cone* 
spending  hatred  on  the  part  of  Hyde,  whose 
prejudice  is  so  apparent  in  every  sentence 
that  the  character  he  gives  of  Heibert 
would  be  altogether  unworthy  of  oedity 
were  it  not  that  both  Charles  L  and  his  soo 
appear  to  have  concurred  in  his  opinion. 
That  the  dislike  of  the  Utter  was  real  ie 
proved  by  his  resolving  that  Herbert  should 
not  accompany  him  when  he  left  France  m 
June  in  the  K>llowing  year.  Sir  Edwaxd 
was  so  indignant  at  this  mark  of  diegrace 
that  he  immediately  suirendered  the  Great 
Seal.  He  died  at  Paris  in  1657;  or,ac 
cording  to  another  authority,  he  suryived 
till  the  Restoration,  and  died  at  Rouen. 

He  married  Margaret,  dauo-hter  of  Sif 
Thomas  Smith,  master  of  the  Requests,  and 
widow  of  Thomas  Carey,  the  second  son  of 
the  Earl  of  Monmouth.  His  three  sooa  all 
became  distinffuished  in  the  suLumdiig 
reigns.  The  eldest,  Charles,  coinmarfw 
a  regiment  of  foot  under  King  WUliMk  mA 
was  slain  in  the  battle  of  A^uIb^  ^?^V^ 
The  second,  Arthur,  was  the 


HERBERT 

taraght  oyer  that  king  in  1668,  and  was 
croated  Earl  of  Torrington,  but,  dying  with- 
oat  iasne,  his  title  became  extinct  in  1716. 
The  yotmgesty  Edward,  took  the  contrary 
«de,  and  ia  the  chief  justice  next  noticed. 

KSBBIBT,  Edwabd.  the  third  eon  of 
the  aboTe  Sir  Edwara,  was  educated  at 
IVineheater,  and  at  New  College,  Oxford, 
where  he  graduated  as  B.A.  in  1669.  He 
then  went  to  the  Middle  Temple,  and,  be- 
coming a  barrister,  migrated  to  Ireland,  on 
hii  becoming  attorney-general  there.  He 
was  kniffhted  in  168$,  and  was  made  chief 
justice  of  Chester.  Subseouently  appointed 
attorney  to  the  Duke  of  York,  he  was  soon 
after  his  royal  highness's  accession  to  the 
throne  made  attorney-general  to  the  queen, 
and  on  October  23, 16»5,  was  promoted  to 
the  Taoant  office  of  chief  justice  of  the 
KiD|^8  Bench.  (Athen,  Oxon.^Y.662;  Fattif 
iL  204 ;  BramiUm,  207.)  On  his  previous 
inrestiture  with  the  necessary  degree  of  Ser- 
jeant he  gave  rinj;s  with  the  extraordinary 
motto  'Jacobus  yincit,  triumphat  lex/ 

Of  his  merits  as  a  lawyer  previous  to  his 
eleyation  we  have  no  means  of  judging 
from  the  English  Reports ;  but  Burnet  de- 
acribea  him  (iii.  02)  as  'a  well-bred  and 
Tirtuous  msn.  generous,  and  good-natured,' 
but '  an  indifferent  lawyer.  .  .  .  He  unhap- 
pily ^t  into  a  set  of  very  high  notions  with 
relation  to  the  king*B  prerogative.  His 
gravity  and  virtues  gave  him  great  advan- 
tMee,  chiefly  his  succeeding  such  a  monster 
(/effireys)  as  had  gone  before  him.  So  he, 
being  found  to  be  a  fit  tool,  was,  vdthout 
any  application  of  his  own,  raised  up  all  at 
once  to  this  hiffh  post.' 

In  the  king  s  attempts  for  the  establish- 
ment of  Popery,  one  of  nis  earliest  steps  was 
to  appoint  Koman  Catiiolics  to  offices,  and 
grant  them  a  patent  of  dispensation  from 
the  oaths  reqmred  by  the  Test  Acts.  Sir 
Edward  Hales  held  the  colonelcy  of  a  regi- 
ment under  these  circumstances,  and,  for  the 
purpose  of  trying  the  question  whether  the 
aing  had  power  to  grant  such  dispensation, 
a  sham  action  to  recover  the  penalty  was 
brought  against  Sir  Edward  by  Godden,  his 
coachman.  On  the  case  being  argued  on 
demurrer  Chief  Justice  Herbert  ffave  a  de- 
cided opinion  that  there  was  no  law  what- 
soever but  what  may  be  dispensed  with  by 
the  king  as  supreme  lawgiver ;  but,  as  it  was 
a  case  of  great  importance,  he  promised  to 
submit  it  to  the  twelve  judges.  On  a  sub- 
sequent day  he  ^ve  judgment  for  Sir  Ed- 
wud  Hales,  stating  that  all  his  colleagues 
agreed  with  his  opinion  except  Mr.  Baron 
Street.  There  can  be  no  doubt,  however, 
that,  unconstitutional  as  this  doctrine  is  now 
allowed  to  be,  the  chief  justice  really  and 
conscientiously  held  it ;  and  afterwards, 
when  his  judgement  was  assailed  by  Sir  Ro- 
bert Atkyns  and  other  writers,  he  published 
ayindication  of  it,  with  the  authorities  upon 


HERIET 


343 


which  it  was  founded.  Almost  immedi* 
ately  followed  his  appointment  as  one  of 
the  ecclesiastical  commissionersy  who  had 
powers  almost  as  extensive  and  quite  as  ob* 
noxious  as  those  of  the  old  High  Commis- 
sion Court ;  but  the  chief  justice  formed 
one  of  the  minority  which  subsequently 
voted  against  the  tyrannical  suspension  of 
the  fellows  of  Magdalen  College.  (StaU 
Triais,  xi.  1106, 1261  :i:vefyn,m.  212,  214 ; 
2  Shoiper,  4970  In  Easter  Term  1687  he 
refused  a  rule  for  the  execution  at  Plymouth 
of  a  soldier  who  had  been  tried  for  desertion 
at  Reading,  and  so  determined  was  the  kinsr 
to  effect  his  purpose  of  introducing  martial 
law  that  Sir  Edward  was  at  once  removed, 
and  within  a  day  or  two  Sir  Kobert  Wright, 
who  was  substituted  for  him,  complied  with 
the  king's  will  as  a  matter  of  course. 

Though  dischargedfrom  theEing^s  Bench, 
he  was  on  the  next  day,  April  22,  made 
chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  in  which 
court  he  continued  till  the  flight  oi  the  king. 
Remaining  true  to  his  master.  Sir  Edward 
joined  the  self-exiled  monarch,  and  was  of 
course  excepted  from  the  bill  of  indemnity, 
notwithstanding  the  high  character  for  ho- 
nour and  integrity  universally  accorded  to 
him  in  the  debates.  In  France  King  Janies 
created  him  Earl  of  Portland,  and  gave  him 
the  nominaloffice  of  lord  chancellor,  in  which 
his  principal  dut^  was  to  draw  up  declara- 
tions, asserting  his  master's  right  to  his  de- 
serted dominions.  Some  of  the  most  violent 
ones  were  unjustly  attributed  to  him;  for 
he  in  truth  had  little  or  no  influence  over 
James,  the  Roman  Catholic  ministers  mono- 
polising all  the  sway.  Though  taking  rank 
as  chancellor,  and  possessing  all  the  external 
marks  of  his  office,  he  was  not  allowed,  as 
a  Protestant,  to  hold  a  seat  in  the  coundL 
A  large  majority  of  the  Jacobites  in  Eng- 
land remonstrated ;  but  to  their  prayer  that 
he  should  be  admitted  James  answered  eva- 
sively, that  he  would  be  '  on  all  occasions 
ready  to  express  the  just  value  and  esteem 
he  has  for  the  lord  chancellor.'  When 
James's  Protestant  servants  were  dinnissed 
in  October  1692  Sir  Edward  retired  into 
Flanders,  but  afterwardsretuming  to  France, 
he  died  at  St.  Germains  in  November  1608. 
(Burnet,  iii.  92,  149 ;  Evelm,  iii.  236 ;  Lut- 
trell:  Lord  Macauky,  iv.  227,  SSd) 

HSBBEBT.     See  &BBERT  Losnf OA. 

HEBEFOBD,  Earl  OF.    iSw  W.  FiTZ-Os- 

BEBNE ;  M.  DE  GlOVCESTEB  ;  H.  BE  BOHITK. 

HBBIBT,  RiCHABB  BE,  was  sheriff  of 
Essex  and  Hertfordshire  in  4  Richard  I., 
and  was  no  doubt  in  some  employment  con- 
nected witli  ^e  Exchequer,  ^m  6  Ri- 
chard L  to  6  John,  1194-1205,  he  acted  aa 
a  justider  in  the  Curia  Regis  at  Westmin- 
ster, his  name  fifequently  appearing  on  the 
fines  that  were  levied  there.  In  1  John, 
Robert  Fitz-Torold  granted  him  half  the 
town  of  Bedefont;  ttid  in  8  John  he  paid 


344 


HERLASTON 


50/.  for  ha\iiig  the  custody  of  his  land  in 
Sarrey,  and  lifty-fiTe  marks  for  tliat  in 
WUts.  He  died  in  1208.  (ilfa<2ar,  L  216; 
Hot.  Canceil.  80,  226 ;  ItoL  Clam.  i.  109.) 

HESLA8T0V,  William  de^  no  doubt 
came  from  the  place  of  that  name  in 
Staffordshire.  In  6  Edward  IL  he  ac- 
companied the  king  abroad  in  the  train 
of  Ingelard  de  Warlee,  keeper  of  the  ward- 
robe. (N.  Fcedenif  iL  213.)  He  lOon 
afterwams  became  a  clerk  in  the  Chan- 
cery, and  was  parson  of  the  church  of 
'  Estwode  near  Reylegh ; '  and  in  July 
1310  he  had  a  grant  of  the  prebend  of 
Carnwyth  in  the  church  of  Glasgow.  (N, 
Foodera,  ii.  401.) 

According  to  the  practice  of  the  time, 
the  Great  Seal  was  placed  in  the  custody 
of  some  of  the  clerks  of  the  Chancery 
during  the  occasional  absence  of  the 
chancellor,  and  they  transacted  the  busi- 
ness appertaining  to  it.  William  de  Her- 
laston  was  frequently  one  of  those  en- 
trusted with  this  duty  from  1321  to  1324. 
{Pari.  WritSy  ii.  p.  ii.  1001.)  He  was  also 
in  the  latter  part  of  this  reign  keeper  of  the 
king's  privy  seal.     {Hot.  Pari.  ii.  383.) 

In  2  Edward  HI.  he  and  Henry  de  Cliff, 
the  master  of  the  Kolls,  were  appointed 
keepers  of  the  Great  Seal  during  a  vacancy 
in  tine  office  of  chancellor,  and  he  acted  in 
the  same  character  several  times  during 
that  and  the  following  year.  He  was  a 
trier  of  petitions  in  the  parliament  as  late 
as  the  twenty-first,  and  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant  in  the  twenty-second  year. 

TTRRTiE,  William  de,  was,  according  to 
Fuller  (i.  281),  bom  in  Devonshire,  because 
he  was  owner  of  Ilfracombe ;  but  it  is  more 
likely  that  he  was  bom  in  Leicestershire, 
both  Robert  de  Herle,  apparently  his  father, 
and  he  having  been  summoned  by  the  she- 
riff of  that  county,  the  former  in  1301,  29 
Edward  L,  to  perform  military  service,  and 
the  latter  in  1324, 17  Edward  H.,  to  attend 
the  great  council  at  Westminster.  (Pari. 
Writs,  i.  365,  ii.  039.)  The  principal  part  of 
his  property  was  certainly  in  that  county. 

In  4  and  6  Edward  II.  he  was  sum- 
moned as  an  assistant  to  parliament,  appa- 
rently in  the  character  of  a  serjeant-at- 
law  ;  and  in  the  ninth  year  he  was  one  of 
three  'qui  sequuntur  pro  rege'  in  a  sidt 
against  the  men  of  Bnstol.  (Hot  Pari.  i. 
359.)  The  wardrobe  account  of  14  Edward 
IL,  1320,  contains  the  entry  of  a  payment 
to  him  of  the  larffe  sum  of  133/.  (is.^&d.  iu 
these  words:  'To  William  Herle,  king^s 
Serjeant,  who,  by  the  king's  order,  will 
shortly  receive  the  honour  of  knighthood, 
of  the  king's  gift,  in  aid  of  his  rank;  6th  of 
August '  (ArcheBohffia,  xxvi.  346) ;  and  he 
was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Common 
Pleas  on  the  16th  of  ^e  following  October. 

On  the  accession  of  Edward  IlL  he  was 
immiediAtely  made  chief  justice  of  that 


HERMAN 

court,  his  patent  bdng  dated  Fehnuur^^ 
1327.  Though  he  was  displaced  oo  Sep- 
tember 3, 1329,  by  John  de  Stoiuffe,it]s 
evident  he  still  continued  to  act  as  a  jndge^ 
as  he  was  at  the  head  of  the  justices  itins- 
rant  in  Nottinghamshire  in  the  following 
December,  and  also,  in  the  succeeding  jesr, 
in  Derb^'shire.  Restored  to  his  place  ii 
chief  justice  on  March  2,  1331,  he  ms 
again  removed  on  November  18.  1S8S; 
but  Henry  le  Scrope,  who  was  tnen  ap- 
pointed, resumed  his  seat  at  the  head  of 
the  Exchequer  on  the  next  day.  The 
cause  of  these  changes  can  only  be  in- 
ferred ;  but  William  de  Herle,  nom  tiiat 
day,  presided  till  July  3,  1337,  when,  it 
his  own  request,  he  was  allowed  to  redn 
from  his  office,  on  account  of  his  age  aid 
infirmities.  The  patent  spoke  in  eulooistie 
terms  of  his  approved  fidelity,  the  aoudity 
of  his  judgment,  the  gravity  of  his  mu- 
ners,  and  his  laudable  and  unwearied  8e^ 
vices  to  the  state ;  and  required  him  to 
remain  on  the  secret  council,  and  to  atfeni 
at  his  pleasure  during  the  rest  of  his  lifr. 
(N.  Fwdera,  u.  913.)  He  lived  nearly 
twelve  years  after  his  retirement,  dying 
in  1347. 

Through  his  wife  Margaret,  the  daughter 
and  heir  of  William  Polglas,  by  Efizabeth, 
the  heir  of  Sir  William  Champernon,  the 
manor  of  Ilfracombe,  and  other  large  pro- 
perty in  Devonshire,  came  into  1^  ?^ 
session.  (Cal.  Inquis.  p.  m.  ii.  135,  265; 
Nichoirs  Leicestersh.  622 ;  IVwce.) 

HEEMAIf  (Bishop  of  Shebbobub  a5D 
Salisbubt)  was  of  Flemish  origin,  and 
had  been  one  of  the  chaplains  of  Edmid 
the  Confessor,  by  whom  ne  was  adviDoed 
in  1045  to  the  small  bishopric  of  Wilton, 
which  in  the  preceding  century  had  bees 
cut  off  from  the  diocese  of  Sherborne^  nd 
the  seat  of  which  was  sometimes  at  Wiltoo, 
sometimes  at  Bamsbury,  and  sometimee  it 
Sunning.  In  1050  he  visited  Kome  in 
company  with  Aldred,  Bishop  or  Wor- 
cester, and  on  his  return  he  used  his 
utmost  endeavours  to  remove  his  see  to 
Malmsbury;  but,  though  the  king  con- 
sented, he  was  defeated  by  the  oppontiflo 
of  the  monks  there.  Indignant  and  do- 
gusted,  he  retired  to  Bertdn,  in  France,  in 
1055,  and  remained  in  that  monastery  ^ 
three  vears.  On  the  death,  howerer,  of 
Efwold,  Bishop  of  Sherborne,  in  1058,  he 
returned  and  succeeded  in  procoiing  the 
reunion  of  the  two  sees  of  Sherborne  nd 
Wilton ;  and  in  1075,  taking  advantigo  c^ 
the  order  of  the  Council  of  Lcmdon,  thii 
the  bishops*  sees  should  be  removed  ta^ 
obscure  places  to  towns  of  greater  nalbb,  te 
effected  the  transfer  of  his  to  Old  StfM 
no  doubt)  however,  under  the  inflMMi  v 
favour,  as  that  place  was  then  BtOi  bittv 
than  a  castle.  He  there  eammmtAil^ 
erection  of  the  cethednJ|  but 


HEBON 

to  witneas  its  completion.  His  death  is 
fixed  by  different  wnters  in  the  years  1076, 
1077,  and  1078. 

Thynne,  in  his  Catalogue  of  Chancellors, 
introduceB  him  with  these  words :  ^  He  is 
thfti  Hermanus  which,  I  suppose,  was 
chancellor  to  William  the  Conc^ueror.' 
With  no  other  authority  than  this,  the 
followers  of  Thynne  have  unhesitatingly 
admitted  his  name. 

He  wrote  the  '  Life  and  Miracles  of  St 
Edmund.'  King  of  the  East  Angles.  (Ho- 
Imsked,  IV.  348 ;  Godwi7i,  336 ;  Httf^hins's 
Dorset,  ii.  373.) 

HESOV,  Edwabd,  was  the  grandson  of 
John  Heron,  a  physician  at  Barming  in 
Kent,  and  the  son  of  Richard  Heron, 
6ettled  at  Harsted  or  Hastings  Hall,  in 
Birdbroke,  Essex.  Admitted  at  Lincoln's 
Inn,  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1574,  and 
elected  reader  in  1587.  In  1594  he  took 
the  degree  of  serjeant-at-law,  which  he 
held  for  fourteen  years  before  he  was 
advanced  to  the  bench  of  the  Exchequer 
on  November  25,  1607,  having  been  pre- 
viously knighted.  He  did  not  long  enjoy 
his  position,  for  he  either  resigned  or  died 
in  1610.     (Croke,  Jac.  197.) 

He  was  twice  married.  His  first  wife 
was  Anne,  daughter  of  David  Vincent, 
Esq.,  of  Bemake  in  Northamptonshire,  the 
ancestor  of  the  present  baronet  of  that 
name.  His  second  wife  was  Dorothy, 
daughter  of  Anthony  Maxey,  Esq.,  of 
Brad  well,  near  Coggleshall.  (MoratWs 
Essex,  ii.  345.) 

HERT£LPOL£,  Geoffrey  de,  of  the 
manor  of  Brereton  in  Northumberland, 
acted  as  a  judge  of  assize  at  Newcastle  in 
the  reign  of  Mward  I.  In  34  Edward  I. 
the  kin^  granted  to  him  the  manor  of  Ken- 
weston  m  Durham  for  his  services. 

He  was  summoned  to  the  coronation  of 
Edward  II.,  and  held  the  office  of  recorder 
of  London  for  about  a  year  in  1320,  and  con- 
tinued during  that  reign  to  act  as  a  justice 
of  assize,  attending  the  parliament  among 
his  brethren  as  late  as  1326.  {Abb,  Placit. 
306-9 ;  Pari.  Writs,  I  379,  ii.  p.  ii.  1003 ; 
Hot.  Pari.  i.  194,  &c. ;  Cal.  Pat.  Pat.  65.) 

HEBTPOBD,  KoBERT  de,  was  one  of  the 
iudges  of  the  Common  Pleas  placed  on  the 
bench  in  the  room  of  those  who  were  super- 
seded for  corruption  in  18  Edward  I.,  1290, 
and  appears  to  nave  continued  to  act  up  to 
1295,  as  he  was  summoned  to  the  parlia- 
ment of  that  year.  (Duz/dale^s  Orig,  44 ; 
Pari.  Writs,  i.  29.) 

HXSILL,  or  HESILT,  William,  was  au- 
ditor of  the  Exchequer  (Acts  Privy  Council, 
ii.  290)  at  the  time  he  was  made  a  baron  of 
that  court  on  July  13,  1421,  9  Henry  V. 
He  was  re-appointed  on  the  accession  of 
Henry  VI.,  but  on  May  18, 1424,  was  ex- 
onerated from  his  office.  {Ibid.  iii.  147.) 
He  died  on  April  9  in  the  following  year. 


HEYDON 


345 


and  was  buried  in  the  church  of  Northfleet 
in  Kent.  He  married  Agnes,  the  daughter 
of  John  Appleton.  (Hastedj  ii.  321,  iii.  316.) 

HXWITT,  Jahss  (Lord  Lifford),  the 
eldest  son  of  William  Hewitt,  a  mercer  and 
draper  at  Coventry,  who  served  the  office  of 
mayor  in  1744^  was  bom  in  1709,  com- 
menced his  life  m  an  attorney's  office,  under 
articles  to  Mr.  James  Birch,  but  was  subse- 
quently induced  to  seek  his  fortune  at  the 
bar.  Entering  the  Middle  Temple,  he  be- 
came a  barrister  in  1742.  His  merits  as  a 
lawyer  procured  him  in  1755  the  dignity 
of  the  coif,  and  four  years  afterwards  the 
position  of  king's  Serjeant.  In  1761  being 
elected  member  for  his  native  town,  the 
style  of  his  oratory  in  parliament  may  be 
surmised  from  the  story  that  is  told  of 
Charles  Townshend,  who  being  met  going 
out  of  the  house,  when  Seijeant  Hewitt  was 
thundering  away  on  some  dull  legal  ques- 
tion, was  asked  whether  the  house  was  up. 
^  No,'  said  Townshend  very  gravely,  *  but 
the  eerieant  is.'  At  this  time  he  was  in 
opposition,  but  in  the  next  year,  when  the 
Earl  of  Chatham  came  in,  and  his  friend 
Lord  Camden  was  made  lord  chancellor,  the 
latter  offi^red  him  the  vacant  judgeship  of 
the  King's  Bench,  which  he  accepted  on 
November  6,  1766,  on  a  promise  that  if  he 
held  the  Seal  when  the  chancellorship  of 
Ireland  became  vacant  he  should  be  pro- 
moted to  that  office.  Within  a  year  the 
Irish  chancellor  died,  and.  Lord  Camden 
having  succeeded  in  overcoming  all  ob- 
stacles, Mr.  Justice  Hewitt  received  his 
patent  as  Lord  Chancellor  of  Ireland  on 
January  9, 1768.  In  June  following  he  was 
created  Baron  Liffi)rd  in  the  Irish  peerage, 
to  which  a  viscounty  was  added  m  1781. 
He  filled  this  high  office  till  his  death  on 
April  28,  1789,  a  period  of  more  than 
twenty-two  years.  W  ith  few  advantages  of 
education,  and  with  no  extraordinary  powers 
of  intellect,  he  was  successful  in  the  exer- 
cise of  his  functions  as  a  judge  by  the  ac- 
curacy of  his  technical  knowledge  and  his 
general  professional  skill.  Formal  in  his 
manner  and  old-fashioned  in  his  ideas,  he 
yet,  by  his  patience  and  urbanity  to  all,  ac- 
quired universal  esteem  and  respect. 

He  married,  first,  a  daughter  of  the  Hev. 
Rhvs  Williams,  D.D.,  rector  of  Stapleford- 
Abbotts  in  Essex,  and  secondly.  Ambrosia, 
daughter  of  the  Rev.  Charles  Bay  ley,  of 
Knavestock  in  the  same  county.  The  vis- 
county is  still  held  by  the  descendants  of 
his  eldest  son.  His  third  son  Joseph  became 
a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench  in  Ireland; 
and  his  fourth  son,  John,  was  deanof  Cloyne. 

HETDOH,  Thomas  db,  is  described  as 
*  clericus  noeter '  in  letters  patent  of  4  John, 
1203,  relative  to  lands  in  Heydon  and  in 
London,  belonging  to  Robert  Furree,  the  cus- 
tody of  whose  daufi^hter,  Constance,  had  been 
previously  granted  to  him.    {Rot,  Pat,  27.) 


346 


HEYM 


From  3  to  11  Henrj  III.  he  was  one  of  the 
regular  justiciers  at  Westminster,  receiv- 
ing the  acknowledgpnent  of  lines  during 
the  whole  of  that  period,  and  acting  as  a 
justice  itinerant  on  several  occasions.  {Dtig^ 
dale's  Orig,  42 ;  Rot,  Claw.  i.  473,  681,  ii. 
82,209;  Madax,  ii.  335.) 

BDETX,  Peter,  was  appointed,  in  20 
Edward  I.,  1202,  a  justice  to  take  assizes 
in  divers  counties,  and  his  pleas  are  re- 
corded in  23  Edward  I.  (Aih,  BoL  Orig.  i. 
92.)  He  was  perhaps  the  son  of  the  under- 
named Stephen  Hejm. 

EETM,  STEPHEN,  was  one  of  the  justices 
of  the  Common  Pleas  at  Easter,  65  Henry 
ni.,  1271,  and  writs  of  assizes  were  taken 
in  his  name  till  the  end  of  that  reign.  He 
was  continued  in  the  office  under  the  suc- 
ceeding king,  as  fines  were  levied  before 
him  from  the  former  date  till  3  Edward  I., 
1274,  when  he  died.  (Excerpt,  e  Rot.  Fin. 
ii.  537-589;  DugdaU's  Orig.  44;  Abb.  Rot. 
Orig.  i.  23.) 

HETBUir ,  Jordan,  was  of  a  Northum- 
berland family,  and  joined  the  barons  in 
their  contest  with  Kin^  John.  He  made 
his  peace  in  the  next  reiffn.  and  in  9  Henry 
in.,  1225,  he  was  one  oitne  justices  itine- 
rant for  Northumberland  and  Westmore- 
land, and  in  1228  he  acted  in  the  same 
character  for  the  liberties  of  the  bishopric 
of  Durham.     {Rot.  Clam.  i.  341, 631,  ii.  77.) 

HILDE8LET,  John  de,  was  parson  of  the 
church  of  Thynden,  and  canon  of  Chichester 
in  the  reiffn  of  Edward  II.,  from  the  tenth 
year  of  which,  till  the  seventh  year  of  the 
next  reign,  he  was  continually  employed  in 
diplomatic  missions  to  various  courts.  He 
was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Exchequer 
on  December  18,  1332,  6  Edward  III., 
having  evidently  been  previously  an  officer 
connected  with  that  department  He  was 
superseded  on  September  9,  1334,  on  his 
becoming  chancellor  of  the  Excheq^uer.  He 
is  so  called  in  12  Edward  HI.,  and  is  named 
two  years  afterwards  as  a  trier  of  petitions 
in  parliament.  {N.  Fcedera^  ii.  329-876; 
Rot.  Pari  ii.  99,  114;  Cal.  Rot.  Pat.  120.) 

HILL,  HroH,  was  bom  in  1802  at  Craig 
in  the  county  of  Cork,  the  residence  of  his 
father,  James  Hill,  Esq.,  a  private  gentle- 
man, whose  family  ori^ally  settled  in 
Ireland  in  Cromwell's  time.  Educated  in 
Dublin  Universitv,  he  graduated  there  as 
A.B.  in  1821,  and,  intending  to  pursue  the 
profession  of  the  law  in  Ireland,  he  then 
Kept  legal  terms  for  two  years  in  the  inns 
of  court  there,  and  afterwards  at  the  Middle 
Temple  in  London.  He  started  as  a  special 
pleaaer  under  Uie  bar  in  1827,  and  for  more 
than  thirteen  years  devoted  himself  with 
unremitting  energy  to  this  department. 
Though  his  progress  was  at  first  not  very 
rapid,  at  last  his  success  exceeded  his  most 
sanguine  expectations.  So  extensive  and 
oppreanve  was  his  bumnees  that  he  felt  it 


HILL 

necessary  to  be  called  to  the  bar  in  Jannafy 
1841,  when  he  joined  the  Northern  Circuit 
Both  there  and  in  Westminat^  Hall  hk 
reputation  as  a  deeply-read  jurist  and  an 
ingenious  and  safe  pleader  aecnzed  to  hin> 
an  immense  quantity  of  the  heavy  bosmeaiy 
which  required  greater  labour,  but  gave  le» 
profit,  than  the  ordinaiy  causes  that  occupy 
the  courts. 

From  1851,  when  he  obtained  the  silk 
gown,  till  1858,  he  was  rewarded  for  his 
past  labours  bv  gaining  a  considerable  lead, 
and  on  May  29  of  the  latter  year  he  was 
constituted  a  judge  of  the  Queen's  Bench. 
But  his  labours  had  overtasked  his  strength; 
his  constitution  was  completely  undeiminedt 
and,  becoming  incapable  of  further  exertion, 
he  retired,  a&r  less  than  four  years*  senrioe, 
in  December  1861,  to  the  regret  of  his  ool- 
leaffues  and  the  loss  of  the  legal  wwld  Hs 
still  survives,  an  example  of  patience  in  his 
sufferings,  and  of  humble  gratitude  to  a  mer- 
ciful God  for  the  blessings  he  has  reoeiTsd. 

He  married  in  1831  a  daughter  of  Ri- 
chard Holden  Webb,  Esq.,  controller  of  the 
customs. 

HILL,  or  EXTLL,  John  (the  name  beiof 
as  often  spelled  one  way  as  the  other),  was 
bom  at  Hill's  Court,  the  seat  of  the  nmilf, 
near  Exeter.  The  earliest  mention  of  hiiB 
as  a  lawyer  is  a  writ  of  summons,  dated  No- 
vember 26,  1382,  to  take  upon  himself  tiie 
degree  of  a  serjeant-at-law,  being  the  fint 
of  that  description  which  has  hitherto  been 
found,  the  previous  entries  only  noticing 
those  who  were  king's  Serjeants. 

He  was  constituted  a  judge  ofthelangfe 
Bench  on  May  20,  1389, 11  HichardIL,and 
on  the  accession  of  Heniy  IV.  his  patent 
was  renewed,  and  his  attendance  in  pariii- 
ment  as  a  trier  of  petitions  is  noted  in  efeiy 
year  from  his  first  appointment  till  thst  of 
October  1407.     (i2oe.  Par^  iiL  268-609.) 

HILL,  or  EXTLL,  Robert,  was  apparently 
of  a  Cornish  family,  and  married  tw» 
heiresses  of  that  countr,  the  first  bein^ 
Isabella,  the  sister  of  Thomas,  the  son  « 
Sir  Thomas  Fychet,  and  the  second  being 
the  daughter  of  Otto  de  Bodru^,  who  or 
whose  father  had  been  sheriff  of  tfast 
county  in  3  Richard  II. 

Robert  Hill  is  mentioned  amoi^  other 
lawyers  in  16  Richard  U.  {Rat.  Pml  vL 
302),  and  in  the  first  year  of  HeniylV., 
1399,  he  was  appointed  one  of  the  Jdngfe 
serieants,  in  which  character  he  was  re- 
quired to  contribute,  or  as  it  was  called  to 
lend,  100/.  to  enable  the  king  to  resist  ^ 
Welsh  and  the  Scotch.  {AcU  Privg  Cmr 
cU,  i.  202.)  He  was  elevated  to  the  beoA 
of  the  Common  Pleas  on  Mav  14, 1406^9 
Henry  IV.,  and  fines  were  tevied  bWi 
him  as  early  as  Midsummer  in  thiftMfe 
(B^daU'B  Orig.  46;  CaL  BaL  MlIM) 
He  sat  in  the  same  court  ths 
mainder  of  his  life. 


HILL 

In  8  Henrir  V.  he  was  one  of  the  judges 
hw  whom  Richard  Earl  of  CamDridge, 
Henry  Lord  Scrope,  and  Sir  Thomas  Grey 
wore  tried  for  treason  at  Southampton, 
and  oondemned  to  death,  and  in  the  first 
Tear  of  the  next  reign  he  is  spoken  of  as 
haTing  been  chief  justice  of  Ely.  (F.  B. 
p.  8  b.) 

He  seems  to  have  been  rather  a  free- 
spoken  jud^  on  the  bench.  An  action 
was  brought  against  a  dyer,  who  had 
bomid  himself  not  to  use  his  craft  for  half 
a  year,  upon  which  Hill  said  that  the  bond 
wasToid  Decause  the  condition  was  against 
the  common  law,  adding,  'And,  by  God,  if 
the  plaintiff  was  here,  he  should  go  to 
prison  till  he  paid  a  fine  to  the  king.' 
nr.  B.  2  Hen.  V.  p.  5  b.)  This  is  perhaps 
the  only  instance  of  an  oath  on  the  bench 
being  r»ori«^. 

The  hut  fine  acknowledged  before  him 
as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  was  in 
Hilary  Term,  3  Henry  VI.,  1425,  soon  after 
which  he  died. 

He  settled  himself  at  Shilston  in  Devon- 
shire, and  left  a  son  named  Robert,  who 
was  sheriff  of  that  county  in  7  Henry  VI., 
and  whose  descendants  flourished  there  for 
many  generations.  One  of  them  was  Abi- 
gail Hill,  Lady  Masham,  the  favourite  of 
Queen  Anne.  (Koies  and  Queries,  2nd  S. 
Tiu.  10.) 

HILL,  RooEB,  belonged  to  a  very  ancient 
Somersetshire  family,  which  had  flourished 
at  Hounston  from  the  time  of  Edward  HI. 
.  In  the  reign  of  Henry  VIIL  it  was  seated 
I  at  Poundsibrd,  near  Taunton,  where  Wil- 
I  liam  Hill^  the  father  of  the  baron,  lived 
and  died  m  1642.    His  mother  was  Mar- 
garet or  Jane,  daughter  of  John  Young,  of 
Devonshire,  and  he  was  bom  at  Colliton  in 
the  latter  county.    He  was  called  to  the 
bar  at  the  Inner  Temple  in  1632,  and  be- 
came a  bencher  in  1649. 

In  March  1644  he  was  the  junior  of  the 
five  coimsel  employed  against  Archbishop 
Laud,  who,  in  allusion  to  the  senior  four 
being  the  only  spokesmen,  calls  him  ^  Con- 
sul Bibulus.'  {Athen,  Oxon.  iii.  130.)  In 
the  next  year  he  was  returned  to  the  Lonff 
Parliament  as  member  for  Bridport,  and 
one  of  the  first  fruits  of  his  siding  with  the 
popular  faction  was  the  ^*ant  to  him  in 
1646  of  the  chambers  of  Mr.  Mos^  and 
Mr.  Stampe  in  the  Temple.  (  Whttdocke, 
201.)  Though  named  in  the  commission 
for  the  king's  trial,  he  never  sat  on  it. 

Cromwell  made  him  a  serieant-at-law 
on  June  29,  1655,  and  in  Easter  Term 
1657  he  is  mentioned  in  Hardres's  Reports 
as  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer.  In  that 
character  he  assisted  at  the  ceremony  of 
investiture  of  the  protector  in  June  1657, 
and  as  one  of  the  judges  attendant  on 
Cromwell's  House  of  Peers  he  delivered  a 
message  from  them  to  the  Commons  in  the 


HTTiLAKY 


347 


following  January.  {Burionj  ii.  340,  512.^ 
In  the  summer  of  1658  he  went  the  Oxford 
Circuit  with  Chief  Justice  Glynne,  an  ao> 
count  of  the  proceedings  in  which,  *  writ  in 
drolling  verse/  was  published  9oon  after. 
(Aihen.  Oxon,  ilL  764.)  When  the  com- 
monwealth was  restored  by  the  removal  of 
Richard  Cromwell  and  the  return  of  the 
Long  Parliament,  Baron  HiU  resumed  his- 
place  as  a  member,  and  on  January  17, 
1660,  he  was  transferred  from  the  Exche- 
quer to  the  Upper  Bench  (  Whitelocke.  693), 
where  his  name  appears  as  a  juage  in. 
IXlary  Term  in  Sideran's  Reports. 

The  author  of  <The  Good  Old  Cause  ^ 
sajs  that  the  parliament  granted  him  the 
Bishop  of  Winchester's  manor  of  Taunton 
Dean,  worth  12,000/.  a  year,  on  the  deter- 
mination of  the  estate  for  lives  (Farl,  Hist, 
iii.  1599),  which  he,  of  course,  was  not 
allowed  to  retain  when  the  bidiops  were^ 
replaced  at  the  Restoration.  At  that 
period  he  escaped  the  censure  of  the  king^ 
out,  being  one  of  the  Rump  Parliament,  he 
had  not  the  same  favour  shown  to  him  as 
most  of  the  other  Serjeants  of  the  common- 
wealth experienced,  m  being  confirmed  in 
their  degree.  He  survived  CnarWs  return 
for  seven  years,  during  which  he  married 
his  third  wife,  who  brought  him  an  estate 
at  Alboro'  Hatch  in  Essex,  where  he  died 
on  April  21, 1667,  and  was  buried  in  the 
Temple  Church. 

He  married  three  times — ^first,  in  1635, 
Katherine^  daughter  of  Giles  Green,  of 
Allington  m  the  Isle  of  Purbeck ;  secondly, 
in  1641,  Abigail,  daughter  of  Brampton 
Gurdon,  of  Assington  Hall  in  Suffolk ;  and 
thirdly,  in  1662,  Abigail,  daughter  and  co- 
heir of  Thomas  Barnes,  of  ^boro'  Hatch,. 
Essex,  and  twice  a  widow,  first  of  John 
Lockey  of  Holms  Hill,  Herts,  and  secondly 
of  Josias  Bemers  of  Clerkenwell  Close,. 
Middlesex.     (Family  Memorials,) 

HILLABT,  RooxB.  of  a  very  ancient  fa- 
mily, which  possessed  large  property  in  the 
counties  of  Lmcoln,  WarpricK.  and  Stafibrd, 
was  the  son  of  William  and  Agnes  Hillary, 
and  Ib  frequently  mentioned  as  an  advocate 
in  the  Year  Books  of  Edward  IL  and  Ed- 
ward HI.  He  was  raised  to  the  Irish  bench 
as  chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas  in  3 
Edward  IlL,  where  he  remained  for  eight 
years.  He  was  then  constituted  a  judge  of 
the  same  court  in  England  on  March  18, 
1337,  to  the  head  of  which  he  was  advanced 
on  Januarys,  1341.  Dugdale,  in  his  '  Chro- 
nica Series,'  makes  WilUam  Scot  supersede 
him  in  that  office  on  April  27 ;  but  this  is 
evidently  an  error,  as  the  latter  was  then 
and  for  some  years  afterwards  chief  justice 
of  the  King's  Bench.  On  May  9,  1342, 
however,  Roger  Hillary  made  way  for  John 
de  Stonore,  on  his  restoration  to  the  chief 
justiceship,  receiving  himself,  on  June  4^ 
new  patent  as  a  judge  on  that  bench.    Oit 


348 


HILTON 


the  death  of  Stonore,  Hoger  Hillary  was,  on 
February  20,  1354,  again  constituted  in  his 

?ilace,  and  continued  to  preside  in  the  court 
or  the  short  remainder  of  his  life. 

His  death  occurred  in  June  1357,  and  he 
was  buried  in  the  church  of  All  Saints  in 
Staifordshire.  By  his  wife  Katherine  he 
had,  besides  other  children,  a  son  Roger, 
who  was  probably  the  serjeant-at-law  men- 
tioned m  the  Year  Books  of  40  Edward  IIL 
(Pari.  Writs,  ii.  p.  i.  333 ;  CW.  Itot.  Pat, 
106 ;  Eot,  Pari,  ii.  119-254.) 

HUTOH,  Aj)ah  DEy  was  the  last  named 
of  four  justices  itinerant  who  in  35  and  36 
Henry  Ul.,  1251-2,  were  appointed  to  visit 
Yorkshire  and  several  other  counties.  There  • 
is  one  instance,  in  December  1253,  of  a  writ 
of  assize  being  paid  for  to  be  taken  before 
Alan  de  Watsand  and  him  in  Yorkshire 
{Excerpt,  e  Rot,  Fin,  ii.  177),  which  bears 
the  appearance  of  his  having  been  one  of 
the  regular  justiciers. 

HOBABT,  Henry,  belonged  to  a  family 
of  ancient  descent  in  Suffolk  and  Norfolk, 
and  was  great-grandson  of  Henry  VH.'s 
attorney-general,  Sir  James  Hobart,  and  son 
of  Thomas  Hobart,  of  Plumsted  in  the  latter 
county,  by  Audrey,  daughter  of  William 
Hare,  of  Beeston  in  Norfolk,  Esq. 

Admitted  a  member  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  he 
was  called  to  the  bar  in  1584.  In  1595  ho 
was  steward  of  Norwich,  and  in  1597  was 
returned  to  parliament  as  the  representative 
of  Yarmouth,  for  which  place  and  for  Nor- 
wich he  had  a  seat  on  several  succeeding 
occasions.  In  1601  he  became  reader  of 
his  inn,  an  honour  which  was  repeated  two 
vears  afterwards,  on  the  occasion  of  his 
bein^  called  Serjeant  by  Queen  Elizabeth ; 
but,  m  consequence  of  lier  death,  he  was  in- 
cluded in  a  new  writ  by  King  James.  (Duff- 
dale's  Orig,  254,  262.) 

Having  been  knighted  on  the  occasion, 
he  was  made  attorney  of  the  Court  of  Wards 
in  1606,  and  on  July  4, 1606,  he  was  created 
attorney-general.  This  office  he  held  for 
above  seven  years,  to  the  annoyance  of  Bacon, 
who  served  under  him  for  six  of  them,  and 
longed  by  his  removal  to  take  another  step 
in  promotion.  Henry,  l^rince  of  Wales, 
made  him  his  chancellor.  In  the  case  of 
the  post-nati  he  of  course  took  the  part  of 
the  plaintiff  (-Ste^c  TriaU,  ii.  609),  and  in  the 
complaint  raised  by  the  Commons  against 
Dr.  Cowel's  book,  claiming  the  superiority 
of  the  civil  to  the  common  law,  it  is  stated 
that  Sir  Henry  '  did  very  modestly  and  dis- 
creetly lay  open  the  offence  of  the  party 
and  the  dangerous  consequence  of  the  book.' 
{Pari,  Hist,  ii.  1124.) 

Modesty  seems  to  have  been  his  charac- 
teristic, and,  though  a  veir  learned,  he  was 
not  by  any  means  a  sparkling  lawyer.  On 
the  death  of  Sir  Thomas  Fleming^  the  chief 
justice  of  the  King^s  Bench,  and  Sir  Edward 
Coke*8  succesBion  to  it^  Hobart  received  the 


HODY 

appointment  of  chiefjustice  of  the  Commin 
I^eas,  from  which  Coke  was  lemored,  on 
November  26,  1613. 

He  presided  in  that  court  with  great  cndit 
as  a  sound  lawyer  and  upright  judge  fat 
twelve  years,  and  with  so  little  imputataoA 
on  his  honesty  and  independence  as  to  fam 
one  of  the  exceptions  to  the  general  adh 
serviency  of  the  oench.  He  was  selected  aa 
chancellor  to  Prince  Charles  in  1617,  and 
was  obliged  for  the  purpose  of  accepting  the 
office  to  have  his  patent  of  chief  justice  re- 
voked, and  a  new  one  granted,  in  order  to 
enable  him  '  to  take  fee  and  liveiy'  fron 
any  one  besides  the  king.  (Crohe,  Car,  1.) 
He  was  created  a  baronet  in  May  161L 

King  Charles  on  his  accession  renewed 
his  patent  of  chief  justice,  but  he  survired 
King  James  only  nine  months,  dying  at  hit 
house  at  Blickling  in  Norfolk  on  December 
26, 1625.  He  was  buried  under  a  fiiir  mo- 
nument in  Christ  Church,  Norwich. 

Spelman  says  of  him  that  he  was '  a  great 
loss  to  the  public  weal ; '  Croke  {Car,  38) 
reports  him  as  '  a  most  learned,  pradeat, 
grave,  and  religious  judge ; '  and  there  lb  n 
excellent  character  of  him  in  the  preftce 
to  6  Modem  Reports.  His  own  Repati 
were  published  uter  his  death,  and  are  so 
well  reputed  as  to  have  passed  throngli 
several  editions. 

By  his  wife  Dorothy,  a  daughter  of  & 
Robert  Bell,  of  Beaupr^  Hall,  Norfolk,  Iwd 
chief  baron  under  Ehzabeth,  he  had  no  lees 
than  sixteen  children,  of  whom  twehe 
were  sons.  From  Sir  Aliles,  his  third  eon, 
who  succeeded  to  the  estates  on  the  death 
of  his  brothers,  descended  Sir  John,  who  in 
1728  was  created  a  peer  by  the  title  of 
Baron  Hobart  of  Bliciding,  to  which  wai 
added  in  1746  the  earldom  of  Buckingham- 
shire.    {Collins  s  Peerage,  iv.  362.) 

HODY,  John,  descended  firom  a  fiir 
mily  of  considerable  antiquity,  thoogh  of 
no  great  note,  in  the  county  of  Bevon, 
was  the  son  of  Thomas  Hody,  who  wi» 
lord  of  the  manor  of  Kington  Magna,  near 
Shaftesbury,  in  the  adjoining  county  of 
Dorset,  in  7  Henry  V.,  and  m  the  same 
year  was  king^s  escheator  there.  Hia 
mother  was  Margaret,  daughter  of  J(^ 
Cole,  of  Nitheway,  near  Torbay,  in  Devon- 
shire.    {Eot,  Pari.  iv.  285,  v.  477.) 

lie  is  frequently  mentioned  in  the  Tear 
Books  from  3  Henry  VL,  and  appears  to 
have  taken  the  degree  of  the  coif  about  the 
fourteenth  year.  He  was  returned  to  pa^ 
liament  for  Shaftesbury  in  7  Henry  V.) 
and  again  in  several  parliaments  of  Hemy 
VI.,  and  subsequently  for  the  county  a 
Somerset  On  April  13,  1440,  18  Hany 
VI.,  he  was  raised  to  the  office  of  dbw 
justice  of  the  Kinff's  Bench,  but  luM  ife  Mi 
quite  two  years,  aying  in  DecwalMr  V 
He  tried  and  oondemned,  a  ftwdbgite 
'  a  gret  and  konnyng  man  ia 


HODY 

Bog«r  Boltrngbroke,  for  labouring  'to  con- 
mane  the  kinges  peisone  by  way  of  nygro- 
mandey'  stirred  up,  as  he  asserted,  by^^e- 
iior  Cobham,  Duchess  of  Gloucester.  He 
was  executed  declaring  his  innocence,  and 
tiie  duonider  concludes  the  narrative  thus : 
*  And  the  justice  that  yaf  of  him  luge- 
ment  lived  not  long  after.'  {English  Cknm,, 
Camden  Soc,  60.)  The  judge  was  buried 
at  Wolavington  in  Somersetshire. 

Notwithstanding  the  short  period  during 
irhidi  he  presided  in  ^e  court,  he  is  stated 
by  Prince  to  have  won  golden  opinions  by 
hia  integrity  and  fimmess  in  the  adminis- 
txation  of  lustice.  That  author  relates  a 
tradition,  that  when  his  son  Thomas  was 
tried  before  him  at  the  asmzes,  and  found 
guiltr  of  a  capital  crime,  he  with  his  own 
moutn  pronounced  sentence  of  death  upon 
him.  How  this  tradition  originated  it 
would  be  useless  to  enquire,  but  that  it  is 
untrue  there  can  be  no  question,  for  his 
eldest  son,  John,  could  not  have  been  more 
than  six  or  seven  years  old  at  his  father's 
death.  Sir  Edward  Coke  {Pref.  to  First 
Ind,)  mentions  him  amongst  the  ^  famous 
and  expert  sages  of  the  law,'  from  whom 
Lyttelton  had  '  great  furtherance  in  compos- 
ing his  Institutes  of  the  Laws  of  England.' 

The  jud^  had  an  estate  at  Stowell  in 
Somersetshire  as  earlj  as  6  Henry  VL ; 
but  he  was  for  some  time  seated  at  Filles- 
den  in  Dorsetshire,  which  came  to  him  by 
his  marriaffe  with  Elizabeth,  daughter  and 
heiress  of  John  Jewe,  son  and  heir  of  John 
Jewe,  by  Alice,  daughter  of  John  de  Pilles- 
den.  By  her  he  had  a  large  family.  His 
second  son,  William,  is  the  subject  of  the 
next  article. 

HODY,  William,  the  second  son  of  the 
above  Sir  John  Ilody,  was  quite  an  infant 
when  his  father  died  in  1441.  Naturally 
pursuing  his  father's  profession,  his  name  is 
first  mentioned  in  the  Year  Books  in  1476. 
He  must  have  attained  some  celebrity,  as 
within  a  month  after  the  accession  of 
Henry  VH.,  in  148t5,  he  was  appointed 
attorney-general.  Before  the  close  of  that 
year  he  was  made  a  serjeant-at-law,  pro- 
bably in  preparation  for  his  assumption  of 
the  office  of  cnief  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  to 
which  he  was  promoted  on  October  29, 1486. 

He  presided  in  this  court  for  the  remain- 
ing twentv-three  years  of  the  reign,  and  for 
the  first  eight  years  of  that  of  Heniy  VIU., 
being  mentioned  as  receiving  his  salary  in 
1616.  {Cal  State  Papers  [1616-18],  876.) 
On  January  18,  1613,  a  grant  of  the  place 
in  reversion  was  obtained  by  John  Scott 
{Ibid.  [1609-14],  470) ;  but  there  is  no 
evidence  of  his  over  having  filled  it.  Sir 
William  probably  lived  till  1622,  when 
John  Htz-James  was  appointed  loid  chief 
baron. 

By  his  wife  Eleanor,  daughter  of  Baldwyn 
Hallett,  of  Corypool  in  Somersetshire^  he  had 


HOLLOWAY 


349 


issue  two  sons  and  two  daughters.  {Princess 
Worthies ;  Hutchms's  Dorsety  L  317.) 

HOLDSBHBSS,  Alexajtder  ds.  At  the 
head  of  the  list  of  justices  itinerant  for  tbe 
county  of  Lincoln  in  May  1226, 10  Henry 
DL,  appears  the  name  of '  Abbas  de  Bui^.' 
He  was  Alexander  de  Holdemess,  who  nad 
been  elected  to  that  dignity  in  1222.  In 
consequence  of  this  appointment,  several 
causes  between  the  abbot  and  other  parties 
at  those  assizes  were  ordered  to  be  heard 
in  the  ensuing  Easter  before  the  justices 
at  Westminster.  Before  that  period  arrived, 
however,  Alexander  died,  m  November 
1226.  He  was  buried  in  the  abbey,  and  in 
1830  a  grave  that  was  opened  in  Peter- 
borouf^h  Cathedral  was  identified  to  be  his. 
by  a  piece  of  lead  inscribed  'Abbas  Alexan.' 
{Browne  Wiai8,U7;  Hot.  C&it«.ii.  151-160.) 

HOLES,  Hugh.    See  TL  Hvls. 

HOLOBAYS,  JoHK,  was  appointed  fourth 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  September  24, 
1484,  2  Bichard  IlL,  and  his  patent  was 
renewed  on  the  accession  of  Henry  VH.  He 
either  resigned  or  died  before  Michaelmas 
1487y  asNicholasLathellwasthen fourth  ba- 
ron. He  was  buried  in  the  abb^  church  of 
Bermondsey.  {Stow^sLondon^ThomslflSG.) 

HOLLOWAT,  RiCHABD,  the  son  of  John 
HoUoway,  who  is  described  by  Anthony 
Wood  as  'a  covetous  civilian  and  public 
notary '  at  Oxford,  became  a  fellow  of  New 
College,  and,  though  admitted  a  member  of 
the  Imier  Temple  on  February  7, 1634,  was 
not  called  to  the  bar  tiU  November  24, 

1668.  tbe  interval  being  probably  caused 
by  the  Great  Rebellion,  or  perhaps  by  his 
pursuing  his  father's  avocations  at  Oxford. 
His  practice  as  a  barrister  seems  to  have 
been  confined  to  that  dty,  and  the  only 
record  of  his  doings  is  that  he  was  one  of 
the  first  passengers  in  the  'flying  coach 
.  .  .  haviiLr  a  boot  on  each  side,'  that 
started  from  Oxford  to  London  on  May  3, 

1669,  and  performed  the  journey  in  thirteen 
hours.  He  became  reader  of  his  inn  in 
Lent  1676,  and  about  this  time  the  follow- 
ing descriptive  hexameter  was  written  on 
five  of  the  family  then  resident  in  Oxford:— 

Sarjeant,  Barrester,  Necessitie,  Notarie,  Mercer, 
Gravelj  doll,  ill-spoken,  lawless,  cum  peigere, 
broken; 

the  first  being  Serjeant  Charles  HoUoway, 
the  uncle;  the  second  being  the  future 
judge,  'living  against  the  Blew-bore  in  St. 
Aldate's parish; "the  third,  Charles,  the  son 
of  Serieant  Charles,  so  called  from  the  old 
saw  Necessitas  non  hahet  leffem,  as  being  a 
barrister  but  no  lawyer;  the  fourth,  the 
judge's  father;  and  the  fifth,  another  uncle, 
a  broken  tradesman.  {Athen.  Oxon, ;  Lifsy 
xliv.,  bdii.,  Ixxix. ;  Fastij  ii.  12.) 

In  July  1667  he  was  created  a  serieant| 
and  Luttrell  (i.  260)  calls  him  king's 
seipeant  in  June  1083,  when  he  was 
kmghted,  and  on  September  26  of  the  same 


350 


HOLME 


year  he  was  constituted  a  judge  of  the 
KiDg*s  Bench.  In  the  following  Novemher 
he  was  engaged  in  the  trial  of  Algernon 
Sidnej^  in  tmit  ooorty  but  took  no  active 

?art  in  it^  and  in  the  other  public  trials  of 
/harWs  reign  his  conduct  was  irreproach- 
able. {State  TridU,  viii.  601,  ix.  867,  x. 
45,  161,  616.) 

After  the  accession  of  James  II.  he 
concurred  in  the  deserved  but  illegal 
sentence  pronounced  against  the  infamous 
Titus  Gates,  and  in  the  excessive  fine  of 
80,000/.  imposed  upon  the  Earl  of  Devon- 
shire for  an  assault  upon  Colonel  Culnepper 
in  the  king's  palace,  overruling  his  lorasnip*s 
plea  of  privilege;  and  for  both  these  juog- 
ments  he  and  the  other  members  of  the 
court  were  called  before  parliament  after 
the  revolution,  when  the  latter  was  declared 
a  breach  of  privilege,  and  so  much  of  the 
former  as  remained  to  be  inflicted  was  re- 
dittcd  by  the  king.  The  judges  were, 
however^  permitted  to  depart  imscathed. 
But  havmg  in  the  great  case  as  to  the  king's 
power  to  dispense  with  the  penal  laws 
acquiesced  in  the  judgment  in  favour  of  the 
crown,  he  and  all  who  survived  were  ex- 
cepted out  of  the  bill  of  indemnity  passed 
in  2  WiUiam  UI.  (Ibid,  x,  1316,  xl 
1200,  1368.) 

'  This  was  a  severe  measure  towards  Sir 
Kichard,  because  he  had  already  been  made 
a  victim  to  James's  vengeance,  and  had 
amply  atoned  for  his  previous  error  by 
boldly  resisting  the  king's  attempt  to  im- 
pose martial  law  in  time  of  peace  without 
the  consent  of  parliament,  and  by  publicly 
declaring  that  the  petition  of  the  seven 
bishops  was  not  a  seditious  libel.  They 
were  acquitted  on  June  30,  1688,  and  on 
July  4  the  honest  judge  was  dismissed. 

He  was  still  living  at  Oxford  in  November 
1685,  as  at  that  time  he  drew  up  the  will 
of  Anthony  Wood,  the  historian  of  the 
university.  (Bramston^s  Atdob,  272,  310; 
LuttreUy  i.  449;  State  Trials^  xii.  426; 
Athen,  Oxon,  i.  Life^  cxxiii.) 

HOLME,  John,  was  constituted  a  baron 
of  the  Exchequer  on  February  3, 1446,  24 
Henry  VI. ;  and  on  May  28, 1449,  he  had  a 
grant  for  Ufe  of  his  sunmier  and  winter 
robes,  probably  on  his  retirement,  for  his 
name  does  not  again  occur. 

HOLBOT]),  Geoboe  Sowlet,  owes  his 
origin  to  the  same  stirps  from  which  Lord 
Sheffield  descended ;  the  direct  ancestors  of 
both,  George  and  Isaac,  being  the  sons  of 
Isaac  Holroyd,  of  Crawcrofte  in  Rish worth, 
in  the  parish  of  Elland  in  the  countv  of 
York.  The  judge  was  the  great-grandson 
of  George,  and  the  eldest  son  of  another 
George,  Dy  Eleanor,  the  daughter  of  Henry 
Sowley,  of  Appleby,  Esq.  He  was  bom  at 
York  on  OctoW  31, 17Ci5,  and  was  sent  to 
Harrow  School  from  which  it  was  intended 
that  he  shoida  pxooaed  to  the  univerBity; 


HOLROYD 

:  but,  in  consequence  of  his  fitther  anffiBring 
some  severe  losses  from  unfortonate  speeoh- 
tions.  he  was  removed  from  Hanow,  ndin 
April  1774  was  articled  to  Mr.  Borthwid^ 
an  attorney  in  London.  At  the  end  of  toe 
vears  he  entered  Gray's  Inn,  and  camnmad 
business  as  a  special  pleader  in  April  17791 

During  the  eiffht  years  that  he  punned 
this  branch  of  the  profession  he  adopted, 
with  Romilly,  Christian,  and  Baynea,<iM 
of  the  most  effective  preparations  for  te 
contests  into  which  they  were  about  to 
enter.  Meeting  at  each  other's  chamben^ 
they  discussed  legal  points  previoad| 
arranged,  one  of  them  taking  the  affirantifB 
side,  another  supporting  the  oontraiy  pai^ 
and  a  third  summing  up  the  aigomenti 
and  deciding  the  question  as  judge.  0& 
June  26,  1787,  he  was  called  to  thebu^ 
and  about  three  months  after  married 
Sarah,  the  daughter  of  Amos  Chaplin,  Esq., 
who  brought  him  fourteen  childrai. 

He  joined  the  Northern  Circuit,  and  tk 
character  he  had  acauired  while  under  tbe 
bar  for  solidity  of  judgment  and  profeawnd 
ability  secured  to  him  a  fair  proportioo  d 
business,  both  in  the  north  and  mWeit- 
minsterHall.  Ere  he  had  been  calkdi 
year  his  name  appears  in  two  cases  in  ihi 
<  Term  Reports.'  (iL  445, 480.)  DuringOc 
twenty-nine  years  that  he  remained  at  ^ 
bar  his  fee-book  shows  the  rapid  increaaed 
his  practice,  proving  also  the  advance  of  Ui 
reputation  by  the  number  and  importana 
of  the  cases  submitted  to  his  direction.  01 
a  retiring  disposition,  he  persisted  in  de- 
clining the  offer  of  a  silk  gown,  and  there- 
fore his  merits  were  comparatively  un< 
recognised  by  the  general  pubUc;  but  among 
the  legal  community  his  superiority  ^ 
fully  acknowledged,  and  it  was  said  of  hin 
that  ^  he  was  absolutely  bom  with  a  gemni 
for  law.'  So  highly  were  his  instrodiooi 
esteemed  that,  while  at  the  bar,  no  lei 
than  forty-seven  pupils  availed  themaetFei 
of  them,  among  wnom  were  Mr.  Baioo 
HuUock,  Mr.  Baron  Holland,  and  Mr. 
Justice  Cresswell.  In  1811  he  greatlj 
distinguished  himself  in  the  celebrated  caK 
of  privilege,  Burdett  r.  The  Speaker  of  th( 
House  of  Commons,  by  his  luminous  azgn* 
ments  on  behalf  of  the  plaintiff.  (14  Jw< 
Reports,  11.)  In  the  last  year  of  hii 
practice  at  the  bar  he  was  sent  by  tiu 
government  to  Guernsey,  at  tiie  head  ol 
a  commission  to  enquire  into  and  dete^ 
mine  certain  '  doleances '  complained  of  I9 
persons  resident  in  that  island. 

At  length  he  was  appointed  a  judge  d 
the  Kings  Bench.  In  that  court  he  Mt  fti 
more  than  twelve  years,  £rom  Febntny  li 
1816,  to  November  17,  1828,  the  dila  d 
his  resignation,  fully  sustainuig  Ai  np" 
tation  he  had  acquired,  and  Ittgd^  01^ 
tributing  to  the  iiig^  choMlv  dt  fti 
bench  to  which  he  hnlaugwrt 


HOLT 

with  such  erudite  and  discrimina- 
iliiig  judges  as  Lord  Tenterden,  Sir  Jolin 
Bi^lfffi  and  Sir  Joseph  Littledale.  His 
patiiwice neyer  seemed  to  be  wearied;  his 
.MBiable  temper  was  never  ruffled;  his 
■dceiaJCTns  were  always  clear  and  well- 
Ibimded.  for  his  memory  was  the  store- 
lioaae  of  all  the  arguments  that  had  ever 
heen  adyanoed  for  or  against  the  case  he 
waa  to  judge;  and  his  taste,  with  no  effort 
at  displayy  was  so  exquisite  that  he  made 
iihe  driest  subjects  interesting.  The  in- 
Jbnnities  which  obliged  him  to  retire,  in 
three  years  terminated  his  life,  on  No- 
vember 21^  1831,  at  his  residence  at  Hare 
Hatch  in  Berkshire.  A  monument  is 
-erected  to  his  memory  in  the  parish  church 
-of  Wargrave,  with  an  inscription,  written  by 
Lord  Brouflham,  faithfully  and  eloquently 
<Lescribing  his  merits  and  his  virtues. 

Of  the  judge's  fourteen  children  six  sur- 
Tived  him,  one  of  whom  exercised  as  a 
commissioner  of  the  Court  of  Bankruptcy 
till  the  recent  alteration  of  that  court  the 
functions  of  his  laborious  office  with  the 
•same  legal  learning,  the  same  patience,  and 
the  same  suavity  of  temper  that  distin- 
guished his  father. 

HOLT,  John,  was  bom  in  Northampton- 
ehire,  where  he  had  considerable  property. 
{Abb,  Hot.  Orig»  ii.  240.)  His  name  ap- 
pears in  the  Year  Books  from  40  Edwi^ 
ill.,  in  the  last  year  of  whose  reign  he  was 
made  a  king^s  serjeant  His  elevation  to 
the  bench  as  a  j  udge  of  the  Common  Pleas 
took  place  in  7  Richard  II.,  1383.  {Cal, 
Hoi.  Flat.  208.) 

He  obeyed  the  summons  of  the  king  to 
attend  him  at  Nottingham,  where,  on  Au- 
gust 26, 1387,  he  united  with  his  colleagues 
in  answering  the  questions  placed  before 
them  by  the  king's  confederated  courtiers, 
.pronouncing  the  proceedings  of  the  last 
parliament,  by  which  a  permanent  council 
•was  appointed,  to  be  illegal,  and  its  pro- 
moters punishable  with  death.    For  this 
act  he  was  arrested,  while  sitting  on  the 
bench,  on  February  3  following,  and  on  his 
trial,  on  March  2,  alleged  that  he  was  com- 
pelled by  the  threats  of  the  Archbishop  of 
York,  the  Duke  of  Ireland,  and  the  £an  of 
Suffolk  to  do  80,  and  that  he  complied 
through  fear  of  his  life.    The  parliament, 
notwithstanding^  found  him  guilty  ;  and  he 
only  escaped  the  sentence  of  death  that  was 
pronounced  by  the  intercession  of  the  pre- 
lates, who  succeeded  in  getting  it  com- 
muted to  banishment  for  life.    To  him  was 
assigned  the  town  of  Drogheda  and  a  cir- 
cuit of  two  miles  around  it,  with  an  al- 
lowance from  the  state  of  forty  marks  for 
his  support.     (Rot.  Pari.  iii.  233-44.) 

Three  years  afterwards  the  kinff  granted 
several  of  his  manors  to  his  son  John ;  and 
in  the  parliament  of  January  13$)7,  20 
Bichard  U.,  so  much  of  the  sentence  as 


HOLT 


351 


regarded  his  banishment  was  remitted,  and 
he  vras  allowed  to  return  to  England.  In 
the  following  year  the  whole  of  the  judg- 
ment was  reversed,  and  his  lands  ordered 
to  be  restored.  Richard's  deposition  un- 
fortunately deprived  the  judge  of  the  bene- 
fit of  this  reversal;  but  Henry  IV.,  on  his 
Setition  in  the  second  year  of  the  reign, 
irected  that  he  should  have  again  all  his 
lands  and  tenements  which  were  in  the 
king's  possession.  This,  however,  turning 
out  to  be  nearly  a  nullity,  inasmuch  as 
many  of  them  had  been  alienated  by  King 
Richard,  another  ordinance  was  made  in  4 
Henry  IV.,  bj  which  he  was  allowed  to  re- 
sume possession  on  making  such  allowances 
to  the  purchasers  as  the  council  should 
deem  reasonable.  {Ibid.  340-461;  CaL 
Hot.  Fat.  221.) 

That  he  was  successful  in  recovering 
them  would  appear  from  the  extent  of  pro- 
perty in  Northamptonshire  and  other  coun- 
ties contained  in  the  inquisition  taken  on 
his  death  in  6  Henrv  V.,  1418.  (Col.  iv. 
37,  52.)  Bv  his  wife  Alice  he  left  another 
son  named  Hugh,  who  succeeded  him. 

HOLT,  John.  After  the  succession  of 
chief  justices  that  disgraced  the  bench  in 
the  reigns  of  Charles  and  James  since  the 
death  of  Sir  Matthew  Hale,  it  is  refreshing 
to  record  a  name  which  excites  universiu 
admiration,  as  possessed  by  one  who  vras 
erudite  in  law,  independent  in  character, 
and  just  and  finn  in  his  decisions.  In  him 
may  be  fixed  the  commencement  of  a  new 
era  of  judicial  purity  and  freedom,  marked 
with  that  perfect  exemption  from  extra- 
neous influences  which  has,  with  few  ex- 
ceptions, ever  since  distinguished  the  bench, 
and  which  is  now  the  undisputed  glory  of 
our  judicature. 

The  family  of  Holt  had  flourished  for 
some  centuries  at  Grislehurst  in  Luicashire, 
and  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  time  had  divided 
into  several  branches.  The  judge's  father 
was  Thomas  Holt,  a  bencher  of  Gray's  Inn 
and  recorder  of  Abingdon,  and  afterwards 
a  Serjeant  and  knighted.  His  mother  wai^ 
Susan,  daughter  of  John  I'eacock,  of  Chaw- 
ley,  near  Abingdon ;  and  this  their  eldest 
son  was  bom  at  Thame  in  Oxfordshire, 
on  December  30,  1642.  (Monumental  Ii^ 
scrwtion ;  T.  Jones,  61.)  If  there  is  no  error 
in  tnis  date,  he  had  not  completed  his  tenth 
year  when  he  was  admitted  into  the  so- 
ciety of  Gray's  Inn  on  November  19,  1662 ; 
nor  attained  his  majori^  when  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  on  FeSruair  27,  1663, 
unless  the  latter  entry  means  1663-4.  The 
early  admission  may  perhaps  be  e2qplained 
by  his  father  being  reader  of  the  inn  at 
the  time.  His  previous  education  was  at 
the  free  school  in  Abingdon,  whence  he 
was  removed  in  1658  to  Oriel  College,  Ox- 
ford. There  he  is  reputed  to  have  been 
notorious  for  his  idleness  and  for  his  asao- 


352 


HOLT 


dation  with  dissolute  companions,  who  led 
him  into  every  kind  of  licence  and  extra- 
vagance. Some  tales  that  were  subse- 
quently related  of  him  give  probability  to 
tne  report  of  his  juvenile  deknquency ;  but 
he  soon  saw  the  error  of  his  ways,  deserted 
his  old  haunts  and  associates,  left  the  uni- 
versity without  taking  a  degree,  and  ap- 
plied himself  diligently,  under  the  ttdtion 
of  his  &ther,  to  that  profession  of  which  he 
was  destined  to  be  one  of  the  brightest 
ornaments. 

So  early  did  he  exhibit  his  superiority 
that  we  find  his  name  in  Sir  Thomas  Ray- 
mond's Reports,  with  the  addition  of 
'junior,'  in  the  year  1668;  and  not  long 
after  it  appears  with  great  frequency,  not 
only  in  those  but  in  other  Reports  of  the 
time.  From  1679  till  the  beginning  of 
James's  reign  he  was  engaged  in  almost  all 
of  the  numerous  state  trials  which  occu- 
pied the  courts  of  justice  during  that  un- 
happy period.  At  first  he  was  retained  on 
the  part  of  the  prosecution,  but,  his  dis- 
taste to  the  arbitrary  proceedings  of  the 
government  becoming  apparent,  he  was 
soon  employed  by  the  unfortunate  pri- 
soners who  were  the  victims.  Whether  on 
one  side  or  the  other,  his  advocacy  was  re- 
markable for  so  much  lucidity  of  arrange- 
ment, and  such  fairness  of  statement,  and 
his  arguments  displayed  such  profound 
knowl^ge  of  the  principles  of  law,  that 
his  colleagues  coiud  not  but  augur  his 
future  promotion.  But  his  nomination  as 
counsel  for  three  of  the  Popish  lords  im- 

S cached  in  1670,  and  his  appearance  in  the 
efence  of  PiUdngton  and  others  for  a  riot 
at  a  city  election,  of  Sir  Patience  Ward 
for  perjury,  of  Lord  Russell  for  high  trea- 
son, and  of  Sacheverell  and  others  for  a 
riot  in  the  election  of  mayor  of  Notting- 
ham— all  political  questions, — seemed  to 
forbid  any  early  fulfilment  of  the  expecta- 
tion of  advancement.  On  the  other  hand, 
his  arguments  in  favour  of  the  monopoly  of 
the  East  India  Company,  and  in  defence  of 
Mr.  Starkey  against  the  Earl  of  Maccles- 
field, and  his  opinion  in  favour  of  the  legal- 
ity of  the  juQgment  upon  the  quo  war-' 
rafUo  against  the  city  oi  London,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  respect  with  which  he  was 
invariably  treatea  by  Chief  Justices  Scroggs, 
Pemberton,  and  Jeffreys,  pointed  him  out 
as  a  fit  object  for  royal  favour.  (State 
Trials,  vii.,  ix.,  x.) 

On  February  18,  1686,  he  was  induced 
rather  unwillimjly  to  take  the  recordership 
of  London.  I&  was  thereupon  knighted, 
and  in  the  Easter  Term  following  he  re- 
ceived the  degree  of  the  coif,  and  was 
immediately  made  king's  serjeant  But 
his  independence  and  his  sense  of  right 
would  not  allow  him  to  act  according  to 
the  king's  unconstitutional  desires.  A 
soldier  being   found  guOty  of  felony  in 


HOLT 

running  away  from  his  colours,  the  re- 
corder refused  to  prononnce  sentanoe  of 
death  upon  him,  aoubting,  as  the  Uag- 
dom  was  at  peace,  whether  the  confietkn 
was  good  in  law.  As  the  rojal  prqjeetcf 
creating  a  standing  army  would  nave  been 
firustrated  if  such  a  doubt  was  reoognifled, 
he  was  of  course  removed  from  his  offiee. 
On  James's  desertion  of  the  kingdom  he 
was  one  of  the  lawyers  called  l^  the  Loidi 
to  advise  them  on  the  course  to  be  taken; 
and  in  the  Convention  Parliament  that  nwt 
in  January  1689  he  was  retumed  for  tli» 
borough  of  Beeralston. 

In  the  early  sittings  of  that  parliament 
he  took  a  leaiding  pturt ;  but  his  soiatorai 
duties  were  soon  terminated  by  his  remonl 
to  a  judicial  sphere.  In  oraer  to  insm 
a  learned  bench.  King  William  reaimed 
every  privy  councillor  to  furnish  a  ust  of 
twelve  lawyers,  and  out  of  these  lists  he 
selected  the  twelve  of  most  con^caou 
merit.  One  of  the  most  satisfiu^iv  ap- 
pointments was  that  of  Sir  John  Hott^ 
I  whose  patent  as  chief  justice  of  the  Kimfi 
I  Bench  was  dated  April  17,  1689.  For 
I  twenty-one  years  did  he  grace  that  seat, 
his  presidency  extending  over  the  whofe 
of  King  William's  reign  and  two-thirds  of 
that  of  Queen  Anne,  during  which  rnriod 
the  administration  of  justice  was  oistin- 
guished  by  learning,  sagacity,  and  inte^ 
rity,  and  freed  from  the  suspidon  of 
private  bias  or  courtly  dictation,  most 
effectually  securing  the  confidence  and 
commanding  the  applause  of  all  partiei^ 
whether  whigs  or  tories,  from  the  con- 
trast it  presented  to  the  experience  of  the 
preceding  thirteen  years.  In  all  of  the 
criminal  trials  at  which  he  presided  he 
acted  with  such  honesty  and  impartialitjr 
that  many  of  the  accused,  even  when  con- 
victed, acknowledged  the  fiEomees  with 
which  they  had  been  treated. 

In  February  1698  he  and  Justice  Efn 
had  the  courage  to  resist  the  Honse  of 
Lords,  when  tnej  were  required  to  ewe 
their  reasons  for  the  judgment  thev  nad 
pronounced  in  1694  in  fisiyour  of  Gnarlei 
KnoUys,  claiming  to  be  Earl  of  Banbiny, 
who  had  pleaded  his  peerage  to  an  indict- 
ment charging  him  as  a  commoner  irith 
the  murder  of  Philip  Lawson,  his  lnothe^ 
in-law.  The  refusal  of  the  two  indcw  to 
do  so,  unless  the  case  was  brought  before 
the  lords  by  writ  of  error,  gave  such  offence 
that  there  was  some  inclination  to  commit 
them  both  to  the  Tower ;  but,  though  the 
question  was  adjourned,  it  was  never  re- 
sumed, and  the  enquiry,  as  Lord  RmHoi 
(i.  18)  says, '  vanished  m  smoak.'  (XaMn^ 
ii.  231,  243.)  j 

That  this  resistance  did  not  arin  i*  J 
caprice,  but  from  principle,  ia  prowd  I^Ml  J 
conduct  in  the  Ayleebiuy  cms.  TfetolM 
puisne  judges  of  the  King'i 


HOLT 

in  oppoaitioii  to  his  opinion,  reversed  a 
Tezdict  in  which  the  constables  of  Ayles- 
boij  -were  cast  in  damages  for  refusing  to 
permit  a  voter  to  exercise  his  franchise,  the 
case  was  removed  into  the  House  of  Lords 
on  a  writ  of  error.  There,  on  the  opinion 
of  the  jud{;es  being  regularly  required,  he 
explained  in  a  very  learned  argument  the 
grounds  of  his  judgment,  and  had  the 
'easore  of  being  supported  by  Lord 
yers  and  a    great   majority  of  peers, 


HOLT 


353 


j^eai 


who  set  aside  the  order  of  his  colleagues 
and  confirmed  the  verdict  given  for  the 
injured  voter.  {Burnet j  v.  112,  191 ;  Ver'^ 
non*8  Letters,  iii.  2o0;  State  Trials^  xiv. 
779.)  Li  the  iniquitous  case  of  the 
bankers,  also,  where  the  Court  of  Ex- 
chequer had  pronounced  a  judgment  in 
their  favour,  which  the  Court  of  Exche- 
quer Chamber  had  by  a  quibble  reversed 
— such  reversal  having  been  strenuously 
opposed  by  Holt,  and  as  strenuously  sup- 
ported by  Lord  Chancellor  Somers  and 
Chief  Justice  Treby, — the  House  of  I^ords 
confirmed  Holt^s  opinion,  and  reversed  the 
reversaL  (Ibid.  20.)  The  correctness  also 
of  his  judgment  that  a  writ  of  error  would 
not  lie  upon  his  denial  of  a  prohibition 
prayed  for  by  Dr.  Watson,  Bishop  of  St. 
I)avid's,  was  acknowledged  by  the  House 
of  Lords  in  opposition  to  the  dictum  of 
Lord  Chancellor  Somers. 

So  highly  were  his  services  valued  by 
King  William  that  on  the  removal  of  Lord 
Somers  he  was  urgentl;^  pressed  to  accept 
the  Great  Seal ;  but,  wisely  declining  the 
responsible  and  unstable  honour,  he  ex- 
cused himself  to  his  majesty  bv  saying 
'that  he  never  had  but  one  Chancery 
cause  in  his  life,  which  be  lost,  and  con- 
sequently could  not  think  himself  fitly 
qualified  for  so  great  a  trust.'  lie  how- 
ever consented  to  act  as  chief  commissioner 
till  the  vacancy  was  filled  up,  and,  in  con- 
junction with  the  two  other  chiefs,  held 
the  Seal  from  May  5  to  21,  when  Sir 
Nathan  Wright  was  appointed  lord  keeper. 
On  the  death  of  King  William  he  took  out 
a  new  commission,  notwithstanding  that 
hid  ofiice  was  held  *  quamdiu  se  bene  ges- 
serit ; '  thus  establismng  the  principle  that 
the  judges  were  removable  at  the  demise 
of  the  crown,  which  continued  to  prevail 
till  the  accession  of  George  III.,  who  by 
one  of  his  first  acts  secured  them  in  their 
»eats  on  the  accession  of  a  new  king. 

For  eight  years  of  the  reign  of  Queen 
Anne  he  maintained  the  credit  of  the 
bench.  He  sat  in  court  for  the  last  time 
nn  February  9,  170D-10,  and  on  March  5, 
during  the  progress  of  the  unadvised  trial 
i)(  Dr.  Sacheverell,  he  died  at  his  house 
in  Bedford  Row.  He  was  buried  in  the 
church  of  Redgrave  in  Suffolk,  the  manor 
of  which,  formerly  possessed  by  Sir  Nicho- 
las Bacon,  he  had  purchased ;  and  a  costly 


monument^  representing  him  sitting  in  a 
chair  in  his  robes  and  collar,  was  erected 
to  his  memory. 

During  the  extended  period  of  his  judi- 
cial reign  he  retained  the  respect  and  the 
confidence  of  all.     His   appointment   as 
executor  of  Chief  Justice  Jreby  is  some 
proof  of  the  estimation  in  which  he  was 
regarded  by  his  contemporaries,  which  is 
i  still  further  displayed  in  the  '  Tatler/  No. 
i  14,  written  about  a  year  before  his  death, 
'  and  the  character  there  eloquently  given 
'  has  been  acknowledged  to    oe  a  faiUiful 
I  description  from  that  time  to  this.    Tho- 
i  roughly  versed  in  the  principles  of  the  law, 
'  and  perfect  master  oi  its  practice,  he  was 
strict    in    its    application,    but    humane, 
patient,  and  forbearing  in  its  administra- 
tion.   Keeping  himseu  entirely  aloof  from 
the  political  mtrigues    of  the  time,  his 
decisions  were  free  and  imfettered,  neither 
infiuenced  by  personal  prejudice  nor  over- 
awed by  the  threats  of  power.  His  spirited 
resistance  of  the  latter  has  been  already 
exemplified,  and  his  personal  courage  is 
evidenced  by  the  following  tradition.    A 
mob  having  assembled  with  the  intention 
of  pulling  down  a  house  in  Holbom  where 
persons  were  supposed  to  be  kidnapped  and 
then  sent  to  the  colonies,  the  Gwuds  were 
called  out.  The  chief  justice,  being  applied 
to,  asked  the  ofilcer  what  he  would  ao  if 
the  populace  did  not  disperse.    'Fire  on 
them,'  said  the  officer, '  as  we  have  orders.' 
'  Have  you  so  ? '  replied  the  judge.    *  Then 
take  notice  that  if  one  man  is  killed,  and 
you  are  tried  before  me,  I  will  take  care 
that  every  soldier  of  your  party  is  hanged.' 
He  then  himself,  accompanied  bv  his  tip- 
staves, went  to  the  mob,  and,  boldly  facing 
them,  by  explaining  to  them  the  impro- 
priety of  their   conduct,  with  a  promise 
that  justice  should  be  done  against  the 
crimps,  induced  them  quietly  to  disperse. 

Among  the  anecdotes  that  have  reference 
to  his  early  follies  is  the  following,  which 
shows  that  he  did  not  hesitate  to  acknow- 
ledge them  when  the  confession  would 
serve  the  ends  of  justice.  In  a  trial  of  an 
old  woman  for  witchcraft,  the  witness 
against  her  declared  that  she  used  a  'spelL' 
'  Let  me  see  it,'  said  the  judge.  A  scrap 
of  parchment  being  handed  up  to  him,  he 
asked  the  old  woman  how  she  came  by  it, 
and  on  her  answering,  'A  young  gentle- 
man, my  lord,  gave  it  me  to  cure  my 
slaughter's  ague,'  enquired  whether  it  cured 
her.  *  Oh !  yes,  my  lord,  and  many  others,' 
replied  the  old  woman.  He  then  turned 
to  the  jury  and  said,  *  Gentlemen,  when  I 
was  young  and  thoughtless,  and  out  of 
money,  I  and  some  companions,  as  un- 
thinking as  myself,  went  to  this  woman's 
house,  Uien  a  public  one,  and  having  no 
money  to  pay  our  reckoning,  I  hit  upon  a 
stratagem  to  get  off  scot-free.    Seeing  her 


354 


nOPTON 


HOSPITALI 


daughter  ill  of  an  ague,  I  pretended  I  had  !  was  committed,  nor  did  he  know  of  tin 


a  spell  to  euro  her.    I  wrote  the  classic 
line  you  see,  and  gave  it  her,  so  that  if 
any  is  punishable,  it  is  I,  and  not  the  poor 
woman*'    She  was  of  course  acquitted,  and 
did  not  fail  to  receive  from  the  judge  a 
compensation  for  the  trouble  he  had  caused 
her.    In  none  of  the  trials  before  him  for 
this  supposed  crime  was  a  conviction  ob- 
tainedy  and  prosecutions  for  it  from  his 
time  fell  into  discredit,  wliich  was  increased 
by  his  putting  into  the  pillory  one  Hath- 
away, convicted  of  pretending  to  be  be- 
witched by  a  poor  woman  whom  he  had 
recently  indicted  for  the  crime.    Of  the 
idle  companions  of   his    youthful  frolics 
there  is  a  melancholy  tradition  that  it  was 
his  fate  to  have  one  of  them  tried  before 
him  and  convicted  of  felony.    The  prisoner 
was  afterwards  visited  byliim  in  gaol,  and 
to  his  enquiry  after  their  college  intimates, 
answered,  'Ah!    my  lord,  they  are    all 
hanged   but   myself   and   your' lordship.* 
(Aowe'i  GrangeVy  i.  165.)     His  only  leffal 
publication   was  an  edition  of  Sir  John 
Key  ling's  Reports,  to  which  he  subjoined 


presentment  until  he  was  taken  befoie  th« 
council  and  committed  to  the  Tower.  I( 
as  Wecver  says,  he  was  fined  in  the  turn  of 
2000  marks,  there  were  probaUy  fortlur 
charges  against  him.  It  would  8eem,lioir- 
ever,  that  his  appeal  to  the  royal  &tov 
was  successful,  for  in  the  same  year  tbe 
king  assigned  to  him  the  lands  of  wliidi 
his  wife  had  died  seisid.  From  the  twenty 
fifth  to  the  thirtieth  year  of  the  reign  abo 
he  was  not  only  summoned  to  peifom 
military  service  in  respect  of  his  lands,  bat 
was  twice  elected  as  assessor  of  the  fi^ 
teenth  and  other  charges  on  the  county  of 
Hereford.  In  33  Edward  I.  he  was  re- 
turned as  knisrht  of  that  shire,  and  in  tiie 
same  year  he  died  in  possession  of  propeitr 
in  Shropshire  of  very  considerable  extent 

It  seems  to  be  more  than  probable  that 
the  above  facts  refer  to  two  persons  named 
Walter  de  Hopton ;  that  they  were  ftthcr 
and  son  ;  and  that  the  division  shonld  be 
made  between  the  sixth  and  thirteenth  yen 
of  the  reign. 

HOBTOK,  Roger,  possessed  the  manon 


three  important  cases  which  he  had  decided.  !  of  Catton  and  Brysingcotes  in  Derbyahn^ 
lie  married  Anne,  daughter  of  Sir  John  in  which  county  he  probably  was  bora.  Hii 
Cropley,  Bart,  who  brought  him  no  issue,  arguments  as  an  aavocate  commence  in  1 
(Aihen,  Oxon.  iy.  505 ;  L%fe  [1764] ;  Wds-  Henry  IV.,  and  continue  till  he  was  called 
hy^B  Lives,  90.)  '  to  the  judicial  seat  in  the  IQng*8  Bench  oai 

HOPTOK,  Walter  de.  To  the  ancestor  1  June  16,  1415,  3  Henry  V.  He  was  re- 
of  this  family,  whose  property  was  situate  I  appointed  on  the  accession  of  Henry  TL,  bit 
in    Herefordshire    and    Shropshire,  King  ';  died  before  the  termination  of  the  fiist  year 


William  is  stated  to  have  granted  the 
celebrated  rhyming  charter,  preserved  in 
Blount's  *  Tenures '  (102).  Whatever  may 
be  the  authenticity  of  the  record,  there  is 
little  doubt  that  ArV'alter  de  Hopton  was  a 
descendant  of  the  alleged  grantee.  In  35 
Henry  HI.,  1251,  Johanna,  the  widow  of 


—viz.,  on  April  30,  1423.  He  was  brniBd 
in  St.  Dunstan's  Church,  Fleet  Street 
(Cfl/.7?oe.7W.  204,209.) 

HOSE,  Geoffrey,  or  H0S8E,  was  tbe 
son  of  ilenrv,  and  held  a  barony  in  tbe 
county  of  Wilts.  He  was  sheriff  of  Oxlbri* 
shire  in  26  Henry  H.  and  two  folloiriag 


Walter  de  Hopton,  paid  for  an  assize  in  |  years.  In  1179  he  wao  >ne  of  the  peiaoM 
Herefordshire.  {Excerpt,  e  Rot,  Fin,u,\\^,)  I  selected  by  the  coun:ii  cf  Windsor  to  act 
These  probably  were  the  father  and  mother  \  as  justices  Itinerant  in  certain  countieafboa* 
of  the  judge.  His  own  wife  was  Johanna,  ing  one  of  the  four  divisions  into  wbicb 
the  daughter  of  William  de  Scalariis.  England  was  then  arranged ;  and  his  pkai 

In  1272  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  in    appear  on  the  roll  of  the  following  yetfibot 
Worcestershire,  and  on  April  24,  1274,  2  \  not  subsequently.    (Madox,  i.  1&.) 


Edward  L,  he  was  one  of  the  barons  of  Uie 
Excheo[uer.  At  the  end  of  that,  or  the 
beginnmg  of  the  following  year,  he  was 
removed  into  the  King's  I^nch,  and  is 
mentioned  as  a  justice  itinerant  in  6  Ed- 
ward I.  The  name  docs  not  occur  again 
tiU  13  Edward  I.,  1284,  in  which  and  in 
the  two  following  years  he  was  joined  in 
yarious  commissions  as  a  justice  itinerant 
(MadoXf  ii.  320),  and  was  one  of  those  who 
were  fined  for  corruption  by  King  Edward 
on  his  return  to  England  in  1289.    By  his 

petition  to  the  king  in  1290,  he  represents  \  II.  he  and  Hugh  Cophin  raider  an 
that  he  was  not  guilty  of  a  charge  brought  \  of  the  proceeds  of  tne  abbey  of  TMriock 
against  Solomon  de  Rochester  and  his  then  in  the  king's  hands.  (MaiBg.L9Qi 
companion  justices  itinerant  in  Norfolk,  He  held  a  prebend  in  Exeter  dttaJULM 
inaamuch  as  he  was  not  associated  with 
them  till  after  the  time  when  the  offence 


He  gave  the  church  of  Little  FajprebaB 
to  the  canons  of  St.  Dionysius  in  ocnAr 
ampton,  and  some  lands  to  the  mcmks  d 
Stanley  in  Wiltshire.  ( DugdMs  Bartmm 
i.  622.)  He  died  in  1  John,  1199,  when  bk 
wife,  Gundred  de  Warenne,  gave  two  hnj- 
dred  marks  for  the  custody  of  Geoflfrey,  Wa 
heir,  and  all  his  lands  imtil  he  was  of  Ig^ 
(J^adox,  i.  202.) 

HOSPITALI,  Ralph  de,  was  another  d 
the '  inquisitores'  against  the  sheri&inllTIV 
16  Henry  II.  In  the  Great  Roll  of  31  Hony 


the  chapel  of  Walingford,  boOjof  «1 
resignedin9John,lS^.  (J2M.MLC 


HOTHAM 

.,  JoHK  DE  (Bishop  of  Ely), 
'waB  a  descendant  of  John  de  Trehouse,  who, 
for  Mb  aseiBtance  to  the  Conqueror  at  the 
battle  of  Harting^y  obtained  the  grant  of  the 
manor  of  Hotham  in  Yorkshire,  with  others. 
In  27  Edward  I.  he  was  assessor  of  the  tenth 
then  granted,  and  in  2  Edward  II.  he  was 
fient  to  Ireland  as  chancellor  of  the  Exche- 
quer (CaL  Hot.  Pat  00) ;  but  in  the  next 
two  years  he  is  found  actinfi:  as  the  king's  es- 
•cheator  on  both  sides  of  the  Trent  {Abb, 
Hoi.  Oria.  I  168-174.)  In  1311  he  was 
^  custoe  domorum'  of  Peter  de  Gaveston  in 
the  cit  J  of  London,  the  termination  of  whose 
-career  in  June  1312  did  not  interrupt 
Hotham's  advance.  On  December  1 3  he  was 
made  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  in  Eng- 
land,  and  in  May  1313,  being  then  called 
canon  of  York,  was  sent  on  a  mission  to 
the  court  of  France.  In  August  1314,  and 
■affain  in  September  1315  (iV.  Faderaj  ii. 
147-27G),  he  went  with  extraordinarypowers 
to  Irelana,  then  invaded  by  Edward  JBruce, 
the  King  of  Scotland's  brother,  to  effect  a 
reconciliation  with  the  barons,  and  to  treat 
-with  the  natives.  In  this  he  was  only  par- 
tially successful ;  for  though  he  induced  the 
tenants  of  the  crown  to  associate  in  binding 
themselves,  under  the  penalties  of  forfeiture, 
to  aid  each  other  to  the  utmost  in  their 
efforts  against  the  common  enemy,  he  made 
little  impression  on  the  chiefs  of  the  natives. 
(^lAngaru,  iii.  30(5.)  It  does  not  appear  that 
Trhile  thus  employed  he  was  removed  from 
his  office  of  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer, 
Trhich  he  certainly  held  in  Easter  1310 
(^MadoXy  ii.  327),  and  probably  did  not  re- 
tire from  it  till  his  election  to  the  bishopric 
of  Ely,  whicli  took  place  on  July  20. 

In  1317  he  was  raised  to  the  treasurer- 
ship  of  the  Exchequer,  and  held  that  office 
till  June  10,  1318.  {Madox,  ii.  39.)  On 
the  following  day  the  Greal  Seal  was  deli- 
vered to  him  as  chancellor ;  but  for  the  next 
nx  or  seven  weeks  he  was  obliged  to  leave 
the  duties  of  his  office  to  be  performed  by 
deputies,  as  he  was  en^raged  in  frequent 
journeys  on  the  king's  affairs,  lie  held  the 
Great  Seal  for  about  nineteen  months, during 
the  latter  part  of  which  period  he  was  en- 
gaged in  negotiating  a  truce  with  the  Scots. 
(3^  FaJerOf  iii.  409.)  After  his  resigna- 
tion on  January  23, 1320,  he  still  continued 
to  be  employed  by  the  king  on  several  con- 
fidential missions. 

Three  days  after  the  accession  of  Edward 
m.,  viz.  on  January  28,1327,  he  was  again 
entrusted  with  the  office  of  chancellor,  and 
continued  to  perform  its  duties  till  March  1 
in  the  following  year.  I  le  then  retired  from 
its  labours,  and  during  the  remainder  of  his 
life  devoted  himself  to  the  administration 
of  his  diocese. 

His  expenditure  for  his  cathedral  was 
enormous  for  those  times,  and  his  confirma- 
tion to  the  see  of  the  manor  of  Oldboume 


HOTHAM 


355 


in  London  was  among  the  liberal  acts  which 
illustrated  his  presidency.  During  the  last 
two  yeai-s  of  his  life  he  was  entirely  disabled 
by  paralysis,  which  terminated  in  Lis  death, 
at  his  palace  of  Somersham^  on  Januaiy  2$, 
1336,  leaving  behind  him  a  hiffh  charactec 
for  piety,  prudence,  and  libenlity.    (God' 

His  nephew  was  summoned  to  parliament 
as  a  baron  in  8  Edward  H.,  but  not  after- 
wards. It  was  the  descendant  of  that  noble- 
man who  was  created  a  baronet  in  1621,  and 
whose  conduct  as  governor  of  Hull,  in  the 
civil  wars,  led  to  ms  own  and  his  son's  un- 
timely execution.  From  his  grandson  de- 
scended Sir  Beaumont  Hotham,  the  subject 
of  the  next  article. 

HOTHAK,  Beaukont  (afterwards  Lord 
Hotham),  was  of  the  same  £unily  as  that 
of  the  above  prelate.  The  seventh  possessor 
of  the  baronetcy  conferred  in  1621  was  Sb 
Beaumont  Hotham,  who  by  his  wife  Fran- 
ces, daughter  of  the  Rev.  William  Thom- 
son, had  five  sons,  on  four  of  whom  the  title 
successively  devolved.  The  third  son,  Ad- 
miral William  Hotham,  for  his  gallant 
achievements  at  the  commencement  of  the 
French  Revolution,  was  in  1797  created 
Baron  Hotham  in  the  Irish  peerage,  with  a 
special  remainder  to  the  heirs  of  ms  father. 
On  his  death  without  issue  in  May  1813, 
his  two  elder  brothers  having  left  no  repre- 
sentative, the  heir  to  both  titles  was  his 
next  brother,  the  judge,  now  to  be  noticed. 

Beaumont  Hotham  was  the  fourth  son  of 
Sir  Beaumont,  and  was  born  in  1737.  He 
was  called  to  the  bar  at  the  Middle  Temple 
in  May  1 758.  He  practised  in  the  Chancery 
courtt),  but  with  little  success  and  less  dis- 
tinction, and  was  member  for  Wigan  in  the 
two  parliaments  of  1768  and  1774.  He  was 
appointed  on  May  10.  1775,  a  baron  of  the 
Exchequer,  and  knignted.  He  sat  in  that 
court  for  the  long  space  of  thirty  years,  and 
the  only  variation  in  his  iudidal  career  was 
in  1783,  when  he  was  placed  as  third  com- 
missioner of  the  Great  Seal  in  the  interval 
between  the  two  chancellorships  of  Lord 
Th  urlo  w.  This  lasted  for  nearly  nme  months, 
from  April  0  to  December  23.  Though  he 
never  had  any  business  at  the  bar,  by  the 
effect  of  great  natural  sense  and  an  excellent 
understanding  he  made  a  good  judge,  and 
was  deserveoly  esteemed  for  his  polished 
manners,  marked  by  courtesy,  kindness,  and 
attention.  So  circumscribed  was  his  Imow- 
ledge  of  law  that  when  any  difficulty  aros^ 
he  was  in  the  habit  of  recommending  the 
case  to  be  referred,  thus  aoauirin^  among 
the  wags  of  Westminster  Hall  the  nickname 
of  *  The  Common  Friend.'  In  criminal  cases 
he  was  distinguished  for  his  humanity,  and 
for  his  impressive  and  pathetic  addresses  to 
prisoners. 

Feeling  the  infirmities  of  ase  approaching, 
he  resigned  in  Hilary  Term  1806,  but  Ih&i 

L  Li 


356 


HOUBRUG 


for  nine  years  afterwards.  Cn  his  brother's 
death  on  May  2, 1813,  he  succeeded  to  the 
title  of  Lord  Hotham,  but  enjoyed  it  only 
ten  months,  his  own  death  occurring  on 
March  4, 1814.  By  his  marriage  with  Su- 
aannahy  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Hankey,  an 
alderman  of  London,  and  widow  of  James 
Norman,  £s<l*y  he  had  three  sons  and  three 
daughters.  The  title  is  now  enjoyed  by  his 
grandson. 

HOUBBUO,  William  de,  is  recorded  on 
the  Fine  Roll  of  8  Henry  m.,  1224  (i.  122), 
as  taking  some  amerciaments  of  a&^nzos  of 
novel  disseisin  in  Shropshire  with  llalph, 
Bishop  of  Chichester ;  but  this  is  the  only 
entry  which  notices  him  in  a  judicial  ca- 
pacity. 

mlliam  de  Hobre^e  is  mentioned  by 
Roger  de  Wendover  (lii.  297-356)  as  one  of 
the  confederates  against  King  John  in  1215, 
and  as  haying  incurred  the  sentence  of  ex- 
communication in  the  following  year.  His 
lands  in  Kent  and  Essex  were  then  seized 
and  granted  to  Richard  Fitz-Hugh.  (Hot. 
Clam.  i.  105,  239,  247.^  Under  the  new 
reign  he  returned  to  his  aUe^ance,  and,  with 
his  wife,  Agnes,  and  her  sister  Alicia,  the 
wife  of  Richard  le  Buteiller,  was  admitted 
in  3  Henry  IH.  to  the  lands  of  Richard 
Picot,  whose  heirs  the  ladies  were.  (JEx~ 
cerpt.  e  Hot  Fiti.  i.  23.) 

HOUGHTON,  John  de,  or  HOTTTON,  was 
connected  in  early  life  with  the  Excheauer. 
In  19  Edward  II.  he  accompanied  the  King 
to  France  in  that  character,  and  was  then 
the  parson  of  the  church  of  Postwick,  a 
parisn  in  Norfolk.  In  that  county  he  had 
the  manor  of  Wormegay  and  considerable 
property.  In  1  Edwfud  HI.  he  was  clerk 
of  the  keeper  of  the  wardrobe,  and  was 
udyanced  to  be  one  of  the  chamberlains  of 
the  Exchequer  in  the  twelfth  year,  in 
which  office  he  continued  till  he  was  called 
to  the  bench  of  that  court  as  a  baron  on 
March  8,  1347.  We  are  not  told  the  time 
of  his  death.  (N.  F(cdera,  ii.  606,  iii.  25, 
53 ;  Devon's  Issue  Hollj  139 ;  Cal,  Exch.  iii. 
166.)  He  was  probably  the  father  of  the 
undermentioned  Adam. 

HOUOHTON,  Adam  de  (Bishop  of  St. 
David's),  was  nrobably  the  son  of  the 
above  Jonn  de  Houton.  He  was  educated 
at  Oxford,  and  adopted  the  clerical  pro- 
fession. His  connection  with  the  court  is 
evidenced  by  his  being  appointed  in  1360 
one  of  the  conmdssioners  to  receive  posses- 
sion of  the  counties  and  cities  which  the 
King  of  France  had  ajpeed  to  give  up  by 
treaty.    {N.  FoederOy  iu.  511,  679.) 

In  1361  he  was,  by  papal  provision, 
placed  in  the  see  of  St.  l)avid's,  and  was 
made  diancellor  on  January  11, 1377,  50 
Edinird  in.  In  the  following  April  he 
was  at  the  head  of  the  commissioners  to 
jn^^tiate  a  peace  with  France,  and  for  this 
purpate  he  proceeded  to  Calais,  and  was 


HOUTON 

still  there  at  the  time  of  King  Edward's^ 
death  on  June  21,  1377.  On  his  imme- 
diate return  to  England  he  was  re-sworn 
into  his  office.  He  then  resided  in  Fleet 
Street. 

His  chancellorship,  which  lasted  only 
till  October  29,  137o,  was  remarkable  for 
nothing  but  the  resumption  of  Biblical 
texts  into  his  addresses'  to  the  parliament, 
a  practice  which  had  been  discontinued  by 
William  of  Wykeham  and  his  successors 
in  the  office.  Among  other  somewhat 
ludicrous  applications,  he  commenced  one 
of  his  orations  with  the  passage  of  St.  Paul, 
*Ye  suffer  fools  gladly,  seeing  that  ye- 
yourselves  are  wise,'  aidding  to  the  as- 
sembly, 'And  as  ye  are  wise  and  I  am. 
foolish,  I  presume  vou  desire  to  hear  me.' 
(Hot.  Pari  ii.  3610  He  died  in  April- 
1389.     (Godwin,  581.) 

HOUOHTOK,  Robert,  bom  at  Gun- 
thorpe  in  Norfolk,  in  1548,  was  called 
to  the  bar  at  Lincoln's  Inn  in  1577,  and 
appointed  reader  in  1591,  and  again  in 
1600.  He  was  one  of  several  who  were 
nominated  by  Queen  Elizabeth  to  be  Ser- 
jeants; but  in  consequence  of  her  death 
were  re-summoned  by  James,  and  took  the 
degree  in  Easter  Term  1603.  He  repre- 
sented the  city  of  Norwich  in  the  parlia- 
ment of  1593,  and  was  chosen  its  recorder 
in  1603,  an  office  which  he  held  till  April 
21,  1613,  when  he  was  made  a  judge  of 
the  King's  Bench  and  knighted.  In 
Peacham*s  case,  who  was  tried  in  1615 
for  divers  treas<mable  passages  contained 
in  a  sermon  which  was  never  preached  nor 
intended  to  be  preached,  but  only  set  down 
in  writing  and  found  in  his  study,  Einj^ 
James,  by  the  advice  of  Bacon,  commenced 
the  imconstitutional  practice  of  obtaining 
the  opinion  of  the  luoges  before  trial ;  and 
he  joined  with  Sir  "Edward  Coke  in  resist- 
ing ^  this  taking  of  auricular  opinions  single 
and  apart,'  as  new  and  dangerous.  The 
trial  took  place,  and  though  tne  poor  man 
was  found  guilty,  yet,  notwithstanding  all 
Bacon's  endeavours,  he  was  not  executed^ 
many  of  the  j  udges  being  of  opinion,  as  every 
reasonable  man  must  be,  that  the  offence 
was  not  treason.     (State  Trials,  ii.  869.) 

Sir  Robert  Houghton  died  at  his  cham- 
bers in  Serjeants'  Inn,  Chancery  Lane,  on 
February  6,  1623-4,  and  was  buried  at 
the  church  of  St.  Dunstan's-in-the-West. 
Croke  calls  him  '  a  most  reverend,  prudent, 
learned,  and  temperate  judge,  and  inferior 
to  none  in  his  time.'  ' 

His  wife  was  Mary,  the  daughter  of 
Robert  Rychers,  Esq.,  of  Wrotnam  in 
Kent,  by  whom  he  had  three  sons  and 
three  daughters.  (Blomefield's  Norwich,  i. 
359 ;  Notfolk,  i.  625.) 

HOTTTOK,  John  de,  frequently  spelled 
Hocton,  was  archdeacon  of  Bedford  when 
he  was  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  ap« 


HOWARD 

pointed  in  9  Henry  III.,  1225,  for  the 
•eouDties    of    Bedford    and   Buckingham 
{MoL  CUtm,  ii.  77),  and  seems  to  have 
been  much  in  the  royal  confidence.    In 
Janiuuy  1224  he  was  sent  on  a  mission 
to  the  court  of  Rome ;  and  on  his  return, 
the  distribution  of  the  stones  of  the  castle 
of  Bedford,  then  razed  to  the  ground  in 
^scnsequence  of  Faukes  de  Breaute's  re- 
bellion, was  entrusted  to  him,  with  Henry 
«de  Braybroc  and  the  sheriff  of  the  county. 
Hn  the  next  year,  besides  his  appointment 
.as  a  justice  itinerant,  he  was  aniin  em- 
;ployed  in  foreign  parts,  first  in  J  uly,  and 
^en  in  October  {Rot.  Clam.  i.  582-0*54,  ii. 
-47-83) ;  and  in  1228  he  took  the  prmcipal 
part  in  the  mission  to  Home  to  oppose  the 
election  of  Walter  de  Heynsham  as  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury.    In  1231  he  changed 
bis  archdeaconry  for  that  of  Northampton, 
and  died  in  1246.     {Le  Neve,  161.) 

HOWASD,  William,  was  the  ancestor 
of  the  Dukes  of  Norfolk.  Henry  Howard, 
of  Corby  Castle,  in  his  Memorials  {App,  xl.), 
makes  him  the  grandson  of  Robert  Howard, 
of  Terrington  and  Wig^nhal],  near  Lynn 
in  Norfolk,  living  in  12  Henry  III.,  and  son 
of  John  Iloward,  living  In  45  Henry  IH., 
and  Lucy  Germund,  his  wife,  adding  that 
they  were  'what  we  should  call  private 
ffentlemen  of  small  estate,  probooly  of 
Saxon  origin,  living  at  home,  intermarry- 
ing with  their  neighbours,  and  witnessing 
•each  other*s  deeds  of  conveyance  and  con- 
tracts.* 

William  Howard  was  selected  as  one  of 
the  eight  special  justices  who  were  as- 
signed in  21  Edward  I.,  1293,  to  take 
^assizes  throughout  the  realm,  in  aid  of 
the  judges  of  both  benches,  and  of  the 
justices  itinerant.  The  district  to  which 
be  was  assigned  comprehended  the  northern 
counties. 

On  October  11,  1297,  he  was  constituted 
one  of  the  judges  of  the  Common  Pleas. 
(Madoxy  ii.  91.)  Both  in  33  and  35 
Edward  I.  he  was  one  of  the  judges 
named  in  commissions  of  trailoaston. 
{Mot.  Pari.  i.  178,  218.) 

On  the  accession  of  Edward  II.  he  was 
le-appointed,  and  sat  in  the  court  during 
the  whole  of  the  first  and  part  of  the  se- 
cond year  of  that  reign  ;  the  patent  of  his 
successor,  Henry  le  Scrope,  oeing  dated 
November  20, 1308.  Howard  is  described 
as  chief  justice  of  England  on  a  window  in 
the  chui-ch  of  Long  Melford  in  Suffolk, 
where  he  is  portrayed  in  his  judge's  robes ; 
but  as  this  was  not  erected  till  about  the 
reign  of  Edward  IV.  or  of  Henry  VU. 
{Dugdal^s  Orig.  44,  99),  and  therefore 
nearly  two  hundred  years  after  his  death, 
it  cannot  be  accepted  as  authority  for  a  fact 
of  which  no  other  evidence  appears. 

He  had  two  wives,  both  of  whom  were 
named  Alice.    The  first  was  a  daughter  of 


HULLOCK 


357 


Sir  Robert  Ufford,  the  ancestor  of  the 
£miily  which  acquired  the  earldom  of  Suf- 
folk. The  second  was  the  daughter  of  Sir 
Edmund  de  Fitton,  of  Fitton  in  Wiggen- 
hall,  St  Germain's,  which  she  afterwaids 
inherited.  She  and  her  husband  xedded 
at  East  Winch,  near  Lynn,  where  he  built 
a  chapel,  acyoinin^  the  church,  in  which  he 
was  probably  buned. 

The  first  marriage  produced  no  issue; 
but  by  the  second  he  left  two  sons,  Sir 
John  and  Sir  William.  Sir  Hobert,  the 
lineal  descendant  of  this  Sir  John  in  the 
fifth  generation,  married  *  Margaret,  the 
daughter  of  Thomas  Mowbray,  Duke  of 
Norfolk,  who  ultimately  became  coheir  of 
John  Mowbray,  the  fourth  duke.  Their 
son  John  Howard  was  sununoned  to  Par- 
liament as  Baron  Howard  by  Edward  IV. 
in  1470,  and  was  created  earl  marshal  and 
Duke  of  Norfolk  by  Richard  HI.  in  1485, 
and  is  Shakspeare's  '  Jockey  of  Norfolk.' 

Not  only  does  this,  the  premier  duke- 
dom, remain  in  the  family ;  but  in  the  pre- 
sent House  of  Peers  the  earldoms  of  Sunblk 
and  Berkshire,  of  Carlisle  and  of  Effingham, 
and  the  barony  of  Howard  of  Walden  are 
represented  by  descendants  from  the  same 
parentage.  Besides  these,  several  other 
peerages  which  have  now  become  extinct 
fiourished  during  various  periods:  the 
viscounty  of  Bindon  from  lo59  to  1619; 
the  earldom  of  Nottingham  from  1597  to 
1681;  the  earldom  of  Northampton  from 
1604  to  1614 ;  the  barony  of  Howard  of 
Escrick  from  1628  to  1714 ;  the  earldom  of 
Norwich  from  1072  to  1777 ;  the  earldom 
of  Stafford  from  1688  to  1762 ;  the  earldom 
of  Bindon  from  1706  to  1722. 

EITLL.    See  J.  and  R.  Hill. 

HTILLOCK,  John,  was  a  native  of  Dur- 
ham, where  his  father,  Timothy  IluUock, 
was  a  master  weaver,  and  proprietor  of  a 
timber  yard  at  Barnard  Castle.  Bom  in 
1764,  he  was  articled  to  an  attorney  at 
Stokesley  in  Yorkshire,  where  he  grounded 
himself  so  well  in  the  principles  of  the 
legal  science  that  the  noted  barrister  Mr. 
Lee,  whom  he  often  met  on  his  visits  to  an 
uncle,  was  so  struck  by  his  intelligence 
and  application  that  he  reconmiended  him 
strongly  to  go  to  the  bar.  Acting  on  this 
advice,  he  was  entered  as  a  student  at 
Gray's  Inn,  and,  having  become  a  barrister 
in  May  1794,  he  ioinea  the  Northern  Cir- 
cuit. In  1792  he  published  a  valuable 
work  called  *  The  Law  of  Costs,'  which  be- 
came quite  an  authority,  and  went  through 
several  editions.  This  made  his  name 
known,  and  necessarily  introduced  him  to 
extended  employment :  so  that  in  1816  he 
felt  himself  warranted  in  accepting  the 
degree  of  the  coif. 

On  the  Northern  Circuit  his  honourable 
feeling  and  his  courageous  conduct  were  on 
one  occasion  tried  and  exhibited.    In  a 


358 


HUI^ 


cause  which  he  led  he  was  particularly 
instructed  not  to  produce  a  certain  deeil 
unless  it  should  be  absolutely  required. 
Notwithstanding  this  injunction,  he  pro- 
duced it  before  it  was  necessary,  with  the 
view  of  deciding  the  business  at  once.  It 
proved  to  have  oeen  forged  by  his  client^s 
attorney;  and  Mr.  Justice  Bay  lev,  who 
was  trying  the  cause,  ordered  the  deed-  to 
be  impounded,  that  it  might  be  made  the 
subject  of  a  prosecution,  ^fore  this  could 
be  done,  Mr.  Hullock  requested  leave  to 
inspect  it,  and  on  its  being  handed  to  him, 
immediately  returned  it  to  his  bag.  The 
judge  remonstrated,  but  in  vain.  ^No 
power  on  earth,'  Mr.  H.  replied,  *  should 
mduce  him  to  surrender  it.  He  had  in- 
cautiously put  the  life  of  a  fellow-creature 
in  peril ;  and,  though  he  had  acted  to  the 
best  of  his  discretion,  he  should  never  be 
happy  again  were  a  fatal  result  to  ensue.' 
The  judge  continued  to  insist  on  the  re- 
delivery of  the  deed,  but  declined  taking 
decisive  measures  till  he  had  consulted  the 
associate  judge.  While  retiring  for  that 
purpose  the  deed  was  of  course  destroyed, 
and  the  attorney  escaped. 

He  siffnalisea  himself  by  the  manner  in 
which  he  conducted  the  prosecutions  at 
Manchester  against  Hunt  and  his  seditious 
associates.  Just  before  he  was  raised  to 
the  bench,  he  was  sent  with  Mr.  (after- 
wards Sir  Joseph)  Littledale  to  Scotland, 
to  arrange  some  criminal  proceedings  of  the 
same  nature  on  the  part  of  the  crown.  He 
met  his  reward  by  being  appointed  on 
March  1, 1823,  to  fill  a  vacant  seat  in  the 
Exchequer. 

For  little  more  than  six  vears  he  dis- 
charged the  duties  of  his  oftice  in  a  most 
exemplary  manner.  A  jjerfect  master  of 
the  law,  he  expounded  it  with  a  liberal 
spirit,  clearing  it  from  all  useless  technical- 
ities, and  acting  upon  its  plain  intention. 
Firmness  and  mildness  were  equally  his 
characteristics,  and  to  these  were  united 
integrity,  sapcity,  and  knowledge.  While 
on  the  circmt  he  was  suddenly  seized  with 
a  severe  bowel  complaint  at  Abingdon, 
which  terminated  his  life  on  July  31,  1820. 
His  estimation  among  his  colleagues  may 
be  judged  from  the  following  energetic 
commendation  with  which  a  brother  baron 
spoke  of  him  to  a  grand  jury:  *  He*  cir- 
cumscribed the  ocean  of  law  with  firm  and 
undeviating  steps.' 

Hin:.S,  or  HOLES,  Hron,  is  stated  by 
Ashmole  to  be  the  grandson  of  Sir  William 
of  the  Hulse,  in  Cheshire,  by  tliat  knight's 
second  son,  David.  He  is  mentioned  in 
Richard  Bellewe's  Reports,  and  on  Mav 
20^  1389, 12  Richard  II.,  he  was  appointed 
a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench.  Durmg  the 
remainder  of  that  reign,  the  whole  of  the 
reign  of  Henry  IV.,  and  the  first  two  years 
of  that  of  Henry  V.,  he  retained  that  poei- 


HUNTIKGFIELD 

tion,  and  under  King  Richard  he  acted  floe 
several  vears  as  locum  ienau  for  the Jnstioe 
of  North  Wales.  (Fird  lUp.  Aft.  iZte, 
App.  01.) 

He  died  in  1415,  and  waa  buried  m 
the  church  of  Watford  in  Hertfordahize. 
( Weever,  601.)  On  his  tomb  he  is  cdled 
Ilugo  de  Holes,  as  he  is  also  in  the  abore- 
mentioned  roll.  His  wife  was  Mamiet^ 
daughter  of  John  Homville,  of  Mobenej  k 
Cheshire,  and  his  descendants  were  settled 
at  Sutton  Courtney  in  Berkshire. 

HUHT,  Roger,  of  Chalverston  in  Bed- 
fordshire, was  probably  the  son  of  Roger 
Hunt,  who  was  attorn  atus  regis  in  Augnt 
1400,  9  Henry  IV.  {CaL  Hat.  JPat.  264.) 
Of  this  Roger  the  first  mention  occnn  a» 
speaker  of  the  parliament  of  8  Hemy  V., 
he  being  then  member  for  HuntingdoouiR. 
He  next  appears  as  counsel  for  John  Mow- 
bray, earl  marshal,  in  his  claim  for  «e- 
cedencc  above  the  Earl  of  Warwick  hacn 
the  parliament  in  April  1425,  3  HeniyM 
In  July  1433  he  was  again  presented  u 
spealter  of  that  parliament.  (jRot,  Pari  ir. 
208,  200,  420.)  On  November  3, 1438, 17 
Henry  VI.,  he  was  appointed  a  htiron  dibt 
Exchequer,  and  the  last  entry  in  which  ht 
is  named  is  a  grant  to  him,  'for  diven con- 
siderations,' of  200/.  out  of  the  custonu  of 
London  in  1443.  (Acttt  l\ivy  ComcU,  iv. 
327,  V.  227.) 

HUNTIHOFIELD,  Roger  de,  was  the 
grandson  of  a  baron  of  the  same  name,  vha 
in  the  reign  of  King  Stephen  gave  the  Ide 
of  Mendham  in  Suffolk  to  the  monb  of 
Castle  Acre  in  Norfolk,  and  the  younger 
son  of  Roger  de  Iluntin^eld.  In  8  John 
he  was  one  of  the  justiciers  before  whom 
fines  were  levied,  and  in  the  following  yett 
his  lands  were  seized  on  occasion  of  the 
interdict,  and  were  placed  by  the  king  in 
the  hands  of  his  brother,  the  under-men- 
tioned William.  {Rot  aam.  L  110; 
IhtgdMs  Baronage^  ii.  7.) 

HTINTIKOFIELD,  WiLLiASi  DE,  the  elder 
brother  of  the  above-mentioned  Wxs^^ 
also  acted  ns  a  justicier  before  whom  fiw* 
were  levied  in  10  and  11  John,  1208-12ia 
In  the  fines  themselves,  which  were  taken 
at  Cambridge  and  Lincoln,  the  justideis 
are  specially  called  justices  itinerant 

During  the  greater  part  of  John*8  reian 
he  seems  to  have  been  a  favourite  with  toe 
king,  being  appointed  constable  of  Dorer 
Castle  in  5  John,  giving,  however,  his  eon 
and  daughter  as  hostages  for  his  safe  hold* 
ing  thereof.  (Rot,  Pd.  34.)  From  11  to 
15  John  he  held  the  sheriffalty  of  tlM 
united  counties  of  Norfolk  and  SoffioUc* 
Rut  on  the  barons  forming  their  confedoicj 
against  the  king  he  joined  them,  aad^^ 
one  of  the  twenty-five  who  warn  aupwrtrf 
to  enforce  the  obsenrance  of  MMpaCtalli 
He  made  himself  bo  pioiiiiinBtIiAii|^ 

quent  wan  that  he  wm  ~^" 


HUSCAKL 

Sr  the  pope,  and  his  lands,  being  seized  into 
e  king's  hands,  were  not  restored  to  him 
till  1217.  1  Henry  III.,  when  he  returned 
to  his  allegiance.  In  June  1219  he  obtained 
licence  to  go  to  the  Holy  Land,  constituting 
his  brother  Thomas  his  attorney  to  transact 
all  business  in  his  absence.  (BoL  Clous,  i. 
215-303.) 

His  death  occurred  in  or  before  0  Henij 
III.,  as  in  that  year  his  son  Koger  (by  his 
wife  Alice  de  St.  Liz)  instituted  a  suit 
against  his  bailiff  for  an  account  of  rents. 
(Ibid,  ii.  83.)  Roger*s  grandson  was 
summoned  to  parliament  by  Edward  1., 
but  in  1351  the  barony  became  extinct 
(Dugdale's  Baronage,  ii.  7.) 

EU8CABL,  KoGKK,  \a  frequently  named 
in  the  fines  levied  at  Westnimster  from  11 
to  IG  John.  He  continued  to  act  as  a 
justicier  till  7  Henrj'  III.,  when  he  was 
sent  to  Ireland,  where  it  is  evident  he  held 
the  next  place  on  the  bench  to  the  chief 
justice.     (Rot,  CUni8.\.b2Q.) 

The  mode  of  remunerating  the  judges, 
both  in  England  and  Ireland,  in  that  age 
seems  to  have  been  by  appropriating  to 
them  certain  lands  during  the  king's 
pleasure.  Thus,  in  10  John,  the  Jand 
which  was  of  Roger  de  Tanton,  in  Kent, 
was  given  to  him  '  ad  se  sustentandum  in 
servicio  domini  regis  quamdiu  eidem 
domino  regi  placuit  ;*  and  in  10  Henry  lU. 
the  town  ot  Baliscadam  in  Ireland  was 
devoted  in  the  same  manner  to  him  and 
others.  {Ihid,  i.  204,  ii.  125.)  He  seems 
to  have  been  lord  paramount  of  a  manor  in 
the  vill  of  Stepney,  which  in  1290  was 
called  *  Stebynhvth  Huscail.'  {GeiU,  Mag, 
April  1855,  p.  388.) 

HXTSE,  James,  was  not  improbably  a 
younger  scion  of  the  baronial  family  of  that 
name.  He  was  made  a  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer on  April  10,  1350, 24  Edward  IH. 
In  34  Edward  III.  he  was  employed  as  a 
commissioner  to  treat  with  the  people  of  the 
counties  of  Somerset,  Dorset,  Wiltsy  Devon, 
and  Cornwall,  as  to  i-aising  forces  for  the  de- 
fence of  the  kingdom.  {N.  Fadera,  iii.  449.) 
EUSE,  William,  there  is  little  doub^ 
belonged  also  to  the  noble  family  of  Iloese  or 
Hose,  and  in  all  probability  was  the  son  of 
*Sir  Henry  Huse,  knight,  who  had  a  grant 
of  free  warren  in  8  Henry  VI.  within  his 
manor  of  Ilerting  in  Sussex,  a  property 
which  was  held  bv  the  Baron  Henry  in  the 
reign  of  Henr>'  HI.  (CaL  IU>t.  Pat.  30, 
270.)  He  was  a  member  of  Gray's  Inn, 
and  on  June  10,  1471,  11  Edward  IV.,  he 
received  the  appointment  of  attorney-gene- 
ral, with  full  power  of  deputing  clerks  and 
oiKcers  under  him  in  any  court  of  record 
{Ibid.  310)— a  power  which  is  still  intro- 
duced into  the  modem  patents.  It  was  not 
till  Trinity  Term  14/8  that  he  took  the 
degree  of  the  coif,  probably  resigning  the 
attorney-generalship,    as    the    degree    of 


HUSSEBUBN 


359 


serjeant-at-law  was  at  that  time  superior  to 
the  office  of  attorney-general,  and  no  one 
had  lately  held  the  two  together.  Three 
years  subseq^uently,  on  May  7,  1481,  he 
was  made  chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench. 
(CW.  Rat,  Fat,  326.) 

On  the  accessions  of  Edward  V.,  Richaid 
HI.,  and  Henxy  VII.,  his  patent  of  chic^ 
justice  was  renewed,  showing  how  little 
the  violent  changes  of  the  time  interfered 
with  the  regular  administration  of  the  law, 
and  how  Uttle  connected  with  politicai 
movements  the  iudfires  were  deemed  to  be. 


He  was  named  by  Henrj  All.  as  one  of  the 
commissioners  to  decide  on  the  claims 
made  to  do  service  at  his  coronation.  {Rui^ 
Umd  Papers,  8.) 

In  the  first  year  of  this  reign  he  supported 
the  purity  of  his  office  by  successfully 
remonstrating  with  the  king  against  the 
judges  being  consulted  beforehand  in  crown 
cases  which  were  afterwards  to  come  before 
them  judicially.     (Coke's  3  Inst,  29.) 

In  June  1402  he  was  one  of  those  com- 
missioned to  treat  with  the  ambassadors  of 
the  King  of  France  {Rymer,  zii.  481)^  and 
on  November  24,  1495,  Sir  John  Fmeox 
was  appointed  his  successor  in  the  chief 
justicesnip.  Whether  the  vacancy  was 
occasioned  by  the  death  or  retirement  of 
Sir  William  Huse  there  is  no  distinct  in- 
formation ;  but  probably  by  the  former. 

The  name  was  evidently  then  pronounced 
Ilusey  or  Husee,  and  was  often  so  spelled,  and 
also  House  and  Howsy.  It  gradually  was 
changed  to  Hussev,  bv  which  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  {kmiiy  have  since  called 
themselves. 

Sir  WUliam  married  Elizabeth,  the 
daughter  of  Thomas  Berkeley,  of  Wymond- 
ham,  Esq.,  bv  whom  he  had  several  chil- 
dren. The  eldest,  John,  was  summoned  to 
parliament  by  Henry  VHI.  in  1534;  but 
oeing  attainted  and  beheaded  two  years 
afterwards,  the  barony  was  lost.  From  Sir 
William's  son  Robert  descended  Sir  Ed- 
ward Hussey,  of  Honnington  in  Lincoln- 
shire, who  was  created  a  oaronet  in  1011. 
and  whose  third  son,  Charles  Hussey,  of 
Caythorpe  in  the  same  county,  received  the 
same  honour  in  1061.  Both  titles  were 
united  in  1700,  and  both  became  extinct  in 
1734.  {Dugdaie's  Baron,  ii.  309 ;  Burke's 
Ext,  Baronet.  276.) 

EUSSEBinur,  Thoxas  de,  is  almost 
always  mentioned  with  the  addition  '  Ma- 
ffister,'  which  in  the  reign  of  Henry  IL 
began  to  be  adopted  by  the  clergy.  He 
appears  to  have  oeen  only  a  canon  of  St. 
Paul's  (DugdaU's  Ortg,  22),  but  several 
of  the  bishoprics  and  abbevs  which  were 
vacant  during  the  reigns  of  Henry  H.  and 
Richurd  I.  were  placed  in  his  custody. 
(Madox,  i.  310,  311 ;  Angl.  Sacr,  i.  100.) 

His  judicial  employment  in  those  reigns^ 
and  in  that  of  John,  appears  by  his  presence 


360 


HUTCHINS 


in  the  Curia  Regis  as  one  of  tlie  justiciers 
before  whom  tines  were  levied  in  33  Henry 
II,,  1187^  from  the  fifth  year  of  Richard 
I.  to  the  end  of  the  reign^  and  in  the  first 
jear  of  King  John ;  and  also  by  his  acting 
as  a  justice  itinerant,  holding  pleas  and 
assessing  ta^ages,  in  33  Henry  II.  and  3 
Richard  I.    (Madox,  i.  544,  634.) 

EUTCHIK8,  George.  Narcissus  Lut- 
trell  relates  in  his  Diary  that  on  a  motion 
in  Chancery  relative  to  the  guardianship 
of  a  child,  rarson  Ilickeringill  the  claimant 
said  of  Sir  George  Hutchins,  who  was 
counsel  against  him,  that  they  were  some- 
thing akin  to  each  other,  not  by  consan- 
guinity, but  by  affinity,  for  he  was  a  clerk, 
and  Sir  George's  father  was  a  parish  clerk. 
Whether  this  story  had  any  foundation,  or 
was  only  invented  for  the  purpose  which  it 
effected,  *  of  setting  the  court  a  laughing,' 
has  not  been  discovered.  Sir  George  is 
described  in  the  Graves  Inn  books  as  son 
and  heir  of  Edmund  Hutchins,  of  Georgham 
in  Devonshire,  gentleman,  and  is  stated  to 
have  been  called  to  the  bar  in  August  1007. 

He  was  summoned  by  James  II.  in 
Easter  1080  to  take  the  degree  of  the  coif, 
and  in  May  1089  was  appointed  king's 
Serjeant  to  William  III.,  who  knighted 
him.  In  Maj  of  the  next  year  he  was 
nominated  third  commissioner  of  the  Great 
Seal,  an  office  which  he  filled  for  nearly 
three  years,  till  March  22,  1003.  On  his 
discharge  Sir  George  claimed  a  right  to 
retain  his  former  position  of  king's  Serjeant, 
and  on  the  question  being  referred  to  the 
judges  they  determined  that,  thoug]i  his 
appointment  of  lord  commissioner  did  not 
deprive  him  of  his  degree  of  the  coif,  it  ex- 
tinguished his  post  of  king*s  serjeant,  which 
was  merely  an  office  conferivd  by  the 
crown.  The  king,  however,  re-appointed 
him  his  serjeant  on  Mnv  0.  He  continued 
to  practise  at  the  bar  till  his  death  on  July 
0,  1705,  and  his  success  may  be  estimated 
by  the  fact  that  on  the  marriage  in  1097  of 
his  two  daughters  (afterwards  his  colieirs) 
he  gave  eaen  of  them  a  portion  of  20,000/. 
The  husband  of  Anne,  the  second  daughter, 
wns  William  Peere  Williams,  the  eminent 
Chancer}'  reporter  of  that  time ;  and  their 
eldest  son,  Sir  Hutchins  Williams,  was  in 
1747  honoured  with  a  baronetcy,  which 
became  extinct  in  1784.  {DUtreWs  Diary^ 
i.  529,  598,  iii.  93,  iv.  289,  051,  v.  570;  3 
LevifiZf  .351.) 

EUTTOK,  Richard,  is  called  by  King 
Charles,  although  he  declared  the  imposi- 
tion of  ship-money  to  be  illegal,  'the  honest 
judge.'  He  was  the  second  son  of  Anthony 
Hutton,  of  a  ffood  Yorkshire  familv  re- 
dding at  Penrith  in  Cumberland,  and  was 
bom  there  about  1500.  He  was  sent  to 
Jesus  College.  Cambridge,  where  he  de- 
Tbted  himselx  to  the  study  of  divinity, 
but  was  induced  to  pursue  the  law  as  a 


HUTTON 

profession.  He  became  a  member,  firrt,  of 
Staple  Inn,  in  the  liall  of  which  his  tnw 
are  emblazoned  on  the  south  window,  ind 
next  of  Gray*s  Inn,  where  he  was  cilled  to 
the  bar  on  June  10, 1586.  When  Jamei 
came  to  the  crown,  he  was  added  to  the 
list  of  those  whom  Queen  Elizabeth,  jot 
before  her  death,  had  summoned  to  tab 
the  degree  of  the  coif  at  Easter  1003,  ud 
was  then  knighted.  (FuUer*8  Worlhietjl 
237 ;  Athen,  Oxon.  iiL  27.)  In  this  cbi- 
racter  he  was  the  leading  counsel  for  the 
defendant  in  the  case  of  the  post-nttL 
{State  Trials,  ii.  009.) 

In  1008  he  was  made  recorder  of  York, 
and  on  May  3,  1017,  was  appointed  ajndgv 
of  the  Common  l^leas.  Lord  Chancellor 
Bacon's  address  to  him  on  his  being  swon 
in  is  memorable  for  the  character  it  gives 
of  him,  and  the  advice  it  offei«.  'The 
king,'  it  begins,  '  being  duly  informed  of 
your  learning,  integrity,  discretion,  expe- 
rience, means,  and  reputation  in  your  coan- 
trv,  hath  thought  fit  not  to  leave  you  the^ 
talents  to  be  employed  upon  yourself  onlr, 
but  to  call  you  to  serve  himself  and  m 
people.'  Among  the  counsels  he  gtre 
were  *  that  you  should  draw  your  learning 
from  your  books,  not  out  of  your  brain; 
'that  you  should  be  a  light  to  jurortto 
open  their  eyes,  but  not  a  guide  to  lead 
them  by  the  noses ; '  '  t]iat  your  speech  be 
with  gravity  as  one  of  the  saf^es  of  the  law, 
and  not  talkative,  nor  with  ImpertineDt 
fipng  out  to  show  learning ; '  and  particu- 
larly '  that  your  hands,  and  the  hands  of 
your  hands,  I  mean  those  about  you,  be 
clean  and  uncorrupt  from  gifts,  from  med- 
dling with  titles  and  from  serving  of  tuns, 
be  they  of  great  ones  or  small  ones?  ( Wcdi, 
vii.  278.)  Pity  that  his  own  precentww 
not  followed  ty  the  lecturer  as  well  as  it 
was  by  his  auditor. 

On  the  accession  of  Charles  I.,  Sir  Ri- 
chard Hutton  was  the  eldest  puisne  judp 
of  the  court,  and  on  the  death  of  Chief 
Justice  Hobart,  so  much  confidence  was 
placed  in  his  learning  and  integrity  that 
the  vacancy  was  not  supplied  for  nearkft 
▼ear,  during  which  he  presided  as  prune 
1  udge.  (  Croke,  Car.  50.)  When  Sir  John 
"Finch  applied  to  each  of  the  judges  sepa- 
rately for  their  opinions  with  regard  to 
ship-money,  Justice  Hutton  refused  to  sub- 
scribe, and*  although  he  afterwards  signed 
the  united  opinion  which  they  gave  is 
favour  of  its  legality,  he  declared,  ^rhn 
Hampden's  case  came  judicially  beftn 
him  m  1037,  that  he  had  so  subsoihiA 
only  for  conformity  with  the  majority^  hit 
that  his  private  opinion  was  ever  9gBt^ 
it;  and  he  gave  nis  reasons,  at  hb  aWi 
'  with  as  much  perspicuity  be  ihamiKf^ 
fections  which  attend  my  age  irillrifiV- 
leave/  why  judgment  aagblk  M  "'^^ 
given  for  the  king.    (Staie  Atfb       I 


HYDE  HYDE  361 

1191.)  He  repeated  his  interpretation  of.  upon  them.  For  these  proceedings  the 
the  law  in  his  charge  to  the  grand  jury  at  judges  in  the  commencement  of  the  Long 
Northampton  when  Thomas  Harrison,  a  Parliament  in  1640  were  called  to  account, 
idergyman  of  that  county,  foolishly  taking  and  their  judgment  reversed.  (State  Triab, 
umbrage  at  this,  came  to  the  bar  of  the  I  iii.  235-335 ;  TlliMdocke,  38.)  Lonff  before 
Ckmimon  Pleas,  and  cried  out  in  a  loud  '  this  inTestigation  took  place  Sir  Nicholas 
Toice,  ^  1  do  accuse  Mr.  Justice  Hutton  of  was  removed  from  the  violence  of  the  times, 
high  treason.'  He  soon  suffered  for  his  ;  He  was  seized  with  a  fever,  which  Liord 
temerity.  Being  indicted  for  the  offence,  I  Clarendon  says  he  got  from  the  infection  of 
he  was  fined  5000/.  and  imprisoned,  and  ,  some  gaol  in  the  summer  circuit,  and  died 
required  to  make  his  submission  in  all  the  ;  on  August  25,  1631. 
courts  at  Westminster.  The  only  point  of  i  In  the  opinions  given  by  him  and  his  col- 
the  story  that  does  not  tell  to  the  judf^e's  leagues,  in  answer  to  the  king's  questions, 
credit  is  that  he  also  brought  an  action  for  I  they  seem  to  have  acted  an  independent 
damages  against  Harrison,  and  recovered  j  part,  and  also  on  several  other  occasions,  in 
lOXXXW.     {broke J  Car,  503.)  I  refusing  to  stop  the  course  of  lustice  at  the 

He  died  on  February  25, 1638-0,  leaving  j  king's  command.  Sir  Nicholas  is  said  to 
« large  family  and  a  fair  estate  at  Golds-  i  have  been  mean  in  his  person  and  bearing, 
borough  in  Yorkshire,  and  was  buried  at  |  and  was  so  unostentatious  that  he  rode  his 
St  Dunstan's-in-t he-West.  He  compiled  ;  circuits  on  horseback,  according  to  Sir 
*  Reports  of  sundry  Gases,'  which  were  j  Symonds  D'Ewes,  in  a  whitish-blue  cloak, 
published  after  hisdeath.  {Surtees  Dur^  \  *  more  like  a  clothier  or  a  woolman  than  a 
Jiaiit,  i.  clxvi.)  !  lord  chief  justice.*    But  Croke  and  White- 

HTDE,  Nicholas,  to  whose  family  Nor-  >  locke,  his  contemporaries  and  colleagues^ 
bury,  in  the  county  of  Chester,  had  belonged  and  Lord  Clarendon,  his  nephew,  give  evi- 
in  regular  descent  from  the  time  of  the  Con-  dence  of  the  sterling  points  of  his  character, 
quest,  was  the  youngest  eon  of  Lawrence  Ci-oke  {Car,  2:25)  calls  him  *a  grave,  reli- 
Hyde,  ofWeat  Hatch  m  Wiltshire,  by  Anne,  gious,  discreet  man,  and  of  great  learning 
daughterof  Nicholas  Sybill,  Esq.,  of  Chimb-  and  piety.'  Judge  Whitelocke  says  that 
hams  in  Kent,  and  widow  of  Matthew  So-  ,  *  he  bved  in  the  place  with  great  integrity 
merton,  Esq.,  of  Claverton  in  Somersetshire,    and  uprightness,  and  with  great  wisdom  and 

At  his  father's  death  he  was  left  depen-  ;  temper,  considering  the  ticklishness  of  the 
dent  on  his  mother,  except  an  annuity  of  times.  He  would  never  undertake  to  the 
30/.  for  life  bequeathed  to  him  by  his  father,  j  king,  nor  adventure  to  give  him  a  resolute 
Admitted  to  the  Middle  Temple,  he  was  '  answer  in  any  weighty  business,  when  the 
called  to  the  bar  by  that  society,  who  elected  question  was  of  the  law,  but  he  would  pray 
him  their  reader  in  Lent  1017,  and  their  that  he  might  confer  with  his  brethren.' 
treasurer  in  1620.  He  had  previously  en-  '  {Hmhwarthy  ii.  111.)  Lord  Clarendon  saya 
tered  parliament  in  1603  as  member  for  I  of  him  (Life,  i.  3-13),  *  His  justice  and  sin- 
Ohristchurch,  Hants,  and  he  is  first  noticed  '  cerity  were  so  conspicuous  throughout  the 
in  the  Keports  as  an  advocate  in  1613.  He  .  kingdom  that  the  death  of  no  judge  had  in 
had  sufficiently  distinguished  himself  to  be  i  any  time  been  more  lamented, 
employed  by  the  Duke  of  Buckingham  in  ,  He  married  Margaret,  daughter  of  Arthur 
preparing  his  defence  to  the  articles  of  im-  |  Swayne,  Esq.,  of  Sarson,  and  left  several 
peachment  prepared  against  him  by  the  ^  children. 
House  of  Commons  in  1626.    (Pari.  Hist,       HTDE,  Edward  (Earl  of  Clarendon), 


u,  167 ;  WhUelocke,  8.)  The  care  and  in- 
genuity evinced  in  that  defence  were  so 
satisfactory  to  the  duke  that  he  was  by  the 


will  ever  be  regarded  with  admiration  and 
reverence  for  his  devoted  adherence  to 
Charles  1.  during  his  misfortunes,  and  to 


favourite's  influence  nominated  chief  justice  \  Charles  II.  for  nearly  twenty  years  after, 
of  the  King's  Bench  on  February  5, 1627  '  His  services  to  both  monarchs,  and  the  in- 
(Rmnery  xviii.  8.%),  and  knighted.  j  fluence  he  exercised  in  the  councils  of  that 

lie  presided  in  the  court  for  four  years  eventful  period,  must  necessarily  occupy  a 
and  a  half  only,  and  had  no  easy  time  of  it.  j  large  and  interesting  portion  of  the  annals 
He  and  the  other  judges  had  to  justify  them-  !  of  the  kingdom ;  and  though  the  principles 
selves  before  the  House  of  Lords  for  re-  i  by  which  ne  was  guided,  and  the  motives 
fusing  to  discharge  the  five  gentlemen  who    which  prompted  him,  will  no  doubt  be  vari- 


were  imprisoned  for  refusing  to  contribute 
^  the  loan.  (Pari  Hist,  ii.  201.)  He  had 
■also,  in  1620,  to  adjudge  the  case  of  Stroud, 
Sir  John  Eliot,  and  the  other  members,  for 


ously  represented  according  to  the  political 
bias  of  the  writers  who  record  his  actions— 
one  party  impugning  what  the  other  extols, 
and  nis  conduct  being  painted  now  in  deep 


their  violence  to  the  speaker  on  the  last  day  I  shadow,  and  now  in  the  brightest  light, — 
of  the  session.  They  were  at  first  refused  the  almost  universal  verdict,  after  two  cen- 
bail,  unless  they  gave  sureties  for  their  good  i  tunes  of  investigation,  is  an  unreserved  ao« 
behaviour,  which  they  refusing,  some  of  j  knowledgment  of  his  loyalty,  his  wisdom, 
iiiem  were  tried  and  sentence  pronounced    and  his  integrity. 


362 


HYDE 


Henry  Hyde,  the  father  of  the  earl,  was 
the  third  son  of  Lawrence  Hyde  of  West 
Hatch,  and  the  hrother  hoth  of  the  above 
Sir  Nicholas  Hyde,  and  of  Sir  Lawrence, 
the  father  of  the  next  mentioned  Sir 
lioheri  Hyde.  By  his  marriage  with 
Mary,  daughter  and  one  of  the  coheirs  of 
Edward  Langford,  Esq.,  of  Trowbridge,  he 
had  a  large  family.  Ldward  was  the  third 
of  his  four  sons,  and  was  bom  at  Dinton  in 
Wiltshire,  the  family  residence,  on  February 
18, 1008-9.  He  was  s(-nt  to  Oxford  with 
a  royal  recommendation  to  be  elected  a 
demy  at  Magdalen  CoUepc :  on  the  refusal 
of  which  (Cal.  State  Papers  ri0i>3],  8,  120) 
he  was  admitted  a  student  at  Magdalen 
Hall  in  Lent  Term  102:5.  On  taking  his 
degree  of  B.A.  he  bep^an  his  legal  curri- 
culum at  the  ^Middle  Temple  on  February 
1,  1020,  his  uncle  Sir  Nicholas  being  then 
treasurer.  Early  in  lOcJo  he  and  White- 
locke  were  chosen  the  repi-esentatives  of 
that  society  to  manage  the  famous  masque 
giyen  by  all  the  four  inns  of  court  to  the 
king  and  queen,  for  the  purpose  of  showing 
their  disapproval  of  the  doctrines  promul- 
gated by  Fr^'nnc  against  interludes  in  his 
*  Histrio-MastLx.*  ( Whitchclce,  19.)  He 
acknowledges  that  at  first  he  gaye  himself 
up  to  gay  society  and  did  not  pursue  his  legal 
studies  yery  industriously,  but  still  enough 
to  enable  him  t6  pass  respectably  through 
his  uncle's  nightly  examinations. 

Before  his  call  to  tlie  bar  he  had  been 
married  twice — once  in  1029  to  Anne, 
daughter  of  Sir  George  Aylille,  who  died 
six  months  afterwards ;  and  again  in  Hjii2 
to  Frances,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Ayles- 
bury, Bart.  He  was  called  to  the  bar  on 
November  22,  10:33,  and  received  in  De- 
cember 1034  a  grant  of  the  oilice  of  keeper 
of  the  writs  and  rolls  of  the  Common  Pleas. 
{Rtftner,  xix.  OOo.)  His  name  does  not  ap- 
pear as  a  barrister  in  the  Beportsof  this 
period;  but  he  was  engaged  in  causes  before 
the  council,  and,  according  to  his  own  ac- 
count, he  got  into  good  practice  in  the 
Court  of  Kequests,  and  realised  a  good  pro- 
fessional income.  Dividing  his  time  be- 
tween forensic  studies  and  polite  literature, 
he  formed  intimacies  with  the  most  eminent 
men  in  both  classes,  and  was  happy  in  the 
enjoyment  of  their  society,  till  the  troubles 
that  afterwards  arose  d^ivided  him  from 
some  of  his  early  friends. 

In  the  lirst  parliament  of  1040  he  was 
returned  by  two  constituencies,  Wooton 
Basset  and  Shaftesbury,  and  sat  for  the 
former.  During  its  short  session  he  spoke 
against  the  grievous  encroachments  of  the 
Earl  Marshal  s  Court,  of  which,  in  the  second 
(or  '  Long')  parliament  of  that  year,  repre- 
senting then  the  borough  of  Saltash,  he 
procured  the  suppression.  Though  exert- 
mg  himself  at  first  for  the  removal  of  this 
and  other  enormous  grievances,  as  soon  as 


HYDE 

he  saw  the  intention  to  encroacli  n^n  the 
royal  prerogatives  he  stood  forward  in  their* 
support.    The  dominant  party  in  the  house, 
he  says,  were  inimical  to  him  from  the  fint^ 
knowing  his  devotion  to  the  Church  and  his 
loyalty  to  the  king,  and  particularly  for  his 
endeavours   to   save  Lord  Stra£fbrd*s  life. 
Yet  they  appear  to  have  used  him  for  thdr 
purposes,    by  making    him    chairman  of 
several  of  their  committees,  and  sendii^ 
obnoxious  messages  by  him  to  the  Lonl& 
Cromwell,  whom  he    had  occanon  to  re- 
buke for  intemperate  conduct  in  a  pxiTste 
committee  where  he  presided,  entertained 
against  him  a  great  enmity,  to  which  majr 
probably  be  traced  the  harsh  votes  agiiut 
him   that  were  afterwards   adopted.     In 
1041  he  hod  his  first  interview  with  \h» 
king,  who  was  desirous  to  thank  himforliis 
exertions  in  parliament,  and  to  induce  him 
to  delay  the  bill  against  episcopacy  till  his^ 
majesty    returned   from   Scotland,  which 
Hyde,  who  was  chairman  of  the  committee, 
managed  to  etfect    He  secretly  penned  the 
answer  adt.tpted  by  the  king  to  the  remon- 
strance of  the  Commons,  and  in  reward  for 
his  ser\dces  was  offered  the  place  of  soUdtor- 
generol,  which  he  declined  to  accept,  ad- 
vising the  king  that  it  would  be  dsngeroos 
to  turn  out  St.  John  at  that  time.    He  con- 
tinued privately  to  give  information  to  the 
court,  OS  well  before  as  after  its  removal  to 
York,  of  all  that  wastransacting^in  thehooae,. 
supplying  answers  to  the  various  dedan- 
tions  of  the  parliament,  which  the  king,  t& 
screen  hmi  from  discovery,  invariably  copied 
with  Ills  own  hand. 

The  republican  leaders,  though  they  «u- 
pected  Hyde  to  be  the  author,  hatl  not 
sutlicient  evidence  of  the  fact  to  visit  hbn 
with  the  vengeance  they  contemplated. 
As  soon  however  as  he  eluded  their  inten- 
tions by  joining  the  king  at  York,  they  die- 
abie<l  him  from  sitting  in  the  house  tni 
excepted  him  from  the  pardon  they  offered 
to  all  wlu)  would  withdraw  from  the  Idng^ 
On  March  :3,  1043,  the  office  of  chancellor  ; 
and  sub-treasurer  of  the  Exchequer  waa 
granted  to  him  for  life  (4  Report  Pub,  &«■> 
A2)p.  ii.  187) ;  and  he  was  at  the  ease 
time  knighted  and  sworn  a  privy  counsellor. 
He  was  consulted  by  the  king  in  his  moafc 
secret  ail'airs,  composing  most  of  the  im- 
portant state  papers  issued^  and  was  one  <iC 
the  conductors  of  the  issueless  negotiation 
at  Uxbridge.  When  it  was  deteimmed  to 
send  IViuce  Charles  to  the  west^  Sir  Bd- 
waixi  Hyde  was  one  of  those  appointed^ 
accompany  him,  and  his  interview  vith 
the  king  at  his  departure  on  March  4,  \Mf 
was  the  last  that  he  had  with  the  ioIb^ 
tuuate  monarch.  He  attended  the 
till  July  1040,  when,  his  highneM 
Jersey,  to  which  he  had  letiradyftri 
Hyde  remained  at  the  fonnar  piM 
two  succeeding  yean^  emplogfipB  Ml Wmi^ 


KYDE 

in  preparing  his  great  work  on  the  History 
of  the  Kebellion,  some  of  the  materials  for 
-which  were  supplied  b^'  the  king  himself. 
He  then  joined  the  prmce  again,  and  was 
-with  him  at  the  time  of  his  father's  murder, 
'when  he  was  immediately  sworn  of  the  new 
king's  privy  council.  Soon  after  he  and 
liora  Cfottington  were  sent  as  ambassadors 
to  Spain,  where  their  mission  was  not  suc- 
cessful, and  then  returning  to  his  family  at 
Antwerp,  he  stayed  there  till  after  the 
battle  of  Worcester,  when,  being  summoned 
to  the  king  at  Paris,  he  continued  in  close 
attendance  on  his  majesty  in  all  the  various 

? laces  at  which  he  resided  during  his  exile, 
'he  king  relying  on  him  as  his  chief  ad- 
viser, he  not  only  performed  such  duties  as 
attached  to  his  office  (wliich  it  may  well  be 
supposed,  considering  the  straitncss  of  the 
Exchequer,  were  difficult  enough),  but  also 
acted  for  some  time  as  the  principal  secre- 
tary of  state,  and  carried  on  the  most  im- 
portant part  of  the  correspondence.  The 
weight  of  these  duties  was  greatly  increased 
by  the  extremity  of  penury  and  want  which 
he  suffered,  of  which  he  gives  a  pitiable 
account  in  his  letter  to  Sir  Edward  r^icho- 
las.  Yet  even  then  his  position  excited 
envy,  and,  with  a  view  to  his  removal  from 
it,  a  ridiculous  charge  was  invented  against 
him  that  he  was  in  intimate  correspondence 
with  Cromwell,  into  whose  chamber  it  was 
alleged  he  had  been  seen  to  enter  on  a 
secret  visit  to  England.  Charles  treated  it 
as  it  deserved,  by  giving  his  personal  testi- 
mony of  its  falsehood. 

The  Great  Seal,  ever  since  Sir  Edward 
Herbert's  resignation  in  June  1654,  had  re- 
mained in  tlie  hands  of  the  king  without 
any  occaj^ion  for  its  use.  But  now,  being 
pestered  with  wrpetual  applications  by  the 
companions  of  his  exile  for  offices,  titles,  and 
reversions,  and  by  the  adherents  of  Crom- 
well for  secret  confirmations  of  grants  and 
estates,  the  king  put  an  end  to  the  personal 
annoyance  by  entrusting  it  on  January  21), 
1058,  to  Sir  Edward  llyde,  with  the*  title 
uf  lord  chancellor,  and  in  that  character  he 
accompanied  the  king  to  England  on  the 
Ifccstoration  in  10()0.  K>r  which  by  his  cau- 
tious counsels  he  materially  cleared  the  way. 
^Vs  chancellor  he  resided  at  first  at  Dorset 
House  in  Fleet  Street,  and  afterwards  at 
Worcester  House  in  the  Strand,  till  he  re- 
moved in  1GG7  to  the  palace  which  ho  built 
at  the  top  of  St.  James's  Street,  the  magni- 
ficence of  which  so  greatly  increased  the 
popular  prejudice  against  him. 

To  the  heavy  and  multifarious  duties  of 
this  office  were  added  those  of  the  chan- 
cellor of  the  Exchequer,  which  he  executed 
for  several  months  after  Charles's  return, 
be^ddes  the  management  of  all  the  important 
business  of  the  state,  and  the  necessary 
changes  consequent  on  the  renewal  of  legiti- 
mate government.    He  was,  in  fact,  prime 


HYDE 


363 


minister,  without  the  title,  but  with  all 
the  envy  and  discontent  usually  attendant 
upon  one  who  is  supposed  to  guide  the 
councils  of  his  sovereign.  Notwithstand- 
ing the  confidence  placed  in  him  both  by 
the  late  and  the  present  king,  the  ^ueen- 
dowager  had  from  the  first  shown  a  distaste 
and  almost  an  aversion  to  him,  and  her 
jealousy  of  the  ascendency  of  his  counsela 
instead  of  her  own  was  in  no  degree  abated 
by  the  successful  results  which  she  could 
not  but  attribute  principally  to  him. 
Charles's  confidence  however  was  not  to- 
be  shaken,  and  he  disappointed  Hyde's 
enemies  by  calling  the  chancellor  up  to  the 
House  of  Peers,  as  Baron  Hyde  of  Hindon 
(November  3, 1660),  and  by  presenting  him 
with  a  roy^  gift  of  20,000/.  Soon  after- 
wards his  daughter  Anne's  marriage  with 
the  Duke  of  York  was  acknowledged,  and 
her  claims  fully  recognised.  On  April  30^ 
1661,  three  days  before  the  coronation,  the- 
chancellor  was  advanced  from  a  barony  to  a 
viscounty  and  an  earldom,  by  the  titles  of 
Viscount  Combury  in  Wiltshire  (an  estate- 
presented  to  him  iy  the  king),  and  Earl  of 
Clarendon. 

This  elevadon  for  a  time  silenced  hia 
enemies,  and  for  the  next  year  or  two  his 
influence  in  the  royal  councils  suffered  no 
diminution.  The  kin^  treated  him  with 
kindness  and  familiarity,  applied  to  him 
for  advice  in  all  emergencies,  and  even 
patiently  submitted  to  the  remonstrances 
he  sometimes  ventured  to  offer  against  tiie 
immorality  so  openly  practised  and  encou- 
raged at  court.  But  at  length  the  panders- 
to  those  practices  obtained  the  mastery. 
By  ridiculing  and  mimicking  the  chan* 
cellor's  overstrict  formality,  tney  led  the 
king  gradually,  first  to  sufier,  then  to  laugh 
at  tlieir  indecent  reflections,  till  by  degrees- 
the  tickle  pupil  was  ashamed  of  appearing  to 
be  schooled.  Clarendon's  credit  at  court 
thus  sensibly  declining,  his  policy  became 
the  next  subject  of  attack.  To  him  were- 
attributed  every  political  oversight,  every 
royal  disappointment,  and  every  national 
calamity,  corruption  was  insinuated  and 
bribery  was  hinted,  till  at  last  his  enemies- 
acquired  such  an  ascendency  over  the  Idng- 
and  the  parliament  that  his  downfidl  and 
his  ruin  became  inevitable. 

The  king  became  more  and  more  tired  of 
his  reproachful  lectures,  administered^  an 
the  chancellor  acknowledges,  with  unadvised 
earnestness;  his  enemies  at  court  were  more 
and  more  jealous  of  the  influence  he  still 
retained;  he  had  been  all  along  obnoxious 
both  to  Presbyterians  and  Roman  Catholics ; 
and  the  people,  taught  to  attribute  to  his  mis- 
management the  miscarriages  of  the  state^ 
were  strongly  prejudiced  against  him.  The 
way  was  thus  fully  paved  to  the  success  of 
the  intrigue  for  his  removal,  in  which  the 
chief  actozs  were  the  Duke  of  BuddDgham, 


364 


HYDE 


Lord  Arlington,  and  Sir  William  Coventry, 
urged  on  and  aided  by  the  arts  of  the 
Duchess  of  Cleveland,  the  king*s  shameless 
mistress.  Clarendon,  conscious  of  innocence, 
refused  -to  resign,  and  the  Great  Seal  was 
taken  from  him  on  August  •'K),  1067.  At 
the  meeting  of  parliament  in  October,  the 
malice  of  his  opponents  not  being  satisfied 
with  the  triumpn  they  had  obtained,  an  im- 
peachment for  high  treason  was  voted  against 
him  by  the  Commons;  but  the  Lords  refused 
to  commit  him  upon  so  general  an  accusa- 
tion until  some  particular  charge  was  ex- 
hibited. No  one  can  read  the  articles  with- 
out seeing  the  weakness  and  frivolitv  of  the 
allegations,  none  of  them,  even  if  true, 
amounting  to  treason.  To  each  and  every 
of  them  Clarendon  has  left  a  satisfisu^tory 

answer ;  but  during  the  discussion  on  the  i  strictly  impartial ;  and  his  *  orders '  for  the 
subject  of  his  committal,  which  continued    regulation  of  the  ofHcers  of  his  court,  reo- 
for  near  a  month,  and  nearly  led  to  an  open 
breach  between  the  two  houses,  he  with- 


HYDE 

in  St  James's,  which  nourished  the  po- 
pular prejudice  a^nst  him,  neatly  ex- 
ceeded the  cost  he  intended,  and  compelled 
him  for  want  of  funds  to  mortgage  his 
estate ;  and  the  nicknames  of  Holland 
House,  and  Dunkirk  House,  and  Tangier 
Hall,  by  which  it  was  satirically  called, 
have  been  long  dismissed  as  unfouided 
misnomers  by  the  prejudiced  multitude. 

His  judicial  career  was  that  of  a  caatioiu 
and  prudent  man,  conscious  of  bis  defiden- 
cies  and  anxious  to  supply  them  with  tbe 
experience  of  others.    He  selected  the  best 
men  to  hll  the  vacancies  on  the  bench,  and 
he  is  said  never  to  have  pronounced  an  im- 
portant decree  without  the  assistaooe  o{ 
two  of  the  judges.    Li  the  admimstntioD 
of  justice  he  is  acknowledged  to  hare  been 


dered  necessary  by  the  change  in  the  go- 
vernment,  are*  still  considei^  adminblr 

drew  to  France.    This  he  was  induced  to    adapted  for  their  purpose.    His  principal 

do,  much  against  his  own  judgment  and 

inclination,  in  consequence  of  an  intimation 

at    iirst 


from  the  kiu^,  who,  though 
acknowled^ng  his  innocence,  was  worked 
upon  ungratefully  to  desert  him :  and  from 
the  urgency  of  his  friends,  who,  consider- 
ing the  temper  of  the  parliament  and  the 
people,  were  fearful  if  he  stayed  that  he 
would  meet  with  Stratford's  fate. 

He  left  a  justificatory  letter  to  the  House 
of  Lords,  which,  from  the  reflections  it  con- 
tained against  his  persecutors,  so  excited 
the  bile  of  the  Commons  that  it  was 
ordered  to  be  burned  by  the  common  hong- 


fame  now  rests  upon  his  valuable  'Hirtorf 
of  the  Ilebellion,  and  the  interesting  me- 
moirs of  his  own  life ;  works  which,  thoogh 
evidently  betraving  a  desire  to  justifjliia 
royal  masters  in  the  course  they  raspec- 
tively  pursued,  and  even  to  find  excuses 
for  their  most  equivocal  acts,  will  alwtjs 
be  valued  as  displaying  a  deep  knowledge 
of  mankind,  and  as  ably  picturing  toe 
scenes  he  describes.  Admired  as  these 
w^orks  deser>'cdly  are,  and  beautiful  as  are 
some  of  the  characters  he  draws,  it  most 
be  acknowledged  that  the  length  of  his 
sentences  and  turn  of  his  periods  give  s 


man ;  and  they  pursued  their  inveteracy  so  certain  turgidity  and  stifluess  to  his  strle. 
far  as  to  pass  an  act  banishing  him  from  '  His  other  writings  were  chiefly  theological, 
the  kingdom,  and  prohibiting  all  correspon-  |  devotional,  and  political,  and  few  of  them 
dence  with  him,  except  bv  his  own  children  :  are  now  regarded, 
and  servants.  Their  malice  followed  him  ;  It  may  be  doubted  whether  he  was  be- 
abroad,  France  by  their  influence  at  first  nefited  iy  the  union  of  his  daughter  ^th 
refusing  him  an  asylum ;  but  soon  altering  i  the  Duke  of  York ;  in  fact,  he  prophened 
her  policy  and  withdrawing  her  prohibi-  that  it  would  sooner  or  later  prove  hu  nun; 
tion,  the  banished  earl  retired  first  to  ;  and  it  certainly  did  not  retard  it  Two 
Montpellier,  then  to  Moulins,  and  eventually  :  queens  were  the  i^sue  of  that  connection, 
to  Kouen,  patiently  employing  the  seven  both  holding  prominent  and  hononiable 
years  of  his  exile  in  the  completion  of  those  place  in  our  historj',  the  reign  of  one  of 
works  which  have  raised  his  character  and  whom  acquii'ed,  from  the  eminent  men 
extended  his  fame.  He  died  at  the  latter  !  who  flourished  in  it,  the  designation  of 
city  on  December  0,  1074,  in  the  sixty-  the  Augustan  Age.  The  earl'S  eldest  bod 
aixth  year  of  his  age.  It  seems  extraordi-  Henry  (the  author  of  the  Diary  of  his  Time  I 
nary,  and  looks  as  if  the  party  prejudice  succeeded  to  the  title,  which,  with  that  of 
against  him  had  subsided,  that  his  remains  the  Earl  of  Kochestcr,  became  extinct  in 
should  have  been  allowed  a  re-sting-place  in  1753.  The  earldom  of  Clarendon  was  re- 
Westminster  Abbey,  his  body  having  been  .  vived  in  177(5  in  the  person  of  Thomas 
Juried  in  Henry  the  Seventh*s  Chapel.  ,  Villiers,  a  scion  of  the  house  of  Jenev,vho 
The  imputation  of  bribery  to  which  he  is  {  had  married  the  granddaughter  and  Iieir  of 
metimes  subject  is  sufficiently  refuted,  as  ,  the  last  earl.     (^Clarendon:   Wood;  IfMfe- 


well  by  the  absence  of  any  specific  charges 

being  brought  forward  at  a  time  when  they 

would  have  been  welcomed  and  encouraj;ed, 

as  by  his  leaving,  after  such  opportunities 

of  accumulation,  his  family  so  poorly  pro-  '  father,  Sir  Lawrence  Hyde^  ] 

-yidedfor.    TheDiiildingof  his  great  house  |  of  attorney-general  to  Qim 


locke:  Burnet;  Macdiarmid^s  X»Mf;ft&) 
HTDE,  KoBEST,  was  the  fint  oo«m  ^ 
the  Earl  of  Clareimon,  both  bdng  asfki** 
of  the  above  Sir   Nidiolas  H|4b-    B> 


HYDE 

consort  of  Jamee  L  By  his  maniago  with 
fiubaia,  daughter  of  —  Castilion,  of  Ben- 
ham,  Berks,  Esq.,  he  had  no  less  than 
elsTen  sons,  most  of  whom  distinguished 
themselTes  in  their  several  Tocations.  Of 
the  four  in  holy  orders,  one,  Alexander, 
became  Bishop  of  Salishury ;  another, 
Edward,  dean  of  Windsor;  and  a  third, 
Thomas,  fellow  of  New  College  and 
judge  of  the  Admiralty.  Another  son, 
Sr  Henry,  bred  to  diplomacy,  was  be- 
headed by  the  parliament  in  1651,  for 
his  adherence  to  the  king ;  and  the 
joongest  acaif  James,  a  doctor  in  medi- 
cines was  elected  principal  of  Msgdalen 
Hall.  Two  only  lollowed  their  father's 
profesuon :  Sir  Frederick,  queen's^  seneant, 
was  promoted  to  a  judgeship  in  South 
Wales;  and  Sir  Robert,  whose  career  is 
now  to  be  traced,  rose  to  the  dignity  which 
his  unde  had  preyiously  attained. 

Robert,  who  was  the  second  son,  was 
bom  at  his  father's  house  at  Heale,  near 
Salisburr,  in  161>5^He  was  called  to  the 
bar  of  the  MiddU^emple  on  February  7, 
1617,  and  elected  reader  in  Lent  1638. 
By  Uiis  time  he  had  got  into  considerable 
practice,  and  two  years  after,  in  May  1640, 
ne  was  summoned  to  take  the  degree  of 
the  coifl  Haying  been  chosen  recorder  of 
Salisbury,  he  was  returned  as  the  repre- 
sentatiye  of  that  dty  to  the  Long  Parlia- 
ment. A  staunch  loyalist,  he  joined  the 
court  party,  and  made  himself  obnoxious 
by  yoting  against  the  bill  for  the  attainder 
o{  Lord  Strafford,  for  which  his  name  was 
plscarded  in  the  list  of  the  minority  who 
opposed  that  unjust  measure,  under  the 
title  of  *  betrayers  of  their  country.*  When 
the  king  retired  to  Oxford  the  seijeant 
joined  him,  and  attended  the  meeting  of 
parliament  there,  and  also  executed  the 
commission  of  array;  the  consequence  of 
which  was  that  he  was  yoted  a  malipiant; 
and  ezpeUed  from  his  seat  at  Westminster. 
After  the  fatal  termination  of  that  reign, 
his  noble  relative  (yi.  340)  relates  that 
Charles  H.,  in  escaping  from  the  disastrous 
htttle  of  Worcester  in  1657,  was  sheltered 
for  many  days  in  the  mansion  at  Ileale, 
which  then  oelonged  to  the  seneant,  and 
was  occupied  by  the  widow  of  his  elder 
hrother.     (Fbrl.  Hid.  iL  622, 766,  iii.  219.) 

Daring  the  Protectorate  he  resumed  his 
practice  at  the  bar,  and  his  arguments  are 
reported  by  Hardres  and  Sideran.  At  the 
Bestoration  he  was  immediately  knighted, 
and  appointed  a  judge  of  the  Common 
Fleas,  nis  patent  being  dated  May  31, 
1060.  He  was  one  of  the  commissioners 
for  the  trial  of  the  regicides,  but,  except 
on  points  at  law,  took  no  part  in  the  pro- 
ceediDga.  In  the  following  spring  the  tnree 
Penya,  a  mdher  and  two  sons,  were  tried 
htbm  him,  and  condemned  to  be  hanged 
for  tlie  mnzder  of  W^illiam  Harrison  at 


HYNDE 


365 


I  Campden  in  Gloucestershire,  though  the 
body  had  not  been  found,  and  though  the 
judge  at  the  preceding  assize,  Sir  Christo- 
pher Tumor,  nad  on  that  account  refused 
to  entertain  the  charge.  Seyeial  years 
after  their  execution  Harrison  appeared 
again,  and  related  that  he  had  been  kid- 
napped and  sold  to  slayery,  from  which  he 
had  escaped.  The  judge  was  dead  before 
this  discoyery  was  made.  {Siderfin,  2; 
StaU  Trials,  y.  1030,  xiv.  1312-24.) 

He  was  indebted  to  his  noble  relatiye  for 
his  promotion  on  October  19, 1663,  to  the 
chiet  justiceship  of  the  King's  Bench,  where 
he  presided  for  about  a  year  and  a  half, 
without  any  great  reputation  as  a  lawyer ; 
but  Sir  Thomas  Raymond  (Rep.  130)  says 
that  he  was  expert  in  the  pleas  of  the  crown, 
and  especially  in  those  which  concerned  a 

i'ustice  of  peace.  The  extreme  horror  that 
le  felt  at  anything  that  tended  to  rebeUion 
was  strongly  manifested  in  the  next  year 
on  the  trial  of  certain  printers  of  seditious 
books.  To  one  of  them  named  Tw3m, 
capitally  conyicted  of  printing  a  treason- 
able work,  called  ^A  Treatise  of  the 
Execution  of  Justice,'  &c.,  incitbg  the 
people  against  the  king  and  the  goyem- 
ment,  who  prayed  his  lordship  to  inter- 
cede for  him,  ne  gaye  the  extraordinary 
and  unmerciful  answer,  that  he  *  would  not 
intercede  for  his  own  father  in  this  case,  if 
he  were  aliye.'  He  was  as  seyere  against 
any  one  who  promulgated  doctrines  con- 
trary to  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church,  and  his 
conduct  on  the  trial  of  Benjamin  Keach  at 
Aylesbury  on  an  indictment  for  publishing 
an  heretical  book,  called  *The  Child's 
Instructor ;  or,  A  New  and  Easy  Primmer,' 
does  not  redound  to  his  credit  or  liberality. 
{Ihid.  yi.  615, 702.) 

He  died  on  May  1,  1665  (Siderfin,  253), 
and  was  buried  in  Salisbury  Cathedral. 
His  wife,  Mary,  the  sister  of  Francis  Baber, 
M.D.,  of  Chew  Magna  in  Somersetshire, 
brought  him  no  children. 

HTDE,  Thokas  de  la,  possessed  consi- 
derable property  in  Cornwall,  and  was 
sheriff  of  that  county  as  well  as  seneschal 
of  the  castles  of  Tintagel,  Restormel,  and 
Tremeton,  and  of  the  stannary  and  the 
coinage  there.  (Madoj;,  i.  107,  132,  144, 
201.)  He  was  placed  on  the  commission 
uf  trailbaston  for  the  ten  western  and 
south-western  counties  in  1305, 33  Edward 
I.  (N.  Fcsdera,  i.  970.)  He  died  in  8 
Edward  IL    {Cal  Inquis.  p.  m.  i.  256.) 

HTHBE,  John,  was  of  a  family  seated 
at  Madingley  in  Cambridgeshire.  He  was 
educated  at  Cambridge,  and  called  to  the 
bar  at  Gray's  Inn,  where  he  was  reader  in 
1517, 1627,  and  a  third  time  in  1631,  on 
his  being  (»lled  to  the  degree  of  the  ooif. 
On  Januaiy  2, 1636,  he  was  nominated  a 
king's  Serjeant ;  and  in  December  1540  a 
letter  was  addressed  to  him  by  tilie  cooiiGfly 


366 


IFELD 


directing  liim  and  three  others  to  take  a 
chaplain  and  a  servant  of  (Goodrich,  Bishop 
of  Ely,  and  to  search  their  houses,  and  also 
the  bishop's  study,  as  to  a  'sedycious  epistle 
•of  Melancton'8,'  and  if  they  found  that  he 
"had  assisted  in  the  translation,  to  charge 
him  to  appear  before  the  council.  (Acts 
Tiivy  Conncily  vii.  08.) 

An  act  passed  in  1542-3  in  Ilynde's 
favour  (St.  ^4  and  85  Henry  VIII.  c.  24) 
*  aifords  a  curious  insitrht  into  the  practice 
of  those  days  as  to  the  payments  made  to 
members  of  parliament.  It  recites  that 
the  manor  of  Burlewas,  otherwise  called 
the  Shyre  manor  of  the  county  of  Cam- 
bridge,'and  certain  lands  in  ^ladingley, 
were  let  to  farm  at  10/.  a  year,  to  the  in- 
tent that  the  yearly  profits  should  be 
applied  to  the  payment  of  the  fees  and 
wages  of  the  knights  of  that  county  sent 
to  parliament ;  and  that  it  miffht  be  per- 
fectly known  what  person  should  be  charged 
to  pay  the  said  rent  of  10/.,  all  the  gentle- 
men of  the  said  county  desired  that  it 
might  be,  and  it  was,  enacted  that  John 
Ilynde,  one  of  the  king's  seijeants-at-law, 
And  his  heirs,  should  hold  the  same  to 


INGE 

him,  his  heirs  and  assigns  for  ever,  npon 
condition  to  pay  10/.  to  the  aherin  and 
members  of  the  county,  who  were  to  diTide 
the  same  between  the  two  kniffhts  erenr 
year.  Hynde's  participation  in  the  plunder 
of  the  monasteries  is  evidenced  bj  varioiu 
grants  entered  in  the  Augmentation  Office. 

On  November  4,  1545,  he  was  promoted 
to  the  bench  of  the  Common  Pleaa,  and 
knighted.  He  sat  there  during  the  re- 
mainder of  Henry's  reign,  and  for  nearly 
four  years  in  that  of  Edward,  daring  part 
of  which  time  he  was  one  of  the  Coun<m  of 
the  North.  (Btnmet's  Reform,  ii.  pt,  iL  312.) 

He  died  in  October  Io50,  and  was  boiied 
in  St.  Dunstan's,  Fleet  Street    Old  Mt- 
chyn's  entry  (p.  4)  proves  him  to  hare 
been  of  gooci  repute  and  character,  for  after 
saying,  <  And  my  Lade  Hinde  dyd  make 
anodur  standard,  and  a  cote  armur,  aods 
penon,  and  a  elmet,  and  target,  and  swcnd, 
to  be  nad  at  the  nioynthe's  mynde  in  the 
contrey  for  him,  and  a  grett  doUe  of  moDOT, 
and  of  mett  and  drynk,  and  gownes  to  m 
pore,'  he  adds,  *  for  ther  was  myche  a  doo 
ther  for  hym.'    This    is  better  than  an 
epitaphs 


IPELD,  John  de,  was  bom  at  Ifcld  in 
Kent,  and  was  the  third  son  of  Thomas  de 
Ifeld.  During  the  reign  of  Edward  II.  he 
WAS  actiyely  employed  in  assessing  the  ' 
aids  imposed  by  parliament,  and  arraying 
the  men-at-arms.  {Pari,  Writs,  ii.  p.  ii. 
1037.)  In  1  Edward  IH.  he  was  one  of 
the  perambulators  of  the  forests  south  of 
the  Trent,  and  in  1329  was  a  justice  itine- 
rant into  Nottinghamshire.  He  next  re- 
presented his  natiye  county  in  parliament, 
and  as  late  as  13  Edward  HI.  was  a  com- 
missioner of  array  for  Surrey.  {Rot,  Pari, 
ii.  425;  Hasted,  i.'238;  N,  Fosdera,  ii.  1071.) 

ULIKGWOBTH,  KicuARD,  was  of  a 
Nottinghamshire  family,  seated  at  Kirkby 
Wodhouse.  He  practised  at  the  bar  from 
33  Henry  VI. ;  and  on  September  10, 1462, 
2  Edward  IV.  {Rot,  Pari,  y.  628),  he  was 
appointed  chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer, 
and  knighted.  He  continued  in  this  place 
till  the  restoration  of  Henry  VI.,  1470,  by 
whom  he  was  not  remoyed ;  but  as  soon  as 
Edward  IV.  resumed  the  crown  he  was 
superseded.  He  had  large  grants  of  land 
in  that  county  from  Edward  IV.,  all  of 
which  were  excepted  from  the  various  acts 
of  resumption  passed  in  that  reign. 

His  dea^  occuiied  in  1476,  and  he 
and  two  of  hia  sons.  Ralph  and  Ri- 
chard, were  buried  or  nad  monuments  in 
the  diiixch  of  St  Albao,  Led;  or  Ladle 


Lane,  Cripplegate,  in  which  ward,  in  the 
neighbourmg  parish  of  St  Giles,  he  pos- 
sessed a  house,  where  he  died.  (Co/,  ia- 
qtiis,  p.  m.  iv.  805,  375 ;  Rot,  Pari  T.  472, 
584;  Storvs  London  [7%owi«],  111.) 

IKOE,  William,  was  an  adyocate  of 
great  eminence  in  his  profession,  and  die 
king's  attorney  as  early  as  15  Edward  L 
1287,  being  then  retained  to  proaecute  and 
defend  for  the  king  at  a  salary  of  SOL  s 
year  {Issue  RoU,  iiL  101),  and  in  ike 
twentieth  year  he  is  noticed  as  the  kiofl^s 
seneant-at-law.  {Rot,  Pari  i.  24-85.)  In 
1293  he  was  one  of  the  eight  who  vm 
assigned  as  justices  to  take  assizesi  &&, 
throughout  the  kingdom  in  ud  of  the 
regular  judges,  in  which  office  he  contiDiied 
till  the  end  of  the  reign.  {Rat,  P^,  L 150- 
206.)  On  April  C,  1305,  he  was  one  of  the 
five  justices  of  trailbaston  named  for  No^ 
folk  and  Suffolk,  and  again  in  Febronf 
1307.  {Rot,  Pari,  i.  21 8 ;  N,  FoederOj  L  870) 

The  accession  of  Edward  IL  made  no 
alteration  in  his  position,  and  until  IdsvlA- 
yation  to  the  bench  his  name  appeaza  amoog 
the  adyocates  recorded  in  the  xear  Book^ 
showing  that,  notwithstanding  his  OBukf* 
ment  as  a  justice  of  assize, he  aid  notMSft 
his  practice  at  Westminster.  Tha  '  ^ 
of  his  appointment  as  a  judm  ol 
of  Common  Pleaa  was  datea  fli 
1314,8  Edward  IL;  andia; 


INGE 

while  merely  a  justice  of  tlie  Common  Pleas, 
he  opened,  by  tne  kind's  directions,  the  par- 
liament then  held  at  Lincoln.  (liot.  Pari, 
i.  350.) 

He  succeeded  as  chief  justice  of  the  King's 
Bench  in  February  1316 ;  but  presided  over 
this  court  for  little  more  than  a  vear,  for  on 
June  15, 1317,  he  was  displaeedi  by  Henry 
le  Scrope. 

Ho  died  in  1321,  leaving  large  possessions 
in  ten  counties.  (CaL  Inqms,  p.m.  i.  2^.) 
Part  of  his  Kentish  property,  the  manor 
of  Stanstead,  subordinate  to  Wrotham,  he 
obtfidned  by  his  marriage  with  Margery, 
one  of  the  daughters  of  Henry  Grapinell. 
{Hastedy  v.  355.) 

IKOE,  John,  though  probably  of  the  same 
family  as  the  above  William  Inge,  was  of  a 
different  branch  of  it  He  was  settled  in 
•Somersetshire,  and  was  employed  from  10 
Edward  II.  in  various  judicial  commissions 
within  that  county,  and  also  acted  there  as 
.assessor  of  the  aids  granted  by  Parliament. 
In  15  Edward  II.  he  was  sheriiF  of  Devon- 
shire, and  three  years  afterwards  had  the 
castles,  towns,  and  honors  of  Roger  de 
Mortimer  in  Wygeton  and  Ludlow  com- 
mitted to  his  custody. 

On  January  18, 1331,  4  Edward  HI.,  he 
was  made  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas, 
•and  died  about  the  twentieth  year,  leaving, 
by  his  wife  Alicia,  a  son  named  John.  {Pari. 
iVrUi,  ii.  p.  ii.  1039 ;  Ahb.  Rot  Orig,  i.  25, 
i>82,  ii.  291.) 

IKGLSBY,  Thomas  de,  settled  at  liipley 
in  Yorkshire,  is  mentioned  in  the  Year 
Book  of  21  Edward  HI.,  1347,  and  as  a 
judge  of  assize  in  the  twenty-fifth  year. 
His  appointment  as  a  judge  of  the  King's 
Bench  took  place  on  September  30, 13ol, 
35  Edward  IIL,  and  he  retained  his  seat  in 
that  court  for  the  sixteen  remaining  years 
of  the  reign,  being,  during  most  of  them, 
the  only  judge  there  in  addition  to  the  chief 
justice.  He  received  an  extra  nant  of  40A 
a  year  beyond  his  stated  judicial  salary  of 
forty  marks ;  and,  besides  this,  he  had  a  fee 
of  20/.  annually  for  holding  assizes  in  dif- 
ferent counties.    {Imi£  JRou,  353.) 

On  the  accession  of  Richard  II.  he  seems 
to  have  continued  in  the  King's  Bench,  as 
■no  new  judge  was  appointed  there  till  to- 
wards the  end  of  the  first  year.  About  that 
time  he  died,  and  was  buried  in  Bipley 
-Church,  where  his  tomb  still  remains.  By 
his  wife,  Catherine  Ripley,  he  left  several 
children,  from  whom  descended  the  under- 
mentioned Sir  Charles  Ingleby.  Another 
of  his  descendants,  Sir  WOliam  Ingleby  of 
Ripley,  was  created  a  baronet  in  1&2,  and 
the  title,  becoming  extinct  in  1772,  was  re- 
newed, and  is  now  held  by  a  kinsman  of  the 
family.  (BoU(m^8Barcmet.iL2&3',  Bwke^s 
£xt.  BaranH,  27Q.) 

nreiiSBY,  Chahles,  whose  father,  John 
Ingleby,  was  a  direct  descendant  from  the 


INSULA 


367 


above  Sir  Thomas  Ingleby,  was  called  to 
the  bar  at  Gray's  Inn  in  1671.  Being  a 
Roman  Catholic,  he  was  involved,  in  Fe- 
bruary 1660,  in  a  chaige  of  being  concerned 
with  Sir  Thomas  Gascoigne  in  a  plot  agaiiut 
the  king,  and  committed  to  the  King's 
Bench  prison ;  but  on  his  trial  at  York  m 
the  following  July  he  was  acquitted,  as  Sir 
Thomas  had  been  before.  After  the  acces- 
sion of  James  II.  he  was  constituted  on  April 
23, 1686,  a  baron  of  the  Irish  Exchequer ; 
but,  declining  to  go  to  that  country,  he  was 
in  May  of  the  next  year  made  a  serjeant-at- 
law,  and  on  July  6,  1688,  was  appointed  a 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  in  England,  when 
he  was  knighted.  One  of  the  effects  of 
James's  anprehensions  on  the  landing  of  the 
Princeof  Orange  was  to  supersede  SirCbarles 
in  the  following  November,  before  he  had 
been  four  months  in  ofiice.  Returning  to 
his  practice  at  the  bar,  he  was  present  at 
the  York  assizes  in  April  1693,  and  was 
fined  forty  shillings  for  refusing  to  take  the 
oaths  to  King  William.  (LuUreU,  L  34- 
482,  iii.  83 ;  BramsUm,  275 ;  SmytKa  Law 
Off,  Ireland,  167 ;  SUOe  Trials,  xii.  263.) 

XKOLESEAX,  Robert  de,  in  31  Henry 
U.  was  one  of  the  custodes  of  the  bishopric 
of  Worcester,  and  in  the  next  year  was  ap- 
pointed archaeacon  of  Gloucester.  In  llo7 
ne  was  one  of  the  justiciers  before  whom  a 
fine  was  levied,  and  his  pleas  as  a  justice 
itinerant  in  Hampshire  and  Devonshire 
occur  in  the  roll  of  1  Richard  I.,  1189. 
{Pine  BoU,  134,  203.) 

He  died  about  1197.     (Le  Neve,  303.) 

IKOOLBESBY,  JoHK,  whose  familj  was 
seated  in  the  parish  of  that  name  m  the 
coimty  of  Lincoln,  probably  held  some 
inferior  office  in  the  Exchequer  before  he 
was  raised  to  the  bench  of  that  court.  His 
first  patent  as  a  baron  is  dated  November  4, 
1462,  2  Edward  IV.,  but  in  September 
1467  he  was  removed  from  his  seat.  In 
the  following  year,  however,  he  received  ft 
new  grant  oi  the  office  for  life  in  revenion 
on  the  next  death  or  resignation,  and  tills 
occurred  on  June  14,  1470.  Henry  VL 
was  restored  in  the  following  October,  and 
Ingoldesby's  name  was  omitted  in  the  new 
patent ;  nor  is  there  any  appearance  in  the 
published  records  of  his  naving  resumed  his 
seat  on  the  return  of  Edward  IV. 

One  of  his  descendants,  though  connected 
by  marriaffe  with  the  Protector  Cromwell, 
deserted  that  side,  and  aided  in  the  resto- 
ration of  Charles  IL,  who  on  August  30, 
1660,  created  him  a  baronet ;  but  the  title 
became  extinct  in  1726. 

nrSTTLA,  Godfrey  dr,  whose  name 
appears  among  the  justiciers  before  whom 
fines  were  lened  from  10  Richard  L  to 
10  John,  is  also  mentioned  as  a  judge  in 
the  rolls  of  the  Curia  Regis  in  13  John. 
(Abb.  Ptaeit.  82.) 

XVfVIA,  Bbiak  de,  whether  so  eaUciL 


368 


INSULA 


from  the  Irfe  of  Wight  or  the  Isle  of  Ely 
is  uncertain,  held  a  high  place  in  royal 
favour  firom  2  John,  1200.     In  6  John 
the  king   gave   him  to  wife  Maud,  the 
daughter  and  heir  of  Thomas,  the  son  of 
WiUiam  de  Selebi,  with  her  lands.    In  the  i 
next  year  the  castle  of  Knaresborough  was 
committed  to  his  keeping,  to  which  was 
afterwards  added  that  of  Bolsover.     He  ; 
was  also  appointed  chief  forester  for  tlie  i 
counties  of  Nottingham  and  Derby ;  one  of 
the  custodes  of  the  archbishopric  of  York 
during  its  vacancy ;  and  a  warden  of  the 
seaports  of  Yorkshire    and  Lincolnshire. 
(Itot.  Chtis.  i.  17-43;  Hot  Pat,  72, 80,88;  i 
MadoXy  I.  773.)    The  king  frequently  de-  i 
scribes  him  as  his  belov^  knight,  and  he  ! 
was  admitted  to  the  intimacy  of  playinjj  at 
tables  with  his  sovereign.     {Rot,  MtstSf 

14  John.)  During  the  turbulent  years  of 
John*8  reign  he  was  a  devoted  adherent 
to  the  king,  and  greatly  benefited  by 
grants  of  the  forfeited  estates.  In  17 
John  he  held  the  ofHce  of  seneschal,  or 
steward,  and  was  appointed  one  of  the 
governors  of  Yorkshire.  (Hot,  Cktus,  i.  210, 
272 ;  Hot.  Pat.  104 ;   WendoveTf  iii.  353.) 

On  the  accession  of  Henry  III.  ho  had 
a  renewal  of  the  custodv  of  the  castle  of  j 
Knaresboroucrh  and  the  Crests  of  Notting- 
ham, and  aided  the  royal  troops  both  at 
Montsorel  and  Lincoln.    In  5  llenry  III. 
he  was  constituted  chief  justice   of  the 
forests,  but  about  three  years  afterwards  . 
was  removed  from  his  olfice,  having  got 
into  disgrace  by  being  one  of  the  barons  { 
who  refused  to  comply  with  the  injunction  ^ 
to  surrender  the  castles  in  their  custody  to  j 
the  king.    (JRapiji,  iii.  14,  21.)    He  was 
then  disseised  of  various  manors  he  held 
under  the  crown,  and  several  of  the  amer- 
ciaments he  had  inflicted  in  his  office  were 
remitted.   Soon,  however,  making  his  peace, 
he  obtained  the  restoration  of  his  lands,  and 
received  several  marks  of  royal  regard,  as 
some  deer  for  his  park  at  Saleby  m  Lin- 
colnshire, and  the  grant  of  a  fair  for  that 
place.     (Rot.  Clam.  i.  308-690,  ii.  40-145.) 

In  10  Henry  HI.  he  was  nominated  one 
of  the  justices  itinerant  for  Yorkshire 
(Ihid.  ii.  151),  and  continued  to  be  en- 
trusted with  the  guardianship  of  the 
castles  of  Knaresborough,  Bolsover,  and 
Peke.  In  the  last  year  of  his  life,  1233, 
he  was  constituted  sheriff  of  Yorkshire,  and 
died  before  August  18, 1 2«34.  (Excerpt,  e  Rot, 
Fm,  i.  263. 205;  Dw/dale'^Baran,  i.  737.) 

nrsULA,  Simon  de,  or  BE  L'ISLE,  was 
probably  of  the  Isle  of  Ely,  as  he  was  one 
of  the  stewards  of  that  bishopric  in  9  and 

15  John,  and  had  property  in  Cambridge- 
shire. (Rot.  Pat.  99.  140;  Rot.  Clam,  i. 
108.)  In  12  John  ne  accompanied  the 
king  to  Ireland,  but  fell  oil  fiK>m  his 
allegiance  in  the  troubles  at  the  end  of 
it.     He    0OOD,   howeveri    submitted    to 


INSULA 

Henry  HI.,  in  whose  fint  year  his  kadi 
were  restored  to  him.  (Rot.  dt  IVvHfjt 
117,  218 ;  Rot.  CUnts.  i.  318,  &c.) 

He  was  a  justicier  with  fines  Isried 
before  him  at  Westminster  fiom  2  to  4 
Henry  HI.,  and  went  as  a  itutice  itinenot 
into  Essex  and  Hertford,  Norfolk  ind 
Suffolk.     (Rot.  Clam.  i.  350,  365, 883.) 

IK81ILA,  William  de,  was  the  son  of  a 
knight  of  that  name  who  married  MatOda, 
the  daughter  of  William  de  Luddenham, 
of  the  manor  of  Luddenham  in  Kent 
(Haded,  vi.  301.)  He  began  his  career  in 
the  service  of  Reginald  de  Comhill,  sheiifT 
of  Kent  and  comptroller  of  the  Mint;  and 
several  instances  occur  from  G  John  of  his 
conveying  money  to  the  king.  (R(a,  Clous. 
i.  39-104.)  In  16  John,  in  an  order  for 
some  repairs  at  Brikestok  in  Northampton- 
shire, he  is  named  as  the  king's  bailiff,  and 
as  having  the  custody  of  the  forests  there^ 
and  in  the  next  year  as  one  of  the  inaticieif 
appointed  to  take  a  recognition  of  the  lait 
presentation  to  the  church  of  Qzeden  in 
that  county.  (TftiW.  190, 196,  270.)  About 
this  time  he  was  raised  to  the  office  of 
marshal  of  the  Exchequer,  and  was  sent  in 
17  John  to  the  constable  of  Marlharoofl^ 
Castle  to  bring  six  hundred  marks  to  ue 
king  at  Windsor.  He  is  so  called  in  i 
Henrv  IH.  in  a  mandate  to  the  barons  of 
the  Exchequer,  who  are  directed  to  reoeiTe 
his  clerk  in  his  place  till  he  retoma  from 
an  embassy  to  Ireland.     (Ibid  214, 26S.) 

In  1222  ho  was  appointed  with  others  to 
hold  pleas  of  the  forest  at  Northampton, 
and  became  constable  of  Rockingham  Castle. 
(Ibid.  407,  510, 573.)  His  first  nominatioB 
as  a  justice  itinerant  was  in  9  Heniy  HLf 
for  the  counties  of  Northampton  and  Ril* 
land ;  afterwards  for  Lincolnshire,  and  for 
several  other  counties.  (Ibid,  ii.  77, 151, 
213.)  The  knowledge  and  ezpeiienoe  lie 
had  acquired  in  his  previous  comiectioQ 
with  the  courts  had  become  apparent;  and 
as  fines  were  levied  before  him  firom  Easter 
1228  tiU  Easter  1231,  it  is  manifest  that 
ho  was  then  called  to  the  higher  peshki 
of  a  justicier  in  Banco  at  Westminsto. 
During  the  whole  of  this  period,  and  aa  lite 
as  18  Henry  IIL,  1233,  his  name  mean 
as  acting  in  numerous  counties,  {pit 
dale's  Orig.  42.) 

IKSITLA,  John  de.  Two  of  this  nanfr 
were  summoned  to  the  parliament  at  Car* 
lisle  in  35  Edwaid  L,  1307  (Rot.  JMl 
188) — one  as  a  baron,  and  the  other  appir 
rently  as  one  of  the  judges  or  leaned  pv^ 
sons  in  the  law. 

It  is  certain  that  the  latter  waa  an  advo* 
cate  in  the  courts,  and  as  early  af  UN 
was  heard  before  theparUamentoathtli^ 
of  the  king  in  two  suita  tlim 
Two  years  aftervFards  he  wm 
100  sfiiUinga  for  some  conteiMi 
justices  of  aasise  (i&idl  IdHSQ 


JAMES 

Edward  I.  was  himself  appointed  to  act  in 
that  character  in  nine  counties.  On  Octo- 
ber 21, 1295  {Ibid.) J  he  was  admitted  as  one 
of  the  barons  of  the  Exchequer.  (K  B, 
nt  i.  36 ;  Madoxy  I  320,  ii.  44-^24.)  In 
^  and  35  Edward  I.  he  was  one  of  the 
justices  of  trailbaston  (Rot.  Pari,  i,  178, 
218)  :  but  whether  he  preserved  his  seat  in 
the  Exchequer  at  the  same  time  doe0  not 
appear.  He  was  not,  howcTer,  numbered 
among  those  barons  who  received  patents 


JEFFREYS 


369 


on  the  accession  of  Edward  II.,  though  he 
was  stall  regularly  summoned  with  the 
judges  to  parliament,  and  in  4  Edwaid  IL 
was  placea  at  the  head  of  the  justices  of 
assize  in  the  northern  counties.  He  re- 
sumed his  seat  in  the  Exchequer,  by  a 
patent  dated  January  30, 1313,  and  is  fie- 
quenthr  noticed  in  that  character  till  tiie 
twelfth  year.  He  died  in  May  or  June 
1320.  (Jhid.  301-360;  Fori  WHU^  iL 
1104 ;  ^66.  Rot.  Ong.  223.) 


JAXE8,  William  MiLBtmins,  the  re- 
cently appointed  lord  justice  of  appeal  in 
Chancery,  was  bom  m  1807,  his  father 
being  Cliristopher  James,  E<»q.,  of  Swan- 
sea, and  his  mother,  Anne,  daughter  of  — 
Williams,  Esq.,  of  Merthyr  l^rdvil.  He 
was  educated  at  the  university  of  GHasgow, 
and  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  society  of 
Lincoln's  Inn  on  June  10,  1831.  He  re- 
mained a  junior  in  the  equity  courts  for 
two-and-twenty  years,  when  m  1853  he 
was  made  a  queen's  counsel,  and  obtained 
a  distinguished  practice  for  sixteen  years 
as  a  leader,  during  which  he  held  tiie  office 
of  vice-chancellor  of  the  county  palatine  of 
Lancaster.  After  thirty-eight  years'  ex- 
perience as  a  barrister,  he  was  raised  to  the 
bench  on  January  1,  1869,  as  vice-chan- 
cellor, in  the  duties  of  which  he  was  found 
HO  efficient  that  in  July  1870  he  was  pro- 
moted to  his  present  position,  and  to  the 
Privy  Council.  He  received  the  customary 
knighthood  when  made  vice-chancellor. 

He  married  Maria,  daughter  of  Dr.  Wil- 
liam  Otter,  the  late  Bishop  of  Chichester. 

JKFFBET,  or  JEFFEEAT,  John,  was  of 
an  old  Sussex  family.  His  father  was 
Eichard,  the  second  son  of  John  Jelfrey,  of 
Chiddingly  Manor,  inherited  from  a  long 
line  of  ancestors.  His  mother  was  Eliza- 
beth, the  daughter  of  Robert  Whitfield, 
Esq.,  of  Wadhurst,  Sussex.  He  was  called 
to  the  bar  at  Gray's  Inn  in  1546,  and  made 
reader  in  1561.  On  his  being  summoned 
to  the  degree  of  seijeant  in  1567  he  was 
presented  with  a  purse  containing  10/.  by 
the  society.  In  1571  he  was  returned 
member  for  East  Orinstead,  and  in  1572 
for  ArundeL  In  the  latter  year  he  was 
nominated  one  of  the  queen's  Serjeants, 
and  on  May  15, 1576,  he  was  promoted  to 
a  judicial  seat  in  the  Queen's  Bench. 
Within  a  year  and  a  half,  on  October  12, 
1577,  he  was  promoted  to  the  chief  bwony 
of  the  Exchequer,  but  his  seat  was  vacated 
by  his  death  on  May  23, 1578.  He  died 
in  Coleman  Street  Ward,  London,  but  was 
buned  in  Chiddingly  Church,  where,  in  a 


small  chapel,  a  magnificent  monument  was 
erected  to  his  memory,  on  which  he  is 
represented  in  his  robes. 

David  Lloyd,  in  his  'State  Worthies' 
(p.  221),  gives  a  curious  and  eulogistic 
summary  of  his  character  in  four  pages  of 
his  sententious  phrases.  His  first  wife  was 
Elizabeth,  daughter  and  heir  of  John 
Ansley,  Esq.,of  Ix)ndon,by  whom  he  had  an 
only  daughter,  who  mamed  the  first  Lord 
Montagu  of  Boughton.  Sir  John's  second 
wife  was  Mary,  daughter  of  George  Gk)ring, 
Esq.  (HorgfiMs  Lewes,  ii.  66;  CoOMa 
Pterage,  ii.  14.) 

JSFFBET8,  Gbobge  (Lord  Jetfbets 
OF  Wem).  The  task  of  writing  the  life  of 
'  this  very  worst  judge  that  ever  disgraced 
Westminster  Hall,'  as  Mr.  Justice  Foster 
desig^ted  him,  is  most  unnatefUl,  espe- 
cially when  the  writer  can  find  no  ground 
for  reversing  the  verdict  that  has  been 
already  pronounced. 

George  Jefireys  was  the  younger  son  of 
John  Jeffreys,  oi  Acton,  near  Wrexham,  hi 
Denbighshire,  a  gentleman  of  ancient  stock, 
but  of  comparatively  slender  means,  b^ 
Mamuret,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Ireland^ 
of  Bewsey  in  Lancashire.  Bom  in  1648, 
his  education  began  at  the  free  school  of 
ShrewsbuiT,  and  was  continued,  first  at 
St  Paul's  School  in  London,  and  then  at 
Westminster  under  Dr.  Busoy,  to  whose 
tuition  he  often  referred  in  his  after-life. 
He  himself  states  in  the  Cambridge  case  that 
he  was  once  a  member  of  that  university 
{StaU  Triali,  xi.  1329),  but  it  is  not  known 
to  what  college  he  belonffed,  and  he  took  no 
degree.  His  untractaUe  disposition  was 
eany  exhibited  by  his  refiising  to  settle  in 
some  quiet  course  of  trade,  for  which  he' 
was  intended ;  and  he  was  of  so  litigious  a 
temper,  and  so  fond  of  opposition  and  Bi^patr 
ment,  that  his  father  uised  to  say  to  him, 
'  Ah !  George,  George,  I  fear  thou  wilt  die 
with  thy  shoes  and  stockings  on.'  (Kortk^a 
XwM,  200.)  Choosing  the  law  as  his  nro- 
fesncm,  he  commenced  his  legal  stuoiei^ 
with  the  pecuniaiy  aid  of  his  grandmother, 


370 


JEFFREYS 


at  the  Middle  Temple,  and  was  called  to 
the  bar  on  November  22, 1069. 

During  his  novitiate  he  had  lightened 
the  rigour  of  his  studies  by  too  great  a 
devotion  to  the  exciting  pleasures  of  the 
times,  which,  as  a  natural  reaction  from 
the  austerities  of  the  Puritan  rule,  had 
become  eminently  hilarious  and  disgrace- 
fully profligate.  Daring  and  impudence  in 
that  age  were  almost  certain  to  insure 
success;  and  an  apocryphal  story  of  the 
proficiency  of  the  young  aspirant  in  these 
qualifications  is  related,  of  his  appearing 
in  a  forensic  gown  at  the  Kingston  assizes 
during  the  year  of  the  plague,  and  plead- 
ing there  as  a  barrister  three  years  before 
he  was  called.  A  voluble  tongue  and  a 
stentorian  voice,  joined  with  the  interest 
of  the  disafiected  party  in  the  state,  to 
which  he  at  first  attacned  himself,  soon 
introduced  him  into  considerable  practice, 
principally  confined  to  criminal  business 
and  tne  city  courts.  This  led  him  into 
the  society  of  the  members  of  the  corpora- 
tion, to  whom  his  jovial  di^^position  was 
not  a  little  recommendation.  He  found  a 
firm  friend  in  an  alderman  of  the  same 
name,  through  whose  influence  he  was 
elected  to  the  place  of  common  seijeant 
on  March  17,  1071,  at  the  early  age  of 
twenty-three. 

Seemg  little  prospect  of  advancement 
from    his    connection    with    the    popular 

Earty,  he  gradually  deserted  it ;  and  getting 
imself  introduced  to  Chilfinch,  the  king^s 
page,  pimp,  and  factotum,  he  made  himself 
so  agreeable  to  that  worthy,  both  by  join- 
ing in  his  potations  and  by  betra3dng  the 
plans  of  the  disafiected,  tKat  he  soon  was 
recommended  to  his  majesty  as  a  man 
likely  to  do  good  service.  Through  the 
same  means,  having  also  procured  another 
powerful  advocate  m  the  Duchess  of  Ports- 
mouth, he  easily  secured  to  himself  the 
?ost  of  recorder  of  London  on  October  22, 
678,  receiving,  a  year  before,  the  first  re- 
ward of  his  apostacy  by  being  kniffhted 
and  appointed  solicitor  to  the  Duke  of 
York.  He  brazened  out  the  disgrace  of 
his  desertion,  and  from  this  time  forward 
he  attached  himself  wholly  to  the  court 
party,  treating  his  former  friends  not  only 
with  contempt,  but  with  the  utmost  vio- 
lence of  reprobation. 

His  first  wife  was  Sarah,  daughter  of 
the  Rev.  Thomas  Neeshara,  and  the  cir- 
cumstances under  which  he  married  her 
(May  22,  1007)  tell  greatly  to  his  credit. 
She  was  the  kinswoman  and  humble  friend 
of  a  merchant's  daughter,  a  prize  of  30,000/., 
to  whose  hand  or  fortune  Jeflreys  aspired, 
and  had  used  the  companion  as  his  secret 
advocate.  But  the  plot  being  discovered, 
the  poor  girl  was'  dismissed,  and,  coming 
up  to  town  to  tell  of  her  failure  and  dis- 
grace, the  discarded  lover  took  pity  on  her 


JEFFREYS 

and  married  her.  She  bore  him  sevend 
children  during  the  eleven  years  of  thdr 
union;  and  three  months  after  her  deatbyin 
May  1078,  he  contracted  a  second  marriage 
with  Mary,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomaa  Blod- 
worth,  lord  mayor  of  London  and  BLP. 
for  the  city,  ana  the  widow  of  Sir  John 
Jones,  of  Fonmon  Castle^  Glamoiganshire^ 
This  lady,  being  supposed  to  be  not  re- 
markable for  continence,  formed  the  sub- 
ject with  her  new  husband  of  a  lampoon 
called  *  A  Westminster  Wedding.' 

He  held  the  recordership  for  two  yean, 
durinpr  which,  though  he  did  not  betray  all 
the  violence  and  cruelty  that  after^rords 
distinguished  him,  he  exhibited  a  sufficient 
inkling  of  his  overbearing  disposition.    In 
his   anxiety   to  follow   the    popular  ay 
against  Papists,  he  forgot  the  religiouspio- 
fession  of  his  patron,  the  Duke  of  Tori^ 
going  out  of  his  way  to  insult  the  prisooen 
of  that  persuasion,  against  whom  he  had  to 
pronounce  sentence  as  recorder,  by  ridi- 
culing and  invei^ing  against  the  doetriaei 
they  professed.    But  when  the  tide  secnned 
to  be   turning,  and   the  court  party  bd 
managed  to  meet  the  petitions  for  a  pl^ 
liament  by  addresses  of  abhorrence^  Sr 
George  took  so  active  a  part  in  getting  up 
the  mtter  that  he  was  visited  with  the 
censure  of  the  House  of  Commons.   On 
November  13,  1080,  a  vote  was  paned, 
declaring  that  by  traducing  and  obstnct- 
ing  petitioning  for  the  utting  of  parlianunt 
he  had  betrayed  the  rights  of  tne  subject, 
and  ordering  that  an  address  be  mads  to 
his  majesty  to  remove  him  out  of  all  poUic 
ofiices,  and  that  the  members  for  London 
should  communicate  the  said  vote  to  the 
Court  of  Aldermen.  On  receiving  this  com- 
munication the  aldermen  resolved  thit  Sir 
George  be  advised  and  desired  to  flo^ 
render  the   office,  which  he  accordinfj^ 
did  on  December  2,  having  in  the  intsom 
obtained  the  reluctant  permission  of  the 
king,  who  laughed  and  said  that  Sir  Geoige 
was  not  parliament-proof.     With  this  con- 
cession and  a  reprimand  on  his  knees  at 
the  bar,  the  house  was  satisfied,  and  Sr 
George  kept  his  other  places.    {Pari  Bd» 
iv.  1210;  NoriKa  Eaamen,  660.) 

Since  his  election  as  recorder  he  had  re- 
ceived the  degree  of  the  coif  in  Felffoaiy 
1079,  and  bad  been  made  Idnff^s  serjeattt 
on  May  12,  1080.  In  the  preceaing  month 
he  had  also  been  constituted  chief  justioa  of 
Chester,  an  office  which  he  retained  till  be 
became  chief  justice  of  the  King*8  Bend* 
In  almost  all  the  numerous  a£ate  todi 
during  this  period,  connected  with  Ai 
Popish,  the  Meal-tub,  and  the  Rje  HoMi 
Plots,  he  was  engaged  on  the  pnt  nf  A* 
crown,  and  after  he  became  king^k  MJ'H^ 
he  took  a  prominent  part  in  tlMiB.  ^^ 
of  these,  as  reported, is  there  MB  "^^^^ 
plain  ofy  except  in  that  ig4P9l        ■i| 


JEFFREYS 

'CoUedge,  whom  lie  seemed  to  take  a  plea- 
■Bore  in  ridiculing^  and  in  which  he  came 
into  coUialon  with  Titus  Oates,  who,  heiug 
B  witness  for  the  prisoner,  threatened  the 
Serjeant  that  he  snould  *  hear  of  it  in  an- 
other place '  (State  Triali,  viii.  601,  641, 
■664) — a  threat  that  was  not  forgotten  hy 
&  George  when  the  brasen-iac^  plotter 
was  sentenced  four  years  afterwanis  for 
perjury.     The  seijeant*s  general  character 
St  the  bar  for  insolence  and  browbeating 
his  antagonists  was  so  notorious  that  his 
Inethren  must  have  enjoyed  the  severe 
i«buke  he  received  at   lungston    assizes 
6om  Baron  Weston. 

In  trials  at  Nisi  Prius  he  sometimes  was 
laid  in  his  own  coin,  and^  as  chief  justice  of 
Chester,  he  soon  behaved  in  such  a  manner 
u  to  draw  down  upon  him  general  anim- 
•dTersion,  being  described  by  Mr.  Booth 
(afterwards  Lord  Delamere  and  Earl  of 
Wanington)  in  his  place  in  parliament  as 
actixig  '  more  like  a  jack-puddmg  than  with 
that  gravity  that  becomes  a  j  udge.'  (Harris' b 
Uve$^  V.  331.)    On  November  17, 1681,  he 
«as  created  a  baronet,  of  Bulstrode  in 
Bockinghamshire,  where  he  had  bought  an 
estate,  and  built  a  mansion,  which  was 
afteorwards  sold  to  William  Earl  of  Portland. 
During  the  last  illness  of  Sir  Edmund 
^aunden,  the  Earl  of  Sunderland  recom- 
mended Jeffreys  to  the  king  for  the  chief 
seat  in  the  £jng*s  Bench,  but  his  majesty 
raised  doubts  of  his  capacity,  and  had  too 
much  knowledge  of  his  character  to  expect 
that  the  appointment  would  be  a^preeable 
to  the  other  judges.    This  hesitation  was 
the  cause  of  the  mace  remainiug  vacant  for 
three  months  aner  Saunders's  death ;  but 
liis  majestv  being  at  last  overtalked,  JefBreys 
^was  installed  chief  justice  on  September  ^, 
1683.    Evelyn  (iii.  93, 140, 100),  referring 
to  his  advancement,  characterises  him  as 
"being  'reputed  to  be  most  ignorant,  but 
HKMt  daring,'  and  relates  that  between  the 
sentence  and  execution  of  Algernon  Sidney 
h»  attended  a  city  wedding  and  was  ex- 
ceeding merry,  danciug  with  the  bride, 
drinking  and  smoking,  and  talking  much 
l)eneath  the  gravity  of  a  judge.  On  another 
ttccasion  he  calls  him  '  of  nature  cruel  and  a 
alave  of  the  court.'    And  Burnet  (ii.  389) 
iays,  <^V11    people   were  apprehensive  of 
^ery  black  designs  when  they  saw  Jeffreys 
made  lord  chief  justice,  who  was  scandA- 
lonsly  vicious  and  was  drunk  eveiy  day, 
hesiaes  a  drunkenness  of  fury  in  his  temper 
that  looked  like  enthusiasm.    He  did  not 
conaider  the  decencies  of  his  post,  nor  did 
he  so  much  as  affect  to  seem  impartial,  as 
became  a  judse;  but  run  out  upon  all 
occasions  into  declamations  that  did  not  be- 
came the  bar,  much  less  the  bench.    He 
was  not  learned  in  his  profession,  and  his 
eloanence,  though  viciously  copious,  was 
Jiduiar  correct  nor  agreeable.' 


JEiTREYS 


371 


Almost  his  earliest  act  as  chief  justice 
was  to  preside  at  Sidney's  trial,  when  by 
his  harsn  and  unfair  treatment  of  the 
prisoner  he  gave  the  first  sample  of  his 
orutal  nature  and  his  courtlv  subserviency. 
The  same  course  he  pursued  in  the  subse- 
quent trials,  insulting  and  vilifying  the 
accused,  and  acting  rather  as  the  advocate 
employed  to  procure  a  conviction,  than  as 
an  impartial  jud^  sworn  to  see  fair  play 
between  the  parties.  Not  only  was  he  un- 
feeling and  indecorous  towards  the  prisoners, 
but  he  bullied  and  threatened  the  counsel 
practising  in  his  court,  instances  of  which 
are  related  in  the  lives  of  Sir  Edward 
Ward,  Mr.  Wallop,  and  Mr.  Bradbury. 

Though  King  Charles  had  at  first  re- 
sisted the  appointment  of  Jefireys,  he  soon 
altered  his  opinion ;  and  immediiately  after 
the  condemnation  of  Sir  Thomas  Arm- 
strong, who,  havinfi;  been  brought  to  the 
bar  on  an  outlawry  nad  claimed  to  be  tried, 
saying  he  demanded  no  more  than  the  law, 
was  brutally  answered  by  Jeffreys  that  he 
should  have  it  to  the  full,  and  thereupon 
ordered  him  for  execution  on  the  next  Friday 
(State  Trials,  x.  1 1 4),  his  maj esty  took  a  valu- 
able diamond  ring  from  his  finger,  and  gave 
it  to  the  chief  justice  in  acknowledgment  of 
his  services.  This  rinff,  Burnet  (iL  411) 
says,  was  thereupon  caUed  his  blood-stone. 

He  justified  the  king's  approbation  of 
him  by  his  zeal  and  active  aia  to  the  court 
in  obtaining  the  surrender  of  the  charters 
of  corporate  boroughs.  The  lord  mayor  of 
London  complained  to  Sir  John  Heresby 
(Memoirs  quoted  in  State  Trials,  viii.  217) 
that  the  chief  justice  usurped  all  the  power 
of  his  office,  that  the  city  had  no  intercourse 
with  the  kinff  but  through  him,  and  that 
the  court  looKed  upon  the  aldermen  as  no 
better  than  his  tools.  In  both  London  and 
York  he  treated  the  aldermen  with  con- 
tempt, and  turned  out  many  of  them,  with- 
out so  much  as  allowing  them  to  be  heard 
as  to  the  crimes  they  were  accused  of. 

Soon  after  King  James  had  succeeded  his 
brother,  Jeffrevs  had  an  opportunity  of  re- 
venging himself  on  Titus  Gates,  who,  being 
convicted  on  two  indictments  for  perjury, 
received  at  his  hands  so  pitiless  a  sentence 
that  even  those  who  most  condenmed  the 
man  pronoimced  it  cruel  and  excessive. 
Though  the  House  of  Lords  refused  to 
reverse  the  judgment.  King  William  at 
their  request  pardoned  such  part  of  the 
punishment  as  remained  to  hie  infiicted. 
(State  Trials,  x.  1315-29.)  Within  a  week 
after  these  trials  Jeffreys  was  created 
Baron  Jeflreys  of  Wem  in  the  county  of 
Salop,  on  May  15,  1085 ;  and  that  very  day 
was  signalised  by  another  exhibition  of  his 
brutality  against  Richard  Baxter,  then 
applying  for  a  delay  of  his  trial.  Alluding 
to  Gates,  then  standing  in  the  pillory,  he 
called  them  Uwo  of  the  greatest  rogues 

B  B  2  I 


372 


JEFFREYS 


and  rascals  in  the  kingdom.*  On  this  trial, 
his  counsel,  and  particularly  Mr.  Wallop^ 
-were  indecently  silenced,  and  Baxter  him- 
self treated  'mth  the  coarsest  reproaches. 
The  indictment  ap^ainst  him  was  for  reflect- 
ing against  the  hishops  in  his  '  Paraphrase 
upon  the  New  Testament;'  and,  notwith- 
standing the  absurdity  of  the  char^,  the 
chief  justice  easily  procured  a  conyiction ; 
but  so  repugnant  to  common  senile  and  to 
truth  was  his  punishment,  that  his  fine  of 
500/.  was  remitted  before  the  end  of  the 
year.  (Ibid,  xi.  497.)  But  his  excesses 
soon  reached  their  climax.  After  the  de- 
feat of  Monmouth  at  Sedgmoor  in  July,  a 
commission  of  fiye  judges  was  sent  into  the 
western  counties  to  try  those  who  were 
concerned  in  the  rebellion.  This  com- 
mission consisted  of  Chief  Justice  Jefireys, 
Chief  Baron  Montagu,  Sir  Francis  Wythens, 
SirCreswell  Leyinz,  and  Sir  Robert  Wright; 
and  in  order  to  giye  greater  importance  to  it, 
Jeffreys  was  invested  with  tne  temporary 
nu^  of  lieutenant-general,  and  the  com- 
mand of  a  strong  military  escort  that  ac- 
companied its  progress.  Commencing  at 
Winchester  and  terminating  at  Wells,  the 
unfortunate  prisoners  at  each  place  that 
was  yisited  met  with  the  full  rigour  of  the 
law,  and,  taking  eyen  the  most  fayourable 
account,  that  of  the  historian  Lingard,  the 
willing  apologist  of  all  the  acts  of  this  reign, 
there  were  330  executed  as  felons  and 
traitors,  above  800  given  to  different  per- 
sons to  be  transported  for  ten  years  to  the 
West  Indies,  besides  many  who  were 
whipped  and  imprisoned.  With  indecent 
haste  all  those  who  were  convicted  after 
trial  suffered  in  the  course  of  twenty-four 
hours,  while  those  who  pleaded  guilty  were 
gratified  with  a  short  reprieve.  Bad  as 
this  report  is,  it  is  not  nearly  so  atrocious 
as  the  accounts  of  other  writers,  equthis 
deserving  of  credit.  And  in  all  ally 
'  western  campaign,'  as  King  James  called 
it,  no  charge  is  brought  against  any  of  the 
iudges  but  the  chier:  on  him  alone  the 
narshness,  the  levity,  the  cruelty  that  at- 
tended the  trials  are  fixed.  His  brutality  in 
the  examination  of  the  witnesses  in  I^y 
Lisle's  case,  the  blasphemy  of  his  impreca- 
tions, his  unjust  insinuations  against  the 
unfortunate  prisoner  in  his  summing  up, 
the  ferocious  anxiety  he  evinced  for  her 
conyiction,  and  the  -threats  to  the  jury  by 
which  he  enforced  it,  are  truly  distrusting, 
and  were  equalled  if  not  surpassed  m  what 
we  hear  of  all  the  subseouent  trials.  Such 
dread  was  attached  to  his  name  that  the 
memory  of  his  fearful  and  sanguinary  ex- 
pedition is  preserved  to  the  present  day  in 
the  district  over  which  he  exeidsed  his 
terrific  sway,  b^  changing  the  name  of  the 
well-known  children^  game  called  'Tom 
Tlddler^a  Ghroond'  into  'Judge  Jeffireys' 
Oioniid.'    (Linfford,  ziiL  68;  Kotei  and 


JEFFREYS 

Queries,  2nd  S.  vL  4<32.)    Even  Lingaid 
is  compelled  by   irresistible  evidence  to 
acknowledge  that  Jeffreys  converted  his 
commission   to   his   own    advantage,   by 
'amassing  a  considerable  sum  of  money» 
probably  by  the  sale  of  his  friendship  ami 
protection.'     The  journals  of  parliament 
prove,  among  other  items,  that  he  extorted 
above  14,000^  from  Mr.  Prideaux  to  save 
him  from  prosecution.    (State  Triaii,  xL 
297;     Pari.   Hist.  v.  246.)      When   thfr 
atrocities  of  these  proceedings  came  to  be 
publicly  discussed,  the  partisans  of  the  king 
and  the  judge  enneavoured  each  to  acquit 
one  by  attributing  the  whole  blame  to  tbe 
other,  Jefireys  asserting  '  that  what  he  did 
he  did  by  express  commands,  and  that  h» 
was  not  half  oloody  enough  for  the  piino» 
who  sent  him  thither ;'  and  the  advocatei 
of  the  king  asserting  'that  he  never  fingive 
Jeffreys  executing  such  multitudes,  con- 
traiy    to  his  express  orders.'      It  seeDU 
scai^cely  necessaiy  to  enquire  on  which  ta^ 
the  truth  preponderates,  for  as  it  is  allowsl 
that  '  the  receiver  is  as  bad  as  the  thie^' 
so  it  will  be  acknowledged  that  '  the  in- 
stigator is  as  bad  as  the  actor ;'  and  tlw 
world,  in  judging  of  the  comparative  in- 
nocence of  either,  will  rather  look  af  that 
which  proves  the  complicity  of  botL    It  is 
certain  that  the  king  received  daily  acooonto 
of  the  proceedings,  and  did  nothing  to  check 
them ;  that  he  delivered  up  the  conrictsd 
prisoners  to  his  courtiers  (including  thfr 
judee  himself)  to  make  what  profit  thej 
could  extort  from  them  for  their  pardon; 
and  that  he  welcomed  the  commisaioDen 
on  their  return  from  the  Bloody  Assize,  ex- 
pressing his  thanks,  and  rewarding  Jeffieji 
immediately  by  raising  him  to  the  head  of 
the  law.    The  Great  Seal  was  given  to  him 
with  the  title  of  lord  chancellor  on  Septem- 
ber 28, 1686,  less  than  a  week  after  his  i»* 
turn.     (Burnet,  iii.  66 ;  Bramston,  207.) 

His  elevation  made  no  change  in  hir 
manners.  At  a  dinner  he  gave,  at  whidi 
Beresby  was  present,  he  not  onlydnnk 
deep,  but  made  one  of  his  gentlemen,  nined 
Mountfort,  an  excellent  mimic,  who  hsd 
been  an  actor,  plead  before  him  in  a  fdgned 
cause,  during  which  he  aped  all  the  gnst 
lawyers  of  the  age,  in  uieir  tones,  their 
actions,  and  their  gestures,  to  the  greit 
diversion  of  the  company.  His  intempemte 
habits  were  in  no  aegree  diminished,  ind 
the  same  author  relates  that,  dining  inth. 
one  of  the  aldermen,  he  and  Lord  Treasmer 
Rochester  got  so  furiously  drunk  that  thej 
stripped  themselves  to  their  riiirt8,andMft 
witn  difficulty  prevented  from  gettiig  tB- 
that  state  on  tne  signpost  to  dxU  A* 
king's  health. 

la  opposition  to  Burnet's  opiaiM  p  t9 
his  leg^  knowledge,  we  haim        '  "' 
judgment  of  Sir  Joseph  Jekyll  < 
Onslow  says  he  madle  a  gml 


JEFFREYS 

the  btuinew  of  that  court,  and  that  in  more 
private  matten  he  was  thought  an  able  and 
mright  judge  wherever  he  sat    Serjeant 
I«T7  in  1754  deecsribes  him  as  ever  'es- 
teeooed  a  great  lawyer/  Even  Roger  North, 
who  hatei  him,  speaks  thus  &vourablj  of 
him  as  a  judge  (p.  219) :  '  When  he  was  in 
temper,  and  matters  indifferent  came  before 
him,  he  became  his  seat  of  justice  better 
than  any  other  I  ever  saw  in  his  plsce.    He 
took  a  pleasure  in  mortifying  fraudulent 
attorney  and  would  dealfoith  his  seve- 
nties with  a  sort  of  majesty.    He  had  extra- 
Qidinaiy  natural  abilities,  but  little  acquired, 
heyond  what  practice  in  aflbirs  had  supplied. 
In  the  January  following  his  elevation 
lie  acted  as  hiffh  steward  on  the  trial  for 
likh  treason  of  Lord  Delamere,  who,  when 
V.  Booth,  had  formerly  nven  too  true  a 
description  of  his  prooe!eaings  at  Chester, 
end  was  fax  from  pleased  with  the  ao^uittaL 
There  is  no  doubt  that  soon  after  this  Jef- 
beji  was  in  some  discredit  at  court,  perhaps 
in  consequence  of  the  kind's  hearing  of  the 
extent  of  his  pecuniary  dealings  wiUi  the 
|irisooerB  in  the  west   To  redeem  his  favour, 
and  to  aid  the  king's  desire  to  introduce  the 
Pofdsh  religionand  to  discover  its  opponents, 
he  suggested  and  was  made  presiaent  of  a 
aew  ecclesiastical  commission,  of  which  the 
&Bt  victim  was  the  Bishop  of  London,  who 
ivas  suspended  from  his  office,  and  under 
which  toe  disgraceful  proceedings  against 
3fagdalen  CoUejge,  Oxford,  took  place. 

llie  prosecution  of  the  seven  bishops  fol- : 
lowed,  for  presenting  a  petition  to  the  lane  I 
praying  that  the  clergy  might  be  excused  j 
uom  reading  the  declaration  which  his  ma-  j 
jesty  had  issued  prodaiming  liberty  of  con-  I 
acience.  This  being  interpreted  as  seditious, 
4i  prosecution  was  determined  on,  and  they 
"Were  committed  to  the  Tower.  It  is  diffi- 
cult to  believe  that  this  unwise  measure 
could  have  been  adopted  without  the  con- 
currence and  advice  of  the  lord  chancellor, 
the  first  legal  functionary  of  the  court ;  but 
lie  professed  to  Lord  Clarendon  that  he  was 
much  troubled  at  the  prosecution,  and  de- 
aired  his  lordship  to  let  the  bishops  know 
Ids  desire  to  be  serviceable  to  them.  This 
conversation,  however,  was  after  he  saw  the 
extreme  uiipopularitv  of  theirimprisonment, 
and  when  he  wished  to  father  it  upon  some 
ether  advisers,  who,  he  said,  '  would  hurry 
the  king  to  his  destruction.'  He  gave  a 
plain  condemnation  of  his  choice  of  the 
judges  by  asserting  just  before  the  trial  that 
'thejr  were  most  of  them  rogues ;'  and  soon 
after  it  was  concluded  he  called  them  '  a 
tiiooaandfools  and  knaves,'  and  Chief  Justice 
Wright  (to  whose  promotion  to  the  bench 
he  had  been  particularly  instrumental)  '  a 
beast'    (Ciarendon'8  Dianf,  iL  177-185.) 

WhenKing  James  was  contemplating  his 
4epartiire  after  the  arrival  of  the  Prince  of ; 
Omsge,  he  required  the  chancellor  to  occupy  i 


JEFFBEYS 


373 


Father  Petre*s  apartments  in  the  palace,  in 
order,  says  Barillon,  to  have  the  Great  Seal 
near  him,  that  he  might  take  it  with  him. 
Accordingly  Jeffireys  delivered  it  up  eight 
days  before  the  king  s  retreat  (i&ui  223-6 ; 
iMttreU,  i.  481),  and,  conscious  of  the  de- 
testation in  which  he  was  held,  and  the 
danger  he  ran  in  remaining,  took  means  for 
his  own  escape.    He  disguised  himself  in  a 
seaman's  habit,  and  proceeding  to  Wapping 
to  embark,  he  went  into  a  cellar  to  tajie  a 
pot   While  there  a  scrivener  came  in,  who, 
Roger  North  rdates  (p.  220),  had  been  con- 
cerned in  a  Chancerv  suit  about  a '  Bummery 
Bird ; '  and  one  of  the  counsel  having  caUed 
him  a  strange  fellow,  who  sometimes  went 
to  church,  sometimes  to  conventicles,  and  it 
was  thought  he  was  a  trimmer^  the  chan- 
cellor immediatelv  fired,  and  cned  out, '  A 
trimmer !  I  have  heard  much  of  that  mon- 
ster, but  never  saw  one :  come  forth,  Mr. 
Trimmer,  turn  round,  and  let  me  see  your 
shape,'  and  rated  him  so  long  that  the  poor 
fellow  was  ready  to  drop;  and  when  on 
quitting  the  hall  he  was  asked  how  he  came 
off, '  Came  off,'  said  he ; '  I  am  escaped  from 
the  terrors  of  that  man's  face,  and  shall  have 
the  frightful  impression  of  it  as  long  as  I 
live.'    The  scrivener  never  forjg^t  that  fear- 
ful countenance,  and  recognising  the  chan- 
cellor at  once  under  his  disguise,  went  out 
and  gave  the  alarm.    The  mob  poured  in, 
and  he  was  with  difficulty  rescued  from 
their  fury.    He  was  hurried,  with  a  shout- 
ing crowd  at  his  heels,  before  the  lord 
mayor,  who  was  so  shocked  at  his  appear- 
ance that  he  could  not  do  anything,  and  was 
seized  with  a  lit  from  which  he  never  re- 
covered.   By  Jeffreys'  own  request  he  was 
taken,  in  a  frenzy  of  terror,  to  the  Tower, 
guarded  by  two  regiments  of  militia,  whose 
strongest  efforts  could  scarcely  keep  off  the 
thousands  who  pressed  around  the  caval- 
cade with  execrations  and  threats  of  ven- 
ffeance.   (lAngard,  xiii.  201 ;  Bramston,  839 ; 
JjuUreU,  i.  486.)   There  he  remained  for  four 
months,  suffering  much  from  the  injuries  he 
received  from  the  populace  in  his  capture, 
and  tormented  witn  the  stone,  to  which  he 
had  been  for  some  years  subject.    There, 
too,  from  a  complication  of  disorders,  aggrar 
vated  by  his  drunken  habits,  and  most  pro- 
bably by  his  recollections  and  his  fears,  he 
died  on  April  18, 1089.    There  also  he  was 
at  first  interred ;  but  on  the  petition  of  his 
friends  his  body  was  removed  in  1092  by 
warrant  from  Queen  Mary  to  the  church  of 
St  Mary,  Aldermanbury,  where  in  1810  it 
was  discovered  in  a  vault  near  the  com- 
munion table,  enclosed  in  a  leaden  coffin, 
with  a  plate  inscribed  with  his  name.    He 
had  formerly  lived  in  the  parish,  and  several 
members  of  his  family  were  buried  there. 
He  was  without  hesitation  excepted  out  of 
the  act  of  indemnity,  and  a  bill  was  or- 
dered to  be  brought  in  for  the  forfeiture  of 


374 


JEKYLL 


his  estate  and  honours,  hut  it  dropped  on  the 
dissolution  of  the  Parliament.  (  Stat,  Realm, 
vi.  178 ;  Notes  mid  Queries,  Ist  S.  vii.  46.) 

However  forhidding  a  portrait  may  he  in 
its  prominent  features,  there  are  often  some 
rays  of  light  that  soften  the  general  gloom 
of'  the  resemhlance.  Even  in  JeAreys' 
career  the  circumstances  attending  his  first 
marriage  evidence  a  generous  disposition  in 
his  early  years ;  and  the  latter  part  of  his 
life  is  notwitbout  some  redeeming  pToo& 
of  a  hetter  disposition.  An  instance  of  his 
gratitude  is  recorded  in  saving  Sir  William 
Clayton,  to  whom  he  owed  his  firbt  advance 
in  city  honours,  from  heing  hanged,  when 
Charles's  ministry  had  determined  to  sacri- 
fice an  alderman  of  London  for  the  purpose 
of  intimidating  that  corporation  ;  and,  even 
when  in  the  midst  of  his  hloodiest  commis- 
sion,  he  listened  with  calmness  to  the  re- 
monstrances of  a  clergyman  of  Taunton 
against  his  proceedings,  and,  though  they 
had  no  immediate  effect  on  his  conduct, 
presented  him  on  his  return  to  London  to  a 
cimonry  in  Bristol  Cathedral. 

His  nonours  hecame  extinct  hy  his  only 
son  John's  death  in  1702  witfiout  male 
issue,  havine  first  dissipated  his  estates. 
One  of  his  daughters  married  Sir  Thomas 
Stringer,  the  after-named  judge.  (TToo/- 
rych  ;  H.  Roscoe;  The  Western  Martyrology.) 

JSKYLL,  Jo8EFH,held  the  office  of  master 

of  the  Rolls  for  one-and-twenty  years,  from 

1717  to  1738.    Pope  descrihes  him  as  an 

Odd  old  whig, 
Who  never  changed  his  principles  or  wig:. 

He  was  the  fourth  son  of  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Jekyll,  a  clergyman  in  Northamptonshire, 
and  was  horn  ahout  ICCii.  In  1G87  he 
was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  Middle  Temple, 
and  was  reader  in  IGUO. 

The  talent  which  the  youthful  barrister 
exhibited,  added  to  the  identity  of  political 
feeling,  gained  him  the  honour  of  an  inti- 
macy with  Lord  Chancellor  Somers,  which 
led  to  his  marriage  with  that  nobleman's 
sister  Elizabeth,  a  lady  several  years  his 
senior.  This  connection  no  doubt  procured 
him  the  post  of  chief  justice  of  Chester  in 
June  1G07,  followed  soon  after  by  the 
honour  of  knighthood,  when  his  noble 
brother-in-law  was  in   the  height  of  his 

Sower.  He  was  further  promoted  to  the 
egree  of  the  coif  in  1770,  and  immediately 
made  king's  serjeant.  From  his  Welst 
judgeship  the  torv  party  on  the  accession 
of  ^ueen  Anne  endeavoured  to  remove  him ; 
hut  on  his  withstanding  the  attempt,  and 
insisting  that  his  patent  appointed  him  for 
life,  the  government  did  not  think  propr 
to  txy  the  question,  but  submitted  to  nis 
continuing  in  the  office,  which  he  held  till 
he  changed  it  for  the  more  honourable  and 
lacrative  post  of  master  of  the  Rolls.  (Lut^ 
treU,  iv.  238,  810,  702-4;  Bwju^,  v.  12.^ 
Tfaia  deddon  was  probably  influenced  in 


JEKYLL 

some  measure  by  his  position  in  parliament,, 
of  which  he  was  an  active  member  for  forty 
years,  from  1698  to  the  end  of  his  life,  re- 
presenting successively  the  boroaghs  of  Eye^ 
Lyminorton,  and  Reigate.  During  that  Ion? 
period  he  steadily  adhered  to  Ms  psrty,  and 
m  the  prosecution  of  its  objects  introSlaoed 
and  supported    several   useful    measures. 
When  Queen  Anne  in  the  session  of  170i 
proposed  by  a  royal  message  to  grant  the- 
iirst  fruits  and  tenths  for  the  augmentation 
of  the  livings  of  the  poorer  clergy,  Sir 
Joseph  moved  that  the  clergy  might  be 
wholly  relieved  from  the  tax,  and  that  an- 
other fund  might  be  raised  to  augment  the 
small  benefices.      The  act  however  wa» 
passed  (2  &  3  Anne,  c.  11^  carrying  out 
the  queen*s  suggestion ;  ana  a  corporatioD 
thereupon  formed  for  administering  wiut 
is  properly   designated  as 'Queen  Aaoe'i 
Bounty.      In  the  debate  on  the  fiunoo 
Aylesbury  case  in  the  same  year  he  sh\f 
maintained  the  right  of  injured  electonto 
seek  redress  at  law ;  and  at  the  end  of  thst 
year  he  risked  the  censure  of  the  house  bj 
pleading  in  behalf  of  Lord  Halifax.   la 
the  absurd  impeachment  of  Dr.  Sacheverril 
in  1710  he  distinguished  himself  by  Idft 
opening  of  the  first  article,  and  wssao  som 
on  the  impotent  result  that  he  caused  an 
indictment  to  be  preferred  against  a  dfll^T' 
man  in  Wales,  wno  in  a  sermon  before  mm 
arraigned  the  proceedings  and  reiiected  oa 
the  managers.  The  grand  iuiy.however.TCiy 
sensibly  threw  out  the  bill.  (FiarL  Hid.  vi. 
271;Zf/«rrf/,v.488,vi.563;  8t,TridU,xsM.) 
On  the  accession  of  Geor^  I.,  when  tl» 
whigs    regained  power,   Sir  Joseph  vw 
chosen  of  the  committee  of  secrecy  to  en- 
quire into  the  conduct  of  thelateministiT; 
and  on  their  report  being  printed  he  stated, 
in  opposition  to  it,  that,  though  there  wis 
sufiicient  evidence  to  convict  Lord  Boto- 
broke  of  high  treason,  there  was  not  ram- 
cient  to  implicate  the  Earl  of  Oxford  in 
such  a  charge.    The  earl,  notwithstsndii^y 
was  committed  to  the  Tower  in  July  1715, 
and  remained  a  prisoner  for  two  years  with- 
out trial.    So  late  as  June  1717  Sir  Joseph 
reiterated  his  objections ;  yet  in  less  than  s 
fortnight  after  ne  appeared  as  a  msnager, 
prepared  to  make  good  the  first  article  of 
the  impeachment,     in  the  farce  with  whidi 
that  trial  terminated  it  looks  as  if  Sir 
Joseph  was  induced  to  take  a  part  in  oppo- 
sition to  his  openly  avowed  opmion,  by  the 
hope,  and  perhaps  by  the  promise,  of  suc- 
ceeding Sir  John  Trevor,  who  was  lately 
dead,  in  the  oifice  of  master  of  the  BoUfly 
to  which  he  was  appointed  in  leas  than 
three  weeks,  on  July  18.    Indeed  he  biA 
amply  deserved  this  advance,  not  oa^iof 
the  constant  support  be  gave  to  ]iii]ilt)rf 
but  for  his  zealous  asaistanee  fa  Hm 
secution  of  those  concenied  in  Ai : 
of  1715,  in  condactixig  the 


JEKYLL 

the  Earl  of  WintouDf  and  the  indictment 
against  Francis  Francia.  (Pari.  Hist,  vii.  67, 
73,  478,  486 ;  Stat^  Trials,  xv.  830,  894.) 

In  addition  to  the  judicial  duties  which 
now  devolved  upon  him,  he  devoted  him- 
self to  affairs  of  state,  and  took  a  prominent 
lead  in  the  dehates  of  the  house.  He  ener- 
getically  exposed  the  South  Sea  Buhhle, 
and  led  the  van  of  those  who  sought  to 
punish  the  peculators.  His  age,  his  posi- 
tion, and  the  apparent  impartiality  with 
which  he  discussed  the  various  questions 
that  arose,  gave  his  opinions  much  weight 
and  influence;  and,  though  a  frequent 
speaker,  he  was  always  listened  to  with  de- 
ference and  respect.  But  with  the  people 
he  risked  his  popularity  hy  introducing  a 
hill  for  increasing  the  tax  on  spirituouji 
liquors  and  for  licensing  the  retailers.  This 
produced  great  disorders  among  the  lower 
classes,  who  were  thus  deprived  of  their 
customary  enjoyment ;  and  Sir  Joseph  was 
ohliged  to  have  a  guard  at  his  house  at  the 
KolK  to  resist  their  violence.  As  it  was, 
he  was  hustled  and  knocked  down  in  Lin- 
coln's Inn  Fields,  then  an  open  space  and 
the  common  resort  of  the  moK  Arising 
from  this  misadventure,  which  was  nearly 
fatal  to  him,  a  great  improvement  was 
luckily  effected,  for,  in  order  to  prevent  the 
recurrence  of  similar  accidents,  palisades 
were  erected  around  the  fields,  and  a  plea- 
sant garden  laid  out.  Another  useful  mea- 
sure which  he  originated  was  the  Mortmain 
Act  of  1730,  hy  which  the  indiscriminate 
disposition  of  lands  to  charitahle  uses  was 
restrained.  (Lord  Ilerveys  Mem.  ii.  88, 
l.*^9  ;  Lord  Macaulay's  Hist.  i.  359.) 

His  presidency  at  the  Rolls  was  distin- 
guished hy  legal  ability,  integrity,  and  de- 
spatch. On  January  7, 1725,  the  Great  Seal 
was  put  into  his  hands  as  the  first  of  three 
commissioners ;  and  they  held  it  from 
.lanuary  7  to  June  1.  The  work  on  *  The 
Judicial  Authority  of  the  Master  of  the 
Kolls/  published  in  1727,  and  occasioned 
by  a  controversy  with  Lord  Chancellor 
King,  who  maintained  that  that  officer  was 
only  the  first  of  the  masters  in  Chancery, 
has  been  usually  attributed  to  Sir  Joseph  ; 
but,  though  he  no  doubt  supplied  some  of 
the  materials,  it  was  really  written  by  his 
nephew  Sir  Philip  Yorke,  at  that  time 
attorney-general,  with  whom  he  always 
lived  on  terms  of  the  greatest  intimacy, 
and  to  whom  he  left  part  of  his  estates. 
(Harris's  Lord  Hardiciclce,  i.  198,  410.) 

He  died  of  a  mortification  in  the  bowels 
on  August  19,  1738,  and  was  buried  in  the 
Rolls  Chapel.  Leaving  no  issue,  he  be- 
queathed 20,000/.,  after  his  wife's  death,  to 
the  sinking  fund  towards  paying  off  the 
national  debt,  a  bequest  which  Lord  Mans- 
field said  was  a  very  foolish  one,  and  that 
he  might  as  well  have  attempted  to  stop 
tho  middle  arch  of  Blackfriars  Bridge  with 


JENNER 


375 


his  fall-bottomed  wig.  In  consequence^ 
however,  of  his  munificent  expenditure  in 
the  erection  of  the  large  ana  convenient 
mansion  at  the  Rolls  for  himself  and  his 
successors,  and  the  contiguous  buildings  in 
Chancery  Lane,  and  of  his  being  <fisap^ 
pointed  m  having  a  long  lease  of  them,  the 
government,  to  make  good  the  loss,  restored 
the  money  to  his  relations.  Lord  Hervey^ 
in  his  Memoirs  (i.  473),  though  giving  him 
a  very  prejudiced  character,  is  obliged  to  al^ 
low  that  he  was  impracticable  to  the  court^ 
learned  in  his  profession,  and  had  '  more 
general  weight  m  the  House  of  Commons 
than  any  other  single  man  in  that  assembly.' 

JEKHSB,  Thomas,  was  the  son  of 
Thomas  Jenner,  £sc^.  He  was  bom  at 
Mayfield  in  Sussex  m  1638,  and  was  ad- 
mitted a  pensioner  of  Queen*s  Colleffei 
Cambridge,  in  June  1655,  but  left  ui6 
university  without  a  degree.  In  1660 
he  was  fortunate  enough  to  marry  Anne^ 
tlie  daughter  and  heir  of  James  Foe,  the 
son  of  Dr.  Leonard  Foe,  physician  to  Queen 
Elizabeth  and  her  two  successors.  At  the 
coronation  of  Charles  U.  in  1661  he 
figured  as  esquire  to  Sir  John  Bramston, 
then  created  a  knight  of  the  Bath ;  and  in 
November  1663  he  was  called  to  the  bar 
by  the  Inner  Temple.  On  October  16, 
1683,  the  king,  having  previously  knighted 
him,  appointed  him  recorder  of  London^ 
immediately  after  the  forfeiture  of  the 
charters  of  that  corporation.  Evelyn  calls 
him  (iii.  99)  at  this  time  '  an  obscuro  law- 
yer.' He  was  raised  to  the  degree  of  the 
coif  on  the  23rd  of  January  following,  and 
was  at  the  same  time  made  king's  Serjeant. 
(Bramston,  1 18 ;  LidireU,  i.  296 :  Wi/mie,  85.) 

In  many  of  the  state  trials  that  followed 
he  was  employed  to  prosecute,  and  proved 
himself,  it  not  a  very  efficient,  a  very 
zealous  advocate  for  the  crown.  On  King 
James's  accession  he  was  elected  member 
for  Rve,  but  had  no  opportunity  pf  speak- 
ing during  the  month  that  the  sittings 
lasted.  The  last  occasion  of  his  acting 
as  king's  Serjeant  was  in  January  1686,  st 
the  trial  of  Lord  Delamero  for  high  treason, 
who  was  acquitted  by  the  Lords.  A  month 
after,  on  February  5,  he  was  constituted  a 
baron  of  the  Excheouer,  and  no  doubt  had 
previouslv  satisfied  the  king  that  he  would 
support  his  majesty's  claim  of  power  to 
dispense  with  the  penal  laws,  for  disputinff 
which  his  predecessor  had  been  discharged. 
In  October  1687  he  was  sent  with  Bisnop 
Cartwright  and  Chief  Justice  Wright  on 
the  notorious  visitation  of  Magdalen  Col- 
lege, Oxford,  when  Dr.  Hough  was  ex- 
pelled from  the  presidency.  He  however 
voted  in  the  minority  against  suspending 
the  fellows  of  th e  college.  (  State  Trials,  xi« 
528,  xii.  36 ;  2  Shower,  453 ;  Burnet,  iii.  140.) 

On .  July  6,  1688,  Baron  Jenner  was 
removed  to  the  Common  Pleaa^  ^^^^^X.-'v^das^ 


376 


JENNEY 


JEKMYK 

He  took  the  decree  of  the  ootf  in  No- 
vember 1463,  and  in  the  next  year  axe  kog 
arguments  relative  to  the  legality  of  an 
outlawry  awarded  against  Jolm  Ptttoa  at 
the  suit  of  Jenney.     Another  liiBcnwifla 
arose  in  1471^  the  principal  queation  beiv 
whether  Sir  John  Paston  should  proeeei 
against  the  serjeant  by  bill  or  hjonoiDal 
writ    (r.B.4  andil  JEdwardir.)    la 
these  cases  he  shows  himself  an  acute  kw^ 
yer,  and  his  practice  in  the  courta  was  ooa* 
sequently  very  extensive.    Although  it  ii 
clear  that  at  one  time  {PasUm  ZSUen,  u 
182)  the  kincf  was  favourable  to  the  Btf- 
tons,  this  did  not  prevent  the  advance  to 
which  the  serjeant^s  lesal  attainments  efi- 
denUy  entitled  him,  and  he  was  aoooidii^ 
constituted  a  judge  of  the  Kind's  BeDcL 
The  date  of  his  elevation,  though  Dngdtle 
states  it  to  have  taken  place  in  Taaitr 
Term  1477,  17  Edward  TV.,  could  ao^ 
according   to  the  Year  Book  and  otber 
evidences,  have  been  before  Easter  Tem 
1481.    He  was  re-appointed  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  reigns  of  Edward  V.  and 


he  retained  during  the  short  remainder  of 
the  reign.  Previous  to  the  king's  flight  he 
obtained  a  pardon,  which  was  soon  after 
stolen  £rom  nis  chamber  in  Seijeants'  Inn, 
together  with  400/.  in  money;  and  en- 
deavouring to  escape  with  the  king,  he  was 
taken  up  bv  the  Favereham  men  and  carried 
to  Canterbury,  from  whence  he  was  re- 
moved to  the  Tower  of  London  in  Januoiy 
1689.  Here  he  remained  till  the  suspension 
of  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act  had  ceased!,  when, 
on  his  being  admitted  to  bail  by  the  King*s 
Bench,  the  House  of  Commons  renewed 
their  investigation  of  his  case,  and,  having 
previously  voted  that  he  had  a  prindpiu 
concern  in  the  arbitrary  proceedings  of  the 
late  rei^,  committed  nim  to  the  custody  of 
the  serjeant-at-arms  on  October  25.  He 
was  not  released  till  the  prorogation  of  the 
Convention  Parliament  in  the  ensuing  Ja- 
nuary, which  was  immediately  followed  by 
its  dissolution.  In  the  first  session  of  the 
next  parliament  the  bill  of  indemnity  was 
passed,  from  which  he  was  of  course  ex- 
cepted by  name,  but  this  led  to  no  further 

poial  consequence.  In  February  1693  he  Richard  HI.,  and  sat  in  the  court  dmiDg 
was  obliged  to  plead  King  James's  pardon  I  the  first  six  months  of  the  latter  reign, 
in  answer  to  a  charge  in  the  Exchequer  of  dyin^  on  December  23, 1483. 
having  levied  3000/.  on  dissenters  without  His  first  wife  was  Elizabeth,  dauditer 
returning  the  money  into  court  Resuming  of  Thomas  Cawse,  Esq.,  and  his  secondwM 
his  practice  as  a  seijeant,  he  is  found  em-  Eleanor,  daughter  of  John  Sampson,  £h^ 
ployed  as  late  as  1702  in  the  defence  of  and  widow  of  Robert  Ingleys,  Esq.  Hii 
Kichard  Holloway,  charged  at  the  Surrey  eldest  son.  Sir  Edmund,  was  the  htiuxd 
asdzes  with  being  a  cheat  and  impostor  the  undermentioned  Sir  Christopher  JenneT. 
in  pretending  to  have  been  bewitched.  JSKKEY,  Christopheb,  was  the  gnnJ- 
{LuUreU,  i.  482,  486,  493,  iL  10,  612,  iiL  son  of  the  above  William  Jenney,  and  the 
37 ;  Pari  Hist.  v.  280,  405 ;  State  Trials,  « third  son  of  Sir  Edmund  Jenney,  of  Kno- 
xiv.  668.)  He  died  at  his  house  at  Peter-  ,  dishall  in  Sufiblk,  by  Catherine,  the  daughter 
sham  in  Surrey  on  January  1,  1707,  where  and  heir  of  Robert  Boys,  Esq.  Punuing 
is  a  monument  to  his  memory.  From  one  of  the  profession  in  which  many  of  his  fiunil/ 
his  sons  descended  the  late  respected  dean  had  become  eminent,  he  became  reader  at 
of  the  Arches,  Sir  Herbert  Jenner  Fust.       \  Lincoln's  Inn  in  1521  and  1522.    In  16S0 

With  very  small  pretensions  to  law,  Sir  there  is  an  entry  in  the  privy  purse  acoonnto 
Thomas  Jenner  was  little  more  than  a  tool  \  of  Sir  Thomas  Le  Strange  or  Hunstintoo, 
of  the  court ;  and  that  he  was  not  only  — '  Itm.  pd.  to  Cristofer  Jenney  for  his  half 
laughed  at,  but  despised,  by  his  contem-  yers  fee  the  xxi  daye  of  Maye,  x*.,'  which 
poraries,  is  apparent  from  a  laughable  pas-  is  afterwards  several  times  repeated,  ahow- 
^uinade  in  a  supposed  letter  from  the  ing  that  he  had  an  annual  retainer  of  U  for 
judge  to  his  wife  and  children.  (Jroo/- |  that  family.  This  fee  was  increased  in  15S5 
rycKs  Jeffreys,  147.)  to  2/.  13«.  Ad.  per  annum,   but  doea  Dot 

JEKKET,  WiLLiAK,  whose  name  was    appear  to  have  been  paid  beyond  Ea^r 

sometimes  spelled  Gyney,  and  more  fre-    '     "       '  " 

quently   Genney,  was    the    son  of  John 
Jenney,    of   Knodishall    in    Suffolk,  and 


m 
Maud,  daughter  and  heir  of  John  Bokill, 
of  Friston.  He  became  one  of  the  go- 
vemors  of  Lincoln^s  Inn  in  1446.  His 
practice  at  the  bar  began  at  least  as  early 
as  Michaelmas  1439,  18  Henry  VI.,  that 
being  the  date  of  his  first  appearance  in 
the  Year  Books.  The  Paston  Collection 
contains  many  proofs  of  the  enmity  which 
existed  between  him  and  the  Paston  family, 
and  which  led  to  those  contests  recorded  m 
the  Year  Bodes  in  the  next  reign.  (Paston 
Letters,  L  140, 196.) 


1531.  (ArchcBologia,  xx.  434-494.)  Be 
was  one  of  those  assigned  to  assist  CardiDal 
Wolsey  in  hearing  causes  in  Chancery  in 
June  1529.  Called  to  the  degree  of  the  coif 
in  Michaelmas  Term  1531,  and  having  been 
made  kind's  seijeant  in  1535,  he  was  raiaed 
to  the  judicinl  seat  on  June  30, 1538^  tat 
judge  of  the  Common  Pleas.  He  remaiiied 
there  little  more  than  four  years,  the  iMt 
fine  levied  before  him  being  dated  in  1& 
chaelmas  1542.  (Dt^dMs  Grig.  47,  W*) 
He  married  Elizabeth,  daughter  oif  mflte 
Eyre,  Esq.,  of  Bury  St.  Edmonda. 

JSBMTV,  Philip,  was  caUaltD  Ailv 
by  the  Middle  Temple  in  lOU^  nil 


JERVIS 

leader  in  1629,  and  before  that  date  be  bad 
attained  considerable  practice  in  tbe  courts. 
He  attained  tbe  degree  of  tbe  coif  in  Ja- 
nuary 1637,  and  was  employed  by  tbe  par- 
Mament  in  tbeirprosecution  of  Judge  Jenxins 
in  1647,  and  appointed  by  tbem  on  October 
12  in  the  next  year  one  of  tbe  judges  of  the 
Kin^s  Bench.  Tbe  tragic  destruction  of 
the  king  made  no  change  in  his  position^  for 
he  consented  to  act  under  tbe  usurped  power. 
{Whitelocke,  2&6,  S42,  S78.)  In  the  extra- 
ordinary trial  of  Lieutenant-Colonel  Lil- 
bume  m  October  1649,  at  which  the  Lord 
Commissioner  Keeble  presided,  Jermyn  was 
one  of  the  commissioners,  and  took  a  promi- 
nent and  violent  part  against  the  prisoner, 
almost  superseding  tbe  president.  (State 
Trials,  iv.  1269  et  seq.) 

Peck  dates  bis  death  on  March  18, 1655. 
(Desid,  Cur.  b.  xiv.  26 ;  Moroni,  i.  183.) 

JSBYI8,  John,  a  member  of  tbe  family 
of  the  Earls  of  St.  Vincent,  was  the  younger 
son  of  Thomas  Jervis,  Esq.,  a  king's  counsel 
long  leading  the  Oxford  Circuit,  and  for 
many  years  a  judge  on  the  Chester  Circuit. 
He  was  bom  on  January  12,  1802,  and 
was  educated  at  Westminster  School,  and 
at  Trinity  College,  Cambridge.  Though 
destined  for  his  father*s  profession,  and  being 
for  that  purpose  entered  of  the  Middle 
Temple,  his  luTe  for  a  military  life  induced 
him  to  accept  a  commission  in  the  Cara- 
bineers. Soon,  however,  leaving  tbe  army, 
he  resumed  his  legal  studies,  and  was  callea 
to  tbe  bar  in  Easter  Term  1824. 

At  first  be  travelled  tbe  Oxford,  and  then 
tbe  Chester  Circuit,  and  in  London  be  prac- 
tised principally  in  the  Exchequer.  On  each 
arena  he  soon  attained  great  reputation,  from 
bis  familiarity  with  legal  practice,  and  from 
his  quickness  of  apprehension  and  great  dis- 
cretion. In  the  Excbe(|uer  bis  opportunities 
were  improved  by  holding  the  ofiice  of  *  post- 
man,'  and  by  reporting  its  decisions  in  con- 
junction, first  with  Mr.  Edward  Younge, 
and  then  with  Mr.  (afterwards  Justice) 
Crompton,  from  1826  to  1832.  He  was  the 
author  also  of  some  other  useful  practical 
works  on  criminal  law,  tbe  law  of  coroners,  &c. 
In  tbe  first  Reform  Parliament  he  was 
returned  for  tbe  city  of  Chester,  which  he 
continued  to  represent  till  his  elevation  to 
the  bench,  invanably  supporting  the  liberal 
party,  to  whose  principles  be  was  zealously 
attached.  I 

In  1837  be  received  a  patent  of  pre-  I 
<^ence^  and  on  July  4,  1846,  on  tbe 
xestoration  of  the  whig  ministry,  be  was 
made  solicitor-general,  which  he  held 
only  three  days,  being  promoted  to  the 
attomey-genersdsbip  on  the  7th  by  tbe 
elevation  of  Sir  Thomas  Wilde  to  tbe  post 
of  chief  justice  of  tbe  Common  Pleas,  when 
be  was  Knighted.  During  the  four  years 
that  be  filled  that  office  tbe  manner  in 
which    he    exercised   its  functions  com- 


JOHK 


377 


manded  universal  approbation.  His  ser- 
vices as  an  adviser  of  the  crown,  in  all 
the  departments  of  the  government,  were 
so  unremitting  and  laborious  that  they 
laid  the  seeds  of  that  disease  which  short- 
ened his  life;  and  his  conduct  on  the 
various  prosecutions  in  those  seditious 
times,  especially  in  the  Chartist  trials,  was 
so  discreet  and  admirable  that  be  well 
merited  his  promotion  to  the  place  of  chief 
justice  of  tne  Common  Pleas  on  July 
15, 1850. 

His  judicial  powers  were  of  the  biffbeet 
order.  His  judgments  were  'modds  at 
once  of  legal  learning,  accurate  reasoning, 
masculine  sense,  and  almost  faultiess  lan- 
guage ; '  and  the  memory  he  displayed,  as 
well  in  summing  up  tbe  details  or  evidence 
as  in  reviewing  the  cases  quoted  before 
him,  was  quite  surprising.  The  following 
curious  case  is  a  good  exemplification  of 
bis  qualities.  '  A  young  man  of  large  pro- 
perty had  been  fleeced  by  a  gang  of  black- 
legs on  the  turf  and  at  cards.  ...  A 
private  note-book,  with  initials  for  names, 
and  complicated  gambling  accounts,  was 
found  on  one  of  the  prisoners.  No  one 
seemed  to  be  able  to  make  head  or  tail  of 
it  The  chief  justice  looked  it  over  and 
explained  it  all  to  tbe  jury.  Then  there 
was  a  pack  of  cards  which  had  been  pro- 
nounced by  tbe  London  detectives  to  oe  a 
perfecUy  fair  pack.  They  were  examined 
m  court;  every  one  thought  tbem  to  be  so. 
They  were  handed  to  the  judge.  .  .  When 
tbe  charge  began,  he  went  over  all  tbe  cir- 
cumstances ti&  be  got  to  the  objects  found 
upon  tbe  prisoners.  '*  Gentiemen,''  aaid  he, 
^1  will  engage  to  tell  you,  without  looking 
at  the  faces,  tbe  name  of  every  card  upon 
this  pack.''  A  strong  exclamation  of  sur- 
prise went  through  tbe  court  Tbe  pri- 
soners looked  aghast  He  then  pointed 
out  that  on  tbe  backs,  which  were  figured 
with  wreaths  of  flowers  in  dotted  lines  all 
over,  there  was  a  small  flower,  tbe  number 
and  arrangement  of  the  dots  on  which 
designated  each  card.'  (His  Zifsj  2y 
Brooke,  iL  142.) 

The  disease  under  which  he  laboured 
sometimes  made  him  impatient  and  irrita- 
ble ;  but  be  was  pronounced  by  tbe  pro- 
fession a  judge  of  the  highest  nmk,  and  in 
tbe  relations  of  private  life  be  was  much 
esteemed  for  hb  amiable  and  cheerful 
disposition. 

He  died  on  November  1, 1856.  leaving  a 
family  by  bis  vrife,  Catherine,  tne  dau^- 
ter  of  Alexander  Mundell,  Esq.  (Law 
Mag.  and  Rev.  Feb.  1857,  p.  302.) 

JOEV  \b  inserted  as  a  chancellor  imder 
Henxy  II.  by  Pbilipot  and  Spelman,  and 
their  followers,  Hardy  and  Lonl  Campbell^ 
but  without  stmicient  authority.  Thynne, 
from  whom  Spelman  avowedly  forms  his 
list,  says  nothing  more  than  this : 


378  JONES 

'  John,  chancellor  of  England  in  the  time 
of  King  Ilenrie  the  Second,  but  what  he 
was  or  in  what  year  of  King  Ilenrie  he 
lived  I  doo  not  know.' 

Du^dale  does  not  notice  him,  nor  is  there 
any  history  which  does ;  neither  has  any 
record  been  discovered  in  which  his  name 
occurs. 

JOKES;  TH03IAS,  was  the  second  son  of 
Edward  Jones,  Esq.,  of  Sandford  in  Shrop- 
shire, by  Mary,  daughter  of  Robert  Powell, 
Esq.,  of  The  Park  in  the  same  county,  and 
was  descended  from  an  ancient  family,  the 
nobility  of  which  is  traced  by  the  AVelsh 
heralds  to  a  period  earlier  than  the  Con- 
quest. His  education  was  begun  at  the 
iree  school  of  Shrewsbury,  and  completed 
at  Emmanuel  College,  Cambridge,  where  he 
took  the  degree  of  B.A.  in  l032^*i.  He 
had  previously  been  entered  at  Lincoln*s 
Inn,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  on  May  17, 
1034.  The  part  which  he  took  in  the  sub- 
sequent trouoles  has  been  variously  repre- 
sented. One  writer  says  he  was  one  of  the 
loyal  Shropshire  gentlemen  taken  prisoner 
bv  the  parliamentary  forces  on  capturing 
Slirewsbury;  while  another  remarks  that 
*  his  conduct  spoke  more  of  prudencethnn 
loyalty,  or  perhaps  of  timeserving  than 
either,'  adding,  that  though  '  in  1G62  he 
declared  he  was  always  for  the  king,  yet 
he  was  never  sequestered,  though  pos- 
sessed of  considerable  property,  but  de- 
clared himself  against  the  commission  of 
array  in  the  time  of  the  wars,  and  refused 
to  find  a  dragoon  for  the  king's  service,  for 
which  he  was  committed  by  Sir  Francis 
Offley,  then  governor  of  Shrewsbury,  which 
commitment  he  afterwards  brought  two 
men  to  testify  before  the  parliament  com- 
mittee as  an  argument  of  his  good  affection 
to  them; '  that  his  brother  was  then  recorder 
of  Shrewsbury,  and  declared  him  from  the 
bench  well  affected  to  the  parliament ;  and 
that  he  was  elected  town-cierk  of  Shrews- 
biuy  by  the  parliamentanr  party,  from 
which  office  he  was  accordingly  diismissed 
at  the  llestoration.  (Gent  Mag,  1840, 
pp.  2,  270.) 

He  was  returned  as  one  of  the  members 
for  Shrewsbury  to  the  parliament  elected 
just  previous  to  Charles's  arrival,  and  again 
in  1001 ,  but  his  name  does  not  appear  in 
any  of  the  debates.  He  was  digniiied  with 
the  coif  in  10($9,  and  was  promoted  to  be 
king^s  Serjeant  two  years  after.  While 
holding  that  position  he  was  knighted,  and 
on  April  13,  1070,  he  was  constituted  a 
judge  of  the  King's  Bench.  During  the 
ten  years  that  he  sat  on  the  bench,  seven 
in  this  court,  and  three  as  chief  justice  of 
the  Common  Fleas,  he  was  ensaged  in 
most  of  the  political  trials  that  disgraced 
the  latter  part  of  Charles's  reign,  and  the 
commencement  of  that  of  James  IL  In 
1Q77  he  properly  refused  to  bail  or  dis- 


JONES 

charge  the  Earl  of  Shafteabury,  impriflnoad 
by  the  House  of  Lords.  That  he  created 
the  testimony  of  Titus  Oatea  and  Wilfiun 
Bedlow,  and  that  of  the  other  witneaiea  t» 
the  Popish  Plot,  notwithstanding  all  tUr 
contraaictions,  is  manifest  in  the  trials  that 
took  place  before  him  in  the  two  sohi^ 
quent  years,  though  he  afterwards  foond 
reason  to  change  his  opinions. 

In    Trinity  Term  1080,  the  Cooit  €f 
King^s  Bench  having  dismissed  the  gnad 
jury  suddenly,  so  as  to  prevent  an  informa> 
tion  against  the  Duke   of   York  for  not 
going  to  church,  the  House  of  Commiw 
directed  Chief  Justice  Scroggs  and  Justice 
Jones  to  be  impeached ;  but  the  pariiameot 
being  soon  after  prorogued,  the  proceedingi 
were  not  renewed.    Li  the  trials  of  fm- 
harris.  Dr.  Plunket,  and  Colledge,  in  168^ 
and  of  Lord  Russell  in  1083,  Sieie  is  ao- 
thing  to  distinguish  Justice  Jones  faToa> 
ably  from  the  other  judges   who  sat  on 
them.    In  the  absence  of  Chief  Jiuties 
Saunders,  he  pronounced  in  June  16B3  tlis 
judgment  of  the  court  in  favoor  of  tiM 
king  taking  the   charter  of  the  city  of 
London  into  his  hands ;  and  on  September 
29  following  he  was  rewarded  yj  beior 
promoted  to  the  place  of  chief  justice  or 
the  Common  Pleas.     On  the  subseqneBt 
trials  of  Femley,  Ring,  Eliz.  Gknnt,  tad 
Alderman  Cornish,  at  which  he  preoded, 
he  showed  great  severity  and  harshneas 
and  the  attamder  of  the  latter  was  rermd 
at  the  revolution.   (State  TrialB,  vols.  tL  to 
xi. :  Pari.  Hist,  iv.  1224, 1201, 1273.)  Bat 
still  he  was   too  honest  and  plainspcto 
for  King  James.    On  bein^  pressed  ay  hi* 
majesty  to  declare  himself  m  favour  of  the 
royal  dispensing  power,  he  said  he  coahl 
not  do  it ;  and  on  the  kinp*s  answering  tiiit 
'  he  would  have  twelye  judges  of  his  oji- 
nipn,*  he  replied  that  possibly  his  n^flitj 
might  find  twelve  Juages  tof  his  cpJoMf 
but  scarcely  twelve  lawyers,     (SimMl^^ 
Hist.  iii.  451.^    He  was  accordmglj  dii- 
missed  from   nis  place  with  three  other 
judges,  on  April  21, 1060. 

At  the  revolution  he  was  called  before 
the  House  of  Commons  to  account  for  » 
judgment  of  the  Court  of  King's  Bench  in 
the  case  of  Jay  v,  Topham,  the  seijetat- 
at-arms,  pronounced  six  years  before,  end 
was  committed  with  Chief  Justice  Ptein- 
berton  for  the  supposed  breach  of  privilege 
on  July  10,  lOSOj  sharing  the  im^nsoniiMnt 
with  his  chief  till  the  prorogation  of  tlie 
parliament.  (State  Triahy  xii.  822.)  He 
died  in  May  1002,  aged  seventr-eiffht^iBA 
was  buried  in  St.  Alkmnnd's  Uhu^ 
Shrewsbury,  where  hia  monnment  tf 
remains. 

Roger  North   (Examoi^  6681I 
Sir  Thomas  as  'a  Teryreyennd 
judge,  a  gentleman  ttid  impaf'' 
mg,  however^  to  Us  whohi 


JONES  JUYN  379 

y  he  appears  to  have  exhihited  too  ,  holdly,  in  his  justification,  to  the  antiquity 
a  tendency  to  accommodate  himself  |  of  his  house :  *  I  am  myself/  said  he, 
to  the  court  or  to  the  popular  party,  as  the  !  *  Liber  Homo;  my  ancestors  gave  their  Toice 
OM  or  the  other  predominated ;  arid  his  for  Magna  Charta.  I  enjoy  that  house  still 
dnm  to  the  title  of  an  upright  judge  is  which  they  did.  1  do  not  now  mean  to 
principally  founded  on  his  resistance  to  the  draw  down  God*s  wrath  upon  my  posterity, 
idDff's  di^wnsing  power.  and  therefore  1  will  neitner  advance  the 

Sj  his  wife,  /ane,  daughter  of  Daniel  king*s  prerogative  nor  lessen  the  liberty  of 
Bemand^  Baq.,  of  Chester,  he  had  three  ■  the  sumect,  to  the  dan^  of  either  king  or 
mmSf  William,  Thomas,  and  Edward,  from  people.'  (Pari,  Hid,  iL  2tK).)  What  his 
te  latter  of  whom  descended  Catherine,    view  of  the  king's  prerogative  was  may  be 


irlio  married  Captain  John  Tyrwhitt,  judged  by  his  joining  in  the  opinion  of  the 
whose  son  Thomas,  succeeding  to  the  ,  bench  in  favour  of  ship-money,  and  by  the 
crtatee^  assumed  the  name  of  Jones,  and  reasons  he  gave  in  support  of  that  opinion 
was  creitfed  a  baronet  in  1808.  in  1G>S7,  in  Hampden  s  case  {State  Trials, 

JOVBB,  William,  belonging  to  an  an-  I  iii.  844-1181);  but,  however  erroneous  his 
dent  fiumly  of  North  Wales,  whose  line-  view  of  the  case  might  be,  there  is  no  doubt 
an  is  traced  by  the  Welsh  heralds  from  that  hb  decision  was  founded  on  a  con- 
m  princes  and  possessors  of  that  country,  scientious  opinion  of  its  correctness, 
was  the  eldest  son  of  William  Jones,  Esq.,  By  his  death  before  the  Long  Parliament 
of  Castellmarch  in  Carnarvonshire,  where  took  up  the  question,  he  escaped  the  im- 
the  ftmOy  had  long  been  seated,  and  of  peachment  instituted  against  his  colleagues. 
Ifamzet,  daughter  of  Humphrey  Wynn  That  event  occurred  on  December  9, 1040, 
ap  Meredith,  of  Hyssoilfarcn,  Esq.  He  in  the  seventy-fourth  year  of  his  age.  He 
was  salt  from  the  free  school  of  Beaumaris  was  buried  under  Lmcoln's  Inn  Chapel. 
to  the  university  of  Oxford,  where  he  pur-  Heame  (Cur,  DiscourseSy  ii.  448)  describes 
sued  his  studies  at  St.  Edmund's  Hall  for  him  as  *  a  person  of  admirable  learning, 
five  years,  and  then  was  entered  of  Fur-  j  particularly  in  the  municipal  laws  and 
nival  s  Inn,  from  which  he  removed  to  ■  British  antiquities.'  His '  Keports  of  Special 
Uncoln's  Inn,  where  he  was  called  to  the  Cases,'  from  18  Jac.  I.  to  16  Car.  I.,  whicli 
har  in  1506,  and  became  reader  in  Lent  were  not  published  till  after  his  death,  have 
1610.  He  had  acquired  sufficient  eminence  a  good  reputation  in  Westminster  Hall ;  and, 
in  his  profession  to  be  selected  in  1017  for  '  to  distinguish  them  from  those  of  Sir  Tbo- 
the  chief  justiceship  of  the  King's  Bench  mas  Jones,  the  judge  in  the  reign  of  Charles 
in  Ireland.  For  this  purpose  he  was  called  II.,  they  are  cited  as  ^  First  Joneses  Reports.' 
to  the  de^e  of  serjeant  on  March  14,  He  married,  first,  Margaret,  eldest  daugh- 
1617,  and  Knighted.  ter  of  Griffith  John  Griffith,  Esq.,  of  Keve- 

After  staying  in  Ireland  for  about  three  ,  namulch;  and  secondly,  Catherine,  daughter 
years,  during  which  he  was  one  of  the  com-  of  Thomas  Powys,  ofAbingdon,  and  widow 
misrioners  of  the  Great  Seal  of  that  king-  '  of  Dr.  Ilovenden,  warden  of  All  Souls'  Col- 
dom,  he  resigned  his  seat  in  the  King's  lege,  Oxford.  (Allien,  Oxon.  ii.  073.) 
Bench ;  and  in  the  patent  of  his  successor,  :  JOSCELHIE  (Archdeacon  of  Cni- 
Jone  1630,  the  services  of  Sir  William  are  •  Chester)  was  one  of  the  custodes  of  the 
thus  encomiastically  alluded  to.  The  king,  ;  bishopric  of  Exeter  in  31  Henry  IL,  1185, 
while  complying  with  his  desire  to  be  callecl  while  it  was  in  the  king's  hands.  Two 
from  his  charge,  says  *he  could  wish,  for  years  afterwards  his  name  occurs  as  a  jus- 
tiie  good  of  his  service  and  his  kingdom  of  tice  itinerant  fixing  the  tallage  of  the  coun- 
Irdsnd,  that  a  man  so  faithful,  honest,  and  ties  of  Lincoln  and  York  (Madox\  i.  310, 
aUe  would  have  afibcted  to  continue  in  035,  713),  and  he  was  present  in  the  Curia 
that  office  longer.'  (Smf/thy  26,  88.)  On  Kegis  as  one  of  the  justices  before  whom  a 
retaining  to  England,  he  resumed  his^prac-  fine  was  acknowledged.  (Hunter  n  Pre- 
tioe  at  the  bar,  but  in  Michaelmas  1621  he  face,)  The  continuance  of  his  judicial 
WIS  placed  on  the  English  bench  as  ajud^  functions  is  shown  by  the  roU  of  1  Kichard 
of  the  Common  Pleas.  (Dugdak^B  Ortg,  I.,  where  his  pleas  as  a  justice  itinerant  in 
48.)  He  continued  in  that  coiurt  for  three  '  various  counties,  not  only  for  that  but  the 
yeaiS;  during  which  he  was  also  employed  preceding  years,  appear.  (Pipe  Roll,)  He 
on  a  commission  in  Ireland,  and  was  then,  ;  probably  died  shortly  afterwards,  as  the 
on  October  17,  1624.  transferred  to  the  '  date  of  his  successor  in  the  archdeaconry  is 
Sing's  Bench,  where  ne  remained  for  the  1100.  (Le  Neve,  65.) 
rest  of  his  life.  TUEJSL,  John,  is  the  last  in  the  list  of 

Id  the  great  question,  in  1628,  as  to  the  justices  itinerant  in  20  Henir  II.,  1174, 
lefosal  of  bail  to  the  five  gentlemen  com-  appointed  to  take  the  assize  of  Hampshire 
nutted  to  prison  for  not  contributing  to  the  (Madox,  i.  123) ;  but  who  he  was  has  not 
hmn,  Jjutace  Jones,  when  called  with  his   been  discovered. 

IbQowb  before  the  House  of  Lords  to  assign  •     juym,  John,  is  so  called  in  the  Rolls 
UmMons  for  that  judgment,  adverted  thus  I  of  Parliament  and  the  Acts  of  the  Privy 


380 


KASLEOL 


Coimdly  but  sometimes  spelled  Joyn,  and  on 
liis  monument  In^rn,  and  so  in  Bishop  Bub- 
with's  will,  of  which  he  was  one  of  the  ex- 
€CutorS|  wluch  seems  most  probably  correct, 
as  his  mansion  is  now  called  '  Inne  Court.' 
He  was  of  a  Somersetshire  fJEunily,  his 
country  seat  bein^  at  Bishopsworth  (now 
called'  Bishport)  m  that  county,  in  which 
he  possessed  the  manor  of  Long  Ashton. 
{CoUimoiCs  Sottierset,  ii.  205^  He  first  ap- 
pears in  the  Year  Book  of  1 1  Henry  IV.,  after 
which  his  name  is  of  frequent  occurrence. 
In  the  next  reign  he  was  one  of  those  who 
refused  to  obey  two  summonses  to  take  upon 
them  the  degree  of  seneant,  but  who  were 
compelled  by  the  parliament  to  do  so  in 


1404.   (Bot.  Pari  It.  107.)    He  held  the 
office  of  recorder  of  Bristol,  and  aboat  eight 
months  after  Ihe  accession  of  Henry  VLne 
was  appointed,  on  May  5, 1423,  to  the  double 
office  of  chief  baron  of  the  Elzcheqiur  and 
judge  of  the  Common  iPleas.     (AcU  iViiy 
CowicUf  iiL  71.)    He  was  knighted  in  4 
Henry  VI.,  and  on  Febmazy  9,  1436,  be 
was  raised  to  the  principal  seat  of  the  latter 
court    There  he  remamed  for  nearly  time 
I  years,  and  then  was  made  chief  j  usiice  of  the 
King's  Bench  on  Jan.  20, 1439,  and  presided 
there  till  his  death,  on  March  24, 1439-40. 
He  was  buried  in  St.  Mary's  Cha^l,  Bed- 
cliffe  Church,  BristoL     By  hia  wife  Alice 
he  left  a  son.    (Barrdfs  Brittoi^  587.) 


K 


KABLEOL,  WiLLiAH  DE,  sometimes 
flpelled  Karlell,  is  erroneously  placed  by 
Dugdale  as  lord  chief  baron  oi  the  English 
Exchequer  on  June  27,  1383, 7  Richard  II., 
havinff  mistaken  the  patent  which  appoints 
him  cniet  baron  of  Ireland.  He  had  been 
eecond  baron  of  the  Irish  Exchequer  from 
1371,  45  Edward  HI.,  and  was  succeeded 
as  chief  baron  there  in  1399.  (Smyth's  Law 
Off.  Ireland,  140.) 

XAUVE,  RiCHABD  DE  (Calne),  is  only 
mentioned  as  one  of  the  justices  itinerant 
into  Wiltshire  in  9  Henry  UI.,  1225,  and  as 
being  appointed  about  the  same  time  to  take 
assizes  of  last  presentation,  &c.,  in  that 
county.     (Bot,  Clous,  ii.  76, 130, 141.) 

XEATIHO,  Henbt  Sikgeb,  is  one  of  the 
present  judges  of  the  Common  Pleas.  He 
was  bom  at  Dublin  in  1804,  and  is  the  third 
son  of  the  late  Lieutenant-General  Sir 
Henry  Sheehy  Keating,  E.C.B.,  who  highly 
distinguished  himself  in  the  West  Indies 
.and  other  parts  of  the  world,  and  of  the 
daughter  of  James  Singer,  Esq.,  of  Anna- 
dale  in  the  county  of  Dublin. 

He  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  Inner 
Temple  on  May  4, 1832,  when  he  Joined  the 
Oxford  Circuit,  and  attended  the  Oxford  and 
Oloucester  sessions,  and  after  labouring  as 
a  junior  for  seyenteen  years  he  receiv^  a 
silk  gown  in  1849. 

In  1852  he  entered  parliament  as  member 
for  Heading,  which  he  continued  to  repre- 
sent till  he  was  elevated  to  the  bench.  Sup- 
porting the  liberal  party  in  the  house,  he 
was  appointed  solicitor-general  in  May  1857, 
and  Imighted,  during  the  first  ministry  of 
Lord  Palmerston,  on  whose  defeat  in  the 
following  February  he  retired,  but  was  re- 
placed in  June  18^^  on  that  lord's  return  to 
fower.  Only  half  a  jeai  had  elapsed  before 
e  was  constituted  a  judge  of  the  Common 
Pleas,  in  whidi  court  he  nas  sat  from  De- 
•cember  14^  1859,  till  the  pzeaent  time. 


He  married  a  daughter  of  MajoivGeDenI 
Evans,  of  the  Artillery. 

KXCX,  Antuont,  the  second  commissioDer 
of  the  Great  Seal  when  King  William  and 
Queen  Mary  had  settled  themselves  on  tlie 
throne,  was  the  son  of  Nicholas  Kewk,  of 
Oldcowclifie  in  Oxfordshire.  Admitted  a 
barrister  by  the  Inner  Temple  in  1000,  he 
became  a  bencher  in  1077.  That  ae  an 
advocate  in  Chancery  he  acquired  a  gnat 
reputation  may  be  inferred  from  his  being 
selected  at  such  a  crisis  as  one  of  the  heada 
of  the  court  on  March  4,  1G89.  He  was  at 
the  same  time  knighted.  Ks  tenure  of 
office  lasted  only  fourteen  months,  till  May 
14,  1090.  After  his  retirement  from  tiie 
Seal  he  was  returned  to  parliament  for 
Tiverton  in  1091,  and  died  in  December 
1095.  In  1007  was  published  a  oompOa- 
tion  from  his  papers  under  the  title  d 
'Cases  argued  and  decreed  in  the  BSgb 
Court  of  Chancery  from  the  twelfth  vear 
of  Charles  the  Second  to  the  thirtv-mit' 
One  of  his  daughters  married  Kidiaid 
Freeman,  who  became  Lord  Chancellor  d 
Ireland^  and  another  married  into  theTiacy 
family.  (Atkynis  Gloucester,  133,  800; 
if<«r«rf/,  ii.  217,  iii.  507 :  WMy.) 

XEEBLS.  RiCHABD,  of  Newton  in  SoStA, 
traces  his  descent  from  Thomas  KeeUe,t 
native  of  that  county,  who,  as  a  leaned 
Serjeant,  fills  a  large  space  in  the  Yetr 
Books  of  Henry  VII.  (Athen.  Oitm.  iv. 
575.^  He  was  called  to  the  bar  at  Orn^a 
Inn  m  1014,  was  elected  an  ancient  in  1633, 
and  reader  in  1039.  Though  he  was  nerer 
in  parliament,  his  political  sentiments  wan 
sufficiently  known  to  induce  that  bod^  to 
elect  him  for  one  of  the  judsea  of  Wtki  iB 
March  1047,  and  to  include  him  ia  As 
batch  of  Serjeants  appointed  in  (Mokr 
1048.    He  wasaenttoX^orwiiAiBlliMaB** 

her  to  try  the  mutineers,  and  flp  H 

poaal  of  the  Great  Seal  after  t  if 


KELLESAY 

the  iangf  he  was  the  junior  of  the  three 
oomnunioiiers  to  whose  custody  it  was  en- 
trusted, an  ofBce  which  he  held  for  above 
fire  years.  {Whiteiocke,  240,  842,  380.) 
Soon  alter  his  appointment  he  presided  at 
the  cmioos  trial  of  Colonel  LilDume,  and 
he  seems  to  have  acted  with  less  severity 
md  nnfidmees  than  some  of  the  judges  who 
wers  joined  in  commission  with  him.  He 
iras  president  also  of  the  High  Court  of 
Justice  on  the  trials  of  Christopher  Love 
nd  John  Gibbons  in  1651  (State  Triais, 
IT.  1260,  T.  49,  268) ;  but  in  Ajpril  1654, 
Cromwell  having  been  proclaimed  pro- 
tector, he  was  diis^laced. 

On  the  restoration  of  Charles  H.  the 
Beijeant  was  excepted  from  the  act  of  in- 
demnity. (Fari.  Hid,  iv.  70.)  How  long 
he  lived  afterwards,  or  to  what  country  he 
retired  to  avoid  his  trial,  does  not  appear. 
His  son,  Joseph  Keeble,  published  several 
law  tracts,  besides  reports  of  cases  in  the 
^ng's  Bench  from  1660  to  1678. 

XXLLE8AT,  Richard  de,  was  the  last 
named  of  the  justices  itinerant  for  the 
county  of  York  in  1225,  9  Henry  HI.  He 
was  uen  abbot  of  Selby,  having  been 
elected  thereto  in  1223.  He  died  in  1237, 
or  at  least  was  then  succeeded  bv  Abbot 
Alexander.  (Bot.  Oottf.  L  633,  540,  ii.  77; 
£rowne  Willis.) 

KBLLSSHULL,  RiCHABD  DE,  was  nro- 
liably  the  scm  of  Gilbert  de  Kelleshull,  to 
whom  a  pardon  was  granted  in  15  Edward 
U.,  for  all  felonies,  &c.,  committed  in  the 
'jnirsuit '  of  the  Despencers.  {Pari,  Writs, 
h.  p.  ii.  166.)  The  family  no  doubt  came 
from  Kekhull  in  Hertfordshire. 

Richard  was  appointed  to  several  judicial 
commissions  from  9  Edward  IH.,  but  was 
not  raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Common 
Pleas  till  Mav  30, 1341.  The  date  of  the 
last  fine  levied  before  him  is  in  1354 ;  but  he 
was  alive  three  years  afterwards,  when  he 
enfeoffed  the  parson  of  the  church  of 
Heydon  in  Essex  with  that  manor  and 
advowson.  (Abb.  Rot,  Plac.  iL  99-291; 
LitgdMs  Ong,  45.) 

XELLT,  Fm-RoT,  has  been  chief  baron 

of  the  Exchequer   since  July  16,  1866. 

This  judge,  according  to  Dod's  Peerage,  &c., 

WIS  grandson  of  Colonel  Robert  Kelly,  who 

distingnished  himself  in  the  East  Indies, 

lod  &e  son  of  Cantain  Robert  Hawke 

KeUr,    by   Isabel,   daughter  of  Captain 

Fordyce,  carver  and  cupbearer  to  Georae 

nL    He  was  bom  in  London  in  1796.   On 

hsiiig  called  to  the  bar  at  Lincoln's  Inn  on 

May  7,  1824,  he  first  joined  the  Home 

(yacaatj  and  then  the  Noitolk  Circuit ;  and 

after  practising  with  great  success  for  ten 

jHXBj  he  was  appointed  a  king's  counsel 

m  1834.    He  was  unfortunate  in  several 

attemptB  to  enter  parliament^  but  at  last  in 

1807  gained  a  seat  for  Ipswich.    From 

184S  to  1847  he  sat  for  Cambridge.    In 


KELYNG 


381 


April  1852  he  was  returned  for  Harwich^ 
and  in  May  for  East  Suffolk,  which  last 
seat  he  retained  till  he  was  called  to  the* 
bench.  During  this  period  his  professional 
advancement  proceeded.  He  held  the  office 
of  solidtor-ffenernl  twice,  with  the  cus- 
tomary knighthood,  from  June  29, 1845,  to> 
July  2,  1846,  and  from  February  27  to 
December  28, 1852.  On  February  26, 1858, 
he  was  appointed  attorney-general,  but  only 
held  the  place  till  June  18  in  the  follow- 
ing year.  He  remained  out  of  office  for  the 
next  eight  vears,  when  Lord  Derby's  admi- 
nistration placed  him  in  his  present  position. 

He  has  been  married  twice.  His  first 
wife  was  A^es,  daughter  of  Captain 
Mason,  of  Leith;  and  his  second  is  the 
daughter  of  Mark  Cunningham,  of  the 
county  of  Sligo. 

XSLYVO,  JQfES^  cannot  be  the  same  per- 
son described  by  Anthony  Wood  as  '  John 
Keeling,  a  counsellor  of  the  Inner  Temple, 
and  a  person  well  read  in  the  municipal 
laws  oiEngland,  created  M.A.  in  the  House 
of  Convocation  in  August  1621,'  and 
noticed  by  him  as  being  possibly  the  same 
person  as  the  chief  justice,  because  tiie  ad- 
mission of  the  latter  into  the  Inner  Temple, 
as  a  mere  student  of  law,  was  more  tnan 
two  years  after,  on  January  22, 1624.  His 
father  was  of  the  same  inn,  and  is  described 
as  a  resident  of  Hertford.  Croke  in  his  Re- 
ports notices  the  name  twice,  once  as  Keel- 
mg  in  1635,  and  next  as  Keeling  junior  in 
1639.  The  former  was  probably  the  M.A. 
of  Oxford.  The  son  was  called  to  the 
bar  on  February  10,  1032,  and  from  this 
time  to  the  Restoration  no  mention  is  made 
of  him  in  the  Reports.  Lord  Clarendon 
describes  him  to  tue  king  a.s  'a  person  of 
eminent  learning,  eminent  suffering,  never 
wore  his  gown  after  the  Rebellion,  but  wsa 
always  in  gaol;'  and  he  himself,  on  his 
being  made  a  jud^  in  1663,  speaks  of  his 
'twenty  years'  silence.'  (Fasti  Oxon,  i. 
404;  IZcftfc,  526.) 

With  such  claims,  it  is  not  surprising 
that  he  was  included  in  the  first  batch  of 
new  Serjeants  called  by  Charles  II.  in  1660, 
and  was  immediately  engaged  on  the  part 
of  the  crown  to  advise  with  the  juo^s- 
relative  to  the  {>roceedings  to  be  adopted 
against  the  resicides.  He  was  counsel  on 
the  trials  of  Colonel  Hacker  and  William 
Heveningham,  and  of  John  James,  a  Fifth 
Monarchy  man.  (1  Siderfin,  4 ;  Kelyng^ 
7;  StaU  Trials,  v.  1177,  1229,  vi.  76.) 
Returned  as  member  for  Bedford  in  May 
1661,  he  prepared  the  Act  of  Uniformity,, 
passed  in  the  next  year.  On  November  8 
ne  was  made  king's  serieant,  and  in  that 
character  was  one  of  the  counsel  on  the 
trial  of  Sir  Harry  Vane,  towards  whom  hi» 
conduct  was  tmfeelingly  harsh  and  insult- 
ing.   {Ibid.  vi.  171 ;  Bumd,  L  184.) 

He  was  appointed  a  judge  of  the  ling's 


382 


KEMPB 


Bench  on  June  18,  1603 ;  and  within  two 
years  afterwards  he  became  chief  justice 
of  the  King's  Bench,  on  Noyember  21, 1665. 
He  retained  the  place  during  the  remainder 
of  his  life,  with  httle  reputation  as  a  lawyer, 
and  frequently  incurrmg  censure  by  his 
want  of  temper  and  discretion.    In  1667 
complaints  were  made  a^rainst  him  in  parlia- 
ment by  gentlemen  of  the  county  for  divers 
'  high  proceedings '  in  the  execution  of  his 
office,  as  fining  of  juries,  &c,  for  which  he 
was  obliged  to  answer  before  the*  House  of 
Commons.    That  body  voted  his  proceed- 
ings to  be  illegal  and  tending  to  the  intro- 
duction of  arbitrary  government,  and  at 
first  seemed  inclined  to  proceed  with  great 
severity,  ordering  that  he  should  be  brought 
to  trial ;  but  in  the  end,  by  the  mediation 
of  his  friends,  the  matter  was  allowed  to 
drop.   (Stale  Triahy  vi.  607, 002 ;  Pepys.  iii. 
278, 324-5.)    Again  in  1670  he  was  obliged 
to  apologise  publicly  in  the  House  of  Lords 
for  rudenr  anronting  Lord  Holies  on  a  trial 
in  ther  Court  of  lung's  Bench.     (Life  of 
Holt  J  Pref,  vi.)      Sir  Thomas  Raymond, 
however  (p.  200),  in  recording  his  death, 
calls  him  '  a  learned,  faithful,  and  resolute 
judge.'  He  collected  various  crown  cases  in 
which  he  was  the  judge,  which  were  pub- 
lished after  his  death  by  Chief  Justice  Holt. 
He  died  at  his  house  in  Hatton  Garden  on 
May  0, 1671,  leaving  a  son,  who  was  named 
in   1660  as  one  of  the  intended  knights 
of  the  Hoyal  Oak,  and  who  afterwards  was 
knighted  and  became  king's  serjeant.    The 
family  name  of  the  mother  of  that  son  has 
not  been  found,  but  the   register    of  St. 
Andrew's,  Hoibom,  records  her  burial  under 
her  Christian  name  Mary  in  September 
1667,  and  the  judge's  marriage  with  Mrs. 
Elizabeth  Bassett  in  the  following  March. 
Whether  the   William  Kelynge  who  re- 
ported cases  in  the  reign  of  (ieorge  II.  was 
of  the  judge's  fiamily  does  not  appear. 

.  KEMPE,  f  John  (Archbishop  op  York 
AND  Canterbttrt),  ou  whom  his  nephew 
Thomas,  Bishop  of  London,  is  said  to  have 
penned  this  hexameter : — 

tBis  primus,  ter  pnescs,  et  bis  cardine  functoB, 

was  descended  from  a  good  family,  which 
had  been  long  in  possession  of  the  estate  of 
OUantigh,  in  the  parish  of  Wye,  in  Kent, 
where  he  was  bom  in  1380.  He  was  the 
younger  son  of  Thomas  Kempe  and  Beatrice, 
a  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Lewknor. 

He  received  his  education  at  Merton 
College,  Oxford,  of  which  he  became  a 
fellow.  Practising  in  the  ecclesiastical 
courts,  he  was  one  of  the  counsellors  called 
upon  by  Thomas  Arundel,  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  to  assist  in  the  proceeding 
against  Sir  John  Oldcastle  for  heresy  m 
1413.  (Stofe  TVio^,  i.  242, 262.)  As  these 
learned  advocates  were  frequently  joined 
to  foreign  missions,  so  we  findnim  employed 


KEMPE 

as  an  ambassador  sent  in  July  1415  to  ne- 
gotiate a  peace  with  the  Kinp^  of  Anagoq, 
and  to  treat  for  a  marriage  with  his  daugh- 
ter. {Rymer,  ix.  205. )  Li  that  year  alao  he 
was  appointed  dean  of  the  Arches,  and  rieu- 
general  of  the  new  archbiahop  Chichdey. 

Unconnected  as  he  was  with  any  noU« 
or  influential  family,  these  employmeBti, 
and  the  rapidity  of  his  subsequent  pidn- 
I  ments,  botn  in  the  church  and  tJbe  states 
speak  strongly  of  his  intellectual  powen 
and  the  excellence  of  his  character.    1^ 
this  time  he  had  been   already  admitM 
archdeacon  of  Durham,  and   in  1418  ie 
was   elected  Bishop     of  Rochester.     In 
i  the  following  April  Henry  V.  made  Urn 
keeper  of  his  pnvy  seal,  and  within  two 
years  he  was  placed  in  the  office  of  dun- 
cellor  of  the  duchy  of  Normandy,  whidi  be 
retained  till  the  end  of  that  reign.    After 
sitting  at  Rochester  for  about  two  yean^  k 
was  removed  to  Chichester  on  Februaiy  S8^ 
1421,  and  on  November  17  in  the  same  jeir 
he  was  translated  to  the  bishopricof  Looooil 
On  the  accession  of  Henry  \l.  he  ddi- 
vered  up  the  seal  of  the  duchy  of  N(]^ 
mandy,  and  was  appointed  one  of  the  yomv 
king's  council.     (Rot,  Pari,  iv.  171,  ^OIJ 
He  was  sent  to  the  Duke  of  Bedford  ia 
France,  and  was  employed  to  treat  fifftiie 
release  of  the  King  of  *Scots.     (AcU  Brief/ 
Courml,  iii.    86,    137.)     Wlien  Caidiiul 
Beaufort  retired  from  the  chancellorBlua 
on  his  temporary  accommodation  widi  m 
Duke  of  Gloucester,  the  bishop  was  niied 
to  that  office  on  March  16, 1426,  and  on  the 
8th  of  the  following  April  was  elected 
Archbishop    of  York.    He   retained  the 
Great  Seal  for  nearly  six  years,  durinf 
which  he  was  one  of  the  peers  who  signed 
the  answers   to   the  Duke  of  GloooMter, 
resisting  his   claim  to  govern  at  his  owi 
will  and  pleasure,  and  explaining  the  luai* 
tation  of  his  authority  as  protector.    (Bd, 
Pari,  iv.   327.)    His  resignation  ci  the 
Great  Seal  on  February  2o,  1432,  vrobaUj 
arose  from  the  contests  between  the  roliBg 
powers ;  for  it  appears  that  the  archbiihop 
continued  industnously  to  attend  the  eoim- 
cil,  and  that  in  1430  he  was  one  of  the 
ambassadors  to  treat  for  peace  with  Ranee. 
In  December  of  that  year   he  was  made 
cardinal  priest  by  the  title  of  St.  Balbim. 
{Pi/mery  x.  758.) 

Ten  years  after  thb  he  was  called  upon 
to  resume  the  office  of  chancellor,  aad 
received  the  Great  Seal  on  Janoaiy  Sl| 
1450,  as  the  successor  of  John  Staflflrii 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  on  whoee  Mk 
in  1452  he  was  raised  to  the  primaeji  to 
which  he  was  elected  on  July  21.  On  tt 
translation  the  pope  mnted  him  tiie  wk 
of  cardinal  bishop,  by  Oie  title  of  St  BilMl 
and  he  had  the  satiafiftction  of  zsqrfllvfht 
cross  and  the  pall  at  the  handioCMl] 
Thomas  Kempe,  then  Bishop  ct7 


KENDAL 

The  united  labours  which  he  thus  under- 
took he  continued  to  perform  for  nearly 
two  years,  when  his  career  was  closed  by 
his  death  on  March  22,  1453-4.  He  was 
buried  in  Canterbury  Cathedral. 

His  name  is  still  remembered  in  the 
university  of  Oxford,  to  the  schools  of 
which,  as  well  as  to  his  own  college,  he 
was  a  munificent  benefactor,  He  beautified 
the  collegiate  church  of  Southwell,  and 
rebuilt  that  of  his  native  parish,  Wye, 
where  he  erected  a  tomb  to  his  parents, 
and  in  1447  endowed  a  college  of  secular 
priests  for  the  celebration  of  divine  service 
and  the  instruction  of  youth,  calling  them 
the  provost  and  fellows  of  St.  Gregory  and 
St.  Martin.  This  establishment  was  dis- 
solved with  the  other  religious  houses 
under  Henry  VIII. ;  but  the  buildings  have 
been  since  devoted  to  the  purposes  of  parish 
education  with  part  of  the  original  endow- 
ments. (GodtvtHy  127,  &c. ;  Hasted^  vols, 
iv.  vii.  xii. ;  Gent.  Mag,  Nov.  1845,  p.  481.) 

KEKDAL,  Hugh  de,  had  the  Great  Seal 
on  July  26,  1284, 12  Edward  I.,  during  the 
temporary  absence  of  the  chancellor,  left  in 
his  care  and  that  of  two  others.  (CaL  Hot, 
Pat.  51.)  This  was  solely  as  clerks  of  the 
Chancery,  many  writs  and  directions  being 
Addressed  to  them  on  the  business  of  the 
Chancery. 

How  long  he  had  been  one  of  the  clerks 
of  the  Choncery  does  not  appear,  but  he 
liad  been  for  several  years  engaged  in  official 
duties.  In  1  Edward  I.  he  received  ten 
marks  for  his  expenses  in  going  to  the  king 
beyond  the  seas ;  two  years  afterwards  he 
was  assessor  of  the  fifteenth  imposed  on  the 
counties  of  Cambridge  and  Huntingdon; 
and  in  the  ninth  year  ne  is  styled  the  king's 
clerk.  In  17  Edward  I.  he  was  paid  116«. 
4^(1  for  erectinff  a  house  in  the  burial-ground 
of  the  abbot  of  Westminster,  in  which  the 
statues  of  King  Henry  and  Queen  Eleanor, 
Edward's  late  consort,  were  being  made ; 
and  in  20  Edward  I.  he  received  20/.  in 
reference  to  some  latten  metal  provided  for 
the  tomb  of  the  former.  (Devon's  Issue 
HoU,  87,  09,  105  ;  Pari.  Writs,  i.  3,  9.) 

KEKT,  Earl  of.  See  Odo  ;  H.  D£ 
BuBOU ;  H.  Gray. 

KEKTON,  Lloyd  (Lord  Kenyon),  was 
the  second  but  eldest  surviving  son  of  Lloyd 
Ken  von,  of  Bryn  in  Flintshire,  a  magistrate 
of  that  county,  by  Jane,  daughter  of  Ro- 
bert Eddowes,  of  Eagle  Hall  in  the  county 
of  Chester.  He  was  bom  at  Gredington  in  1 
Flintshire  on  October  5,  1732;  and  after 
passing  through  Ruthin  j^rammar  school  in 
Denbighshire,  then  in  high  repute,  and  in 
which  Lord  Keeper  Williams  was  formerly, 
And  Chief  Baron  Richards  more  recently  a 
pupil,  was  articled  to  Mr.  Tomkinson,  an 
attorney  at  Nantwich.  There  with  extra- 
ordinary diligence  and  assiduity  he  mastered 
the  elements  of  his  profession,  occasionally 


KENYON 


383 


recreating  himself  by  some  boyish  attempts 
at  poetry.  Luckily  for  his  fame,  he  soon 
deserted  the  Muses,  and  acquired  so  much 
credit  with  his  master  for  his  proficiency  in 
law  and  steadiness  in  conduct  that  negoti- 
ations were  entered  into  to  receive  him  into 
partnership.  Some  difi*erence  however  aria* 
mg  as  to  terms,  and  his  elder  brother  having 
lately  died,  it  was  determined  that  he  shoida 
seek  his  fortune  at  the  bar ;  and  accordingly 
he  was  entered  at  the  Middle  Temple,  fmd 
was  called  to  the  bar  on  February  7, 1756. 
During  his  years  of  pupilage  and  for  the 
long  interval  after,  in  which  his  merits  and 
even  his  name  were  unknown,  he  occupied 
every  instant  of  his  time  in  laying  in  that 
store  of  knowledge  so  essential  for  the  man 
who  aims  at  the  character  of  a  real  lawyer. 
He  lived  in  a  small  set  of  chambers  in  Brick 
Court  in  the  Temple,  and  was  constant  in 
his  attendance  in  Westminster  Hall,  where 
he  began  taking  notes  of  the  cases  he  heard 
there  so  early  as  1753.  The  small  meana 
which  his  father  could  allow  him  obliged 
him  to  live  with  the  greatest  economy,  by 
which  he  contracted  a  habit  of  parsimony 
which  stuck  to  him  to  the  last  day  of  his 
life ;  and  he  was  proud  even  in  his  prosperity 
of  pointing  out  the  eating-house  near 
Chancery  Lane  in  which  he  and  Dunning 
and  Home  Tooke  used  to  dine  together  at 
the  cost  of  7jdl  a  head.  With  Dunning, 
who  soon  discovered  his  merits,  he  formed 
a  close  intimacy,  attended  with  mutual 
benefit.  When,1by  an  unexampled  success 
Dunning  was  overwhelmed  with  cases  and 
briefs,  Kenyon  was  employed  by  him  to 
answer  many  of  the  former  and  to  look  out 
the  law  and  arrange  the  arguments  arising 
from  the  latter.  By  this  employment  he  not 
only  improved  in  the  exercise  of  his  powers, 
but,  when  his  assistance  was  discovered,  the 
cases  by  degrees  were  sent  direct  to  him,  till 
at  last  he  was  well  employed  in  that  branch 
of  business,  and  his  opimons  became  much 
sought  for  and  highly  esteemed. 

He  was  regular  in  his  attendance  on  the 
different  courts,  particularly  the  Chancery^ 
and  travelled  the  Welsh  and  Oxford  Cir- 
cuits, which  Chancery  barristers  had  not 
then  ceased  to  do.  Interposing  sometimes 
as  amicus  curiee  with  some  abstruse  law  or 
forgotten  clause  in  an  old  act  of  parliament, 
he  attracted  the  attention  of  Loid  Thurlow, 
whose  idle  habits  required  the  aid  of  a  la- 
borious helper  \  and  he  was  soon  joined  with 
Mr.  Hargrave  in  doing  privately  the  work 
for  which  the  great  man  receivea  the  credit. 
This  assistance  was  well  rewarded ;  for  not 
long  after  Thurlow  became  lord  chancellor 
he  gratefully  conferred  on  his  ^ devil'  in 
1780  the  chief  justiceship  of  Chester,  an 
office  most  ^tifying  to  Kenyon,  as  it  not 
only  gave  him  honour  in  his  own  country, 
but  confirmed  the  standing  he  had  attained 
at  the  bar.     In  the  same  year  he  waa 


384 


EENYOK 


leturned  member  for  Hindon  in  Wiltshire. 
Soon  after  he  made  his  first  prominent  ap- 
pearance as  leader  in  the  defence  of  Lord 
Qeorge  Gordon  for  high  treason,  in  refer- 
ence to  ^e  riots  of  17S),  in  whicn  his  noble 
client  was  infinitely  more  indebted  to  the 
seal  and  eloquence  of  Mr.  Erskine,  who 
acted  as  junior  counsel,  than  to  him.  In 
&cty  though  a  deeply  learned  lawyer  and  a 
forcible  arguer,  he  was  never,  from  his  want 
of  oratorical  powers,  an  efiicient  leader  in 
criminal  or  Nud  Prius  cases. 

Lord  Thurlow  advanced  him,  ««•  saUum, 
to  the  attomey-generalshin  in  March  1782, 
but  he  was  not  a  very  zealous  assistant  to 
the  ministry.  He  continued  in  office  till 
April  1783,  when  both  he  and  Lord  Thurlow 
were  turned  out  by  the  Coalition.  His  ex- 
clusion lasted  only  till  the  following  Decem- 
ber, when  he  was  re-appointed  under  Mr. 
Fi^  but  did  not  hold  the  place  above  three 
months,  receiving  the  ofiice  of  master  of  the 
Rolls  on  March  SO,  1784,  and  also  the  ho- 
nour of  a  baronetcy  on  July  24  In  the  new 
Sirliament  he  was  elected  for  Tregon^,  and 
Uy  ingratiated  himself  with  the  mmister 
by  nis  zealous  opposition  to  Mr.  Fox  as  a 
candidate  for  Westminster,  actually  having 
a  bed  put  up  in  the  loft  of  his  stebles  to 

S*  ve  him  a  vote,  and  supporting  the  scrutiny 
at  followed  that  election  with  more  energy 
than  discretion.  After  presiding  at  the 
RoUs  for  four  years,  during  which  he  was 
much  commended  both  for  efficiency  and 
despatch,  he  was  raised,  on  the  resignation 
of  Lord  Mansfield,  to  the  head  of  the  Court 
of  King's  Bench  on  June  9, 1788,  and  on 
the  same  day  was  created  a  peer  by  the  title 
of  Lord  Kenyon  of  Gredington. 

In  diffnity,  urbanity,  and  grace  there  was 
a  sad  feuling  off  in  the  court ;  but  in  know- 
ledge of  law,  application  of  principle,  dis- 
crimination of  character,  intuitive  readiness, 
and  honesty  of  purpose,  the  new  chief  jus- 
tice need  not  fear  a  comparison  with  his 
great  predecessor.  The  disapprobation  with 
which,  &om  the  offensiveness  of  his  manner 
and  his  severity  of  expression,  he  was  re- 
garded by  both  branches  of  his  profession 
was  more  than  counterbalanced  b^  the  ad- 
miration which,  from  the  infiexibility  of 
his  justice,  was  universally  accorded  to  him 
by  the  suitors  and  the  public.  To  his  un- 
popularity with  the  former  is  to  be  attri- 
buted the  multitude  of  anecdotes  about  his 
worn-out  habiliments,  shabby  equipage,  and 
bad  Latin,  circulated  by  the  contemporary 
jesters  of  the  bar.  They  have  been  minutely 
detailed  by  Mr.  Townsend,  and  repeated  by 
Lord  Campbell ;  but,  whether  true  or  in- 
vented, they  ou^ht  now  to  be  forgotten,  as 
the  venial  uailties  of  the  man,  in  regard  to 
his  acknowledged  merits  as  the  judge.  To 
make  the  most  of  them,  they  were,  as  he 
himself  considerately  declared  of  the  errors 
of  EiMne,  merely  '  blots  in  the  sun.'    He 


KILKENNY 

was  truly  honest  and  independent,  and  had 
an  absolute  abhorrence  of  anything  that 
savoured  of  irreligion,  immorality,  or  fraud* 
He  was  particularly  sharp  in  punishing  the- 
misdeeds  of  unworthy  practitioners ;  in  ac- 
tions for  criminal  conversation  he  urged  the- 
moft  exemplary  damages ;  he  made  forcible- 
war  against  the  spirit  of  gambling,  and 
neither  high  nor  low  escapedhis  invectives ; 
and  to  the  gross  libels  of  the  day,  both  po- 
litical and  personal,  he  was  a  stem  opponent;. 
Though  his  observations  on  these  subjects 
might  in  some  instances,  no  doubt,  have- 
been  tempered  with  a  little  less  warmth, 
they  were  dictated  by  the  strictest  mora? 
principle,  and  tended,  and  were  intended,  to- 
repress  the  evil  practices  upon  which  he  wa9 
called  to  adjudicate.  His  addresses  to  jurie? 
were  clear  and  distinct,  and  showed  sound 
common  sense  and  great  discrimination; 
his  arguments  in  Banco  always  exhibited 
soundness  of  law,  both  technical  and  mate- 
rial; and,  notwithstanding  all  his  minor 
failings,  the  decisions  and  rulings  of  no 
judge  stand  in  higher  estimation  than  those 
of  Lord  Kenyon.  His  presidency  lasted 
nearly  fourteen  years,  and  his  death,  which 
was  fastened  by  his  grief  for  the  loss  of  hi» 
eldest  son,  occurred  at  Bath  on  April  4, 
1802.  He  was  buried  in  the  family  vault  at 
Hanmer,  where  there  is  a  monument  with 
his  effigy  by  Bacon,  jun.,  and  an  inscrip- 
tion recordmg  his  piety  and  worth.  £us 
notes  of  cases,  whicn  only  extended  from 
1753  to  1759,  were  published  some  years 
after  his  death. 

He  married  Mary,  daughter  of  George 
Kenyon,  of  Peel  in  Lancashire,  the  elder 
branch  of  the  family,  and  had  by  her  three 
sons.  The  title  is  now  enjoyed  by  the 
fourth  baron. 

XEBDE8T0K,  WnjJAM  de,  was  one  of 
the  justices  of  trailbaston  appointed  on 
April  6,  1305,  33  Edward  L,  for  Norfolk 
and  Suffolk  (N,  Foedera,  i.  970),  of  which 
he  had  been  sheriff,  and  held  considerable 
possessions  in  the  former  of  them.  When 
the  new  commissions  were  issued  two  vears 
afterwards,  his  name  was  omitted,  probably- 
on  account  of  his  death,  as  the  frequent 
entries  about  him  in  the  parliamentary 
writs  cease  in  the  thirty-fourth  year. 
They  show  him  to  have  l>een  summoned 
to  perform  military  service,  and  to  have- 
been  variously  employed  in  those  counties. 
He  married  Margaret,  daughter  of  Gilbert 
de  Gant,  Baron  of  FolMngham.  His  son 
Hoger  was  summoned  to  parliament  in  (> 
Edward  III.,  but  the  barony  fell  into  abey- 
ance in  the  next  reign.  {pugdM»  Barotu 
ii.  112 ;  NicoMs  Synopsis,) 

glLKENHY,  William  be  (Bishop  of 
Ely),  was  archdeacon  of  Coventry  in 
1248,  and  held  some  official  position  in 
the  court  from  1249,  33  Henry  IH.,  to 
1252.    (ilfflW!tw,  ii.  129,  202.)    When  John 


KINDEBSLET 

de  Lexinton  retired  from  court  in  1250,  the 
Great  Seal  was  committed  to  Peter  de  Ri- 
Tallis  and  William  de  Kilkenny,  and  it  ia 
not  improbable,  as  they  both  were  con- 
nected with  the  kingr's  wardrobe,  that  it 
was  merely  deposited  there  under  their 
safe  custody  during  John  de  Lexinton's 
absence. 

William  de  Kilkenny,  however,  was 
afterwards  in  the  sole  possession  of  the 
Seal,  although  the  date  of  its  delivery  to 
him  is  not  recorded.  His  signature  ap- 
pears to  a  patent  dated  July  2,  1253, 
relative  to  the  government  of  the  king- 
ilom,  during  the  king's  absence  in  Gascony, 
by  Queen  Eleanor  and  Richard  Earl  of 
Cornwall,  who  had  been  appointed  regents. 
They  at  the  same  time  were  directed  to 
deliver  to  William  de  Kilkenny  the  seal  of 
tlie  Exchequer,  to  be  kept  by  him  in  the 
place  of  the  Great  Seal,  which  the  king  had 
ordered  to  be  locked  up  till  his  return. 

About  Michaelmas  1254  the  monks  of 
Ely  elected  him  their  bishop,  and  on  the 
5th  of  the  ensuing  January,  the  king  hav- 
ing returned  to  England  on  the  1st,  the 
bishop  elect  delivered  up  the  Great  Seal  to 
him,  and  received  a  patent,  39  Henry  UI., 
m.  15,  expressive  of  his  diligent  and  accept- 
able service,  with  on  entire  quittance  from 
all  reckonings  and  demands  in  respect  of 
the  King's  Court  or  otherwise, '  de  tempore 
quo  fuit  citstos  SigUU  nostri  in  Anglia.' 
(Afadoxy  i.  69,  71.) 

Matthew  Paris  calls  him  '  cancellarius 
Fpecialis ; '  and  Sir  T.  Hardy,  following  him, 
has  introduced  him  into  his  column  of 
chancellors.  There  are  only  two  recorded 
instances  in  which  he  is  distinguished  by 
that  title,  both  in  37  Henry  IH.  (Hymer, 
i.  288 ;  Abb.  Placit.  133.)  It  is  observable, 
however,  that  in  neither  of  the  preceding 
entries  of  that  year  is  he  so  designated, 
and  the  words  a^ove  cited  from  his  quietus 
seem  conclusively  to  prove  that  his  real 
olHce  was  that  of  keener  of  the  Seal. 

He  presided  over  nis  see  for  little  more 
than  one  year,  during  which  he  gave  to  his 
monks  the  churches  of  Melbum  and  Swaff- 
liam.  Ills  decease  occurred  on  September 
22,  1256,  while  engaged  on  an  emoaflsy  to 
Spain.  His  body  was  buried  at  Sugho, 
where  he  died,  but  his  heart  was  brought 
to  his  own  catnedral. 

In  times  of  violence  and  distraction,  such 
as  those  he  flourished  in,  it  is  pleasant  to 
And  all  parties  writing  in  his  praise.  He 
is  represented  as  handsome  in  his  person, 
modest  in  his  demeanour,  skilled  m  the 
municipal  laws  of  the  kingdom,  wise,  pra« 
dent,  and  eloquent;  and  he  is  mentioned 
among  the  benefactors  of  Cambridge.  (Ood" 
win,  256 ;  AngL  Sac.  i.  310,  636.) 

XIKDEB8LET,  KicHABJD  ToRnr,  waa 
bom  on  October  5,  1792,  at  Madras,  and 
is  the  eldest  son  of  the  late  Nathaniel 


KIKG 


385 


Edward  Kinderaley,  Esq.,  of  Sunning  Hill,. 
Berkshire,  formerly  in  tne  civil  service  of 
the  now  defunct  East  India  Company, 
and  descended  from  a  Lincolnshire  family. 
Being  brought  to  England  for  education, 
he  proceeded  from  Haileybury  to  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge,  and  graduated  B.A. 
in  January  1814,  being,  fourth  wrangler  of 
his  year,  and  gaining  his  election  as  fellow  of 
his  college  in  Octooer  1815.  He  took  his 
degree  of  M.A.  in  July  1817,  and  on  the 
10th  of  the  following  Februaiy  was  called 
to  the  bar  by  the  society  of  Lincoln's  Lm. 

In  January  1835  he  was  made  one  of  the 
king's  counsel,  and  occupied  that  position 
till  1848,  having  been  advanced  in  the  pre- 
vious year  to  the  honourable  post  of  chan- 
cellor of  the  county  palatine  of  Durham. 
During  the  whole  of  the  thirty  years  that 
had  ekipsed  since  he  assumed  the  barrister'a 
gown  he  had  practised  in  the  Court  of 
Chancery,  and  both  as  junior  and  senior, 
for  juridical  learning,  patient  industry,  and 
solid  Judgment,  had  held  so  high  a  reputar 
tion  tnat  he  was  early  ranked  among  those 
who  would  sooner  or  later  be  called  to  a 
judicial  office. 

Never  having  been  in  parliament,  and  not 
having  any  pohtical  interest,  he  had  to  wait 
till  March  1848  for  his  advancement,  and 
then  only  received  a  mastership  in  Chan- 
cery. In  that  poidtion  his  jumcial  talent 
be<»me  so  evident  that  on  October  *20, 
1851,  he  was  appointed  vice-chancellor, 
and  was  knighted.  This  office  he  resigned 
in  November  1866,  and  the  fifteen  years 
during  which  he  held  it  confirmed  the  cha- 
racter he  bore  throughout  his  whole  career. 

He  married  the  omy  daughter  of  the  Rev. 
John  Lei^  Bennett,  of  Thorpe  in  Surrey. 

XIKO,  Peteb  (Lobjd  King).  The  career 
of  this  eminent  judge  afibrdsanotherstriking 
instance  of  how  genius  and  industry  may 
overcome  the  most  unpromising  beginnings, 
and,  when  united  with  modesty  and  good 
conduct,  may  raise  the  possessor  from  a  sub- 
ordinate position  to  the  highest  dignity  in 
the  state.  Peter  King's  father,  Jerome 
King,  was  a  thriving  and  respectable  grocer 
and  Salter  in  Exeter,  and  he  himse&  was 
compelled  reluctantly  to  pursue  the  same 
btLsiness  for  some  years.  His  mother  was 
Anne,  daughter  of  Ireter  Locke,  of  a  Someiv 
setshire  family,  and  first  cousin  of  the  great 
philosopher  .John  Locke.  He  was  bom  in 
1669,  and  after  receiving  the  ordinary  edu- 
cation at  the  grammar  school  of  his  native 
city,  he  had  no  other  apparent  prospect  than 
was  onened  to  him  by  his  father's  trade. 
Though  faithfully  and  diligently  discharginff 
the  duties  of  this  unattractive  avocation,  his 
mind,  which  was  serious  and  contemplative^ 
sought  more  congenial  employment,  and  in- 
stead of  occupying  his  leisure  hours  in  the 
usoai  amusements  of  youth,  he  devoted  them 
to  literary  pursuits.     Encouraged  b^  bSa^ 


386 


KING 


celebrated  relative,  who  saw  with  surprise 
and  pleasure  the  progress  in  learning  of  one 
who  could  command  so  few  opportunities 
for  study,  he  published  anonymouslyin  1681 
a  work  suggested  to  him  by  the  discussions 
in  parliament  on  the  scheme  of  Compre^ 
hension,  which  about  that  time  agitated  the 
religious  world. 

This  was  entitled  an  '  Enquiry  into  the 
Constitution,  Discipline,  Unity,  and  Wor- 
ship of  the  Primitive  Church  that  flourished 
within  the  first  300  years  after  Christ :  faith- 
fully collected  out  of  the  extant  writings  of 
those  ages.'  He  soon  afterwards  produced 
a  second  part,  leading  to  a  correspondence 
between  him  and  Mr.  Ellis,  which  was  pub- 
lished by  the  latter.  In  1702  he  issued 
another  theological  work,  called  '  The  His- 
tory of  the  Aposties'  Creed,*  which  greatly 
increased  his  reputation.  Bred  up  among 
Dissenters,  he  had  in  his  firat  work  naturally 
advocated  the  claims  of  the  Presbyterians ; 
but  when  Mr.  Sclater*s  book  called  ^  Original 
Draught  of  the  Primitive  Church'  appeared, 
so  late  as  1717,  he  is  said  to  have  acknow- 
ledged that  his  principal  arguments  had 
been  satisfactorily  confuted.  However  this 
may  have  been,  his  early  work  attracted  the 
notice  of  the  learned  world,  and  it  displayed 
such  an  extent  of  reading  and  researcn  that 
his  relative  induced  his  father  to  release 
him  from  his  conmierdal  engi^ments,  and, 
by  sending  him  to  complete  his  education 
at  the  university  of  Leyden,  prepare  him 
for  a  position  more  suitable  to  his  talents. 
He  resided  at  Leyden  for  three  years,  and 
returned  in  1604  and  applied  himself  dili- 
gently to  the  study  of  the  law  at  the  Middle 
Temple,  where  he  was  called  to  the  bar  on 
June  8,  1698.  To  Chief  Justice  Trebv  and 
to  his  other  whig  connections  he  pro{)ably 
owed  his  early  introduction  into  practice,  in 
which  he  was  soon  successfully  and  exten- 
sively established,  both  in  Westminster 
Hall  and  on  the  Western  Circuit.  By  the 
same  interest  he  was  almost  immediately 
provided  with  a  seat  in  the  senate,  being, 
m  both  the  parliaments  of  February  and 
December  1701,  elected  for  Beeralston,  a 
close  borough,  for  which  he  sat  till  he  as- 
cended the  bench.  During  the  whole  of 
this  time,  although  we  know  from  his  cor- 
respondence with  Locke  that  he  was  an 
active  partisan  and  an  occasional  speaker, 
the  records  of  parliamentary  oratory  are  so 
scanty  that  his  name  very  seldom  appears. 
The  nrst  occasion  on  which  he  is  noticed  is 
in  January  1704,  when  he  delivered  an  able 
and  effective  argument  in  support  of  the 
right  of  electors  to  appeal  to  tne  common 
law  for  redress  against  the  returning  officers 
of  Aylesbury  for  refusing  to  receive  their 
votes.  {ParL  Hid,  vi.  264.)  This  year  was 
an  eventful  one  to  him,  being  marked  by  his 
marriage  in  September  with  Anne,  daughter 
of  Richard  Seyes,  Esq.,  of  BoTerton  in  Gla- 


KINO 

morganshire,  and  by  the  death  in  the  next 
month  of  his  cousin  John  Locke,  who  bad 
been  his  affectionate  guide  and  adviser,  and 
who  proved  his  confidence  and  lore  by 
making  him  his  executor  and  leaving  him 
his  MSS.,  and  a  great  part  of  his  property. 
In  1705  he  received  hia  first  promotion, 
that  of  recorder  of  Glastonbury,  which  wis 
succeeded  by  his  election  on  Julv  27, 1706, 
to  the  recordership  of  London,  and  nis  knight- 
hood in  the  following  September.    At  this 
time  his  reputation  was  so  high  that  he  nu 
designed  for  speaker  of  the  new  parliament; 
but  his  claims  were  withdrawn  in  favour  of 
Sir  Bichard  Onslow.    He  was  one  of  the 
managers  for  the  Commons  in  the  impeach- 
ment of  Dr.  Sacheverell  in  1710,  and  opened 
the  second  article  in  a  most  elaboratespeech, 
replving  also  to  the  doctor's  defence  m  <m 
as  able  and  as  long.    In  these  oraticne  he 
displayed  all  his  theological  learning;  bat 
he  coiAd  not  efiectivelv  support  a  prosecution 
like  this,  which  itself  in  some  measure  ood- 
travened  the  principles  of  that  tolentkn 
which  he  had  advocated.     This  however 
was  a  party  affair,  in  which  he  prolitblj 
was  compeUed  to  assist ;  but  he  soon  ifker 
showed  his  adherence  to  his  old  opinions  by 
his  energetic  defence  of  Whiston  and  of 
Fleetwood,  Bishop  of  St.  Asaph.    (Me 
Trials^TV,  134,418, 703 ;  JPdrl  jyi!rf.vL1165.) 

When  George  I.  came  to  the  throne  tb« 
whigs  regained  their  power,  and  Sir  Peter 
was  at  once  promoted.  From  the  iHiig 
leader  in  the  House  of  Commons  andtilie 
acknowledged  head  of  the  bar,  though  un- 
dignified with  office,  he  was  raised  on  No- 
vember 14,  1714,  to  the  post  of  chief  jna- 
tice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  in  which  he  flat 
for  more  than  ten  years,  with  the  approba- 
tion of  lawyers  for  his  learning,  and  of 
suitors  for  nis  impartiality.  The  *  State 
Trials'  report  only  Irwo  criminal  trials befon 
him ;  ano^  in  both  of  them  his  summing  op 
of  the  evidence  and  his  statement  of  the 
law  are  most  careful,  clear,  and  distinct; 
and  though  his  construction  of  the  Coventoy 
Act  in  that  of  Woodbum  and  Co^pe  did  not 
meet  with  universal  acquiescence,  it  mt 
agreed  on  all  sides  that  the  prisoners  were 
most  deservedly  condemned.  (^SUde  TMf 
XV.  1386,  xvi.  74.) 

On  the  resignation  of  Lord  Chancellor 
Macclesfield  in  January  1725,  Sir  Pftter 
King  was  appointed  speaker  of  the  Howe 
of  Lords ;  in  which  character  he  presided 
at  the  trial  of  that  nobleman,  and  W- 
nounced  sentence  against  him  on  BCay  **• 
Five  days  after,  on  June  1,  the  Ghreat  Seal 
was  placed  in  his  hands  as  lord  chanodkif 
he  having  three  days  before  been  xaiaad  to 
the  peerage  by  the  title  of  Baron  Qfg 
Ockham  m  Surrey.  lEs  aalanrof  wOjfc 
was  increased  by  1200A,  tLvawmf^  ■JJ 
pensate  for  the  lose  of  the  ide  '  1P^ 
offices  in  the  Court  of  ChaMflQ  ^w 


KING 

•eflect  acknowledging  that  to  have  been 
theretofore  a  rocognised  privilege,  for  the 
exercise  of  which  Lord  Alacclesiield  had 
been  punished.  He  had  held  the  Seal  for 
two  years  when  George  I.  died ;  yet,  though 
he  had  given  his  opinion  on  the  subject  of 
the  marriage  and  education  of  the  royal 
family  in  favour  of  that  king's  prerogative, 
and  against  the  claim  of  the  Prince  of 
Wales,  the  latter  when  he  came  to  the 
crown  was  so  convinced  of  his  unbiassed 
integrity  that  he  was  continued  in  his  high 
trust  for  the  first  six  years  of  the  reign. 

His  earliest  labours  were  devoted  to  the 
construction  of  a  plan  by  which  the  frauds 
and  misapplication  of  the  suitors'  money,  as 
lately  exposed,  might  be  for  the  future  pre- 
vented :  and  this  was  satisfactorily  effected 
by  the  appointment  of  a  new  officer  called 
the  accountant-general,  in  whose  name  all 
the  funds  brought  into  court  were  imme- 
diately placed,  to  be  dispensed  under  strict 
regulations  to  those  found  to  be  entitled  to 
them.  In  the  daily  exercise  of  his  judicial 
functions,  though  he  exhibited  the  same 
learning,  care,  and  impartiality,  he  did  not 
sustain  the  same  reputation  he  had  won  by 
his  presidency  of  the  Common  Pleas.  He 
had  not  had  any  experience  in  equity  prac- 
tice, and  consequently  was  diffident,  irre- 
solute, and  dilatory.  So  many  of  his  de- 
crees were  appealed  against,  and  so  many 
of  his  decisions  were  reversed  or  contro- 
verted, that  the  admiration  which  he  had 
earned  as  a  judge  cannot  be  extended  to 
him  as  a  chancellor.  Lord  Hervey  (ilfc- 
moirsj  i.  281)  relates  that  the  queen  once 
said  of  him  that  '  he  was  just  m  the  law 
what  he  had  been  in  the  gospel — making 
creeds  upon  the  one  without  any  steady 
belief,  and  judgments  in  the  other  without 
anv  settled  opinion.' 

l)uring  the  latter  part  of  his  career  his 
health  failed,  and  he  became  so  lethargic 
*  that  he  often  dozed  over  his  causes  when 
on  the  bench  ; '  a  circumstance  which,  ac- 
cording to  Jeremy  lientham  (an  eyewit- 
ness), <was  no  prejudice  to  uie  suitors,' 
owing  to  the  good  understanding  between 
Sir  Philip  Yorke  and  Mr.  Talbot,  who, 
though  opposed  to  each  other  as  counsel, 
arranged  tne  minutes  of  the  decrees  be- 
tween them  ^so  as  that  strict  justice  might 
be  done.*  {Cookm/y  60.)  No  wonder  then 
that  this  mode  of  settling  their  claims  was 
imsatisfactory  to  the  litigants.  Lord  Kind's 
infirmities  increased  so  much  that  on  No- 
vember 29,  VJ'^X  he  felt  himself  compelled 
to  resign  tlie  Seal,  after  having  held  it  for 
nearly  nine  years. 

From  this  time  he  graduallv  sank  till  the 
dose  of  his  life.  He  died  on  July  29, 1734, 
and  was  buried  at  Ockham,  where  a  hand- 
some monument  bears  record  of  his  many 
excellencies. 

From  the  liberal  principles  in  which  he 


KINGSMILL 


387 


was  educated  he  never  swerved  during  the 
whole  of  his  career,  and  against  his  private 
character  no  word  has  ever  been  whispered. 

He  left  four  sons,  each  of  whom  succes- 
sively enjoyed  the  title.  The  great-grand- 
son of  the  fourth  brother  was  created  by 
Queen  Victoria,  in  183d,  £arl  of  Lovelace, 
and  is  now  lord  lieutenant  of  Surrey. 

KIHGEBTOH,  IIenbt  be,  in  1197^  9 
Kichard  1.,  was  one  of  four  justices  itine- 
rant who  tallaged  Kington,  a  small  town 
in  Berkshire  (madox^  x.  705),  and  was  no 
doubt  of  the  same  place.  His  name  does 
not  appear  on  any  other  occasion. 

XIKOBMILL,  «roHir,  was  the  son  of  John 
Kingsmill,  of  Barkham,  Berksf  and  was 
himself  afterwards  seated  at  Sidmantonin 
Hampshire.  He  had  his  legal  education  at 
the  Middle  Temple,  and,  having  been  no- 
ticed in  the  Year  Books  from  Michaelmas 
1489,  was  called  from  that  society  to  take 
the  degree  of  the  coif  in  1494,  and  in  1497 
he  was  made  one  of  the  king's  Serjeants. 
(F;  5.  9  Henry  VIL  fo.  23  b.)  That  he 
was  held  in  high  estimation  at  the  bar  is 
proved  by  the  foUowin^  letter  from  one  of 
the  correspondents  of  Sir  Robert  Plumpton 
{Cwresp,  134),  for  whom  the  seijeant  was 
professionally  engaged  : — *  Sir,  for  Mr. 
kingsmel,  it  were  wel  doon  that  he  were 
with  you,  for  his  authority  and  worship ;  for 
he  may  speke  more  plainly  in  the  matter 
than  any  counsel  in  this  country  will,  for  be 
knowes  the  crafty  labour  that  hath  been 
made  in  this  matter,  and  also  he  will  not  let 
for  no  maugre.  And  yf  the  enquest  passe 
against  you,  he  may  shew  you  summ  com- 
fortable remedy,  for  I  suppose  with  good 
counsell  you  may  have  remedy;  but,  sir, 
his  coming  will  be  costly  to  you.' 

On  July  2,  1503,  he  was  preferred  to  a 
judicial  seat  in  the  Common  Pleas;  and 
tines  were  levied  before  him  as  late  as  Fe- 
bruary 1509,  two  months  before  the  king's 
death.  His  own  death  probably  occurred 
about  the  same  period,  as  his  name  does 
not  appear  in  the  reign  of  Henry  VHL 

He  married  Joan,  daughter  of  Sir  John 
Gifford  of  Ishill,  and  had  a  son  John,  whose 
second  son,  George,  is  the  next  judge  noticed. 

KDrOBMILL,  Geoboe,  the  grandson  of 
the  above  John  Kingsmill,  was  the  second 
son  of  Sir  John  Kingsmill,  of  Sidmanton  in 
Hampshire,  by  Constance,  the  daughter  of 
John  Goring,  of  Burton  in  Sussex.  He 
passed  through  the  grades  of  legal  study  at 
Lincoln's  Inn,  where  he  was  called  to  the 
bar  in  15C7,  and  became  reader  in  autumn 
1578.  In  1594  he  removed  from  the  inn  on 
being  made  a  Serjeant,  and  in  the  following 
year  he  received  the  additional  honour  (n 
queen's  seijeant.  Lord  Burleigh  recom- 
mended him  for  advancement  as  a  man 
*well  able  to  bear  the  burden  of  service' 
{Peek's  Desid.  Cur,  b.  v.  24),  and  soon  after 
that  minister's  death  \a  ^m^  ^«s«X«^  V^ 


388 


KINLOSS 


the  bench  as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas, 
on  February  8,  1590.  After  the  accession 
of  King  James,  who  knighted  him,  he  re- 
tained his  post  till  Hilanr  1600,  when  he 
resiffned,  and  in  the  April  following  he  died. 

He  married  Sarah,  daughter  of  Sir  James 
Ilarington,  of  Exton,  and  widow  of  Francis 
Lord  Hastings.   ( CoUiriHS  Peerage,  vi.  668.) 

jLiHLOBB,  LiOBJ).    See  Edwabd  Bruce. 

xntXEBY,  Gilbert  be,  like  many  of  his 
namesakes,  was  connected  with  the  courts ; 
and  that  his  standing  was  a  hi^h  one  is 
shown  by  his  being  selected  in  il  Edward 
I.,  1203,  as  one  of  the  eight  justices  of 
assize  then  appointed,  when  Kent  and 
eight  other  counties  were  assigned  to  him 
and  to  John  de  Insula.  He  had  property 
in  Hinton  and  Brackley  in  Northampton, 
and  was  sheriff  of  that  county  for  five 
years,  commencing  2  Edward  I.  (Abb. 
Flacit.  200 ;  Fuller.) 

XntXEBY,  John  be.    This  name  appears 
three  times  in  the  judicial  list  of  the  reign  of 
Henry  HI.— viz.,  in  1227, 1230,  and  1272. 
The  presumption,  therefore,  is  that  they  do 
not  apply  to  the  same  individual,  but  that 
the  party  mentioned  in  the  first  of  the  two 
former  years  was  probably  the  same  person 
recorded  in  the  second  of  them.    Great 
difficult]^,   however,    freouently  arises   in 
distinguishing   individuals    who    are    de- 
nominated from  their  native  places,  espe- 
cially when  towns  of  the  same  name  occur, 
as  in  this  case,  in  different  counties.    A 
John  de  Kirkeby,  parson  of  the  church  of 
Kirkeby  Lonsdale,  in  11  Henr}'  III.,  ob- 
tained the  grant  of  a  fair  there;  but  there 
is  nothing   to   prove,  though  it  is  very 
possible,  that  he  was  the  same  John  de 
Kirkeby  who,  in  August  of  the  same  year, 
1227,  was  appointed  one  of  the  five  justices 
itinerant  selected  for  the  counties  of  North- 
ampton, Bedford,  Buckingham,  Cambridge, 
Huntingdon,  and  Rutland.     (Rot.  Clous,  ii. 
201,  213.)    Again,  the  tallage  of  Yorkshire 
was  assessed  by  a  John  de  Kirkeby  in  14 
Henry  III.  (mado.\\  i.  708),  and  either  a 
justice  itinerant,  or  a  clergyman  in  the 
neighbourhood,  might  have  been  so  em- 
ployed.    In   10    Henrv   HI.  a  John  de 
Kirkeby  paid    seven    hundred    marks    to 
the  king  for  the  wardship  and  marriage 
of  the  son  and  daughter  of  Philip,  the 
brother  of  Thomas  de  Burgh  {Excerpt,  e 
Rot.  Fin.  i.  281);   and  in  the  next  year 
again,  in  Easter  1230,  the  name  appears  as 
a  justider,  taking  the  acknowledgment  of 
fines.     (Duffdale's  On'g.42.)    As  it  may  be 
easily  presumed  that  the  justice  itinerant 
is  the  same  as  the  justider,  and  considering 
that  it  was  not  uncommon  for  the  judges 
of  that  period  to  have  ecclesiastical  pre&r- 
mentSy  there  is  a  reasonable  ground  for 
bdieving  that  he  and  the  incumbent  of 
the  living  of  Srkeby  Lonsdale  aze  one. 

r,  JoHK  DB  (Bishop  of  Elt), 


KIRKEBY 

is,  there  is  little  doubt,  the  indiridoal 
ferred  to  in  the  last  artide  under  the  date 
1272.    He  was  rector  of  the  church  of  St 
Berian  in  Cornwall,  dean  of  Wymbum  in 
Dorsetshire,  a  canon  in  the  ca&edrals  of 
Wells  and  York,  and  in  1272,  56  Henry 
III.,  was  appointed  archdeacon  of  Coventiy. 
(Rot.  Pari.  1.  14;  LeNeve,  132.)   When,  on 
the  death  of    Richard  de  Middelton  oq 
August  7  of  the  latter  year,  the  Greit 
Seal  was  delivered  into  the  king's  ward- 
robe under  the  seal  of  John  de  Kiricebjr, 
there  is  no  doubt  that  he  was  dther  la 
officer  of  the  Exchequer  or  a  derk  of  the 
Chancerv.  On  the  king*s  death,  on  Nov^- 
ber  10  &)llowing,  it  was  delivered  up  by 
him  to  the  king^s  coundl.    There  is  amoof 
the  records  in  the  Tower  a  letter  addresBed 
to  him  as  the  king's  vice-chancellor  about 
this  time.  (7  RmoH  Pub.  Ree.,  App.  n.'2^.) 

It  was  not  till  nearly  six  years  after  thu 
that  he  had  a^ain  possession  of  the  Great 
Seal.  When  Kobert  Bumel,  the  chancellor, 
went  abroad  on  Februair  11,  1278, 6  Ed- 
ward I.,  John  de  Kirkeby  was  named  u 
his  substitute ;  and  the  same  course  wis 
repeated  on  several  other  occasions  dmiiig 
that  chancellor*s  temporary  absences— vix., 
on  Mav  25,  1279;  February  20,  1281  f 
Februwy  13, 1282 ;  and  March  1, 1283.  As 
he  was  left  to  expedite  the  business  of  the 
Chancery  in  the  meantime,  it  is  xnimfest 
that  he  was  cognisant  of  the  duties  of  the 
office,  and  most  probably  that  he  was  the 
senior  clerk  in  the  Chancery,  then  a  place 
of  high  importance.  From  this  he  was  pro- 
moted on  January  0,  1284,  to  the  office  of 
treasurer'  (Madox,  lii.  30),  which  he  filled 
until  his  death. 

On  July  20,  1280,  he  was  elected  Kshop 
of  Ely,  and,  although  he  had  preTioiulj 
held  so  many  ecclesiastical  dignities,  m 
obliged  to  be  ordained*  priest  before  hii 
consecration.  Within  four  years  a  violent 
fever  terminated  his  career,  on  March  26, 
1200.  lie  was  buried  in  his  own  cathedral, 
and  was  succeeded  in  his  pro]jerty  by  a 
brother  named  William.  He  is  chai^ 
with  neglecting  the  care  of  his  diocese  in 
his  devotion  to  the  affairs  of  the  state,  and 
to  have  borne  himself  with  too  much  arro- 
gance, sinking  the  bishop  in  the  treasQref' 
His  successors,  however,  would  not  fail  to 
bless  his  memory  for  the  munificent  bequtft 
he  made  to  them  of  the  manor  of  Hdbonii 
where  their  London  palace  was  built,  near 
the  site  which  is  now  called  Ely  Pla«» 
(Oodmrif  257 ;  Angl.  Sacr.  i.  037 ;  Ckrm. 
Petrob.  160.) 

KISKEBT,  TnoxAS,  wasone  of  the  maiUn* 
in  Chancery  from  18  Henry  VL,  14a9|t3i 
March  20, 1447,  when  he  receiTed  ajpiB^ 
of  the  office  of  master  of  the  Mhj^ 
reversion  after  the  death  of  Jcta  Bk/jjf^ 
don  (Roi.  Ptiri.  y.  8-128,  817|  ^ay^wA 
probably  came  into  poasMOB  hUtmlkg 


KIBKETON 

K^  foQoinng,  when  Stopindon's  suoceasor  in 
bhej  archdeaoonxy  of  Voiaet  was  collated, 
lifter  bis  predecessor's  death  he  took  a 
lew  patoit.  dated  January  26,  1448.  when 
fehe  grant  was  made  to  him  for  life ;  but  his 
oew  grant  on  the  accession  of  Edward  IV. 
was  onlj  'quamdiu  se  bene  gesserit.'  In 
little  more  than  nine  months  he  was  directed 
to  give  np  the  Rolls  to  Kobert  Kirkham, 
who  succeeded  him  on  December  23, 1461. 
He  died  in  1476,  being  then  treasurer  of 
Exeter  Cathedral.    (Le  Neve,  91,  281.) 

CBKETOV,  RooBR  be,  although  intro- 
duced bj  Dugdale  among  the  justices  of 
the  Conmion  fleas  in  30  Edward  III.,  on 
the  authori^  of  a  liberate  for  the  pay- 
ment, no  doubt,  of  his  salaiy,  was  then  only 
made  one  of  the  king's  Serjeants,  and  was 
not  raised  to  the  bench  till  the  early  part  of 
46  Edward  III.,  1372.  His  arguments  as 
an  advocate  extend  from  28  to  45  Edward 
m,  in  the  Year  Books,  in  which  he  is 
named  as  seijeant  in  the  fortieth  year.  It 
was  not  till  46  Edward  III.  that  he  was  for 
the  fint  time  introduced  as  a  regular  judge. 
The  fines  acknowledged  before  him  com- 
mence in  February  in  that  year. 

He  continued  on  the  bench  during  the 
remainder  of  that  reign,  and  was  re- 
appointed at  the  commencement  of  the 
Mowing.  His  name  on  the  fines  does  not 
occur  beyond  July  1380,  4  Richard  II., 
hot  he  li?ed  till  the  ninth  year  of  that  reign. 

He  was  of  a  Lincolnshire  origin,  and 
hsd  property  in  the  place  from  which  he 
was  called  in  that  county ;  and  there  are 
some  circumstances  which  ruse  a  question 
whether  he  and  Roger  de  Meres,  after- 
mentioned,  are  not  one  and  the  same  person. 

XntKHAX,  RoBBRT,  was  a  master  in 

Chanceiy  in  1454,  32  Henry  VI.,  till  the 

•eDd  of  that  reign ;  and  nine  months  after  the 

aoceedon  of  Edward  IV.  he  superseded 

Thomas  Kirkeby  as  master  of  the  Rolls, 

OQ  December  23,  1461.    Twice  during  the 

absence  of  the   lord   chancellor,  George 

KcTill,  Kshop  of  Exeter,  the  Great  Seal 

was  placed  in  nis  custody,  from  August  23 

to  October  25, 1463,  and  from  April  10  to 

May  14,  1464.    From  June  8  to  20, 1467, 

it  was  sffain  put  into  his  hands  to  transact 

the  business  of  the  Chancery.    Although 

called  keeper  in  the  record,  it  was  in  a 

jery  restricted  sense,  for  he  was  to  act  only 

in  the  presence  of  two   lords   and  two 

blights,  and  to  deliver  the  Seal  to  one  or 

other  of  them  every  day  when  the  sealing 

Was  finished.  Kirkham  certainly  continued 

master  of  ^e  Rolls  till  the  restoration  of 

fieniy  VL  on  October  9, 1470 ;  and  it  would 

leem  that  he  was  not  removed  during  the 

four  following  months,  for  his  successor, 

William  Monand,  was  not  appointed  till 

Pebniary  12,  1471.    It  apj^ears  nrobable 

Quit  he  bad  been  for  some  time  ill,  which 

peifaape  was  the  cause  of  his  not  being  dis- 


KNYVET 


389 


turbed  in  his  office  by  Henry  VL:  and,^as  he 
was  not  restored  to  it  when  Edward  IV. 
resumed  the  throne,  he  probably  died  just 
before  Morland's  appointment. 

XVOYILL,  GiLBEBT  DB,  was  sheriff  of 
Devonshire  from  21  to  28  Edward  L,  during 
which  time  he  witnessed  the  charter  by 
which  Isabella  de  Fortibus,  Countess  of 
Albemarle  and  Devonshire,  granted  to  the 
kin^  the  Isle  of  Wight,  and  the  manors  of 
Chnstchurch  in  Hants  and  Lambeth  in 
Surrey,  and  was  also  one  of  her  executors. 
CRot,  ParL  i.  335.)  He  was  indebted  to  her 
lor  the  manor  of  Batishom  in  the  parish  of 
Honiton,  which  long  remained  in  his  family. 
(Risdon,  40.) 

In  31  Edward  I.,  1303,  he  was  sent  as  a 
justice  itinerant  into  the  isles  of  Jersey, 
Guernsey,  Aldeme;^,  and  Sark,  and  in  1305 
and  130/  was  appointed  one  of  the  justices 
of  trailbaston  into  ten  counties,  of  which 
Devonshire  was  one.  {Rot»  ParL  L  218, 464.) 

Judging  from  a  contemporary  song,  he 
graced  the  seat  of  justice  with  mercv  and  a 
tender  consideration  for  the  poor.  (  ivright^e 
Pbl.  Son^fs,  2Sh)  In  2  Edward  IL  he  peti- 
tioned  the  parliament  for  relief,  in  conse- 
quence of  having  received  during  his  sheriff- 
alty 108/.  in  a  coin  called  pollards,  which 
had  been  reduced  to  half  tneir  value  by  a 
royal  proclamation ;  and  the  barons  of  the 
Exchequer  were  afterwards  ordered  to  make 
him  the  allowance.  {MadoXy  i.  294.)  He 
died  in  7  Edward  IL   {Abb.  Pot.  Grig A.2Q^.) 

JLSTTEHj  John,  was  a  descendcmt  of  the 
very  ancient  family  of  Knyvets,  which  had 
been  settled  in  England  previous  to  the  Con- 
quest. He  was  the  eldest  son  of  Richard 
Knyvet,  of  South  wick  in  Northamptonshire, 
custos  of  the  forest  of  Cly  ve,  by  Johanna, 
the  daughter  and  heir  of  John  Wurth,  a 
Lincolnsnire  knight.  In  21  Edward  III.  he 
was  practising  as  an  advocate  in  the  courts 
(r.  ^.);  and  in  31  Edward  IH.  he  was 
called  to  the  degree  of  the  coif;  and  there  is 
Sir  Edward  Coke's  authority  (4  Innt,  70) 
that  he  was  ^  a  man  famous  in  his  profession.' 

On  September  30,  1301,  35  Edward  III., 
he  was  constituted  a  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas;  and  on  October  20,  1365  (having 
been  previously  knighted),  he  was  promoted 
to  the  office  of  chief  justice  of  the  King's 
Bench.    {N.  Fosdera,  iii.  777.) 

On  June  30,  1372,  he  was  constituted 
chancellor,  and  during  the  four  years  and  a 
half  that  he  retained  the  office  he  acted  with 
great  wisdom  and  discretion ;  but  the  king, 
being  at  the  termination  of  that  period  under 
the  influence  of  the  Duke  ol  Lancaster, 
was  induced  to  revert  to  the  old  practice  of 
having  ecclesiastical  chancellors ;  and  Adam 
de  Houghton,  Bishop  of  St.  David's,  was 
substituted  for  Sir  John  on  January  11, 1377. 
We  have  a  proof  in  the  Year  Book  of  48 
Edward  IH.  (fo.  32,  pL  21)  that  Knyvet, 
while  chancellor,  used  to  visit  his  old  court 


390 


KUNILL 


It  is  there  stated,  '  Et  puis  Kniyet  le  Chanc. 
vyent  en  le  place,  et  le  case  luj  fuit  monstre 
par  les  justices,  et  11  assent j/  &c.  The 
king  survived  about  five  months,  and  Sir 
John  Kny  vet  was  one  of  the  executors  of 
his  will,  which  was  dated  October  7,  1376. 
He  lived  several  years  after,  dying  in  4  Ri- 
chard n.  By  his  wife  Alianora,  the  elder 
daughter  of  Italph  Lord  Basset  of  Weldon, 
he  left  a  son,  whose  descendants  flourished 
till  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century.  The 
principal  branch  was  established  at  the  castle 
and  manor  of  Buckenham  in  Norfolk  in 
1461,  and  Philip,  its  representative,  was 
created  a  baronet  at  the  nrst  institution  of 
that  order  in  1611.  The  title,  however, 
became  extinct  in  1699.  Other  branches 
made  themselves  eminent  in  various  wavs ; 
and  one  of  them,  Sir  Thomas  Kny  vet,  having 
been  of  the  bedchamber  of  Queen  Elizabeth 
and  of  the  privy  council  of  James  I.,  was 
instrumental  in  the  discovery  of  the  Gun- 
powder Plot,  and  was  raised  to  the  peerage 
Dv  the  title  of  Lord  Kny  vet  of  Escrick  in 
\  orkshire,  on  July  4, 1607  j  but  dying  with- 
out children  in  1622,  the  barony  became 
extinct.  (Dugdal^s  Baron,  ii.  424 ;  Blome- 
JjMb  Norfolk,  i.  257.) 

XUHUL,  William  be,  is  inserted  by 
Mr.  Hunter  among  the  justiciers  before 
whom  fines  were  levied  in  7  Bichard  I., 
1195.    The  name  does  not  again  occur. 

Km,  Simon  de,  held  a  lordship  of 
that  name  in  Kesteven,  Lincolnsnire, ! 
which  he  inherited  from  his  father,  Philip 
de  Kj^me.  In  3  Richard  1.,  1191,  he  acted 
as  a  justice  itinerant;  and  in  8  Richard  1. 
he  was  one  of  those  who  set  the  tallage  of 
Lincolnshire,  of  which  county  he  was 
sheriff  in  the  seventh  and  two  following 
years  of  that  reign.  He  seems  to  have 
been  more  fond  of  legal  than  of  military 
contests,  inasmuch  as  he  paid  one  hundred 
marks  to  be  exempted  from  attending  King 
Richard  on  his  Norman  expedition,  while 
there  are  several  entries  on  the  rolls  of  his 
fining  for  different  processes,  and  for  claim- 
ing lands  to  which  he  had  no  right. 
{Madox,  i.  245-794.) 

It  is  evident,  however,  that  he  was  again 
employed  as  a  justicier  in  the  next  reign, 
as    in   1207,  8    John,   he    is   so  styled. 


LACY 

with  others  who  were  sent  to  Lincoln  to 
clear  the  gaol  there,  and  to  hear  a  certain 
appeal.     (Rot,  Clau$,  L  88.^ 

By  his  vdfe  Roese  he  nad  a  son,  also 
named  Simon,  who  sided  with  the  rebel- 
lious barons,  and  was  excommunicated  by 
the  pope.    His  lands  were  restored  after 
his  aeath  in  4  Henry  Ul.,  1210,  to  Ik 
brother  Philip  (Kccerpt,  e  Mot,  Fin.  i.  44), 
whose  successors  were  summoned  to  par- 
liament in  the  reigns  of  the  three  Edvrards; 
but  the  eighth  baron  dying  in  1338  with- 
out issue,  the  male  branch  oecame  extinct, 
and  the  barony  is  in  abeyance  among  the 
representatives  of  Lucia,  the  sister  of  the 
last  lord,  who  married    Gilbert  Earl  of 
Angus. 

KTVABTOH,  William,  was  a  member 
of  a  family  long  established  at  Ruvton-of- 
the-eleven-towns  in  Shropshire,  fie  par- 
chased  in  1721  the  office  of  master  in 
Chancery  from  Mr.  William  Rogers,  to^ 
whom,  according  to  the  vicious  practice  of 
the  period,  he  paid  6000/.  for  the  plsoe, 
besides  1500  guineas  to  Lord  Chancellor 
Macclesfield  for  his  admission.  When 
the  investigation  took  place  in  1725-6  into 
the  malpractices  of  the  court,  among  the 
deficiencies  in  the  accounts  of  several  of 
the  masters,  that  of  Mr.  Kynaston  wu 
found  to  be  above  20,000/.  He  suffered 
imprisonment  in  the  Fleet  for  his  debt, 
ana  was  exposed  in  two  acts  of  parliament, 
St  12  Geo.  1.  c.  32  and  33.  Afterwards 
making  good  his  deficiency  from  his  private 
estate,  he  was  not  excluded  from  his  ofHce, 
in  which  he  still  continued  till  his  death. 
The  '  Gentleman*s  Magazine  *  (x.  d3)  in- 
nounces  his  appointment  as  cursitor  oaroa 
of  the  Exchequer,  in  the  room  of  Georgfr 
Clive,  deceased,  in  February  1740;  buta^ 
there  is  no  patent  nor  other  proof  of  his 
holding  that  office,  and  as  Edward  Baiier 
had  the  grant  of  it  in  January  1744,  it  i» 
probable  that  he  only  performed  the  datie» 
temporarily  during  the  vacancv.  In  173S 
he  was  elected  recorder  of  Shrewsbmr, 
and  represented  that  borough  in  the  pa^ 
liaments  of  1736, 1741,  and  1747.  He  died 
in  1759,  and  was  buried  in  the  family  vaalt 
at  Ruyton.  (StaU  Trials,  xvi  868,  907; 
Pari.  Hist,  xiv.  76.) 


L 


LAOT,  RoeKB  de,  was  descended  from 
the  before-mentioned  Eustace  Fitz-John, 
whose  son  Richard  Fitz-Eustace,  constable 
of  Chester,  married  the  daughter  of  Al- 
breda,  widow  of  Henry  de  Lacy,  by  her 
aecond  husband  Robert  de  Lizures,  and 
had  hy  her  a  son,  John,  who  assumed  the 
name  and  aims  of  Lacy,  on  becoming  pos- 


sessed of  the  property  of  the  ancient  family 
of  De  Lacy.  Roger  was  the  son  of  w 
John,  by  Alice  de  Vere,  the  sister  of  ^^ 
liam  de  Mandeville,  and  on  his  filWi 
death  in  1179,  inherited  the  conrtidW^ 
of  Chester. 

He  accompanied  King  BUflii  te  A* 
Holy  Land,  and 


LACY 

of  Acre  and  Damietta.  In  Kine  John's 
confidence  also  he  held  a  high  place,  and 
-was  sent  by  him  with  other  eminent  men 
to  conduct  the  King  of  Scotland  to  Lin- 
coln, to  do  homage  and  fealty  to  the  En- 
glish sovereign.  A  lively  account  is  given 
by  Roger  de  Wendover  (173,  180,  2;i0)  of 
his  bravery  in  defending  for  nearly  a  year 
the  castle  of  Koche-Andeli  in  Normandy, 
when  besieged  by  Philip,  King  of  France, 
and  of  his  ultimate  capture  in  1204,  when 
famine  compelled  a  surrender.  King  John 
advanced  for  him  his  ransom  of  one  thou- 
sand marks,  and  afterwards  exonerated  • 
him  from  its  repayment  (Rot.  Claus.  i.  4),  j 
conferring  upon  nim,  on  his  return  to  Eng-  ; 
land,  the  sneritfalty  of  the  counties  of 
York  and  Cumberland,  with  the  custody  of 
their  castles.  (Hot.  Fat.  48 ;  FulUr.)  llis 
constant  attendance  on  the  king  is  shown 
by  various  records;  and  from  two  entries  on 
the  Rotulus  de  Prtestito,  of  losses  of  forty 
shillings  and  twenty-five  shillings,  *  de  ; 
ludo  suo  ad  tabulas,'  may  be  judged  the  ! 
familiarity  which  existed  between  him  and 
the  monarch,  who,  it  may  be  observed, 
devoted  part  of  Sunday  to  this  amusement. 
{Hot.  Chart.  paf«sim  ;  Rot.  Misa,  13&-1G4; 
Rot.  de  Prastito,  229,  238.) 

Among  other  valorous  ,acts  of  his  life, 
it  is  related  of  him  that,  hearing,  during 
Chester  fair,  that  Kanulph,  Earl  ot  Chester, 
was  besieged  by  the  Welsh  in  the*  castle  of 
Kothellan,  he  proceeded  with  a  body  of 
loose  and  unarmed  people  collected  there, 
and  delivered  the  earl  from  hia  danger. 
For  this  timely  assistance  the  earl  granted 
him  'magisterium  omnium  leccatorum  et 
meretricum  totius  Cestreshire,'  which  he 
afterwards  transferred  to  his  steward,  Hugh 
de  Dutton,  and  his  heirs. 

That  he  acted  as  a  justicier  appears  from 
fines  which  were  levied  before  him  in 
the  tenth  year  of  this  reign.  (Hunter's 
Preface.) 

Ho  married  Maud  de  Clere,  sister  to  the 
treasurer  of  York  Cathedral,  and,  dying  in 
January  1212,  was  buried  in  the  abbey 
of  Stanlaw  in  Cheshire.  He  was  suc- 
CL>eded  by  his  son,  the  next-mentioned 
John.     (DugdaWs  Baron,  L  100.) 

LACT,  John  de  (Earl  of  Lincoln),  was 
the  son  of  the  above  Koger  de  Lacy,  by 
Maud  de  Clere.  Though  the  king  con- 
tinued to  him  the  favour  which  he  had  ex- 
tended to  his  father,  it  is  evident  that  some 
suspicion  of  his  loyalty  existed,  inasmuch 
as,  when  his  castle  of  Dunington  was  com- 
mitted to  his  charge  in  July  1214, 16  John, 
he  was  called  upon  to  provide  four  of  his 
vassals,  as  well  as  his  brother  Roger,  as 
hostages  for  his  faithful  services.  (Rot. 
Claw.  i.  151, 107,  169.)  He  nevertheless 
joined  the  insurgent  barons,  and  was  one  of 
the  twenty-five  who  were  appointed  to 
enforce  the  observance  of  Magna  Charta. 


LAKEN 


391 


Obtaining,  however,  the  pardon  of  the  king 
in  January  1216,  he  not  only  had  his  landa 
restored,  but  several  other  fEivours  were  soon 
after  conferred  upon  him ;  and  in  August 
he  had  letters  or  protection  tine  termmo, 
(Rot.  Pat.  162,  176, 179, 180.)  Two  sub- 
sequent records,  however,  afford  proof  of  a 
second  revolt^ne  in  September  1216,  by 
which  the  king  committed  his  land  of 
Navesbv  in  Northamptonshire  to  Emald 
de  Ambleville;  and  another  in  August 
1217, 1  Henry  HI.,  by  which,  on  returning 
to  his  allegiance,  his  propertv  was  again 
replaced  in  his  possession.  He  then  made 
a  pilgrimage  to  the  Holy  Land,  but  had  re- 
turned to  England  before  5  Henry  HI.,  in 
which  year  he  and  his  wife  Margaret  had  a 
grant  of  the  chase  of  Wynbameholt.  (Rot, 
Clam.  i.  289,  318,  ^39,  462.)  She  was  the 
daughter  of  Robert  de  Quincv,  by  Hawise, 
daughter  of  Hugh  Cyvelioc,£!arl  of  Chester, 
and  one  of  the  coheirs  of  her  brother, 
Ranulph  Earl  of  Chester,  who  had  been 
also  created  Earl  of  Lincoln.  On  Ranulph's 
death  without  issue  the  earldom  of  Lincoln 
was  granted  to  this  John  de  Lacy. 

Although,  at  first,  the  new  earljoined 
the  party  of  Richaid  Mareschal,  1^1  of 
Pembroke,  in  his  resistance  to  the  king's 
authority,  he  was  soon  induced  to  return  to 
his  duty.  He  continued  loyal  for  the  re- 
mainder of  his  life,  and  was  entrusted  with 
the  sheriffalty  of  Cheshire  in  21  and  24 
Henry  m.,  and  with  other  honours  and 
privileges. 

He  twice  filled  the  office  of  justice  itine- 
rant—in 10  and  18  Henry  UL,  1226-1283. 
(Ibid.  ii.  161.) 

He  died  on  July  22, 1240,  and  was  buried 
in  the  abbey  of  Stanlaw.  By  his  wife  Mar- 
garet, who  survived  him,  and  was  after- 
wards married  to  Walter  Mareschal,  Earl 
of  Pembroke,  he  had  a  son,  Edmund,  whose 
son  Henry,  the  third  earl  of  this  name,  died 
in  1312  without  issue  male.  (Excerpt,  e 
Rot.  Fin.  L  265,  338,  390;  Wendover^  iii 
297,  366,  iv.  44,  266,  270.) 

LAKEH,  WiLUAX,  was  of  an  opulent 
family  seated  at  Willey  in  Shropshire.  He 
was  the  son  of  Sir  Richard  Laken,  knighL 
by  Elizabeth,  the  daughter  of  Sir  Hamond 
de  Peshall,  of  the  county  of  Stafford,  knight, 
and  widow  of  Henry  Grendon.  He  is  men- 
tioned in  the  Year  Book  in  Michaelmas^ 
31  Henry  VI.,  1462 ;  and  in  the  Februaiy 
following  he  was  summoned  to  take  upon 
him  the  degree  of  the  coif.  On  June  4^ 
1465, 5  Edward  IV.,  he  was  constituted  the 
fifth  judge  of  the  Court  of  King's  Bench, 
and  sat  tnere  till  the  restoration  of  Henzy 
VI.  in  1470,  when  he  was  re-appointed ;  aa 
he  was  also  by  Edward  IV.  on  his  retam 
in  the  following  year. 

He  died  on  October  6,  1476,  and  wi» 
buried  at  Bray  in  Berkshire,  where  his 
monumental  brass  stiU  remains,    K^  \&sbx.<-> 


392 


.  LAM\^ALLEI 


Tied  twice:  his  firstwife  was  named  Matilda; 
his  second  was  Sybella,one  of  the  daughters 
of  John  Syterwalt,  of  Cleaver.  They  left 
issue,  which  was  afterwards  widely  spread ; 
and  he  is  now  represented  by  Sir  Eamund 
Lacon,  baronet  of  Norfolk,  the  third  of 
that  title.  (Hasted,  ii.  307;  AshmMs 
Berks,  iii.  4.) 

LAKVALLEI,  William  de,  was  a  baron 
holding  lands  in  Essex ;  and  his  attendance 
on  the  court  is  shown  by  his  being  one  of 
the  witnesses  to  the  king's  charter  in  10 
Henry  II.  He  was  selected  as  a  justice 
itinerant  and  associated  with  Thomas 
Basset,  a  man  experienced  in  the  laws,  in 
21  Henry  U.,  11/5;  and  their  pleas  con- 
tinue to  be  recorded  for  the  five  following 
years,  though  they  probably  are  only  the 
arrears  of  the  pleas  of  the  first  year.  (Madax, 
I  125-130.) 

Nothing  further  is  related  of  him  during 
the  rest  of  Henry's  reign ;  but  in  that  of 
Bichard  he  lost  the  royal  favour  and  his 
lands,  recovering  both,  however,  by  a  timely 
fine  of  one  hundred  marks.  Under  John, 
although  he  never  acted  as  a  justicier,  he  is 
so  described  in  the  letters  sent  by  Baldwin 
de  Betun  as  security  for  the  fine  on  the 
charter  of  liberties  granted  to  the  burgesses 
of  Heddun.  (Hot,  de  Oblatts,  80.)  In  the 
same  year  he  was,  for  a  fine  of  two  hundred 
marks,  entrusted  with  the  custody  of  Col- 
chester Castle  and  of  the  forest  up  to 
Chelmsford  Bridge,  as  he  formerly  lield 
them  in  Richard's  reign.  But  he  again 
forfeited  the  royal  favour,  for  in  3  John  he 
paid  seventy  marks  for  the  king's  '  bene- 
volentiam  ;  '*  and  in  0  John,  Geoffrey  Fitz- 
Peter  had  the  custody  of  his  lands  in  Essex. 
(Hot,  de  Dnibus,  270.) 

Dying  in  12  John,  he  left  by  his  wife, 
Haw^se,  a  son  William,  whose  daughter 
mamed  John,  son  and  heir  of  Hubert  de 
Burgh,  Earl  of  Kent.  (JDugdales  Baron,  i. 
633;  Mcolas.) 

LAHCABTEB,   William   de,   was   the 

Sandson  to  BogerFitz-Beinfnd,  a  justicier. 
is  father,  Gilbert,  had  married  Ilelewise, 
the  only  daughter  of  William  de  Lancaster, 
Baron  of  Kendal,  who  not  onlv  himself 
confederated  with  the  barons  in  tlieir  wars 
with  King  John,  but  involved  his  son, 
William,  who  assumed  the  name  of  Lan- 
caster from  his  mother,  in  the  same  troubles. 
He  was  one  of  the  knights  who  were  talcen 
in  liochester  Castle  in  17  John,  and  it  was 
only  by  a  fine  of  twelve  thousand  marks 
that  his  father  could  obtain  his  release,  and 
a  remission  of  the  royal  anger ;  nor  was  it 
till  1  Henry  lU.  that  he  was  discharged 
£rom  prison.  (Hot.  Clatts.  i.  241, 385 ;  liot. 
de  Ftnibtts,  570.)  H e  af termurds  cond  ucted 
himself  aa  a  loyal  subject,  and  in  lO.Henxy 
IIL  was  nameJl  as  one  of  the  justices  itine- 
rant for  the  county  of  Cumberland. 
He  held  the  sheriffalty  of  Lancashire 


LANE 

from  18  to  30  Henry  III.,  and  the  honor 
of  Lancaster  was  committed  to  his  trust. 
He  died  in  December  1240^  and  was  buried 
in  Fumess  Abbey.  He  left  no  issue 
by  his  wife,  Agnes  do  Brua.  (fiugdMt 
Baron,  i.  421.) 

LAHE,  KiCHARD,  the  lord  keeper  of  the 
Great  Seal  of  Charles  I.,  was  son  of  Richard 
Lane,  of  Courtenhall,  near  Northampton, 
by  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Clement  Vincent, 
of  Harpole  in  the  same  county,  where  he 
was  bom  in  1584.    {Baker's  NorthampUmA, 
i.  181.)    He  was  called  to  the  bar  at  the 
Middle  Temple,  and  his  early  practice  wu 
in  the  Excheouer,  the  cases  m  which  be 
reported  from  1605  to  1 612.    He  was  reader 
to  his  inn  in  1630,  and  treasurer  in  1637, 
and  had  previously  in  1615  been  appointed 
counsel  or  deputy  recorder  of  Nortbamptoo, 
and  in  1634  attorney-general  to  the  Piince 
of  Wales.    (Clarendon's  Life^  i.  67.)  Wlwn 
the  House  of  Commons  impeached  the  Eiil 
of  Strafford,  Mr.  Lane  was  assigned  Xo  con- 
duct the  earUs  defence,  which  he  did  so 
ablv  that  the  Commons,  seeing  the  grett 
probability  of  the  earVs  acquittal  by  the 
Lords,  desisted  from  the  trial,  and  effectdi 
their  malicious  purpose  by  a  disgnoeful 
bill  of  attainder,  which  by  popular  dunoor 
was  eventually  pa8:;ed.     {State  Triakj  iiL 
1472.)    Officially  connected  with  the  court, 
he  of  course  jomed  the   king  at  Ozfoid, 
where,  having  been  previously  knighted, 
he  was  appointed  lord  chief  baron  on  Ja- 
nuary 25,  1644. 

The  first  duty  that  Sir  Richard  had  to 
perform  was  to  act  as  one  of  the  comou«- 
sioners  on  the  part  of  the  king  in  treating 
for  an  accommodation  at  Uxbridge,  when 
he  joined  the  other  lawyers  in  resisting  tlie 
demand  of  the  parliament  to  have  the 
militia  entirely  vested  in  them.  There  ap- 
pearing no  probability  of  satisfactorily  set- 
tling this  question,  or  that  upon  religion, 
which  was  violently  debated,  the  treaty 
was  broken  off  and  the  war  proceeded.  On 
Lord  Lyttelton's  death,  the  Great  Seal  was 

E laced  in  the  hands  of  Sir  ftichard  as  lord 
eeper,  on  August  30,  1645.  The  king, 
whose  difficulties  increased  daily,  was  at 
last  obliged  to  escape  from  Oxford,  and 
that  city  was  surrendered  to  the  opposing 
army  under  General  Fairfax  on  June  24, 
1646,  under  articles  in  which  the  lord 
keeper  was  the  principal  party  on  the  kuig's 
behalf.  By  one  of  tnem  it 'was  provided 
that  the  Great  Seal  and  all  the  other  offioal 
seals  should  be  left  for  the  victors.  (WkU' 
hclce,  210.)  Thus  deprived  of  the  inofliift 
of  his  office,  nothing  remained  to  hiniW 
its  name,  which  he  retained  during  the  i»- 
mainder  of  the  king's  life.  The  <mi1j  evi* 
dence  that  his  patent  was  xenewM  to 
Charles  II.  is  in  the  epitaph  on  Ui  iMh 
tomb  at  Kingsthorp.  Luce  tiia  kil||^  hi 
became  an  exue  from  hia  nativv.lMtMi 


LANFRANC 

died  in  1050  in  France,  as  appears  by  the 
commission,  dated  Apnl  22,  1661,  to  his 
relict  the  L^y  Margaret,  to  administer  to 
his  personalty. 

LAHPSAHC  (Abchbishop  of  Caitteb- 
buby)  was  bom  at  Pavia  about  the  year 
1005,  and  belonged  to  an  illustrious  family 
which  is  said  to  have  descended  from  the 
Emperors  Cams  and  Numerian.  After  ac- 
quinng  some  celebrity  in  his  native  city, 
where  he  was  for  several  years  professor  of 
laws,  his  anxiety  to  travel  took  him  to 
Normandy,  where  he  first  opened  a  school 
at  A\Tanches,  and  eventually,  about  1042, 
retired  to  the  poor  and  lonely  abbey  of  Bee, 
then  one  of  the  most  insignificant  of  the 
Norman  monasteries.  Henuin,  the  abbot, 
discovering  his  talents,  induced  him  to  re- 
sume his  office  of  teacher ;  and  the  fame  of 
his  lectures  became  so  widely  extended 
that  students  flocked  to  them  from  all 
parts.  Pope  Alexander  U.  being  one  of 
his  pupils. 

lie  thus  dififused  a  taste  for  knowledge 
among  the  clergy,  and  to  him,  in  a  great 
degree  is  to  be  attributed  the  revivid  of 
Latin  literature  and  the  liberal  arts  in 
France.  His  exposure  of  the  ignorance  of 
Arfastus  has  been  already  mentioned,  and 
the  enmity  it  occasioned.  Its  effect,  how- 
ever, was  soon  removed  by  the  good  humour 
of  Duke  William,  and  he  became  first  a 
monk,  and  then  prior,  of  the  monastery. 
Among  the  students  who  came  to  receive 
his  instructions  there  were  some  who  had 
been  pupils  of  Berengarius,  archdeacon  of 
Angers,  who  was  master  of  a  school  at 
Tours.  This  desertion  exciting  the  envy 
of  Berengarius,  who  had  propounded  some 
doctrines  relative  to  the  Eucharist  in  oppo- 
sition to  those  maintained  by  the  Roman 
Church,  he  in  revenge  endeavoured  to  im- 
plicate Lanfranc  in  the  same  opinions. 
Lanfranc,  however,  had  little  difiiculty, 
not  merely  in  satisfying  the  pontiff  of  his 
orthodoxy,  but  in  establishing  such  a  re- 
putation at  Home  as  to  be  called  upon  to 
refute  the  obnoxious  heresy  in  the  council 
then  assembled. 

Duke  William,  who  highly  appre- 
ciated his  talents,  took  the  advantage 
of  his  visit  to  Rome  by  employing 
him  to  obtain  a  repeal  of  the  sentence  of 
excommunication  to  which  he  hod  been 
subjected  by  Mauger,  Archbishop  of  Rouen, 
on  account  of  his  marriage  wim  Matilda, 
allef|:ed  to  be  related  to  him  within  the 
forbidden  degrees  of  consanguinity.  Lan- 
franc was  successful  in  obtaining  the  papal 
dispensation,  accompanied  by  a  condition 
that  W^illiam  and  his  wife  should  each 
found  an  abbey  at  Caen.  This  injunction 
they  immediately  obeyed,  dedicating  one 
of  them  to  St.  Stephen,  and  the  other  to 
the  Holy  Trinity.  Of  the  former,  Lanfranc 
"was  appointed  the  first  abbot  in  1063,  and 


LANFRANC  . 


393 


pursued  his  lectures  there  with  increased 
celebrity. 

William  entrusted  to  him  the  education 
of  his  children,  and  offered  him  the  arch- 
bishopric of  Rouen,  which  he  was  allowed 
to  reluse :  but  after  the  Conquest,  on  the 
removal  of  Stigand  ^m  the  archbishopric 
of  Canterbury,  the  king,  feeling  the  im- 
portance of  supplying  his  place  with  a  man 
of  weight  and  prudence,  faithful  to  his 
interests,  and  equal  to  the  burden,  selected 
Lanfranc  as  his  successor,  and  overcame 
the  scmples  with  which  the  modest  abbot 
resisted  his  elevation.  He  was  not  only 
willingly  accepted  by  the  monks,  and  ap- 
proved by  the  oarons  and  people,  but  gladly 
confirmed  by  the  pope.  He  was  accord- 
ingly consecrated  in  August  1070,  and  on 
visiting  Rome  in  the  following  year  to 
receive  the  pall  was  welcomed  with  parti- 
cular respect  by  his  former  pupil  Alexander 
II.,  who  rose  to  give  him  audience,  kissed 
him  instead  of  presenting  his  slipper  for 
that  obeisance,  and,  not  satisfied  with  giving 
him  the  usual  pall,  invested  him  with  that 
which  he  had  himself  used  in  celebrating 
mass.  In  this  visit  he  defended  the  rights 
of  the  church  of  Canterbury  against  the 
claims  of  Thomas,  Archbishop  of  York, 
and  eventually  succeeded  in  establishing 
them  before  the  king,  to  whose  decision  the 
pontiff  i*eferred  the  question. 

On  his  return  from  Rome  he  laboured 
successfully  in  reforming  the  irregularities 
and  rudeness  of  the  clergy.  His  severity 
in  depriving  many  occasioned  considerable 
complunts ;  but  the  introduction  of  foreign 
scholars  in  their  places  contributed  effec- 
tually to  the  enligntenment  of  the  nation. 
His  efforts  in  support  of  his  church  were 
unremitting,  nor  were  they  repressed  by  the 
power  of  his  opponents.  Finding  that  the 
king's  brother,  Odo,  Bishop  of  Bayeux,  and 
Earl  of  Kent,  while  Stigand  was  in  dis- 
grace, had  taken  possession  of  many  of  the 
manors  belonging  to  the  archbishopric,  Lan- 
franc instituted  a  suit  against  him,  which 
was  tried  before  Geofl&^y,  Bishop  of  Cou- 
tance,  at  a  shiremote  on  Penenden  Heath, 
when,  after  three  days'  hearing,  the  resto- 
ration of  twenty-five  manors  was  adjudged 
to  him. 

Enjoying  the  favour  of  the  Conqueror 
and  of  his  successor,  he  employed  his 
power  in  the  advancement  of  justice  and 
the  protection  of  the  English.  His  pri- 
vate charities  were  widely  diffused,  and 
his  munificence  as  a  prelate  is  proved  by 
his  rebuilding  the  cathedral  of  Canterbury, 
recently  destroyed  by  fire,  together  with  all 
the  buildings  for  the  monks,  whose  num- 
bers he  increased  from  twenty  to  one  hun- 
dred and  forty.  He  founded  also  the  two 
hospitals  of  St.  Nicholas  at  Harbledowui 
and  of  St.  John  at  Canterbury,  for  lepezB 
and  the  infirm ;  he  repaired  many  chuxfi.\B«^ 


394 


LANGDALK 


LANGLEY 


and  monasteries  in  his  diocese  which  had  i  contrary  to  the  statutes  of  Sinum  Ii% 
suffered  in  the  wars ;  and  he  contributed  !  its  founder.     And  if  this  Wickliffe  d» 


largely  to    the   restoration  of  Kochester 
Cathedral 


the  same  man  as  the  reformer,  of  wUck 
some  doubt  has  been  lately  nosed,  then 


Dugdale  (20)  infers  that  Lanfranc,  in  :  is  evidence  in  his  writings  to  show  thit 
conjunction  with  Geof&ey,  Bishop  of  Cou-  •  his  attacks  on  the  popbh  ezactioos  mn 
tance,  and  Robert,  Earl  of  Moretou,  held  .  not  occasioned  by  this  quarrel,  as  he  hid 
the  oliice  of  chief  justiciary  during  some  I  commenced  them  some  years  earlier, 
part  of  the  Conqueror's  reign,  from  the  On  September  27, 1368,  Pope  Urbin  V. 
existence  of  several  precepts  he  had  seen,  '  promoted  Langham  to  the  dignity  oC  t 
directed  to  them  by  the  kmg,  which  he  can  cardinal  presbyter,  by  the  title  of  Sl 
only  thus  interpret.  That  this  inference  is  ,  Sixtus.  The  king  taking  umbrage  at  1» 
correctly  drawn  we  have  the  evidence  of  acceptance  of  it,  he  resigned  the  iich- 
some  letters  of  Lanfranc  addressed  to  the  ,  bishopric  on  November  27,  and  retired 
king  while  in  Normandy.  His  influence  |  to  Avignon.  Pope  Gregoiy  XL  adTsnced 
with  William  was  undoubted,  and  the  him  to  the  title  of  Cardinal  Bishq>  of 
arrest  of  Odo  is  ascribed  to  his  over-  |  Preneste,  having  first  employed  him  in 
coming  the  Conqueror's  reluctance  to  |  several  negotiations  in  13/2  to  mediite 
touch    an   ecclesiastical    person,   by  sug-  j  peace  between  the  Kings  of  England  and 

g?sting  that  he  might  take  him,  not  as  :  France  and  the  Earl  of  Flanders,  daiiog 
ishop  of  Bayeux,  but  as  Earl  of  Kent.        ;  which  he  revit^itcd  his  native  countir.   In 
After  a  useful  and  active  occupation  of  j  these  treaties  he  is  styled  the  Cardinal  of 
the  primacy  for  nineteen  years,  he  died  on    (^'anterburv,  and  the   king  calls  him  hii 
May  24,  1089,  at  the  age  of  eighty-four,    » dear  and"  faithful  friend.'     (.V.  Faden, 
and  was  buried  in  his  cathedral.  iii.  032-1^70.)     It  is  certain  that  he  le- 

Although  devoted  to  literature  during  tjiined  so  much  of  the  royal  favour  as  tt^ 
the  whole  of  his  life,  few  proofs  of  his  i  be  pcniiitted  to  hold  various  prefermenti 
learning  i*emain.  His  principal  work  was  at  tliis  time  in  England.  Besides  a  pre- 
his  treatise  against  l3erengarius.  The  ■  bend  in  the  church  of  York,  he  was  trea- 
others  were  chiefly  upon  ecclesiastical  i  surer  and  archdeacon  of  Wells,  and  dean  of 
matters,  including  a  commentary  on  the  '  Lincoln,  his  tilling  the  latter  place  whiles 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul.  {Biog.  Brit  Lite-  i  cardinal  being  the  subject  of  a  complaint 
raria,  ii.  1 ;  Godicin,  50 ;  MadoXj  i.  8,  3'2  ;  ;  to  the  parliament  of  April  1376.  (JW. 
WiU.  Malmesb.  447-495  j  R.  dc  Wetulover,    Pari  ii.  339.) 

ii.  8-36 ;  &c.)  I      It  is  stated  that  at  this  time  he  had 

LAN6DA1E,  Lord.  aJ^XI-Bickersteth.  applied  for  and  procured  permission  to 
LANGHAM,  Siiiox  de  (ARcnsisnop  of  return  to  England,  and  that  he  projected 
Canterbury),  became  a  monk  of  West-  the  rebuilding  of  Westminster  Ahhey. 
minster  in  1355,  and  till  his  death,  forty  i  But  all  his  plans  were  frustrated  by  » 
years  afterwards,  he  was  a  devoted  friend  paralytic  stroke,  which  occadoned  hi* 
to  the  house.  Appointed  prior  in  April,  death  on  July  22,  1376.  He  was  fist 
and  abbot  in  May,  1349,  he  applied  his  j  buried  in  the  church  of  the  Carthoaia 
early  savings  to  the  discharge  of  the  en-  j  nionastery  which  he  had  founded  in  Aiig- 
gagements  of  the  monastery ;  he  suppressed  non,  and  was  three  yearo  afterwards  »- 
its  abuses,  regulated  its  discipline,  and  moved  to  St.  Benet's  Chapel  in  Westoin- 
gained  the  esteem  of  the  brotherhood  by  ster  Abbey,  where  his  tomo  still  remains, 
his  kind  and  equitable  sway.  He  was*  a  man  of  great  capacity,  wi*, 

He  was  raised  to  the  office  of  treasurer  '■  affable,  temperate,  and  himnble;  and  of  his 
of  the  kingdom  on  November  21, 13G0,  34  munificence  we  have  evidence  in  hiabene- 
Edward  III.,  and  elected  two  years  after- 1  factions  to  Westminster,  so  that  it  ia  pro- 


wards  to  two  bishoprics,  London  and  Ely, 
to  the  latter  of  whicn  he  was  appointed,  fiy 
his  own  selection,  on  January  10,  13(32. 

He  continued  treasurer  till  February 
1363,  when  he  succeeded  William  de 
Edington,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  as  chan- 
cellor. On  July  22.  1366,  he  was  trans- 
lated to  Canterbury  by  papal  pro>'ision,  and 
about  the  same  time  resigned  tne  Great  Seal. 

During  his  primacy  he  greatly  exerted 
himself  m  the  correction  of  the  abuse  of 
the  privilege  of  pluralities ;  but  he  incurred 
some  censure  by  the  removal  of  John 
Wickliffe  from  the  headship  of  Canter- 
bury Hall  in  Oxford,  which  was  in  conse- 


quence of  the  appointment  having  been    Educated  as  a  priett|  1m 


bable  that  the  *  railing  hexameters  *  on  his 
translation  from  Ely  to  Canterbury— 

Lxtentar  coeli,  quia  Simon  transit  ab  Ely ; 
Cujus  in  adventum  flent  in  Kent  millia  centoDr 

were  rather  the  malicious  effusion  of  ^ 
individual  enemy  than  the  expresaioD  » 
popular  feeling.  (Godwin,  115,  261; 
neevet;  479;  Le  Xeve,  0,  39,  H  *» 
Anffl.  Sac,  i.  46.) 

LANOLET,      or     LOHOLET, 
(Bishop    of   Dubham),   was 
from  an  honourable  family  in 
He  studied  at  Cambridffe,  and  ia 
was  a  retainer  of  the  hCN^      ' 


THOKtf 


mik 


LANQLET 

1400  to  a  canoniy,  and  in  1401  to  the 
deaneiy  of  York. 

His  connection  with  the  reigning  family 
nan  introduced  him  to  the  coiurt,  where  he 
)egan  his  political  career  as  keeper  of  the 
dug's  piiTj  seal  in  1403  (Devon^s  Isme 
ReU,  2^,  retaining  it  till  March  1405,  6 
leniy  VL,  when  he  received  the  Great  Seal. 

A  Yacancy  in  the  archbishopric  of  York 
tccmring  soon  after  by  the  execution  of 
•lichard  Scrope,  Langlej  was  elected  his 
neoeasor  on  August  8  (Rymer^  viii.  407)  ; 
mt  the  pope  resisting,  and  the  death  of 
ffishop  Skirlawe  opportunely  happening 
Don  afterwards,  he  took  the  wiser  course 
)f  aToidin|^  a  contest  with  the  papal  power 
\xj  acceptmg  the  bishopric  of  Durham,  to 
arhich  he  was  elected  on  IkLay  17^  140G. 
Be  retained  the  Great  Seal  till  Januaiy 
30, 1407. 

During  the  remainder  of  the  reign  of 
Henry  IV.  he  was  frequently  employed  in 
state  affiurs.  In  1409  he  had  letters  of 
protection  on  goin?  into  Tuscany  on  the 
king's  business,  and  in  1411  he  acted  as 
a  commissioner  at  Hauden-Stank,  on  the 
borders  of  Scotland.  In  the  latter  year, 
on  June  11,  he  received  a  cardinal's  hat 
from  Pope  John  XXIII.,  an  elevation 
which  was  not  displeanng  to  his  sovereign, 
whose  continued  confidence  in  him  was 
shown  by  making  him  one  of  the  executors 
of  his  wilL     {Devon's  Issue  HoU,  335.) 

Henry  V.  soon  after  his  accession  sent 
him  as  one  of  the  ambassadors  to  the  King 
of  France  (Ilnd.  330,  340),  with  whom  a 
truce  for  one  year  was  concluded.  He  was 
a  second  time  raised  to  the  office  of  chan- 
cellor on  July  23,  1417,  and  retained  it  to 
the  end  of  the  reign,  when,  finding  himself 
in  the  possession  of  the  Great  Seal  with  a 
new  sovereign  only  a  few  months  old,  he 
had  the  precaution  to  obtain  a  formal  entry 
of  his  delivering  it  up  to  the  king's  uncle, 
Homphrev  Duke  of  Gloucester,  and  other 
lords,  and  to  have  the  same  recorded  on 
the  Rolls  of  Parliament.  With  the  full 
issent  of  that  parliament  the  bishop  was 
ro-anpointed  on  November  16,.  1422  (Eoi, 
/Wl  170-1),  but  continued  in  office  only 
ihcmt  twenty  months,  being  succeeded,  on 
July  6,  1424,  by  Beaufort,  Bishop  of 
Winchester. 

He  was  nominated  one  of  the  king's 
nmncil  in  the  parliament  at  Leicester  in 
February  1426 ;  but  in  the  following  June 
b  prayed  to  be  excused  therefrom  on  ac- 
count of  his  age  and  infirmities,  so  that  he 
lu^ht  attend  to  his  emscopal  duties.  (Acts 
Vrry  Council,  iiL  197.)  Thus  relieved 
nm  political  attendance,  he  occupied  the 
9st  or  his  life  in  numerous  magnificent  and 
baritable  works  in  his  diocese,  among 
'hich  was  his  restoration  of  the  Galilee  in 
is  oathednl  built  by  Bishop  Pusar,  and 
ID  foundation  of  two  schools  for  grammar 


LANGTON 


395 


and  music.  He  did  on  November  30, 1437, 
having  presided  oyer  his  see  for  more  than 
thirty-one  years.  (Godwin,  761 ;  Le  Neve, 
314,  346;  Angl.  Sac.  i.  775;  Surtee£s 
Durham,  i.  iv.) 

LAHOTOH,  JoHK  DE  (Bishop  of  Chi- 
chester), of  whose  parentage  nothing  is 
known,  was  a  derk  in  the  Chancery,  and  is 
the  first  person  to  whom  the  title  of  master  or 
keeper  of  the  Rolls  can  be  distinctly  traced. 
In  a  ]^atent  of  14  Edward  I.,  1280,  ouoted 
by  Sir  T.  Hardy,  he  is  called  'Gustos 
Kotulorum  CancellaricB  Domini  Kegis,'  a 
duty  which  then,  probably,  devolved  on 
the  senior  clerk  of  the  Chancery,  as  even 
in  the  present  reign  that  officer  was  still 
considered  as  the  head  of  the  masters  of 
that  court.  Like  his  brethren  in  that  de- 
partment, he  was  an  ecclesiastic,  and  held, 
among  oUier  preferments,  canonries  in  the 
churches  of  Cnichester,  Lincoln,  and  York,, 
and  the  treasurership  of  Wells. 

He  was  appointed  chancellor  on  Decem- 
ber 17,  121^3,  and  continued  the  prudent 
and  sagadous  course  pursued  by  Bishop- 
Bumel,  his  predecessor.      He  witnessed, 
during  his  mmistry,  the  triumph  of  bin 
sovereign*s  arms  in  Scotland,  ana  the  resig- 
nation of  that  kingdom   by  Baliol.     An. 
event  much  more  important  in  its  conse- 
quences also  occurred  while  he  held  the 
oeal — viz.,  the  enactment  of  the  statute 
called  'ArticuH  super  Cartas,'  28  Edward 
I.,  1300,  by  which  the  Great  Charter  was 
fully  confirmed,  and  regulations  made  to- 
prevent  any  future  encroachments  on  ita 
provisions. 

On  the  death  of  William  de  Luda, 
Bishop  of  Ely,  in  1298,  a  contest  arose  be- 
tween the  monks  of  that  abbey,  one  party 
electing  their  prior,  and  the  other  John  de 
Langton,  to  till  the  ^vacancy.  The  king 
gave  his  assent  to  the  latter  choice,  but  the 
pope,  to  whom  the  two  candidates  hastened 
to  submit  their  pretensions,  superseded  both, 
and  placed  another  in  the  seat.  (^Godwin, 
250.)  To  conciliate  all  parties,  however^ 
the  cunning  pontiiF  raised  the  prior  to  the 
bishopric  of  Norwich,  and  gave  the  arch- 
deaconry of  Canterbury,  then  a  very 
valuable  preferment,  to  J  ohn  ^de  Langton. 
This  appointment  took  place  in  1299.  (i> 
Neve,  J 2.) 

He  resigned  the  chancellorship  on  Au^st 
12, 1302,  and  in  May  1306  he  was  raised 
to  the  bishopric  of  Cnichester. 

Soon  after  the  accession  of  Edward  U. 
he  was  again,  about  August  1307,  appointed 
chancellor,  and  on  January  21,  1308,  he 
delivered  up  the  Great  Seal  to  the  king, 
who  was  then  proceeding  to  Boulogne  to 
celebrate  his  nuptials  with  the  I^rench 
princess,  Isabel,  and  received  another  to  be 
used  during  the  king's  absence.  He  con- 
tinued chancellor  till  May  11,  1310,  whea 
he  retired  from  the  office. 


396 


LANGTON 


He  predded  over  his  diocese  during  the 
remainder  of  the  troubled  reign  of  Edward 
IL,  and  for  the  first  ten  years  of  that  of  his 
«ucce8Sor|  dying  on  June  17,  or  July  19, 1337. 
He  was  resolute  in  the  performance  of  his 
ecclesiastical  functions.  Having  excom- 
municated Earl  Warren  for  adultery,  that 
nobleman  came  with  his  retainers  to  lay 
violent  hands  on  him ;  but  the  bishop,  aided 
by  his  servants,  succeeded  in  resisting  their 
attempt,  and  threw  the  earl  and  all  his 
party  mto  prison.  He  was  very  bountiful  to 
bis  see,  ana  in  the  university  of  Oxford  he 
founded  a  chest,  still  called  by  his  name, 
out  of  which  any  poor  graduate  might,  on 
proper  security,  borrow  a  small  sum  for  his  j 
inunediate  necessities.  {Godicin,  506  ; 
Chapter  JBaoks,  Chichester.) 

lAHOTOK,  Walter  DE  (Bishop  of  Lich- 
PiELD  AND  Covextry),  is  introduced  bv  Sir 
T.  Hardy  among  the  keepers  of  the  (jreat 
Seal,  because  on  the  death  of  Bishop  Bumel, 
the  chancellor,  on  October  25, 1202, 20  Ed- 
ward I.,  it  was  delivered  to  him  as  custos 
of  the  king*s  wardrobe,  under  the  iteal  of 
William  de  Hamilton.  If  either  of  these  is 
to  be  called  keeper,  however,  the  latter  is 
the  more  entitled  to  the  designation.  They 
had  no  more  than  the  temporary  care  of  the 
Seal,  while  in  its  usual  place  of  deposit,  till 
the  appointment  of  a  new  chancellor,  the 
.tibove  John  de  Langton,  which  took  place 
on  December  12. 

Walter  de  Langton  was  born  at  West 
Langton  in  the  county  of  Leicester,  and 
was  nephew  of  William  de  Langton,  dean 
of  York.  He  was  himself  dean  of  the  free 
chapel  at  Bruges,  a  canon  of  Lichfield,  and 
one  of  the  pope's  chaplains.  He  held  the 
office  of  keeper  of  the  wardrobe  until  ho  was 
raised  to  the  treasurership  of  England,  on 
September  28,  1206 ;  and  in  the  following 
February  he  was  elected  Bishop  of  Coventry 
and  Lichfield,  still  retaining  the  ofiice  of 
treasurer.    (Madox^  ii.  42.) 

Although  possessing  the  king's  confidence 
and  favour,  his  integrity  ana  boldness  in 
correcting  the  insolence  of  Peter  de  Gave- 
ston  and  Prince  Edward's  other  servants, 
and  restraininfif  their  expenses,  occasioned 
him  much  trouble  and  persecution.  In  1301 
he  was  chai^d  with  such  heinous  crimes  , 
by  one  Sir  John  Lovetot,  as  adultery,  simony, 
and  homicide,  that  the  king  was  obliged  to  ! 
•dismiss  him  till  he  had  purged  himselL  For  [ 
this  he  was  compelled  to  take  a  journey  to  • 
liome,  where,  after  ^at  cost/ he  succeeied, 
imd  was  not  only  remstated  in  June  1303, 
but  received  the  stron^st  proof  of  his  sove- 
reign's conviction  of  his  innocence  by  being 
made  principal  executor  of  the  king's  will. 
On  Edward  8  death,  however,  his  persecu- 
tion recommenced.  He  was  turned  out  of 
his  office,  cast  into  prison,  and  a  long  list  of 
charges  brought  ag^st  him  for  malversa- 
tion, which  were  directed  to  be  heard  before 


LAW 

WiUiam  de  Hereford,  one  of  the  jodgetL 
After  a  long  imprisonment  at  London,  Wal- 
lingford,  and  York,  no  proof  coald  be  brought 
against  him,  and  he  was  absolved  by  the 
court  in  October  1308.  In  1311  he  wu 
again  imprisoned  on  a  charge  of  homicide^ 
but  again  succeeded  in  confounding  his  ac- 
cusers.. 

His  adherence  to  the  king  against  tiie 
barons  was  followed  by  his  restoratioo  to 
his  office  in  March  1312, 6  Edward  IL,  from 
which  he  finally  retired  in  September  1814, 
and  spent  the  remainder  of  his  days  in  the 
quiet  exercise  of  his  episcopal  duties. 

He  died  on  November  1(5,  1321,  and  wm 
buried  in  the  chapel  of  St.  Mary,  which  he 
had  added  to  his  cathedral  at  Lichfield. 
His  benefactions  to  his  see  were  namerou 
and  munificent.  {AngU  Sac.  L  441;  God- 
winy  318.) 

LA8IH0BT,  William,  derived,  pnhablj, 
from  a  manor  of  that  name  in  Lincohuhiip, 
is  first  mentioned  in  the  Rolls  of  Parliament 
of  8  Henry  IV.,  where  there  are  copies  of 
commissions  to  him  and  two  others  to  treit 
on  the  part  of  the  Earl  of  Northumberland 
with  Kobei-t,  King  of  Scotland,  and  the  am- 
bassadors of  France.  For  his  connectioii « 
with  the  earVs  treasonable  proceediius  he 
was  attainted,  and  all  his  lands  foinited. 
In  the  last  year  of  Henry's  reign,  however, 
he  obtained  his  pardon,  and  was  restored  to 
his  possessions  with  the  assent  of  the  pfi^ 
liament.    {Hot.  Pari.  iii.  606,  055.) 

On  the  accession  of  Henry  V.  he  was  ap- 
pointed chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer;  hot 
the  only  judicial  transaction  in  which  ^ 
find  him  engaged  is  on  the  commission  to 
try  liichard,  Earl  of  Cambridge,  Sir  Thomn 
Grey,  and  Sir  Henry  Lescrop,  of  Marsham, 
who  were  condemned  for  conspiracy  against 
the  king's  life.    (Ibid.  iv.  05.) 

A  new  chief  l^ron  was  appointed  on  No- 
vember 4,  1410 ;  but  whether  the  Tacancj 
was  made  by  Lasingby's  death  or  resigni- 
tion  does  not  appear. 

LATHELL,  Nicholas,  who  in  1  Edvaid 
IV.,  1461,  is  described  of  the  Exchequer, 
had  a  gran);  of  20/.  a  year  out  of  the  profits 
of  Bedfordshire  and  fiuckinghamshire.  hi 
1473  he  was  clerk  of  the  Pipe,  and  fourteen 
years  afterwards,  in  Michaelmas  1487,  S 
Ilenry  VII.,  he  waa  promoted,  no  doubt  on 
accoimt  of  his  experience  as  an  officer,  to 
the  bench  of  the  Exchequer,  as  fourth  baion. 
On  December  5^  1488,  he  was  advanced  to 
the  ofiice  of  third  baron,  and  retained  hiB 
seat  till  the  seventeenth  year  of  that  reign. 
{Hot.  Pari.  V.  472,  529,  vi.  07.) 

LATJKFABE,  John  de,  is  introduced  1)J 
Madox  (ii.  319)  in  his  List  of  Barons  of  tM 
Exchequer  in  42  Henxy  m.,  125a 

LAW,  Edwabd  (Lobb  ELLBraoBOV^ 
was  of  a  family  distingaiahed  IijcIhW 
honours.  His  father  was  th*  u«Md  H* 
mund  Law^  Bishop  of  Gid  iH* 


LAW 

brother  John  became  Bishop  of  Clonfert  in 
1782,  of  Killalft  in  1787,  and  of  Elphin  in 
1705 ;  and  another  brother,  George  Edward, 
was  consecrated  Bishop  of  Chester  in  1812, 
and  was  translated  to  the  diocese  of  Bath 
and  Wells  in  1824.  His  mother  was  Mary, 
the  daughter  of  John  Christian,  Esq.  of 
Unerigge  in  Cumberland ;  and,  of  the  tnir- 
teen  children  she  produced,  he  was  the  sixth 
child  and  fourth  son. 

Edward  Law  was  bom  at  Great  Salkeld 
in  Cumberland  on  November  16, 1760.  In 
17G2  he  was  placed  on  the  foundation  of 
the  Charterhouse,  where  he  remained  six 
years,  and  rose  to  the  head  of  the  school. 
IVoceeding  in  1768  to  Cambridge,  he  en- 
tered Peterhouse  College,of  which  Ms  father 
had  been  master  since  the  year  1754.  Among 
liis  friends  there  was  Archdeacon  Coxe,  by 
whom  his  picture  at  that  time  has  been  so 
faithfully  drawn  that  it  may  be  recognised 
in  all  his  future  career.  His  disposition  is 
described  as  warm  and  generous,  his  thoughts  , 
as  ^eat  and  striking,  Ms  lanjnia^e  as  strong  ; 
and  nervous,  and  somewhat  inclined  to  ex-  ' 
press  his  opinions  with  a  little  too  much  | 
abruptness;  active  and  enterprising,  and  j 
preferring  in  his  studies  ^  the  glowing  and 
animated  conceptions  of  a  Tacitus  to  the 
softer  and  more  delicate  graces  of  a  Tully.' 
In  1771  he  took  Ms  degree  of  B.A.,  coming 
out  of  the  school  as  third  wrangler,  and 
gaining  the  gold  medal  for  classical  learn- 
ing. In  the  next  two  years  he  obtained  the 
members'  prize  for  the  second  best  dissertar 
tion  in  Latin  prose,  and  honourably  com- 
pleted Ms  imiversity  career  by  being  elected 
fellow  of  his  college. 

lie  had  been  admitted  at  Lincoln's  Inn 
in  1769,  and  when  he  left  the  university 
he  attended  at  the  chambers  of  Mr.  (after- 
wards Baron)  Wood,  studying  the  mys- 
teries of  special  pleading  for  two  years,  at 
the  end  of  wMch  he  devoted  Mmself  for 
five  years  more  to  the  practice  of  that 
science,  the  mastery  of  which  is  so  essential 
to  all  who  hope  for  future  success  and 
honour.  He  then  was  called  to  the  bar  in 
Hilary  Term  1780,  and  joined  the  Northern 
Circuit,  where  he  was  not  long  before  his 
merits  were  tested.  His  name,  so  familiar 
in  the  north,  added  to  his  abeady  ^pained 
repute  in  London,  insured  him  an  imme- 
diate accession  of  business.  In  1787  he 
had  earned  suihcient  professional  credit  to 
be  honoured  with  a  silk  gown,  and  in  the 
same  year  held  a  crown  brief  on  the  trials 
of  Lord  George  Gordon  and  others  for 
libels.  (22  StaUTriahy  183,)  But  the  best 
proof  of  the  estimation  with  wMch  his 
forensic  efforts  were  regarded  was  that 
before  he  had  been  eight  years  at  the  bar 
he  was  entrusted  with  the  conduct  of  the 
defence  of  Warren  Hastings,  his  juniors 
being  Mr.  Dallas  and  Mr.  Plumeiv  botii 
subsequently  raised  to  the  bench.    In  this 


LAW 


39r 


arduous  and  deeply  responsible  undertak- 
ing, opposed  to  all  the  eloquence,  invete- 
racy, and  power  of  the  greatest  orators  of 
the  day,  he  manfully  and  successfully 
struggled  during  the  seven  years  of  that 
famous  trial,  from  February  1788  to  April 
1705,  when  his  exertions  were  rewarded 
by  the  acquittal  of  his  persecuted  client. 
During  the  continuance  of  that  trial  h& 
was,  m  1792,  made  attorney-general  of 
Lancaster;  and  on  February  14,  1801,  he 
was  selected  by  Mr.  Addington  as  attorney- 
general,  and  knighted.  In  little  more  thaa 
a  year  he  was,  by  the  death  of  Lord  Ken- 
yon,  called  to  the  high  position  of  lord 
chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench.  Hia 
promotion  took  place  on  April  12,  1802, 
accompanied  by  his  being  called  to  ihe- 
House  of  Peers  with  the  title  of  Baron  El- 
lenborough,  a  small  village  in  Cumberland. 
At  the  time  when  he  was  appointed  at* 
tomev-general  for  Lancaster  ike  political 
world  vras  agitated  by  the  excesses  of  the 
French  Revolution,  and  he  became  neces- 
sarily engaged  in  all  the  trials  that  resulted 
from  the  seditious  attempts  of  its  admirers 
in  this  country.  In  conducting  the  extra- 
ordinary prosecution  at  Lancaster  of 
Thomas  Walker  and  others  for  a  con- 
spiracy, he  at  once  consented  to  an  ac- 
quittu,  on  finding  that  the  evidence  in 
support  of  it  was  in  the  highest  degree 
suspicious,  and  prosecuted  the  perjured 
witness.  He  succeeded  at  York  in  con- 
victing Henry  Bedhead  Yorke  of  conspi- 
racy, and  he  assisted  in  London  on  the 
trials  of  Thomas  Hardy  and  John  Home- 
Tooke  for  high  treason,  in  which  his  duties 
were  confined  to  the  examination  of  the 
witnesses.  During  the  few  months  in 
which  he  held  the  office  of  attorney-general 
to  the  king,  besides  prosecuting  to  convic- 
tion Joseph  Wall  on  a  charge  of  murder 
committed  twenty  years  before,  while  go- 
venor  of  the  island  of  Goree,  he  originated 
no  prosecution  for  political  ofiences.  On 
commencing   his  official  career  a  seat  in. 

Sarliament  was  provided  for  him,  and 
uring  the  short  time  that  he  held  it  he- 
supported  the  ministerial  measures  with  a 
nerve  and  vigour  wMch  at  once  fixed  the- 
attention  of  thd  house.  These  character- 
istics distinguished  his  oratory  in  the 
House  of  Lords.  His  arguments  were- 
enforced  with  extraordinary  power,  and 
seemed  to  be  urged  without  preparation ; 
but,  his  temper  heing  too  easily  ruffled,  ho- 
was  apt  to  use  expressions  the  violence  of 
wMch  rather  astonished  than  convinced 
I  that  august  assembly,  and  their  coarseness- 
and  intemperance  frequently  called  down, 
upon  him  aeserved  castigation. 

On  the  death  of  Mr.  Pitt  in  1806,  Lord. 
EUenborough,    according   to    established 
custom,  held  the  seal   of  chanceUor  of 
the  Exchequer  till  the  new  miniatrY 


398 


LAW 


LAWRENCE 


appointed.    By  that  ministiy,  composed  of    tioasness  of  the  press,  and  the  severity  witii 
tne  whiffs  and  a  few  of  Lord  Sidmouth's  |  which  the  convicted  were  punished.    Hia 


were    considered    severe 


friends,  he  was   offered   and   refused  the  !  judgments,  indeed,  in 
<>reat  Seal,  but  by  unadvisedly  accepting 
A  seat  in  the  cabinet,  subjected  himself,  as 
Lord  Mansfield  had  done  before  him,  to 


all  criminal  cases 
and    thftt  pro- 


nounced  against    Lord    Cochrane,  found 
guilty  of  a  charge  of  conspiracy  (his  com- 


the  suspicions  which  must  attach  to  one  '  plid^  in  which  was  never  positively  proved 
who  at  the  same  time  holds  a  political  and    and  is  now  more  than  doubted),  was  psr- 
a  judicial  position.    However  honourably    ticularly  condemned.    The  most  degraoinr 
and  independently  the  individual  may  act,    part  of  it  was  immediately  remitted,  and 
there  is  so  palpable  an  indecorum  in  the    the  sentence  led   to  the  abolition  of  the 
connection  between  the  two  that  it  is  to  j  punishment  of  the  pillory,  except  for  pe^ 
be  hoped  no  further  example  will  revive  '  jury.    Even  Lord  Cochrane's  own  coaiuel 
the  controversy.    His  adherence   to    the    acknowledged   the  judge's  strict   ]IDpa^ 
whigs  lasted  only  till  the  ministry  expired,    tiality  on  the  trial,  ana  fairly  attribnied 
Thenceforward    he    disconnected    himself   the  sentence  to  his  abomination  of  all  fraod, 
from  party,  though  all  his  tendencies  were    and  to  his  determination  to  prove  thit  in 
-stronglytowardsthe  support  of  government    the  eyes  of  the  law  there  can  be  no  diB- 
and  the  resistance  of  innovations.    He  op-    tinction  of  persons, 
posed  most  of  the  excellent  endeavours  of       Fewjudgeshave  equalled  him  in  leumog, 
§ir  Samuel  Romilly  to  amend  the  criminal    sagacity,  and  unsuspected  integrity,  and 
law,  but  was  himself  the  author  of  an  act,    none  liave  surpassed  him.    His  rule  wbi 
which  goes  by  his  name,  making  more    resolutely  firm  and  inflexibly  just,  unswml 
stringent  the  punishment  for  malicious  in-    by  the  hope  of  popular  applause  or  tiiefeir 
juries.    So  immical  was  he  to  all  changes  ;  of  popular  frenzy.     Yet,  tnough  the  t^- 
that  he  resisted  the  attempt  of  the  same  !  ration  and  respect  which  must  neoeiBaxilj 
enlightened  lawyer  to  subiect  real  estates  '  attend  those  qualities  could  not  be  witb- 
to  tne  payment  of  the  dents  of  the  pro-    held  from  him,  he  failed  in  securinfr  the 
prietor.  affection  of  those  over  whom  he  presidei 

Though  the  bigotry  of  his  opinions  as  a  ,  His  severity  of  demeanour,  his  intolenmt 
legislator  incurred  grave  censure,  in  his  manner,  aad  his  frequent  petulance,  Data- 
character  as  a  judge  he  won  the  admiration  :  rally  produced  more  fear  than  love.  In  the 
of  all.  At  least  equal  to  his  predecessor  in  |  exercise  of  his  wit,  of  which  he  had  a  kive 
legal  learning,  in  personal  deportment  and  i  share,  there  was  too  much  sarcasm  andriu- 
in  judicial  eloquence  he  formed  a  complete  cule  ;  and  in  the  numerous  examples  of  it, 
contrast  to  him.  His  dignified  bearing  be-  which  have  been  over  and  over  again  re- 
spoke  the  chief  justice,  and  his  forcible  peated,  thero  is  scarcely  one  of  them  which, 
language  gave  weight  to  his  judgments,  nowever  it  may  amuse  the  hearers  by  iti 
while  the  oread  of  nis  indignation  against ;  humour,  does  not  inflict  a  wound  upon  its 


every  attempt  to  impose  upon  the  court 
tended  greatly  to  improve  the  practice. 
His  powers  ot  sarcasm  were  very  great, 
sometimes   inconsiderately  exercised;  but 


>ictim. 

At  length  overcome  by  his  incesstnt  W 
hours,  he  felt  the  necessity  of  retiring.  His 
resignation  was  received  by  the  govemment 


prevarication  by  a  witness,  frivolous  objoc-  with  real  regret,  and  the  prince  regent,  in 
tions  by  a  counsel,  or  any  appearance  of  an  elegant  and  eloquent  letter,  expresMd  his 
indecorum  in  the  conduct  of  a  case,  never  '  sorrow.  This  event  occurred  on  November 
escaped  the  severity  of  his  robukes.  In  all  I  6,  1818,  and  in  little  more  than  a  month  he 
questions  between  man  and  man  he  was  ceased  to  live.  He  died  on  December  11, 
inflexibly  just,  and  in  the  trial  of  cases  and  was  buried  in  the  Charterhouse,  where 
whero  the  laws  of  morality  were  outraged  an  excellent  statue  of  him  has  been  placed, 
by  either  party  he  exposed  the  delinquent    _  He  married  Ann,  the  daughter  of  Geoi]ge 


with  indignant  austerity. 

During  his  presidency  the  press  teemed 
with  libels  botn  political  and  personal,  and 
the  chief  justice  partook  most  imjustly  of 
the  unpopularity  which  attended  the  nu- 
merous prosecutions  for  them,  particularly 
in  the  time  when  Sir  Vicary  Gibbs  was 
attorney-general.  Unmindful  that  a  judge 
has  nothing  to  do  with  originating  charges, 
the  people  forgot  that  he  is  not  answerable 
for  tne  cases  brought  before  him  for  trial, 
and  they  wero  apt  to  tax  his  lordship  with 
being  me  promoter  of  the  obnoxious  pro- 
ceedmgs,  as  well  as  to  blame  him  for  the 
boldnesB  with  whic&  he  exposed  the  licen- 


PhiUips  Towry,  Esq.,  formerly  in  the  royal 
navy,  and  by  that  union  he  vyas  the  fiitfcer 
of  five  sons  and  five  daughters.  Edward, 
the  eldest,  for  his  services  to  the  state,  was 
in  1844  promoted  to  an  earldom ;  and 
Charles  Ewan,  the  second  son,  held  tbe 
important  office  of  recorder  of  London,  and 
was  M.P.  for  the  university  of  Cambridge 
at  the  time  of  his  early  death.  (Ziveiiji 
Toionsetid,  Lord  CampliU^  &c.) 

LAWSSHCB,  SouLDEV,  whose 
traced  by  the  heralds  as  far  back  tf  •  I 
who  was  honoured  vTith  their 
of  arms  by  Richard  Ccsur  de'UoB.iMrUi 
bravery  at  the  siege  of  Aen^ 


LEACH 

nmdaon  to  a  phjacian  to  five  crowned 
eada,  grandson  to  a  captain  in  the  royal 
aTTy  and  son  of  Dr.  Thomas  Lawrence, 
i  Essex  Street  in  the  Strand,  president 
if  the  College  of  Physicians.  He  was 
Mm  in  1751,  and  was  educated  at  St. 
Pknl^s  School,  and  St  John's  Collepre,  Cam- 
bddge,  where  he  took  his  degree  of  B.A.  in 
1771,  coming  out  seventh  wrangler,  and  of 
ILA.  in  1774,  when  he  was  elected  fellow 
-of  his  college.  Called  to  the  bar  by  the  Inner 
Temple  in  June  1784,  he  was  honoured  with 
a  8eneant*s  coif  in  1787.  Seven  years  after- 
waids  he  was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  in  March  1794,  but  in  the 
ooune  of  a  month  exchanged  his  seat  with 
Hr.  Justice  BuUer,  for  one  in  the  Court 
of  King's  Bench,  receiving  the  honour  of 
knighthood. 

fte  Reports  of  the  time  will  show  how 
well  he  justified  the  selection,  and  the  sound- 
nets  of  nis  law  was  not  questioned  when  he 
differed  in  opinion,  as  sometimes  he  did, 
with  Lord  Kenyon.    That  chief  was  suc- 
ceeded in  1801  by  Lord  Ellenborougb,  who 
had  been  Sir  Soulden's  college  friend ;  but 
after  a  few  years  a  difference  arose  between 
them,  which  induced  the  latter  to  take  the 
opportamty  that  the   resignation   of  Mr. 
Jwice  Rooke  in  1808  gave  him,  of  return- 
ing to  his  original  position  in  the  Common 
Pkas.    There  he  sat  for  the  four  following 
^vesn,  when  he  resigned  in  Hilary  vacation 
1812.    Surviving  his  retirement  only  two 
jears  and  a  half,  he  died  on  Julv  8,  1814, 
and  was  buried  in  St.  Giles's-in-tne-Fields, 
^beie  there  is  a  monument  to  his  memory. 
He  was  a  great  favourite  with  the  bar, 
^ho  respected  him  for  his  learning,  and 
lored  hmi   for   his   courtesy,  a  habit  to 
"which  there  was  no  exception,  unless  it 
"Was  a  little  roiighness  towards  those  who 
^irere  connected  with  the  newspaper  press. 
Be  was  so  conscientious  a  judge  that  by  a 
codicil  to  his  will  he  directed  the  costs  to 
be  paid  to  a  litigant  who  had  been  de- 
feited  in  an  action  in  which  he  considered 
ihtt  he  had  wrongly  directed  the  jury. 
{Hoan^B  wots;  FrahfiM,  81;  Gent.  Mag, 
Ixxxiv.  p.  iL  92,  Ixxxv.  p.  ii.  12-17 ;  Notes 
<itd  Queries,  drd  S.  iii.  18,  395.) 

lUCH,  JoHir,  was  bom  on  August  28, 
1760,  at  Bedford,  where  his  father,  Kichard 
l^ich,  carried  on  the  trade  of  a  copper- 
flmtL    He  was  educated  at  the  grammar 
tdioolof  that  town,  and,  being  intended  for 
tt  architect,  was  placed  in  the  office  of  Sir 
&bert  Tavlor,  then  eminent  in  that  pro- 
Won.    One  specimen  of  his  constructive 
^^ts  remains  at  the  present  day  in  a 
We  called  Howlett's,   at  Bekesboume, 
^^  Canterbury,  which  he  planned  for  the 
]*t»prietor  of  the  estate ;  and  there  is  no- 
4ing  in  this  example  to  indicate  that  he 
^  unwise  in  leaving  that  calling  for  a 
^ovt  ambitioiu  career.    How  the  change 


LEACH 


399 


occurred  is  variously  related,  but  the  result 
was  that,  by  the  recommendation  of  some 
of  his  friends  who  were  struck  with  his 
energy  and  acuteness,  he  commenced  the 
study  of  the  law  when  he  was  about 
twentv-five  years  old,  entering  the  Middle 
Temple  in  January  1785,  and  placing  him- 
self under  the  tuition  of  Mr.  (afterwards 
Lord  Chief  Baron)  Alexander,  an  equity 
counsel  in  considerable  practice. 

He  was  called  to  the  bar  in  February 
1700,  and,  as  the  custom  in  those  days  was 
for  even  Chancery  barristers,  selected  the 
Home  Circuit  and  Surrey  sessions.  Durinjr 
the  next  ten  years  he  attended  them,  and 
in  both  he  secured  an  extensive  business  by 
his  neat  and  forcible  speeches  and  his  lucid 
statement  of  facts.  Ho  also  was  engaged 
as  counsel  at  the  Seaford  election  and  on 
the  subsequent  petition,  being  his  first 
connection  with  that  borough,  for  which 
he  was  elected  recorder  in  1796,  and  over 
which,  by  his  residence  there  and  his  pur- 
chases of  property,  he  ultimately  acquired 
such  an  influence  as  to  be  enabled  to  return 
both  of  its  members.  From  1800,  when 
he  left  the  sessions  and  the  circuit,  his 
business  in  the  equity  courts  increased  to 
such  an  extent  that  in  Hilary  Term  1807 
he  was  called  ^thin  the  bar  with  a  patent 
of  precedence,  and  proved  himself  an  able 
opponent  to  the  counsel  who  then  took 
the  lead  in  those  courts.  His  style  was 
peculiarly  precise  and  terse,  and  £is  lan- 
guage remarkably  correct  and  perspicuous, 
so  tnat  his  arguments  were  very  effective. 
In  the  previous  year  he  entered  parliament 
for  Seiuord,  for  which  he  continued  to  sit 
till  1816,  when  he  left  the  ranks  of  the 
whigs,  which  he  had  at  first  joined,  and 
adopted  the  politics  of  the  regent,  who  had 
set  him  the  example  of  change.  With 
that  royal  personage  he  had  gradually  ob- 
tained favour  from  the  time  he  defended 
the  Duke  of  York  in  1809  against  the 
attacks  of  Colonel  Wardle,  in  one  of  the 
few  speeches  which  he  uttered  in  the 
house.  Another  of  his  speeches  was  in 
support  of  the  Regency  Bill  in  1811,  thus 
confirming  the  favourable  impression  he 
hod  made  on  the  regent,  by  whom  he  was 
appointed  chancellor  of  the  duchv  of  Corn- 
wall in  February  1816.  To  ttis  in  the 
next  year  was  added  the  chief  justiceship 
of  Chester. 

The  next  proof  of  royal  favour  which 
he  received  was  the  appointment  of  vice- 
chancellor  of  England,  tne  bill  establishing 
which  office  he  hod  four  years  before  stre- 
nuously opposed.  He  succeeded  to  that 
seat  on  January  9, 1818,  and  was  knighted ; 
and  in  May  18z7  he  was  nominated  master 
of  the  Rolls,  and  was  sworn  a  privy  coun- 
sellor. In  this  office  he  remained  till  his 
death,  on  September  16, 1834,  when  he  was 
buried  at  Eoinburgh. 


400 


LEACH 


Though  remarkable  for  the  gentleness  of 
his  manner  and  the  suavity  of  his  address. 
Sir  John  Leach  was  the  most  unpopular 
judge  of  his  time,  and,  though  his  legal 
experience  was  great,  his  jud^ents  gave 
but  scant  satisfaction.  His  imtable  temper 
frequently  involved  him  as  a  barrister  in 
unseemly  altercations  with  those  opposed 
to  him,  and  as  a  judge  in  violent  collisions 
with  the  leading  members  of  the  bar.  His 
manner  of  treatmg  those  who  differed  from 
him,  or  against  whom  he  had  imbibed  a 

Srejudice,  became  so  obnoxious  that  a 
eputation  of  the  most  distinguished  coun- 
sel practising  in  his  court  waited  upon  him 
with  a  formS  remonstrance  upon  his  intem- 
perate and  dictatorial  deportment  towards 
the  profession.  The  known  intimacy  be- 
tween him  and  the  prince  regent,  and  the 
strong  suspicion  that  he  assisted  in  getting 
up  the  case  against  Queen  Caroline,  did  j 
not  tend  to  diminish  the  dislike  with  which  I 
he  was  generally  reofarded.  { 

Sir  Samuel  Romilly,  writing  in  his  Diary  j 
in  1816,  while  he  speaks  highly  of  his 
talents  and  his  powers  of  argumentation, 
says  that  he  is  worse  qualified  for  a  judicial 
situation  than  almost  any  one  he  has  known 
in  the  profession,  as  *  he  is  extremely  defi- 
cient as  a  lawyer,'  only  knowing  what  he 
has  acquired  by  daily  practice,  and  being 
extremely  wanting  in  jud^ent.  And  he 
prophesies  that  if  he  snould  be  ever  raised 
to  a  great  situation,  this  deficiency,  and 
'  his  extraordinary  confidence  in  himself, 
will  involve  him  in  some  serious  difficulty.' 
This  prophecy  was  verified  in  the  result. 
Both  as  vice-chancellor  and  master  of  the 
KoUs,  though  he  despatched  the  causes 
before  him  with  immense  celerity,  he  relied 
so  little  upon  authorities,  and  listened  so 
indifferently  to  any  arguments  that  con- 
fficted  with  his  own  opinion,  sometimes  not 
even  condescending  to  give  any  reasons 
for  his  judgments,  that  ms  decisions  were 
frequently  appealed  against,  and  not  un- 
frequently  overturned.  In  comparing  his 
summary  judgments  with  Lorn  Elaou's 
proverbial  delays,  the  chancellor's  court 
was  designated  the  court  of  Oyer  safis 
terminer ^  and  Sir  John's  that  of  Terminer 
sans  oyer. 

In  private  life  his  amenity  and  courteous- 
ness  were  as  remarkable  as  his  sharpness 
and  want  of  temper  on  the  bench.  One  of 
his  failings  tended  to  make  him  somewhat 
ridiculous.  Not  content  with  distinction 
as  a  lawyer,  he  had  the  absurd  ambition 
of  being  considered  a  man  of  fashion.  He 
prided  himself  on  his  aristocratic  intimacies, 
and,  seldom  associating  with  his  professional 
brethren,  firequented  the  crowded  parties  of 
the  great;  even  after  the  fatigue  of  sitting 
in  ms  court  to  a  late  hour  m  the  ni^ht. 
This  perpetual  round  of  fatigue  and  ffaiety 
probaoly  occanoned,  or   aggiavatec^  the 


LECHMERB 

diseases  under  which  he  suffered  towut 
the  end  of  his  life— diseases  Teqairiiig  pair 
ful  operations,  which  he  underwent  wit 
the  greatest  fortitude,  and  which  he  neve 
allowed  to  interfere  with  the  discbaige  o 
his  duties.  He  was  in  his  seventy-fifU 
year  when  he  died,  and  was  never  married 
{Legal  Observer,  Oct.  1834 ;  Law  and  Lam- 
yerSf  ii.  88 ;  Law  Mag.  xii.  427.) 

LB  BLAKG,  SnroN.    This  smiable  judge 
was  the  second  son  of  Thomas  Le  Bhuic^  of 
Charterhouse  Square,  London,  Esq.,  sod 
was  bom  about  tne  year  1748.    Admitted 
a  pensioner  of  Trini^  Hall,  Cambridge,  in 
January   1766,   he  became  a  scholar  in 
November  following,  proceeded  LL Jb  in 
1773,  and  was  elected  a  fellow  of  his  boiue 
in  January  1779.    He  studied  the  law  at 
the  Inner  Temple,  and  was  called  to  the 
bar  in  February  1773,  joining  the  Norfolk 
Circuit.    He  accepted  the  depee  of  the 
coif  in  Hilary  Term  1787,  obtaming  in  the 
Common  Pleas  a  considerable  lead,  and  in 
1791  he  was  chosen  as  counsel  for  his  alma 
mater. 

He  was  promoted  on  June  6, 1799,  to  the 

Eost  of  justice  of  the  King's  Bendi,  and 
nigh  ted.  In  that  court  he  sat  for  nea^ 
seventeen  years,  with  the  character  of  an 
excellent  lawyer  and  a  conscientious  and 
impartial  J  udp^.  The  absence  of  inddenta 
worthy  of  being  related  in  so  long  a  period 
—if  we  may  except  an  atrocious  libel  on  him 
in  a  newspaper  called  'The  Independent 
Whig/  in  1808,  for  which  the  editor  vaa 
speeailv  punished  bv  a  long  imprisonment 
(StaU  Trials,  xxx.  1131-1322)— is  a  proof 
that  the  whole  of  it  was  employed  in  the 
regular  discharge  of  duty,  iminfluenced  hj 
political  bias  or  personal  prejudice.  There 
is  not  a  more  gra^ful  testimony  that  this 
was  the  case  with  Sir  Simon  Le  Blanc  than 
the  sentence  'Illo  nemo  neque  inteffrior 
erat  in  civitate,  neque  sanctior/  with  which 
his  death  on  April  15,  1816,  is  recorded 
by  the  respected  reporters  of  his  court 
— Messrs.  Maule  and  Selwyn  (voL  v.  p.  L). 
LEGHMEBE,  Nicholas,  of  a  Worceste^ 
shire  family,  second  to  none  in  antiquitj 
and  reputation,  was  the  third  but  eldest 
surviving  son  of  Edmund  Lechmere  of 
Hanley  Castle,  by  Margaret,  the  sister  of 
the  accomplished  and  ill-fated  Sir  Thoma» 
Overbury.  He  was  bom  in  September 
1613,  the  year  in  which  his  uncle  w 
poisoned  in  the  Tower,  and  was  bred  up 
m  Gloucester  School,  whence  he  was  re- 
moved to  Wadham  CollegOi  Oxford.  After 
taking  his  degree  of  B.  A.  he  became  a  stu- 
dent of  the  law  at  the  Middle  Teimik^ 
where  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  IMlf 
and  elected  a  bencher  in  166G.  Bato 
that  date  he  had  taken  a  promnMBk  Wt  V 
the  side  of  the  parliament  agaiBitflM> 
I.  His  name  is  appendfld|  ^'"''^ ''*'>>*4 
otherS;  to  a  snmmoni  to  %m  M  '- 


LECHMERE 

liVorcester  in  June  1646 ;  and  he  was  one 
of  the  committee  who  came  to  that  city  on 
its  surrender  in  the  following  month. 
(Xash's  WorceHcTj  ii.  'App.  c.-cvi.)  In 
1648  he  was  elected  memoer  for  Bewdley, 
and  sat  during  the  remainder  of  the  Long 
Parliament  When  Charles  U.,  accom- 
panied by  the  Scotch  army,  possessed  him- 
self of  Worcester  in  1661,  ilanley  Castle 
was  twice  used  by  the  Scottish  horse  as 
their  quarters,  while  its  master  Joined 
Cromwell's  forces  and  shared  in  his  triumph 
at  the  battle.  In  Cromwell^s  second  and 
third  parliament  of  1654  Lechmere  was  one 
of  the  members  for  Worcestershire.  In  the 
latter  he  promoted  the  Petition  and  Advice, 
prcifsed  tnat  it  should  be  published,  called 
it  a  Magna  Charta,  and  afterwards  likened 
it  to  the  Petition  of  Right.  Before  Crom- 
well's death  he  was  appointed  attorney  of 
the  duchy  of  Lancaster,  and  walked  in  that 
character  at  the  protector's  funeraL  In 
this  ofBce  he  was  continued  imder  Richard, 
in  whose  parliament  he  was  one  of  his 
staunchest  supporters.  On  its  dissolution 
he  took  his  place  as  part  of  the  Rump,  both 
before  and  after  its  second  expulsion.  Two 
days  previously  t!o  its  dissolving  itself  in 
preparation  for  the  king's  return,  a  bill  was 
passed  for  reviving  the  duchy  of  Lancaster, 
and  Nicholas  Lechmere  was  voted  its  at- 
torney. (Pari.  Hist.  ii.  624,  iii.  1583; 
BvrUm'%  Ihary,  ii.  136,  526,  iii.  586.) 

In  the  meantime  Lechmere  had  made  his 
peace  with  the  king,  who  before  he  left 
l^reda  granted  him  a  full  pardon ;  but  he 
could  not  expect  to  be  elected  for  the  Con- 
vention Parhament ;  and  during  the  rest  of 
his  life  he  never  resumed  his  senatorial 
dignity.  In  his  legal  capacity  he  bore  a 
<>rood  reputation ;  and  it  is  evident  that  he 
enjoyed  an  ample  share  of  professional 
emoluments,  from  his  being  enabled  not 
only  to  repurchase  those  portions  of  the 
patrimonial  estates  which  nad  been  alien- 
ated by  the  former  necessities  of  the  family, 
but  to  add  other  lands  and  manors  to  it. 
At  the  revolution  his  exemplary  character, 
and,  perhaps,  his  early  opposition  to  the 
Stuart  dynasty,  recommended  him  to  the 
new  government.  Though  he  had  attained  | 
tlio  age  of  seventy-six,  he  was  raised  to  the 
bench  of  the  Exchequer  on  May  4, 1689, 
and  was  thereupon  knighted.  He  sat  there 
for  eleven  years ;  but  in  the  last  ^ear  he 
was  so  infirm  that  he  sent  his  opinion  on 
the  bankers'  case  in  writing,  and  was 
obliged  to  be  excused  from  gomg  the  cir- 
cuit. He  received  his  quietus  at  the  end 
of  June  1700 ;  and  on  April  30,  1701,  he 
died  at  his  mansion  at  Hanley.  (PepySf  i. 
337 ;  LuttreU.) 

He  married  Penelope,  daughter  of  Sir 
Edwin  Sandys,  of  Nortnbome  in  Kent,,  and 
left  several  children.  Among  their  de- 
scendants one  was  raised  to  the  peerage  as 


LEE 


401 


Baron  Lechmere  of  Evesham  in  1721, 
which  died  with  him  in  1727 ;  and  another 
received  the  honour  of  a  baronetcy  in  1818, 
whose  representative  now  enjoys  the  title. 

LEDXHHAM,  EusTACB  de,  was  one  of 
the  justices  itinerant  into  Lmcolnshire  in 
8  Richard  I.,  1196-7  {Madox,  i.  704),  of 
which  county  he  had  been  shenff  two  years 
before.  His  principal  property  was  at 
Lange  Ledenham. 

LBE,  WiLLiAif ,  was  the  second  son  of  Sir 
Thomas  Lee,  baronet,  of  Hartwell,  Buck- 
inghamshire, and  of  his  wife  Alice,  daughter 
of  Thomas  Hopkins,  a  merchant  of  London. 
([  WoUorCs  Baronet,  iii.  149.)  He  was  bom 
in  1688,  and  was  educated  at  the  univer- 
sity of  Oxford,  where  he  took  his  bachelor's 
degree.  He  was  entered  in  July  1703  at 
the  Middle  Temple,  whence  he  removed  in 
February  1717  to  the  Inner  Temple,  from 
which  he  proceeded  as  barrister. 

His  classical  attainments  may  be  inferred 
from  his  being  appointed  Latin  secretaiy  to 
the  king  in  1718  (6  BepoH  Pub.  Records, 
Ajyp.  ii.  119) )  and  his  forensic  talents  from 
his  success  at  the  bar  and  his  being  made 
one  of  the  king's  counsel,  an  office  m  those 
times  of  far  greater  distinction  thim  it  holds 
at  the  present  day,  when  the  multiplicity 
of  courts  requires  an  almost  infinite  num- 
ber of  silken  leaders.    In  the  first  parlia- 
ment of  Geon^  H.,  January  1728,  he  was 
elected  member  for  Chipping  Wycombe, 
and  between  its  third  and  fourth  sessions  he 
was  raised  to  the  bench,  being  constituted 
a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench  in  June  1730. 
During  the  seven  jears  that  he  sat  in  that 
court  as  a  puisne  judgre  he  refused  the  cus- 
tomary honour  oi  knighthood,  but  on  his 
elevation  to  the  head  of  it  on  June  8, 1737, 
he  was  induced  to  accept  the  honorary  dis- 
tinction.   He  presided  as  lord  chief  justice 
of  the  King's  Bench  for  seventeen  years; 
and,  though  succeeding  so  eminent  a  judge  as 
Lord  Hardwicke,  his  impartial  administn^ 
tion  of  justice  and  his  peifect  mastery  of  the 
science  of  law  secured  to  him  the  respect 
and  admiration  of  his  contemporaries.    It 
fell  to  his  lot  to  try  the  persons  implicated 
in  the  rebellion  of  1745,  and  he  performed 
the  obnoxious  duty  with  dignity  and  firm- 
ness.   In  March  1754,  shortly  before  his 
death,  the  office  of  chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer having   become    vacant   by   the 
sudden  death  of  Mr.  Pelham,  the  seals  were 
placed  in  his  hands  as  chief  justice  of  Eng- 
land till  the  office  should  be  filled  up.  This 
was  done  in  compliance  with  a  custom 
which  had  been  acted  on  from  time  im- 
memorial, and  originated  in  the  fact  that 
the  chief  justiciary  in  former  ages  was  the 
president  of  the  Exchequer.    He  died  on 
April  8,  1754,  and  was  buried  at  HartwelL 
(StaU  Trials,  xvii.  401,  xviii.  320;  Burrow' 9 
8.  C.  106,  364.) 
Lord  Campbell  (Ch.  Juii.  ii.  213),  though 


402 


LEEEE 


with  an  ineffectual  attempt  to  place  liis 
character  in  a  ridiculous  lignt,  is  ooliged  to 
speak  highly  of  his  leffal  and  intellectual 
powers,  and  to  acknowledge  the  purity  of 
nis  intentions,  the  suavity  of  his  nuumers, 
and  the  justice  of  his  decisions.  Sir  James 
Burrowi  who  had  sat  under  him  during  the 
whole  period  of  his  career,  in  his  '  Settle- 
ment Cases '  (p.  328)  thus  expresses  him- 
self : — '  He  was  a  gentleman  of  most 
imhlemished  and  irreproachable  character, 
both  in  public  and  in  private  li^o  I  amiable 
and  gentle  in  his  disposition;  affable  and 
courteous  in  his  deportment;  cheerful  in  his 
temper,  though  grave  in  his  aspect;  generous 
and  polite  in  his  manner  of  hvin^ ;  sincere 
and  deservedly  happy  in  his  friendships  and 
£unily  connections ;  and  to  the  highest  de- 
gree upright  and  impartial  in  his  distribu- 
tion of  justice.  He  had  been  a  judge  of  the 
Court  of  King's  Bench  for  nearly  twenty- 
four  years,  and  for  nearly  seventeen  had 
presided  in  it.  In  this  state  the  integrity 
of  his  heart  and  the  caution  of  his  de- 
termination were  so  eminent  that  they 
never  will,  perhaps  never  can,  be  excelled.' 

His  brother,  Sir  George,  was  at  the  same 
time  the  president  of  the  highest  court  of 
dvil  law,  as  dean  of  the  Arches  and  judge 
of  the  Prerogative  Court  of  Canterbury ;  a 
coincidence  of  which  there  is  another  recent 
example  in  Lord  Eldon  and  his  brother  Sir 
William  Scott,  Lord  StowelL 

Sir  William  Lee  nuuried,  first,  Anne, 
daughter  of  John  Goodwin,  of  Burley  in 
Suffolk ;  and  secondly,  Margaret,  daughter 
of  Boger  Drake,  Esq.,  and  widow  of  •uunes 
Melmoth,  Esq.  The  iMuronetcy,  after  being 
enjoyed  for  a  hundred  and  sixty-seven  years, 
Med  in  1827. 

LEEKS,  Thomas,  was  the  eldest  son  of 
Balph  Leeke,  of  Wilsland  in  Shropshire, 
where  the  family  had  been  established 
once  1334.  He  was  educated  at  Shrews- 
bury School,  and  at  St  John's  College, 
Cambridge,  where  he  took  his  desirees  of 
BA.  and  M.A.  in  1622  and  1626.  Beyond 
his  being  admitted  as  a  student  at  Gray's 
Inn  in  1616  no  other  fact  is  known  of  him 
in  the  law  till  he  was  appointed  cursitor 
baron  on  November  25,  lo42.  As  he  was 
certainly  not  a  Serjeant,  and  is  not 
named  by  any  law  reporter  as  a  barrister, 
he  probablv  held  some  office  in  the  Ex- 
chequer before  his  promotion.  His  loyalty 
prompted  him  to  join  the  king  in  the 
troubles,  and,  in  consequence  of  the  incon- 
venience occasioned  by  his  leaving  his  post, 
Mr.  Richard  Tomlins  was  put  in  his  place 
by  the  parliament  on  September  29,  1645, 
in  order  that  he  flight  on  the  next  day  re- 
ceive the  new  sheriffs  of  London,  and  pre- 
serve the  forms  which,  the  entry  says,  nad 
never  been  omitted  for  the  space  of  three  or 
four,  hundred  years. 

At  the  Bestoration  Mr.  Baron  Leeke  re- 


LEGGE 

appeared  and  resumed  his  official  podtion, 
which  he  enjoyed  for  the  short  remainder 
of  his  life.  He  died  in  1662.  {Zord^ 
Journals,  vii.  606.) 

LEEKE,  WiLLiAX,  though  inserted  in 
Dugdale's  'Chronica  Series  as  a  baron  of 
the  Exchequer  in  1679,  and  though  in  the 
reports  of  the  kingdom  there  is  a  grant  to 
him  of  the  office  on  May  8  in  that  year,  is 
found  on  investigation  to  have  refused  the 
honour  thus  bestowed  upon  him.  Many 
instances  are  to  be  found  of  modesty  de- 
clining an  offer  of  advancement,  but  this  is 
a  unique  example  of  an  office  actually  con- 
ferrea  being  immediately  abdicated. 

He  was  uie  eldest  son  of  William  Leeke, 
of  Wimeswould  in  the  county  of  Leicester, 
Esq.  Bom  about  1630,  he  was  admitted 
into  the  socieW  of  Gray's  Inn,  and  called  to 
the  bar  in  1661,  becoming  an  ancient  in 
1676.  His  monument  speaks  of  his  know- 
ledge of  the  science  oi  the  law,  and  his 
great  pains  to  prevent  litigation  among  hLs 
clients,  which  may  account  for  his  l^ing 
nowhere  mentioned  by  the  reporters.  On 
February  12,  1679,  he  was  summoned  to 
take  the  degree  of  serjeant-at-law  ifl  the 
following  Easter  Term,  with  the  view, 
probablv,  to  his  further  elevation.  Ac- 
cordingly on  Ma^  8  he  received  a  patent  as 
a  baron  of  the  coif.  An  entry  in  the  Gray's 
Inn  books  shows  that  he  had  given  up  that 
title  (if  he  ever  took  it)  before  May  28,  for 
on  that  day  libertv  was  nven  to  him,  under 
the  description  of  Mr.  Serjeant  Leeke,  to 
assign  his  chamber  in  the  mn  to  any  other 
gentleman  of  the  society — an  entry  which 
did  not  necessarily  show  that  he  meant  to 
retire  from  practice,  as  he  had  of  course  a 
chamber  appropriated  to  him  in  Serjeants' 
Inn. 

He  died  at  the  age  of  67,  on  October  9, 
1687;  and  in  the  encomiastic  inscription 
on  his  monument  in  Wimeswould  Church 
occurs  this  passage  : — 

In  alta  enim  Parpuratorum  Judicam  subsdlia 

a  Carolo  II.  evectus,  munere  se 

tarn  prteclaro  statim  abdicavit; 

moderationis  plane  siDgularis 

raram  exemplum. 

He  married  Catherine,  daughter  of 
William  Bainbrigge,  Esq.,  of  Lockinffton 
in  Leicestershire.  (Nichois^s  Leicesteruurey 
iiL506.) 

LE60E,  Heneage,  was  the  second  son  of 
William,  first  Earl  of  Dartmouth,  by  Lady 
Anne  Finch,  third  daughter  of  Heneage, 
first  Earl  of  Aylesford,  and  great-grandson, 
through  his  mother,  of  the  celebrated  lord 
chancellor  of  Charles  II.,  the  Earl  of  Not- 
tingham. Bom  in  1704,  he  was  called  to 
the  bar  at  the  Inner  Temple  in  1728.  He 
was  chosen  hiprh  steward  of  the  city  of 
Lichfield  in  1734,  and  in  1739  became  one 
of  the  king's  counsel.  In  1743  he  was  ap- 
pointed counsel  to  the  Admiralty  and  auditor 


LEICESTER 

of  Greenwich  Hospital, and  in  the  same  year 
•was  engaged  to  defend  William  Chetwynd, 
indicted  for  the  murder  of  his  schoolfellow 
Thomas  Ricketts  by  stabbing  him  with  a 
"knife  for  taking  away  a  piece  of  cake.  The 
j  ury  found  a  special  verdict ;  butthe  question 
whether  it  was  murder  or  manslaughter 
was  never  decided,  the  king  granting  a  free 
pardon,  and  the  vindictive  efforts  of  the  de- 
ceased's friends  to  sue  out  an  appeal  not 
being  successful. 

In  June  1747  he  was  raised  to  the  bench 
as  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  and  sat  there 
for  twelve  years,  respected  as  well  for  his 
leaminof  as  for  his  impartiality  and  modera- 
tion. The  latter  qiuuities  were  manifested 
in  his  able  summing  up  on  the  trial  in  1752 
of  Mary  Blandy  for  the  murder  of  her  father. 

He  died  on  August  30, 1759,  leaving  issue 
by  his  wife  Catherine,  daughter  of  Mr. 
Jonathan  Fogg,  a  merchant  of  London. 
(Collins  8  Peerage  J  i.  121 ;  State  TriaU,  xviii. 
2130,1170.) 

LEICESTES,  Earl  of.  See^j>^  Beau- 
mont. 

LEICE8TEB,  Peter  de,  in  1290, 17  Ed- 
ward I.,  was  one  of  the  justices  of  the  Jews ; 
but  in  1291,  the  duties  of  his  olHce  having 
terminated  with  the  expulsion  of  the  Jews 
from  England,  he  was  appointed  a  regular 
baron  of  the  Exchequer,  in  which  office  he 
continued  to  act  till  his  death,  in  the  thirty- 
tirst  year  of  the  reign.  (AfadoXf  i.  237-64, 
ii.  62-323.)  He  left  a  son  named  Thomas, 
and  had  property  in  Buckinghamshire,  War- 
wickshire, and  Northamptonshire.  (Abb, 
Placit.  348 ;  Cal,  Inquis.  p.  m.  i.  163,  187, 
223 ;  Abb.  Rot.  Orig,  i.  163.) 

LEICE8TEB,  Roger  de,  was  the  son  of 
Sir  Nicholas  de  Leicester,  who  possessed 
large  estates  in  Cheshire,  by  Margaret,  the 
daujjhter  of  Geoffrey  Button,  and  widow  of 
Kobert  de  Denbigh.  He  became  a  justice 
of  the  Common  Pleas  in  1276, 4  Edward  I., 
from  Trinity  in  which  year  till  Michaelmas 
1289  fines  were  levied  before  him.  (Dug- 
dale's  Orig,  44.)  Being  then  removed  from 
his  office  with  several  of  his  brethren  for 
<?xt<jrtion  and  other  judicial  crimes,  he  was 
compelled  to  pay  for  his  release  from  im- 
prisonment 1000  marks  {Weevery  367),  a 
sum  so  much  less  than  that  imposed  upon 
some  of  the  others  that  it  is  to  be  hoped 
his  offence  was  not  of  so  deep  a  dye.  Dug- 
dale  introduces  his  name  SLguin  on  January 
2,  121»3,  as  being  then  appointed  a  baron  of 
the  Exchequer  ;  but  both  on  the  above  ac- 
count, and  because  in  Madox's  list  of  those 
who  attended  in  the  court  after  that  date 
he  is  never  mentioned,  it  seems  not  unlikely 
that  his  name  was  by  mistake  substituted  for 
that  of  looter  de  Leicester,  who  certainly  was 
appointed  about  the  same  time,  and  whose 
subsequent  attendance  is  regularly  noted. 

Peter  Jjeicester  of  Tablev,  his  lineal  de- 
Bcendant,  was  created  a  baronet  on  August 


LENTHALL 


403 


10,  1660 ;  but  the  title  became  extinct  in 
1742.  A  daughter,  however,  married  Sir 
Peter  Byrne,  baronet,  whose  grandson,  Sir 
John  Fleming  Leicester  (the  surname  having 
been  assumed),  was  created  Baron  de  Tab- 
ley  on  July  16, 1826.  His  son  Georpe,  who 
has  taken  the  name  of  Warren,  is  the  pre* 
sent  baron. 

LENTHALL,  William,  of  an    ancient 
Herefordshire    family,     one    member    of 
which  shared  with  Henry  V.  the  glories 
of  Aginconrt,   was   the   son   of  William 
Lenthall,  of  Latchford  in  Oxfordshire,  and 
Frances,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  South* 
well,  of  St.  Faith's  in  Norfolk,  and  was 
bom  in  June  1591.    After  receivi^  the 
rudiments    of    his   education    at   Thame 
School,  he  was  sent  to  St.  Alban's  Hall, 
Oxford.    Here  he  continued  for  three  years, 
when,  without  taking  a  degree,  he  was  r^ 
moved  to  Lincoln's  Inn  (Athen,  Oxon,  iii, 
603),  where  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in 
1616,    became    a   bencher   in    1633,  and 
elected  reader  in  1638.    Long  before  this 
date  he  had  got  into  considerable  praclicey 
since,   writing    to    Secretary  Nicholas  in 
1641,  he  speaks  of  his  previous  labours 
of  twenty-tive   years,  the  profits  of  the 
last  years  of  wluch  he  subsequently  states 
to  have  amounted  to  2500/.  a  year.    (Notes 
and  Queries f  1st  S.  xiL  358.)     Clarendon 
(i.  240,  297)  describes  him,  when  elected 
speaker,    as    'a    lawyer    of   no    eminent 
account  but  ^of  competent  practice.'    He 
became  recorder  of  Gloucester    in  1637, 
and  held  the  same  office  in  the  borough 
of  Woodstock,  of  which  he  was  elected 
representative  in  both  the  parliaments  of 
1640,  over  the  latter  of  which  he  was 
chosen  to  preside  as  speaker.     It  is  curious 
to  contrast  the  fulsome  compliments  and 
humble    professions  of   his    opening    and 
earlier    addresses    to    the    king,    as    the 
organ   of  the    Commons,  with   the   pro- 
ceedings against  that  sovereign  which  he 
was  soon  to  authenticate ;  and  to  watch  the 
gradual  diminution  of  courtly  ezpressiona 
as  those  proceedings  became  more  violent, 
and  the  adulatory  and  submissive  strain  he 
adopted  towards  those  who  ultimately  ac- 
quired the  ascendency.    Clarendon   says, 
with  truth,  that  he  was  a  weak  man,  and 
unequal  to  the  task ;    yet  his  answer  to 
Kin^  Charles  on  January  4, 1642,  on  his 
conung  to  the  house  to  demand  the  five 
members  whom  he  had  accused,  bore  some 
semblance  both   of  spirit  and  ingenuity. 
When  the  king  asked  him  '  whether  any 
of  these  persons  were  in  the  house  ?  whe- 
ther he  saw  any  of  them  ?  and  where  they 
were?'  the  speaker,  falling  on  hb  knees, 
replied,  '  May  it  please  your  majesty,  I 
have  neither  eyes  to  see   nor  tongue   to 
speak  in  this  place,  but  as  the  house  is 
pleased  to  direct  me,  whose  servant  I  am 
nere ;  and  humbly  beg  "so>>i  TSk!K^^\:^''^  ^JKfc- 


404 


LENTHALL 


don  that  I  cannot  give  anj  other  answer 
than  this  to  what  your  majesty  is  pleased 
to  demand  of  me.'     (  TFhitelockef  62.) 

When  the  parliament  set  on  foot  the 
subscription  for  their  defence  in  June 
1642^  the  speaker,  as  his  contribution, 
promised  to  maintain  a  horse  and  to  fpye 
oO/.  in  money  or  plate.  So  well  pleased  were 
tJie  Commons  with  his  conauct  in  the 
chair,  that  on  their  adopting  a  new  Great 
Seal  for  themselves,  one  of  the  first  uses 
they  made  of  it  was  to  constitute  him 
master  of  the  Rolls,  taking  no  accoimt  of 
the  king's  previous  appomtment  of  Sir 
John  Colepeper.  He  was  accordingly 
sworn  into  that  office  on  November  22, 
1643,  and  was  continued  by  special  votes 
in  1645,  notwithstanding  the  self-denying 
ordinance.  (Ibid.  78, 146, 177.)  In  con- 
sequence of  the  difference  of  opinion  in  the 
two  houses  as  to  the  persons  to  be  named 
oonmiissioners  of  the  Ureat  Seal  in  1646, 
they  placed  it  ad  interim  in  the  custody  of 
the  two  speakers  on  October  30,  to  hold  it 
for  a  week ;  but  that  period,  by  their  con- 
tinued irresolution,  extended  to  March 
15,  1648,  when  new  commissioners  were 
agreed  to. 

In  July  1647  the  London  apprentices 
tumultuously  presented  petitions  to  par- 
liament concerning  the  militia,  and  acted 
so  insolently,  threatening  all  manner  of 
violence  if  their  demand!s  were  not  com- 
plied with,  that  both  houses  were  from 
terror  compelled  to  revoke  the  ordinances 
complainea  of.  The  speakers  accordingly 
withdrew  to  the  army,  and  put  themselves 
imder  its  protection ;  and  though  the  Com- 
mons had  in  the  meantime  elected  another 
speaker  in  Lenthall's  place,  he  was,  on  his 
return  with  the  anny,  after  a  week's  ab- 
sence, allowed  to  resume  the  chair.  It  was 
believed  that  the  whole  transaction  was  a 
plot  to  give  power  to  the  army,  and  that 
the  speaker  was  compeUed  to  join  in  it  by 
a  threat  that  he  should  be  impeached  for 
embezzlement  if  he  did  not  comply.  He 
was  charged  also,  in  the  next  year,  with 
endeavouring  to  impede  the  treaty  with 
the  Idng  in  the  Isle  of  Wifrht  (Clarendon^ 
v.  461-469 :  Fori  Hist.  in.  729-736, 1060) ; 
and  in  all  the  subsequent  measures  affect- 
ing the  kmg's  life  he  did  not  hesitate  to 
preside.  After  the  tragic  scene  of  Ja- 
nuary 30,  1649,  '  the  parliament  of  Eng^ 
land,'  or  rather  the  House  of  Commons, 
assumed  the  government,  Lenthall,  as 
speaker,  being  nominally  the  head.  The 
same  honours  were  ordered  to  be  paid  to 
bim  when  visiting  the  city  of  London  as 
bad  been  used  to  the  king,  by  delivering 
to  lum  the  swoxd  on  his  recepnon,  and  by 
placing  him  above  the  lord  mayor  at  the 
feast  {WhUdocke,  406.)  But  the  real 
power  was  in  a  council  of  state,  and  that 
ooostitated  by  the  anny,  over  which 


LENTHALL 

Cromwell,  by  his  superior  energy  and  hiff^ 
success  in  battle,  soon  acquired  unlimited 
ascendency.  In  four  years  both  the  army 
and  the  nation  got  tired  of  the  parliament 
and  on  April  19,  1053,  the  speaker  waa- 
compelled  to  vacate  his  chair  by  Crom- 
well s  forcible  expulsion  of  all  the  re- 
maining members  m)m  the  house. 

Ketinng  to  the  Bolls,  he  seems  to  have* 
kept  aloof  from  any  public  interference  in 
politics  till  Cromwell  summoned  his  se- 
cond parliament  on  September  3,  1654, 
when  Lenthall,  who  sat  for  Oxfordshire,, 
was  again  chosen  speaker.  It  sat  for 
nearly  five  months,  and  then,  being  too 
argumentative  for  the  protector^s  purposes, 
was  dissolved  without  passing  a  smgle  act. 
{Pari  Hid.  iii.  1444,  14G0,  1481.)  The 
protector  and  his  council,  in  the  April  fol- 
lowing, proposed  to  the  commissioners  of 
the  Seal  ana  the  master  of  the  Bolls  a  new 
ordinance  for  the  better  regulation  of  the 
Chancery,  and  for  limiting  its  jurisdiction, 
which  all  those  officers  (except  L/Isle) 
strongly  opposed.  Lenthall  was  most 
earnest  agamst  its  adoption,  protesting 
'that  he  would  be  hanged  before  the 
Bolls  gate  before  he  would  execute  it;' 
but  no  sooner  did  he  see  that  the  two 
opposing  commissioners  were  dismissed 
than  he  'wheeled  about,'  and  gave  in 
his  adhesion.  {Whitelocke,  625-6.)  The 
next  parliament,  called  by  Cromwell  in 
September  1656,  though  Lenthall  was 
again  returned  for  Oxforshire,  was  pre- 
sided over  by  Sir  Thomas  Widdrinjrton. 
In  the  farce  that  was  enacted  in  it  of 
offering  to  Cromwell  the  title  of  king  the 
master  of  the  Bolls  performed  a  leading 
part,  using  the  most  specious  arguments  to 
mduce  him  to  accept  it.  Upon  Cromwell's 
refusal  and  the  establishment  of  a  new  con- 
stitution, Lenthall  was  not  at  first  included 
in  the  number  of  lords  which  the  protector 
was  authorised  to  nominate :  but  on  com- 
plaining of  the  omission  he  received  a 
summons  to  take  his  seat.  That  parlia- 
ment was  dissolved  within  a  fortnight  after 
the  new  Lords  met,  principally  from  the 
hostility  occasioned  by  their  appointment, 
and  Cromwell  died  seven  montns  after  its 
dissolution.  In  the  parliament  which  his 
son,  the  Protector  Bichard,  called  in  Ja- 
nuary 1659,  Lenthall  again  appeared  as 
one  of  the  Lords ;  but  on  its  dismissal 
three  months  after,  the  Long  Parliament 
having  resumed  its  sittings,  he,  after  some 
hesitation,  was  induced  to  forget  his  short- 
lived nobilitv,  and  again  take  his  seat  as 
speaker.  (Pari  Hist.  iii.  1488,  1519, 1546 ; 
LudloiVy  252,  254.)  On  May  23  he  was 
voted  keeper  of  the  Great  Seal  for  eight 
days,  at  the  end  of  which  other  commis- 
sioners were  appointed,  who,  in  turn,  were 
superseded  by  the  Committee  of  Safety. 
He  again,  for  a  third  time,  held  the  Seal' 


LEONARD 

Tor  a  fortnight  in  January  1660|  by  order 
of  the  Long  or  Rom^  Parliament,  which 
had  again  met,  but  which  in  the  following 
liarch  was  finally  dissolved,  having  in  the 
interval  conferrea  on  him  the  chamoerlain- 
Bhip  of  Chester.    (  WJtitdocke,  679,  698.^ 

This  and  his  other  places  the  Restoration 
oblifled  him  to  resign,  though  Ludlow  says 
(p.  §83)  he  offered  3000^.  to  be  continued 
master  of  the  Rolls.  As  he  had  been  ex- 
»pted  by  name,  together  with  Cromwell 
ind  Bradshaw,  nom  the  pardon  offered  by 
Charles's  proclamation,  dated  Paris,  May  3, 
1654,  Lenthall  no  doubt  trembled  at  his 
present  position,  till  he  found  that  the  ex- 
tieme  p^:ialty  was  to  be  confined  to  those 
■etuall^  concerned  in  the  king's  death. 
{Sarru^s  Lives,  iv.  129^  During  the  dis- 
cussions on  the  Act  of  Lidemnity  he  found 
it  necessary  to  address  a  letter  to  the 
House  of  Commons,  denying  the  reports  of 
his  'great  gains'  as  speaker.  The  Com- 
mons, notwithfitanding,  excepted  him  from 
the  biU,  to  suffer  such  pains  and  penalties, 
not  extending  to  life,  as  should  be  proper 
to  infiict  on  him;  out  the  Lords,  pro- 
bably through  the  influence  of  Monk, 
moderated  the  vote,  by  directing  that  the 
exception  should  only  take  place  if  he  ac- 
cepted any  office  or  public  employment. 
(ParL  Hik.  iv.  68,  91.)  Eventually  he 
leceived  the  kin^s  pardon. 

Thus  preserving  the  wealth  he  had 
acquired  in  his  various  offices,  he  retired  to 
fiorford  Priory,  his  seat  in  Oxfordshire, 
but  not  before  he  had  offered  another  proof 
•of  his  timeserving  pusillanimity,  by  for- 
getting his  famous  reply  to  the  king,  and 
giving  evidence  of  words  spoken  in  par- 
<Biment  by  Thomas  Scott  the  regicide. 
(SUUe  Trials,  v.  1063.)  He  died  on  Sep- 
tember 3,  1662,  and  was  buried  at  Burford. 
EiB  confession  or  apology  in  his  last  illness, 
made  to  Dr.  Brideoak,  afterwards  Bishop 
of  Chester  (Athen.  Oxon,  iii.  608),  confirms 
the  impression  universally  formed  of  the 
weakness  of  his  character,  and  the  narrow- 
ness and  timidity  of  his  dispositon. 

By  his  wife  laizabeth,  daughter  of  Am- 
bose  Evans,  of  Lodington  in  Northamp- 
tonshire, he  left  several  children,  llis 
eldest  son,  John,  whom  Anthony  Wood 
calls  'the  grand  braggadocio  and  Iyer  of 
tiie  age,'  was  a  member  of  the  Long  Par- 
liament, and  held  several  offices  under 
Cromwell,  who  created  him  a  baronet. 
After  the  Restoration  he  was  sheriff  of 
Oxfordshire,  and  was  knighted  by  Charles  IL 

LEOVAED  affords  a  remarkable  instance 
to  prove  that  those  who  were  appointed 
justices  itinerant  to  impose  the  tallages  on 
the  different  counties  were  not  fuways 
lelected  from  the  members  or  officers  of 
the  Curia  Regis.  One  of  the  two  who 
leted  for  Berkshire  in  20  Henry  II.,  1174, 
iras  this  Leonard,  who  is  simply  described 


LEVESHAH 


405 


as  '  a  knight  of  Thomas  Basset.'  (Madox^ 
i.  124.)  He  thus  probably  was  a  resident 
in  the  county,  and  was  well  acquainted 
with  the  various  properties. 

LEITKHORE,  Geoffbky  db,  was  a  son  or 
brother  of  Nicholas  de  Leuknore,  who  was 
keeper  of  the  king's  wardrobe  at  the  time 
of  his  death  in  52  Henry  lU.  In  the  year 
after  his  death  Geoffirey  had  a  royal  grant 
of  a  field  in  Chiselhampton  in  Oxfordshire, 
with  a  mill  late  belonging  to  a  Jew,  and 
two  years  afterwards  he  had  an  additional 
grant  of  further  property  there.  {Cal.  Hot. 
Pat,  42, 44.)  He  appears  with  three  others 
as  a  justice  itinerant  in  30  Henry  III., 
1255,  for  that  and  other  counties,  perhaps 
only  for  pleas  of  the  forest ;  but  he  is  next 
mentioned  in  the  forty-fifth  and  two  fol- 
lowing years  as  a  justice  itinerant  into 
various  counties.  Dugdale  does  not  intro- 
duce him  at  all  as  a  regular  justicier  in  the 
reign  of  Henry  HL,  but  it  would  seem  that 
he  held  that  position,  inasmuch  as  from 
March  1265  till  September  1271  there  are 
numerous  entries  on  the  Rotulus  de  Uni- 
bus  {Excerpt,  ii.  422-^9)  of  payments 
made  for  assizes  to  be  held  oefore  him.  If 
he  were  then  on  the  bench,  he  must  have 
been  removed  on  the  death  of  Henry,  for 
his  name  does  not  occur  among  those 
appointed  to  either  court  on  the  accession 
of  Edward  I.  Dugdale,  however,  intro- 
duces him  as  a  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas  on  November  2, 1276,  in  the  fourth 
year;  but  the  patent  which  he  quotes  as 
his  authority  can  scarcely  have  been  read 
by  him,  for  it  merely  appoints  Geoffirey  de 
Leuknore  and  two  others  to  be  justices  to 
hold  assizes  and  pleas  in  the  liberty  of 
Dunstable.  He  is  mentioned  as  a  justice 
itinerant  in  6  Edward  I.,  but  there  is  no 
record  of  his  acting  beVond  the  following 
year.     {Pari  Writs,  i.  382.) 

LEVESHAM,  Thohas,  is  not  introduced 
by  Dugdale  in  his  list  of  appointments  to 
the  office  of  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  but 
he  notices  that  John  Durem  was  consti- 
tuted in  his  place  on  May  26,  1449,  27 
Henry  VI.  lie  had  been  long  in  the  ser- 
vice of  the  Exchequer,  and  is  always  dis- 
tinguished by  the  clerical  designation.  At 
the  end  of  Henry  V.'s  reign  he  was  employed 
in  the  marches  of  Picardy,  ^upon  divers 
inquisitions  taken  for  the  kyn^s  avayle ' 
(Acts  Priiy  Cotmcil,  iii.  56) ;  m  2  Henry 
YL  he  is  mentioned  as  delivering  a  certain 
commission  to  the  lord  treasurer  in  the 
presence  of  the  barons  of  the  Exchequer 
{KaL  Exch,  ii.  122) ;  in  14  Henry  VL  his 
name  stands  next  to  that  of  Sir  Jonn  Juyn, 
the  chief  baron,  in  the  list  of  those  called 
upon  to  contribute  to  the  equipment  of  the 
kmg's  army  {Acts  Privy  Council,  iy.  325) ; 
and  in  16  Henry  VI.,  being  then  called 
'remembrancer  on  the  king's  remem- 
brancer's side  of  the  Exchequer/  he  wa 


406 


LEVINTON 


paid  liL '  as  an  especial  reward  for  writing 
out  the  statutes  of  Wales  in  two  rolls  for 
the  king*a  use.'     (Devon's  Issue  HoU,  434.) 

EQs  appointment  as  baron  must  therefore 
have  taken  place  after  the  latter  entry;  but 
neither  that  date  nor  any  other  fact  of  his 
aubsequent  life  has  yet  been  discovered. 

LEVIHTOH,  RiCHABD  he,  was  the  son  of 
Adam  de  Levinton,  constable  of  Walling- 
ford  Castle,  who  held  a  barony  in  Cumber- 
land,  and  died  about  12  Jo&n.  Hichard 
was  implicated  in  the  barons'  war  with 
King  John,  for  in  2  Henry  IIL  his  lands 
were  restored  to  him  on  his  returning  to 
his  allegiance.  (Baronage,  i.  708;  JRoL 
Clous,  L  374.)  His  barony  of  Burgh-on- 
tiie-Sands  not  being  held  by  militi^  ser- 
vicei  but  by  coma^,  he  was  not  liable  to 
be  summoned  to  join  the  king^s  armies ; 
and  in  8  Henry  III.  the  sheriff  of  Cum- 
berland was  commanded  not  to  summon 
him  to  the  army  of  Bedford  on  that  ac- 
emmt.  It  seems  doubtful  whether  he  was 
not  about  this  time  constable  of  Carlisle, 
that  title  immediately  following  his  name 
on  the  mandate  of  0  Henry  HI.,  relative  to 
the  conveyance  of  the  quinzime  of  Cum- 
berland to  York ;  but  it  may  possibly  be  a 
distinct  person.  In  the  same  year  ne  was 
appointed  a  justice  itinerant  for  the  coun- 
ties of  Cumberland  and  Westmoreland,  and 
in  18  Heury  III.  for  Laucashire.  (Rot 
Clans,  i.  614,  ii.  73-77.) 

He  died  about  June  1250. 

LjsyuiZ,  Creswell,  descended  from  an 
ancient  and  respectable  family,  seated  at 
Levinz  HaU  in  Westmoreland,  was  the  son 
of  William  Leviuz,  nnd  was  bom  about 
1627  at  Evenle  in  Northamptonshire.  Ad- 
mitted a  sizar  of  Trinity  College,  Cam- 
bridge, in  1648,  ho  took  no  degree,  and  en- 
tering Gray's  Inn,  he  was  called  to  the  bar 
in  1^31,  was  made  a  bencher  in  1078,  and 
became  treasurer  in  the  following  year. 
What  part  he  took  during  Cromwell's 
away  is  not  known,  but  his  name  is  found  in 
the  Reports  from  the  earliest  year  of  the 
Bestoration.  About  1678  he  was  appointed 
king's  council  and  knighted,  and  was  em- 
ployed for  the  crown  in  the  several  prosecu- 
tions arisinff  out  of  the  Popish  Plot.  Though 
joining,  as  he  apparentlv  did,  in  the  popular 
oelief  in  the  plot,  and  in  reliance  on  the 
witnesses  who  supported  it,  he  conducted 
them  with  great  decency  and  fairness.  He 
was  appointed  attorney-general  in  October 
1679,  and  during  the  sixteen  months  that 
he  held  that  office  he  took  the  lead  in  many 
other  trials  of  persons  implicated  in  the 
same  charge,  in  all  of  which  he  showed  ns 
much  lenity  as  was  consistent  with  his 
position. 

In  December  1679  he  was  directed  by 
the  king  in  council  to  prepare  the  famous 
'proclamation  against  tumultuous  petitions,' 
for  which  he  waa  called  to  account  and 


LEVINZ 

required  to  state  who  assisted  him  in  draw* 
ing  up  the  proclamation,  a  demand  which 
he  at  first  resisted,  stating  that  he  alone 
was  responsible;  but  on  being  atrongly 
pressed  he  at  last  was  compelled  to  give  up 
the  name  of  Chief  Justice  North.  For  this 
he  is  visited  by  Hoger  North  (Hvameny 
646-54;  Life,  170)  with  rather  unneceasary 
blame.  If  he  had  persisted  in  his  refusal, 
he  would  have  certainly  incurred  great 
personal  risk,  without  benefiting  any  one; 
and  he  knew  that  the  proclamation  was  so- 
cautiously  worded  that  no  harm  could  come- 
to  the  chief  justice,  the  threatened  impeach- 
ment against  whom  soon  dropped  to  the 
ground. 

He  was  constituted  a  judge  of  the  Com- 
mon Pleas  on  February  12, 1681,  and  filled, 
that  seat  for  five  years,  respected  for  his 
legal  knowledge  and  upnght  conduct. 
Soon  after  the  accession  of  James  II.  he 
was  joined  with  three  other  judges  in  the- 
commission  to  Sir  George  Jefireys  on  the 
'Bloody  Assizes'  in  the  West;  but  little- 
is  related  with  reference  to  that  horrible 
visitation  implicating  any  otherjudge  than 
the  brutal  cliief  justice.  On  February  6, 
1686,  he  suddenly  received  a  supersedeas  to 
discharge  him  from  his  office,  *  whereto,'  h& 
modestly  says  in  his  Reports,  *I  humbly 
submit;*  and  when  called  upon  by  thft 
House  of  Commons  in  1669  to  explain  the^ 
cause  of  his  dismissal,  he  said,  *  I  thought 
my  discharge  was  because  I  would  not  give 
juclgment  upon  the  soldier  who  deserted  his 
colours,  and  for  being  against  the  dispens- 
ing power.'  (Levinz' 8 HeporiSy  iii.  2o7  ;  ParL 
jffis^.  V.  313.) 

Sir  Creswell  immediately  returned  to  the 
bar,  and  Branistou  (p.  221)  says  he  '  is  not 
likely,  'tis  thought,  to  loose  by  the  change.^ 
That  this  prophecy  was  well  founded  is 
evident  from  the  contemporar}'  Reports,  in 
which  his  name  frequently  appears.  On 
the  trial  of  the  seven  bishops  m  1688  he 
was  one  of  the  counsel  employed  in  the 
defence.  Bv  Lord  Macauiay's  account 
(ii.  376),  Sir  Creswell  *  was  induced  to  take 
a  brief  against  the  crown,  by  a  threat  of  the 
attorneys  that  if  he  refused  it  he  should 
never  hold  another.'  The  authority  his 
lordship  cites  for  this  extraordinary  state- 
ment seems  hardly  sufficient  to  overthrow 
the  contrary  impression  which  Sir  Cres- 
well's  conduct  tends  naturally  to  produce. 
He  appears  to  have  played  a  very  active 
part  in  the  trial,  and  to  have  taken 
the  objection  that  there  was  no  proof  of 
publication  in  Middlesex,  which  very  nearly 
put  an  early  end  to  the  case  of  the  crown. 
This  does  not  look  as  if  his  was  a  com- 
pulsory or  unwilling  appearance;  and  the 
fact  that  his  brother,  Baptist  Levinz,  "was 
Bishop  of  Sodor  and  Man  will  more  pro- 
bably account  both  for  his  being  engaged, 
and  for  the  energy  of  his  advocacy.    (States- 


LEXINTON 

Mais,  xiL  S20,  &c.)  He  continTied  to 
nctise  up  to  ICOQ,  when  his  Reports  termi- 
late.  They  were  puhlished  in  three  parts 
he  year  after  his  death,  which  occurred  on 
anuary  29,  1701.  He  was  huried  at 
Svenle,  where  there  is  a  monument  to  his 
nemory.  Lord  Hardwicke  says  of  him 
haty  though  a  good  lawyer,  he  was  a  very 
azeless  reporter. 

By  his  wife,  Mary,  daughter  of  William 
iiyesay,  of  Lancashire,  he  had  three 
hildren.  (Nobie's  Granger,  i.  167;  Thores- 
y's  Nats,  iii.  264  j  LuUreil,  v.  12.) 

LEXIVTOH,  John  be,  was  the  eldest  son 
)f  Richard  de  Lexinton,  a  baron  so  called 
rom  a  manor  of  that  name  near  Tuxford  in 
SoUb.  {Baronaffe,i,743,)  He  was  evidently 
in  officer  connected  with  the  court,  and 
[urohably  one  of  the  clerks  of  the  Chancery, 
Lhe  Great  Seal  having  been  several  times 
placed  in  his  hands  apparently  in  that 
character— viz.,  in  1238,  m  1242,  in  1249, 
ind  in  1253.     {Hardy^s  Catalogue.) 

Within  these  years  he  went  to  Kome  on 
the  king's  business,  and  performed  other 
duties  in  connection  with  the  court.  In 
1241  he  had  the  custody  of  Griffin,  Prince 
of  Wales,  in  the  Tower  of  London  (Itapin, 
m.  71) ;  and  in  1247  he  is  spoken  of  as  the 
kin^s  seneschal.     (CaL  Hot.  Pat.  22.^ 

it  is  apparent  that,  though  he  mignt  be 
occasionally  called  to  take  possession  of  the 
Great  Seal  on  a  particular  emergency  after 
June  1248,  32  Henrjr  Ul.,  he  had  then 
been  elevated  to  the  judicisJ  bench ;  for  on 
that  date  and  afterwards,  till  December 
1256,  a  few  week  before  his  death,  there 
are  numerous  entries  of  pavments  made 
for  assizes  to  be  taken  before  nim,  precisely 
in  the  same  manner  as  before  the  other 
judges.  In  1251  also  he  was  one  of  those 
ajipointed  to  hear  the  pleas  in  the  city  of 
London  (Excerpt,  e  Hot.  Fin.  il  36-246)  ; 
and  in  12o4  he  is  mentioned  as  having  been 
lent  by  the  king  and  council  to  pronounce 
a  judgment  '  ad  Bancum  dommi  regis.' 
M.  PlacU.  132.)  In  37  Henry  IH.  be 
was  made  chief  justice  of  the  forests  north 
of  the  Trent,  and  governor  of  the  castles  of 
Bamburgh,  Scarborough,  and  Pickering. 

He  married  Margaret  Merlay,  but  leit  no 
children.  His  property  devolved,  on  his 
death  in  February  1267,  on  his  youngest 
Wther,  Henry,  Bishop  of  Lincoln.  (  Thoro- 
^'<  Notts,  iii  220  5  Excerpt,  e  Hot.  Fin. 
n.  250,  287.) 

ULuAxOH,  KoBERT  DE,  was  a  younger 
^ther  of  the  above-mentioned  John, 
brought  up  as  an  ecclesiastic,  he  followed 
he  practice  of  those  times  by  pursuing  also 
he  study  of  the  law ;  but  never  appears  to 
ave  been  further  advanced  in  the  former 
rofesdon  than  to  a  prebend  in  the  church 
r  Soathwell,  to  which  he  was  presented  in 
3  John.  In  the  same  jeai  ne  acted  as 
istos  of  the  archbishopric  of  York  during 


LEY 


407 


;  its  vacancy.  (Hot.  Pat.  116 ;  H(d.  Claus.  i. 
208.) 

As  a  lawyer  he  is  first  mentioned  as  taking 
the  acknowledgment  of  a  fine  in  Michael- 
mas, 4  Henry  UL,  from  which  period  until 
a  short  time  before  his  death  there  are 
numerous  evidences  of  his  having  acted  as  a 
justicier,  both  at  Westminster  and  in  the 
provinces. 

In  1228  his  name  is  at  the  head  of  four 
justiciers  before  whom  a  fine  was  levied  at 
Westminster,  and  in  July  1234  three  jus- 
ticiers appointed  *  ad  Bancum'  were  ordered 
to  be  admitted  by  Robert  de  Lexinton  and 
William  of  York,  he  being  at  that  time  the 
oldest  judge  on  the  bench,  and  perhaps  the 
chief  of  the  court.  When  the  king,  in  1240, 
sent  justices  itinerant  through  all  the  coim- 
ties,  under  pretence  of  redressing  ^evances, 
but  with  the  real  object  of  extorting  money 
from  the  people,  Robert  de  lexinton  was 
placed  at  vie  nead  of  those  assigned  for  the 
northern  counties.  (Hot.  Claus.  461 ,  468, 631 ; 
MadoXy  ii  366.)  The  subsequent  entries  of 
his  acting  as  a  judge  do  not  extend  beyond 
Hilary  1243,  27  Henry  IH.  (Excerpt,  e  Hot. 
Fin.  1.  348^,  in  all  of  whicn  he  is  placed 
at  the  heaa  of  his  associates.  He  then  pro- 
bablv  retired,  having  been  on  the  bench 
nearly  twenty-four  years ;  but  his  death  did 
not  occur  till  seven  years  afterwards. 

He  appears  to  have  added  military  to  his 
judicial  duties,  and  to  have  received  various 
proofs  of  the  royal  confidence  and  favour. 
In  8  Henry  III.  he  was  constituted  custos 
of  the  honor  of  Pec  (Hot.  Claus.  i.  694,  &c.) 
and  governor  of  its  castle,  and  that  of  Bol*- 
over  in  Derbyshire;  and  there  is  a  letter 
from  him  to  Hubert  de  Burgh,  detailing  the 
progress  of  William,  Earl  of  Albemarle, 
through  Nottingham,  with  his  own  prepara- 
tions to  oppose  him,  and  stating  his  in- 
tention to  proceed  himself  into  Northumber- 
land. (4  Heport  Piib.  Hec,  App.  ii.  157.) 
He  afterwards  also  had  the  charge  of  the 
castle  of  Orford.  On  his  death,  in  June  1250, 
his  brother,  the  last-mentioned  John,  suc- 
ceeded as  his  heir  to  all  his  property.  (Hot. 
Claus.  i.  430,  &c. ;  Excerpt,  e  Hot.  Fin.  i.  66.) 

LEY,  James  (Earl  of  Marlborough), 
was  bom  about  1662  in  the  parish  of  Tef- 
font-Evias  in  Wiltshire,  the  residence  of 
his  father,  Henry  Ley,  Eso.  He  became  a 
commoner  of  Brazenose  College,  Oxford, 
and,  having  taken  a  degree  in  arts,  he  en- 
tered on  his  legal  studies  at  Lincoln's  Inn, 
where,  having  been  called  to  the  bar  on 
October  11, 1584,  he  worked  his  way  up  to 
the  bench  of  that  society  in  1600,  and  was 
chosen  reader  in  1602.  He  had  previously 
held  the  post  of  one  of  the  Welsh  judges, 
and  in  1603  he  had  a  separate  call  to  the 
degree  of  the  coif,  probably  in  preparation 
for  holding  the  office  of  lord  chief  justice  of 
the  King's  Bench  in  Ireland,  to  which  he 
was  appointed  in  the  following  year,  when 


408 


LEY 


lie  ;was  also  knighted.  While  filling  that 
position  he  "was  one  of  the  commissioners  of 
the  Great  Seal  of  that  country  from  April  6 
to  November  8,  1606.  He  presided  in  the 
Irish  King's  Bench  about  four  years,  resign- 
ing in  December  1608;  and  Bacon  (WorkSf 
vii.  263)  sneaks  of  his  *  j^ravity,  temper,  and 
discretion'  in  that  office.  Ketuming  to 
England,  he  received  the  profitable  place  of 
attorney  of  the  Court  of  Wards  and  Liveries, 
at  the  same  time  establishing  the  right  of 
that  officer  to  take  precedence  in  coui*t  of  the 
king's  attorney-general,  for  which  he  had  a 
privy  seal  dated  May  16, 1609.  He  must 
then  have  resigned  his  rank  as  serjeant ;  for 
in  that  and  the  twelve  succeeding  years  he 
is  recorded  as  one  of  the  governors  of  Lin- 
coln's Inn.  On  the  elevation  of  Sir  Francis 
Bacon  to  the  Great  Seal  in  1617,  Sir  James 
was  a  candidate  for  the  attorney-general- 
ship, and  the  Duke  of  Buckingham  told  Sir 
Henry  Yelverton  that  he  offered  10,000/.  for 
the  office.  (Liber  FanielicuSf  66.)  Not  suc- 
ceeding in  this,  he  was  created  a  baronet  on 
Julv  16, 1619. 

On  January  29, 1021,  he  was  constituted 
lord  chief  j  ustice  of  the  King's  Bench.  He 
was  then  about  sixty-nine  years  of  age, 
and  in  that  year  {Yonge's  Diary,  40)  mar- 
ried his  third  wife,  Jane,  daughter  of  John 
Lord  Butler,  by  Elizabeth,  the  sister  of  tht 
favourite,  George  'N^'illiers,  Duke  of  Buck- 
ingham, to  whose  patronage  he  probably 
owed  his  future  advance.  Witliin  two 
months  after  his  appointment  he  was  called 
upon,  in  consequence  of  the  proceedings 
i^ainst  Bacon,  to  take  the  place  of  speaker 
of  the  House  of  Lords ;  and  in  that  character 
he  had  to  pronounce  their  judgment,  first, 
in  the  cases  of  Sir  Giles  Mompesson  and 
Sir  Francis  Michell,  and  then  against  the 
chancellor  himself  and  Sir  Henry  "i  elverton. 
{Pari  Hist.  i.  1207-1258.) 

After  performing  the  duties  of  his  judicial 
office  for  nearlv  four  years,  he  imitated  the 
example  of  bis  predecessor.  Sir  Henry 
Montagu,  by  retiring  from  it.  and  accepting 
the  profitable  place  of  lord  treasurer  on 
December  20,  1624.  On  the  31st  he  was 
created  Lord  Ley  of  Ley  in  the  county  of 
Devon,  the  ancient  seat  of  his  family.  He 
was  more  fortunate,  however,  th'an  Sir 
Henry  Montagu ;  for  he  retained  the 
royal  purse  for  the  remainder  of  James's 
reign,  and  for  more  than  three  years  in  that 
of  Charles  L,  who  in  the  May  following 
his  accession  created  him  Earl  of  Marl- 
borough. He  was  removed  in  July  1628,  to 
make  way  for  Sir  Richard  Weston,  and  re- 
trograded to  the  almost  empty  title  of  presi- 
dent of  the  council,  which  he  held  for  the 
few  remaining  months  of  his  life. 

He  died  on  March  14,  1629,  and  was 
interred  at  Westbury,  Wilts,  in  the  parish 
church  of  which  a  magnificent  monument 
ia  erected  to  his  memory. 


LEYE 

In  the  midst  of  corruption  among  lawy 
and  statesmen,  and  holding  the  bi^h 
offices  on  the  bench  and  in  the  council, 
is  said  by  Milton  to  have 

Liv'd  in  both  unstained  by  gold  or  fte. 

Sir  James  Whitelocke,  however,  sa 
that  he  was  a  great  dissembler,  and  w 
wontto  be  called '  Volpone,'and  that  harii 
borrowed  money  from  some  of  the  judge 
he  would  have  favoured  them,  but  Si 
Kobert  Pye  refused  to  execute  the  warrani 
{Liber  Famelicw,  108.)  His  character  i 
imdisputed  for  ability,  temperance,  ani 
erudition ;  the  latter  not  confined  to  hi 
legal  studies,  but  extending  over  subject 
of  general  interest.  His  professional  a^ 
tainments  and  industry  were  exhibited  b) 
his  Keports,  and  by  his  treatise  on  the 
king's  nght  of  wardship,  &c. ;  and  he  con- 
tributed various  papers  to  the  Society  of  An- 
tiquaries, of  which  he  was  an  early  member. 
He  was  three  times  married.  His  fint 
wife  was  Mary,  daughter  of  John  Pettev, 
of  Stoke  Talmage  in  Oxfordshire;  bu 
second  was  Mary,  the  widow  of  Sir  William 
Bower,  knight;*  and  the  third  was  Jaoe, 
daughter  of  John  Lord  Butler.  His  hoDoun 
expired  on  the  death  of  his  third  son, 
William,  in  1679.  {Baronage^  iL  451; 
Athen.  Oxon.  ii.  441.) 

LETE,  Roger  de  la,  was  an  experi^M^ed 
officer  of  the  Exchequer,  acquinng  thoee 
royal  favours  and  clerical  dignities  which 
were  usually  distributed  among  the  high 
in  place  in  tnat  department.  In  35  Hemt 
III.,  1261,  he  held  the  office  of  remem- 
brancer of  the  Exchequer.  {MadoXj  iL 
266.)  During  the  contests  with  the  baroM 
in  1263,  the  affairs  of  the  Exchequer  haTiDg 
got  into  great  disorder,  the  rents  not  being 
paid,  and  no  baron  being  resident  there, 
the  king,  on  November  1,  directed  that  he 
should  till  the  office  of  a  baron  there,  and 
on  the  30th  of  the  same  month  commanded 
that  he  should  execute  the  offices  of  trea- 
surer and  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  until 
otherwise  ordered.  In  the  next  year  he 
was  directed  to  continue  to  act  as  baron 
and  treasurer.  In  62  Henry  HI.  he  was 
again  constituted  chancellor  of  the  Exche- 
quer, and  remained  so  for  the  three  follow- 
ing years. 

lie  continued  one  of  the  barons  of  tho 
court  during  the  first  two  years  of  Edward's 
reign,  and  then  was  a  third  time  raised  to 
the  office  of  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer. 
In  the  latter  year,  1276,  he  was  remoyed, 
as  he  is  spoken  of  as  '  nuper  canoellaDQ\ 
and  was  about  that  time  appointed  neh- 
deacon  of  Essex.  {Ibid,  ii.  28^  6Sy  ft^ 
320.)  From  that  dignity  he  was  xmdt « 
October  26^  1283,  II  Edwazd  L.  tt^ 
deanery  of  London,  which  1m  W*  ** 
than  two  year^  nis  deat^  • 

August  18, 1286.    (Le  iAi 


UFFOBD 

UFFOBD,  Lord.  See  J.  Hewitt. 
LDICOIJI,  Altjbed  j>Bf  is  another  in- 
tanoe  of  a  aheriff  being  appointed  a  justice 
tinerant  to  fix  the  assize  on  the  demesnes 
if  the  crown  in  the  county  under  his  juris- 
liction.  He  was  so  employed  in  20  Henry 
I.,  1174,  for  Dorsetshire -and  Somersetshire^ 
>f  which  he  held  the  sherifiDEdty  for  six  years, 
»mmenciiig  16  Henry  IL  (madox,  i.  123.) 
His  grandiather  of  the  same  name,  at 
the  general  survey  possessed  Wimentone 
ji  Bedfordshire,  and  fifty-one  lordships  in 
Lincolnshire.  His  flEither  was  Robert,  who 
beld  the  castle  of  Wareham  for  the  Em- 
press Maud,  against  Stephen. 

Alureddied  inlO  Richard  1.,  1109,  leav- 
isg  by  his  wife,  Albreda,  the  next-named 
Alured.     (Baronage,  i  412.) 

LDIGOLK,  Alitbed  be,  the  eon  of  the 
ibove,  was  in  King  John's  service,  and 
seems  to  have  been  connected  witn  the 
treasiuy  from  various  entries  on  the  rolls 
leoording  payments  of  money  by  him. 
(BoL  de  Liberate,  63 ;  Hot,  Claus.  i.  1,  31, 
46, 97.)  In  12  John  he  accompanied  the 
king  to  Ireland  (Hot,  de  Pr€B9tito,  184, 204, 
■216) ;  but  in  the  barons'  wars  he  deserted 
lu8  sovereign,  and  his  lands  were  conse- 
CTieDtly  seized,  but  were  restored  to  him  in 
1  Henry  in.  He  thenceforward  pursued 
so  loyid  a  course  that  in  9  Henry  HI.  ho 
was  selected  as  one  of  the  justices  itinerant 
&r  the  county  of  Dorset,  in  which  a  prin- 
cipal part  of  his  estates  were  situate.  (Hot, 
Clous,  i,  236,  302,  ii.  76.)  He  died  about 
1240,  leading  by  Maud  his  wife  a  son,  also 
named  Alured,  who  died  in  1264,  without 
isBue.    (Baronage,  i.  412.) 

LISLE,  John,  was  bom  about  1606  at 
Wootton  in  the  Isle  of  Wight,  the  residence 
of  his  father,  Sir  William  Ulsle,  who  was 
descended  from  a  branch  of  the  noble  family 
of  that  name.    After  being  educated  at 
Magdalen  Hall,  Oxford,  where    he    took 
the  degree  of  bachelor  of  arts  in  February 
1625-6,  he  repaired,  it  is  said,  to  one  of 
&e  Temples  as  a  student   in  law;  but 
whether  ne  was  ever  called  to  the  bar  is 
^mcertain.     He  was  chosen  member  for 
Winchestei'  in  both  the  parliaments  of  1640, 
and  in  the  latter  he  at  once  took  the  po- 
pular side,  advocating  the  violent  measures 
on  the  king's  removal  to  the  north,  and 
obtaining  some  of  the  plunder  arising  from 
^  sale  of  the  crown  property.     In  No- 
Temher  1644  he  was  made  master  of  St. 
Cross,  and  retained  that  valuable  prefer- 
^*tent  till  it  was  given  to  Mr.  Solicitor- 
^eral  Cook  in  June  1649,    (Fasti  Oxon. 
i.  422,  437 ;     Wliitelocke,  441.)    In  De- 
<2ember  1647,  when  the  king  was  in  duress 
*t  the  Isle  of  Wight,  L'Isle  was  selected 
^  one  of  the  commissioners  to  carry  to  him 
the  four  bills  which  were  to  divest  him  of 
lU  sovereignty,  and  to  which  they  had  to 
bring  back  the  king's  magnanimous  refusal 


L'ISLE 


409 


to  consent  He  showed  his  extreme  inve- 
teracy against  his  majesty  by  his  speech 
on  September  28, 1648,  in  support  of  the 
motion  Uiat  the  vote  which  the  Conunons 
had  come  to  two  days  before,  that  no  one 
proposition  in  regard  to  the  personal  treaty 
should  be  binding  if  the  treaty  broke  otf 
upon  another,  should  be  rescinded ;  and  by 
his  further  speech,  some  days  later,  urging  a 
discontinuance  oi  the  negotiation.  (Pari, 
Hist,  iii.  823,  828, 1026, 1038.) 

He  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  king's 
trial  as  one  of  the  managers  for  conducting 
its  details,  being  present  during  its  whole 
continuance,  and  drawing  up  the  form  of  the 
sentence.  (State  Triah,  iv.  1053,  et  seq.) 
The  result  oi  this  activity  was  his  receivinj^ 
the  appointment  on  February  8,  1648-1), 
little  more  than  a  week  after  the  king's 
death,  of  one  of  the  commissioners  of  tbe 
Great  Seal,  and  being  placed  in  the  council 
of  state.  He  not  only  concurred  in  Decem- 
ber 1653  in  nominating  Cromwell  protec- 
tor, but  administered  the  oath  to  him ;  and, 
having  been  re-appointed  lord  commissioner, 
was  elected  member  in  the  new  parliament 
for  Southampton,  of  which  town  ne  was  the 
recorder.  (Pail,  Hist,  1287,  1290,  1420, 
1431.)  In  Juno  he  was  constituted  presi- 
dent of  the  High  Court  of  Justice,  and  in 
August  he  was  appointed  one  of  the  com- 
missioners of  the  Exchequer.  When  the 
ordinance  for  better  regulating  the  Court  of 
Chancery  was  submitted  to  the  keepers  of 
the  Seal,  L'Isle  alone  was  for  the  execution 
of  it,  bis  colleagues  pointing  out  the  incon- 
venience of  many  of  the  clauses.  The  con- 
sequence of  his  subserviency  to  Cromwell's 
wishes  was  that  he  was  continued  in  the 
office  on  the  removal  of  his  colleagues  in 
Jime  1055,  and  was  again  confirmed  in  it 
in  October  1656  by  Cromwell's  third  par- 
liament, to  which  he  was  again  returned  as 
member  for  Southampton.  (IVhitelocke, 
571-653.)  In  December  1657  Cromwell, 
having  revived  the  House  of  Lords,  sum- 
moned L'Isle  as  one  of  his  peers.  (Pari, 
Hist,  iii.  1518.)  The  death  of  OUver  in 
September  1658  made  no  difference  in 
L'lsle's  position.  Protector  Richard  preserv- 
ing him  in  his  place ;  but  when  the  Long 
Parliament  met  again  in  the  following  May 
he  was  compelled  to  retire,  and  other  com- 
missioners were  appointed.  (IVTntel^ke, 
666,  676, 678.)  The  house,  however,  named 
him  on  January  28,  1660,  a  commissioner 
of  the  Admiralty.  (Mercurius  PolUicus^ 
No.  605.) 

In  the  changes  that  soon  occurred,  L'Isle, 
conscious  that  he  had  taken  such  a  part  that 
he  could  not  hope  for  pardon,  thought  it 
most  prudent  to  leave  the  kingdom ;  aiid, 
escaping  to  Switzerland,  he  established  him- 
self first  at  Vevay,  and  afterwards  at  Lau- 
sanne. There  he  was  shot  dead  on  Au^rust 
11, 1664,  on  his  way  to  church,  by  an  Irish- 


410 


LITTLEBERE 


man,  who  was  indignant  at  the  respect  and 
ceremony  with  which  a  regicide  was  treated. 
The  assassin  escaped,  and  the  murdered 
man  was  solenmly  buried  in  the  church  of 
the  city. 

He  married  Alice,  daughter  and  heiress 
of  Sir  White  Beckenshaw,  of  Moyle's  Court 
in  Hampshire,  who  lived  long  after  him, 
and  perished  at  last  by  a  violent  death,  being 
beheaded  in  1685  on  a  conviction,  forced  by 
the  brutal  Judge  Jeffreys' from  a  jury  who 
had  twice  returned  a  verdict  of  not  guilty, 
for  harbouring  John  Hicks,  a  preacher,  who 
had  been  out  with  the  Duke  of  Monmouth. 
(Athe^i,  Oxm,  iii.  665 ;  State  Trials,  xi.  297.) 

LITTLEBESE,  Martin  be,  was  evidently 
brought  up  to  the  profession  of  the  law.  In 
31  Henry  lU.,  1247,  an  assize  was  held 
before  him  in  Kent  (Excerpt,  e  Hot.  Fin.  iL 
0),  but  it  was  not  till  July  1261  that  he 
was  appointed  a  regular  justicier.  From 
that  date  assizes  to  be  taken  before  him 
commence,  and  they  continue  without  in- 
terruption till  November  1272.  (Ibid.  ii. 
355-^89.^  lie  is  mentioned  as  a  judge  of 
the  King  8  Bench  in  1  Edward  I.  (Devon's 
Issue  Hull,  87) ;  and  Dugdale  quotes  a  li- 
berate in  his  favour  in  the  following  year, 
after  which  his  name  does  not  occur. 

UTTLEDALE,  Joseph,  descended  from  an 
ancient  Cumberland  family,  was  the  eldest 
son  of  Henry  Littledale,  Esq.,  of  Eton 
House,  Lancashire,  and  of  Mary,  daughter 
of  Isaac  'Wilkinson,  Esq.,  of  Whitehaven. 
Bom  in  1767,  he  completed  his  education 
at  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge,  in  1787, 
with  the  honourable  distinction  of  Senior 
"Wrangler  and  First  Smith's  Prizeman.  En- 
tering Gray's  Inn,  he  practised  for  some 
years  as  a  special  pleader  under  the  bar  till 
l7f)8.  Being  then  called,  from  that  time 
till  1824,  a  period  of  twenty-six  years,  his 
intimate  knowledge  of  the  law  and  patient 
industry  insured  the  confidence  of  all  who 
had  the  management  of  business,  and  gave 
him  very  extensive  employment. 

In  1822  he  was  sent  into  Scotland  with 
Mr.  (afterwardsBaron)  Hullock  for  the  pur- 
pose of  arranging  some  government  prose- 
cutions. He  never  accepted  a  silk  gown, 
nor  sought  a  seat  in  parliament,  and  was 
indeed  so  little  of  a  party  man,  and  so  en- 
tirely a  lawyer,  that  when  he  was  asked  by 
a  friend  what  his  politics  were  he  is  said  to 
have  answered, '  Those  of  a  special  pleader.* 

His  professional  merits  alone  recom- 
mended him  to  a  scat  in  the  Court  of  lunges 
Bench,  to  which  he  was  appointed  on  April 
30,  1824,  with  the  usual  honour  of  knight- 
hood. With  such  colleagues  as  Chief  Jus- 
tice Abbott,  Mr.  Justice  Bayley,  and  Mr. 
Justice  Holroyd,  the  court  presented  for 
many  y earn  as  perfect  a  phalanx  of  learned 
and  efficient  men  as  had  ever  been  united 
in  the  administration  of  justice.  For  the 
remaining  years  of  the  reign  of  George  IV., 


LLOYD 

for  the  whole  of  that  of  William  IV.,  anc 
for  nearly  four  years  of  the  present  reign,  c 
period  altogether  of  seventeen  years,  Sii 
Joseph  LitUedide  performed  the  duties  o( 
his  otfice  to  the  admiration  not  only  of  law- 
yers, but  of  the  public  in  generaL    There 
was  scarcely  a  barrister  who  did  not  lenxd 
him  as  a  judicial  father,  and  none  could  re- 
call an  unkind  word  of  his  utterance,  or  m 
impatient  expression  of  his  coimtenanoe. 
He  was  so  devotedly  attached  to  his  pro- 
fession that  he  heartily  enjoyed  the  discis- 
sion of  the  legal  points  before  him.    Once 
when  the  author  of  these  pages  ventured  to> 
express  a  hope  that  he  was  not  &tigaed 
with  the  labours   of   a    hea\T   day,  he 
answered, '  Oh !  no,  not  at  all ;  I  Wee  iU 

At  the  end  of  Hilary  Term  1841,  beiny 
then  seventy-four,  he  resigned  his  seat,  to 
the  regret  of  his  colleagues,  and  also  of 
an  admiring  bar,  who  paid  him  the  well- 
merited  compliment  ot  an  afifectioDate  ad- 
dress, expressive  of  their  sorrow  at  parting, 
and  of  good  wishes  for  his  future  welfare. 

Though  he  was  immediately  called  to  tiie 
privv  council,  he  had  very  little  ojpportunitT 
of  aiding  in  the  hearings  before  its  judicial 
committee,  for  in  less  than  a  year  and  a  half 
the  infirmities  that  had  warned  him  to  re- 
tiro  made  rapid  way,  and  he  died  on  June 
26, 1842. 

LLOTD,  KicnARD,  is  described  in  the 
books  of  the  Middle  Temple  as  the  son  and 
heir  of  Talbot  Llovd,  of  Lichfield,  deceaaei 
He  was  sent  for  his  early  mstruction  to  toe 
grammar  school  of  that  city,  where  no  le« 
than  four  of  his  contemporary  judges  werfr 
educated — viz..  Lord  Chief  Justice  Willea, 
Chief  Baron  Parker,  Mr.  Justice  Noel,  and 
Sir  John  Eardley  Wilmot  Called  to  the 
bar  in  1723,  he  was  elected  a  bencher  of  his 
inn  in  1728,  and  reader  in  1744.  About  that 
time  he  was  made  one  of  the  king's  coonseL 

In  174G  he  opened  the  indictment  wainst 
Lord  Balmerino  in  the  House  of  Lcffd^ 
and  is  on  that  occasion  designated  a  Imi^t 
He  was  returned  to  parliament  in  1745  for 
the  borough  of  St.  Michael's,  in  1747  for 
Maldon,  and  in  1754  for  Totnes;  butonlj 
two  of  his  speeches  are  recorded,  one  oo 
the  Westminster  election  in  1751,  and  the 
other  on  the  repeal  of  the  Jew  bill  in  1751 
In  17y4  he  was  advanced  to  the  office  of 
solicitor-general :  but  on  the  change  of  the 
ministry  in  November  1756;he  wasremoTed, 
to  make  way  for  the  Hon.  Charles  Yofke. 
On  November  14,  1759,  his  ambition  wia- 
obliged  to  be  satisfied  by  being  placed  o* 
the  bench  of  the  Exchequer.    His  judical 
career  was  very  short,  as  he  died  <m  Se^ 
tember  6,  1761,  at  Northallerton^  onhiiii- 
turn  from  the  Northern  Circuit,    ffii^*^: 
was  Elizabeth,  daughter ^f  Willir* 
Esq.,  of  Crastwick  in 
Lord  Northtn^tony  11 ;  Harr 
wicke,  iii.  12,  96;  Wriykf9 


LODELOWE 

LODELOWE,  Thomas  be,  beloDged  to 
one  of  the  three  families  of  the  nauie  of 
Lodelowe  (Ludlow)  which  flourished  in 
the  reign  of  Ed  warn  II.,  two  of  which  sent 
members  to  parliament  respectively  for 
Shropshire  and  Surrey,  and  tne  third  held 
the  manor  of  Campedene  in  Gloucester- 
shire ;  but  it  is  uncertain  which.  He  him- 
self appears  to  have  been  established  in 
Kent,  as  in  33  Edward  lU.  he  was  one  of 
the  commissioners  for  keeping  the  peace  in 
that  county,  and  in  46  Edward  III.  was 
among  the  custodes  of  the  seashore  there. 
(iV.  Fcodera,  iii.  404, 952.) 

He  was  elected  recorder  of  London  in 
1353,  being  then  an  alderman  of  the  city, 
and  held  that  office  till  he  was  constituted 
chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  October 
21),  1305.  He  acted  as  a  trier  of  petitions 
in  all  the  subsequent  parliaments  till  the 
47th  yeai-  (^Rot.  Pari  li.  289-317),  when 
probably  his  death  occurred.  During  this 
period  he  is  several  times  mentioned  in  the 
Year  Books  as  a  justice  of  assize.  (Issue 
Roll,  83,  280.) 

LODINGTON,  William,  in  1  Henry  IV. 
wiis  constituted  the  king's  attorney  'in 
Communi  Banco  et  in  aliis  locis  quibus- 
cunque'  (Cal.  Rot.  Fat.  237),  and  was 
called  to  the  degree  of  serjeant-at-law  in 
12  Henry  IV.  It  is  possible,  however, 
that  the  Serjeant  was  son  of  the  attorney- 
general.  He  was  made  one  of  the  king's 
Serjeants  on  the  accession  of  Henry  V.; 
and  on  June  10,  1415,  in  the  third  year  of 
that  reign,  )ie  was  constituted  a  judge  of 
the  Common  Pleas.  He  enjoyed  the  office 
only  four  years,  as  he  died  on  January  9, 
1419-20.  He  was  buried  in  the  church  of 
St.  Peter,  at  Gunby  in  Lincolnshire,  where 
there  is  a  monumental  brass  to  his  memory. 
(I'rociefiin(/s  Arch<col.  Inst.  Lincoln,  liv.) 

LOKTON,  John  de,  derived  his  name 
from  the  township  of  Lokton  in  Yorkshire, 
w^iere  he  had  property  at  Mai  ton  in  its 
neighbourhood.  He  was  probably  the  son 
of  Thomas  de  Lokton  and  Beatrice,  his 
wife,  wlio  purchased  half  of  the  manor  of 
Canewyk  m  Lincolnshire  in  24  Edward 
III.,  and  sold  it  in  the  same  year.  (Abb. 
Rot.  Orif/.  ii.  213,  215.)  He  is  described 
as  a  king's  serjeant  in  7  Richard  U.,  1384, 
assisting  at  the  trial  of  John  Cavendish  for 
defaming  the  chancellor,  Michael  de  la 
l*nle.  {Rot.  Pari.  iii.  190.)  In  the  same 
character  he  subscribed  the  questions  and 
answers  prepared  by  Chief  Justice  Tresilian 
at  Nottingham,  on  August  25,  1387,  for 
which  he,  with  Sir  Robert  Bealknap  and 
other  judges,  was  afterwards  impeached 
and  condemned  to  death.  As  no  other  of 
the  king's  Serjeants  were  then  present,  he 
was  no  doubt  summoned  to  that  council  in 
consequence  of  his  being  designed  as  the 
successor  of  David  Hannemere,  the  judge 
of  the  King's  Bench,  then  recently  de- 


LONDON 


411 


ceased,  since  his  appointment  took   place ^ 
two  months  afterwards,  on  October  25. 

On  his  trial  on  Mai'ch  2,  1388,  having 
pleaded,  like  the  rest,  that  he  acted  under 
compulsion,  his  sentence  was  commuted 
into  banishment  for  life,  Waterford,  with 
a  circuit  of  two  miles  round  it,  being  fixed 
for  his  residence,  and  20/.  per  anntmi  as- 
signed for  his  support.  It  would  appear 
that  he  died  in  exile,  but  his  properly  was 
ultimately  restored  to  the  family.  (Ibid.  238^ 
244,  442 ;  Cal,  Inquis.  p.  m.  iii.  107,  162.) 

LONDON,  Henky  of  (Archbishop  op 
Dublin),  when  archdeacon  of  Stafford  ia 
invariably  described  at  the  time  by  his 
Christian  name,  Heniy,  only ;  but  he  is 
called  by  Le  Neve  (133)  Henry  of  London. 
He  was  probably  the  same  person  who,  in 
16  Henry  II.,  is  mentioned  under  the  name 
of  Magister  Henricus  de  Lundonia,  as  hav- 
ing been  sent  to  Chichester  by  Richard  de 
Luci,  the  chief  justiciary,  to  collect  the 
rents  of  that  bishopric,  then  vacant.    The 

Srecise  year  of  his  being  raised  to  the  arch- 
eaconiy  does  not  appear ;  but  it  is  certain 
he  held  it  in  1  John,  as  he  is  then  stated  to 
have  paid  imder  that  title  50/.  Gs,  Sd., 
which  he  owed  for  having  the  goodwill 
of  King  Richard,  into  the  *  Scaccanum  Re- 
demptionis.'  In  the  same  year  also  he  is 
so  called  as  one  of  the  justices  itinerant 
who  fixed  the  tallage  in  Berkshire,  and  as 
a  justicier  before  whom  fines  were  levied. 
(Madox,  i.  190,  307,  722.) 

In  3  John  he  went  on  an  embassy  to  the 
King  of  Navane  (Rot.  Pat.  3) ;  and  in  5 
John  on  another  to  the  King  of  Connaught,, 
with  Meiller  Fitz- Henry,  justiciary  of  Ire- 
land.    (Rot.  de  Liberate,  83.) 

After  his  return  to  England  he  resumed 
his  duties  as  one  of  the  regular  justiciers 
(Rot.  de  Fin.  306,  398,  401),  and  was 
gratified  with  various  ecclesiastical  prefer- 
ments, terminating  in  March  1213  with, 
the  archbishopric  of  Dublin.  (Rot,  Pat, 
11-97;  Rot.  Chart.  200;  Leland's  Ire- 
land, 1.  195.) 

He  witnessed  the  charter  by  which  King 
John  resigned  the  crown  to  the  pope,  and 
was  present  when  he  granted  Magna Charta. 
(R.de  Wendover,m.264r-302.)  Holinshed 
(vi.  43)  relates  that  he  obtained  the  name 
of  Scorch-bill  or  Scorch-villein,  in  conse- 
quence of  throwing  into  the  fire  the  evi- 
aences  of  their  titles  which  his  tenants  had 
brought  for  his  inspection.  IBs  motive  for 
this  remains  a  mystery,  as  none  of  the 
tenants  were  turned  out  of  their  lands. 

He  assisted  at  the  coronation  of  Henry 
III.,  under  whom  he  was  appointed  justi- 
ciary of  Ireland  in  October  1221,  and  ad- 
ministered the  affairs  of  that  kingdom  till 
the  middle  of  1224,  when  he  surrendered 
the  office  to  William  Mareschall,  Earl  of 
Pembroke.  (Rot.  Claus.  i.  470-491.) 
During  his  presidency  he  built  the  castle- 


-412 


LONDON 


of  Dublin,  and  dyin^  in  the  year  after  his 
letirement,  was  Duried  in  Chnst  Church. 

LOUDON,  William  de,  the  nephew  of 
the  above  Heniy  de  London,  was  of  the 
^clerical  profession,  and  in  12  John  accom- 
panied the  king  to  Ireland.  In  16  John  he 
was  presented  to  the  prebend  of  Stokes  in 
the  cha]^l  of  Wallingford  Castle,  and  two 
Tears  atterwards  to  the  church  of  Breten- 
ham  in  the  diocese  of  Ely.  (JRot,  Pat.  118, 
•186.)  He  is  called  *  our  beloved  clerk '  by 
Henry  lU.,  and  had  some  grants  from  him, 
jroving  the  royal  favour.  (Hot,  Claus,  i. 
-o64,  ii.  88.)  It  is  not  improoable  that  he 
was  appointed  a  regular  justicier  about  11 
ifienry  IIL ;  for  in  the  list  of  justices  itine- 
rant nominated  in  August  of  that  year, 
1227,  his  name  in  the  commission  for  se- 
veral counties  stands  the  next  to  Stephen  de 
Segrave,  and  in  1230 he  holds  an  equally  pro- 
.minent  position.  From  18  to  16  Henry  III. 
fines  were  levied  before  him  at  Westmins- 
ter {Ibid.  ii.  213 ;  Dugdale's  Orig.  42)  ;  so 
that  there  is  no  doubt  that  he  must  have 
been  elevated  to  the  bench  shortly  after,  if 
not  before,  his  first  selection  as  a  justice 
:  itinerant. 

LONCKJHAKP,  Williah  de  (de  Longo 
Campo)  (Bishop  of  Ely),  was  a  Norman 
by  birth  and  of  the  lowest  extraction,  his 
.grandfather  being  little  more  than  an  agri- 
cultural labourer.  The  earliest  notice  of 
him  is  in  the  employment  of  Geoffrey,  the 
natural  son  of  King  Henry ;  afterwards  he 
was  taken  into  that  of  Richard,  while  Earl 
of  Poictiers. 

In  what  capacity  his  earlier  services  were 
rendered  is  notrelated ;  but  before  Richard's 
coronation  as  King  of  England,  and  while 
lie  assumed  the  title  of  ^Dominus  Anglise' 
only,  Longchamp  had  acquired  such  favour 
with  his  royal  master  as  to  be  appointed  his 
chancellor;  and  his  name,  with  the  addition 
of  'cancellarius  meus,^  appears  on  a  charter 
;.ffranted  to  Gerard  de  Camville,  while  the 
king  was  at  Barfleur,  in  his  progress  to  this 
country  to  take  possession  of  his  crown. 
(Arch€eoloffia,  xxviL  112.) 

He  was  confirmed  in  his  office  on  Richard's 
coronation,  and  at  the  council  of  Pipewell, 
on  September  15,  he  was  nominated  to  the 
.flee  of  Ely.    King  Richard  then  appointed 
Hugh  Pusar,  Bishop  of  Durham,  and  Wil- 
liam de  Mandeyille,  Earl  of  Essex  and  Albe- 
marle, to  be  chief  justiciaries  and  regents  of 
the  kingdom  during  his  absence ;  but,  the 
•■earl  dving  m  November,  the  king  named 
Longchamp  in  his  place,  assigning  the  rule 
of  the  northern  parts  to  the  Bishop  of 
Durham,  and  that  of  the  southern  to  the 
Bishop  of  Ely,  and  at  the  same  time  asso- 
'  dating  with  them  as  a  council,  Hugh  Bar- 
dolf,  William  Marshall,  GeoflBrey  Fitz-Peter, 
-and  William  Briwer. 

The  power  which  Longchamp  thus  ac- 
^uired  iy  holding  two  sudi  offices  as  chief 


LONGCHAMP 

iusticiaiT  and  chancellor  was  still  further 
mcreas^  in  the  following  June  by  Pope 
Clement  appointing  him  legate  in  England, 
Wales,  and  L*eland. 

After  the  king's  departure  on  his  progress 
to  the  Holy  Land,  Longchamp,  who  had  up 
to  that  period  exhibited  the  greatest  pru- 
dence and  humility,  began  to  display  an 
arrogant  and  overbearing  disposition,  W  ith- 
out  believing  all  the  tales  which  are  related 
of  him  by  monkish  historians,  with  whom 
he  was  no  favourite,  it  is  certain  that  he 
assumed  to  himself  the  whole  authority, 
neglecting  altogether  the  council  appointed 
by  the  king,  and  superseding  his  cocidjutor, 
the  Bishop  of  Durham,  and  actually  casting 
him  into  prison  till  he  delivered  up  the  castles 
in  his  portion  of  the  kingdom.  lie  engrossed 
all  the  ecclesiastical  patronage,  and  accumu- 
lated vast  sums  by  appropriating  the  rents 
of  the  vacant  abbeys  and  bishoprics  to  him- 
self. He  afiected  a  royal  state,  and  the  sons 
of  nobles  not  only  waited  on  him  at  table, 
but  were  happy  to  take  his  isolations  in  mar- 
riage. He  never  travelled  without  such  an 
enormous  attendance  that  the  churches  and 
monasteries  where  he  was  entertained  were 
nearly  ruined  by  providing  for  him  and  his 
retinue ;  and  if  Benedictus  Abbas  tells  truly, 
the  bishop  required  rather  expensive  deli- 
cacies at  his  table.  The  people  suffered 
severely  firom  the  taxes  he  imposed  on  them 
for  the  supply  of  the  absent  king ;  the  clergy 
were  equally  oppressed ;  and  the  gentrvand 
nobles,  besides  being  obliged  to  contribute, 
were  disgusted  with  his  insolence  and  rapa- 
city; so  that  it  was  not  long  before  all 
classes  were  ready  to  welcome  any  oppor- 
tunity to  rid  themselves  of  so  tyrannous  a 
ruler. 

Earl  John,  the  king's  brother,  was  not 
backward  in  fomenting  this  dissatisfaction 
for  the  furtherance  of  his  own  ambitious 
views,  and  matters  in  a  short  time  were 
brought  to  a  crisis. 

Longchamp,  having  ejected  Gerard  de 
Camville  from  the  sherift'alty  of  Lincoln- 
shire, besieged  the  castle  of  l^incoln,  which 
the  sheriff  refused  to  surrender.  Earl  John, 
by  surprising  the  castles  of  Nottingham  and 
iickhill,  obliged  the  regent  not  only  to  raise 
the  siege,  but  to  enter  into  certain  conditions 
before  he  was  allowed  to  resume  the  royal 
authority.  Not  warned  by  this  lesson,  he 
persisted  in  his  violent  career,  and  in  Sep- 
tember 1191  seized  the  king  s  natural  bro- 
ther, Geoftrey,  Archbishop  of  York,  at  the 
altar  of  St.  Martin  at  Dover,  where  he  had 
taken  refuge  on  his  arrival  in  England,  con- 
trary to  the  king's  prohibition.  The  arch- 
bishop was  dragged  through  the  streets  and 
imprisoned  in  the  castle,  whence  he  was  not 
released  until  Longchamp,  finding  that  the 
popular  indignation  could  not  be  resisted, 
at  the  end  of  eight  days  allowed  him  to 
depart.    An  assembly  of  the  bishops  and 


LONGCHAMP 

Mzoosy  at  which  the  archhishop  and  Earl ' 
Tohn  attended,  was  immediately  afterwards 
idd  at  Reading,  where  a  letter  from  King 
Richard,  which  some  writers  consider  to 
have  been  forjred,  was  read,  appointing  the 
Archbishop  of  Bouen  at  the  heaa  of  a  council 
of  regency.   Longchamp,  after  an  ineffectual 
attempt  at  resistance,  was  eventually,  at  a 
council  held  in  St  PauFs  Churchyiml,  on 
October  10, 1101,  condenmed  to  resign  his 
offices  to  ^e  Archbishop  of  Bouen,  and, 
fearful  of  personal  consequences,  deemed  it 
advisable  to  quit  the  kmgdom.    For  this 
paipose  he  proceeded  to  JDover,  and,  dis- 
gninng  himself  in  female  attire,  waited  on 
the  beach  for  the  arrival  of  the  boat  that 
was  to  convey  him  to  Cahus.    His  awkward 
gait,  however,  and  his  total  inability  to 
speak  the  English  language,  caused  his  dis- 
ooTery  before  his  escape  was  effected,  and 
1)6  was  obliged  to  be  taken  to  the  prison  of 
the  town  to  save  him  from  the  insults  of  the 
populace.    After  some  time  he  was  per- 
mitted to  depart,  when  he  proceedea  to 
Normandy.    Here  he  fulminated  sentence 
of  excommunication  against  his  adversaries, 
a&d,  among  them,  against '  Master  Benet, 
▼ho  presumed  to  hold  the  Great  Seal  con- 
tzanr  to  the  ordinances  of  the  king  and  the 
kingdom,   and  his    own  prohibition.'    It 
iroold  thus  appear,  therefore,  that  on  his 
discharge  the  office  of  keeper  of  the  Seal 
was  entrusted  to  this  Master  Benet.    He 
afterwards  ventured  over  to  Dover,  and 
opened  a  negotiation  with  Earl  John  for  the 
Rstoration  of  his  powers,  but  without  effect, 
•ad  he  was  compelled  again  to  depart 

Longchamp,  on  hearing  of  the  detention 
of  King  Richard,  was  the  first  to  discover 
his  prison,  and  to  assist  in  his  restoration  to 
fiherty.    The  bearer  of  the  royal  order  to 
the  council  of  regency  for  raising  the  tax  for 
his  redemption,  Ee  rested  in  his  journey  at 
the  abbey  of  St.  Edmund's  Bury,  where 
Abbot  Samson  would  not  permit  mass  to  be 
song  before  him  until  the  sentence  of  ex- 
communication  issued  by  the  Bishop  of 
London  agninst  him  had  been  removed. 

On  Richard's  release,  although  Long- 
rhamp  was  not  restored  to  the  chief  jus- 
idaryship,  he  was  continued  in  the  office 
)f  chancellor.  He  signed  in  that  character 
he  treaty  of  peace  between  England  and 
Prance  in  July  1195  {Rynier,  i.  Qk\  and  in 
he  next  year  he  was  present  at  Winchester 
irhen  a  fine  was  levied  before  the  king  him- 
lelf.  {Hunter's  Preface,)  There  is  nothing 
o  show  that  he  did  not  continue  chancellor 
iU  the  day  of  his  death. 

He  held  the  sheriffalty  of  Essex  and  Hert- 
oidahire  in  1196,  and  at  the  latter  part  of 
hat  year,  he  and  Philip,  Bishop  of  Durham, 
rere  aent  to  Rome  to  induce  the  supreme 
Kmtiff  to  remove  the  interdict  whicn  the 
lidibiahop  of  Rouen  had  pronounced 
kgainst  all  Normandy.  He,  however,  never 


LOSINGA 


4ia. 


reached  his  destination,  for,  falling  sick  on 
the  journey,  he  died  at  Poictiers  on  Janu- 
ary 31,  1197,  and  was  buried  in  the  Cis-^ 
tercian  monastery  of  Pina. 

It  is  difficult,  amid  the  conflicting  opinions- 
of  historians,  to  form  a  just  estimate  of  the 
character  of  this  prelate.  While  some  de- 
nounce him  as  a  monster  of  impiety,  and 
charge  him  with  pride,  lust,  arrogance,  and 
granny,  others  describe  him  as  loved  of 
(iod  and  of  men,  wise,  amiable,  generous, 
benififn,  and  meek,  and  their  relation  of  the 
incidents  of  his  life  are  coloured  accordingly. 
That  he  was  too  much  elated  with  his  pros- 
perity,  and  exercised  his  office  with  too  free 
a  hand,  cannot,  however,  be  denied ;  but, 
recollecting  the  difficulties  of  his  position,, 
and  the  ambitious  and  treasonable  designs 
of  Earl  John,  it  would  be  unjust  entirely  to 
condemn  him,  the  more  especially  as  the 
countenance  he  subsequently  received  from 
King  Richard  tends  to  show  that  the  com- 
plaints against  him  were  greatly  exagge- 
rated. {Godwin,  251 ;  Stow,  41 ;  Mmox, 
i.  22,  34,  &c ;  Angl  Sac,  i,  478,  a32 ;  lUc. 
JDewizes,  C-59 ;  Ltnffard,  iii.  333-340.) 

LOSD,  James,  is  known  only,  like  many 
of  the  puisne  barons  of  the  Exchequer  in 
these  reigns,  by  his  appointment  to  that 
position  under  Elizabetn  on  November  12, 
1666.  His  death  occurred  about  January 
1576. 

L08IHOA,  Hbbbert  (Bishop  of  Thet- 
FORD  AND  Nofiwicn).  Thynuc,  in  his 
'  Collection  of  Chancellors,*  has  this  passage : 
'  Herbertus,  chancellor  in  the  fourth  year  of 
Heuiy  1.,  in  the  year  of  our  salutation  1104 
(as  appeareth  by  an  anonymall  pamphlet  in 
written  hand),  of  whom  I  am  not  resolved 
whether  this  were  Herbertus  Losinga, 
Bishop  of  Norwich,  or  noe.'  {Holinshed, 
iv.  349.) 

Tliis  is  the  sole  authority  for  inserting 
Herbert  as  a  chancellor,  for  the '  anonymall 
pamphlet  in  a  written  hand '  is  not  forth- 
coming, and  no  record  of  the  time  contains- 
any  fact  which  gives  authenticity  to  the 
assertion.  Besides  this,  there  is  sufficient 
evidence  that  Waldric  was  chancellor  at  the 
specified  date. 

Bishop  Herbert  was  the  son  of  Robert 
Losinga,  but  authorities  differ  whether  he 
was  a  Norman  or  a  Briton,  and,  if  the  latter,, 
in  what  county  he  was  bom.  One  says, '  In 
pago  Oxunensi  in  Normannia;'  another, 
*  In  pago  Oxunensi  in  Sudovolgia  Anglorum 
Comitatu,'  which  some  interpret  Oxford  in 
Sufiblk;  and  again  another,  that  he  was 
bom  at  Oxford.  The  first  of  these  seems 
the  most  probable,  as  there  is  no  doubt  that 
he  was  prior  of  Fescamp  in  Normandy, 
previous  to  his  coming  over  to  England 
with  William  Rufus.  Making  himself  use- 
ful in  every  way  at  court,  he  became  a  great 
favourite  with  that  monarch.  In  1087  he- 
was  preferred  to  the  rich  abbey  of  Bamaey^ 


414 


LOUDHAM 


;and  four  years  afterwards,  in  1091,  was  pro- 
moted to  the  bishopric  of  Thetford.  For 
this  advancement  he  is  stated  to  have  paid 
to  the  king  the  sum  of  1900/.,  and  is  charged 
ivith  using  the  same  simoniacal  means  for 
procuring  the  abbacy  of  Winchester  for  his 
father. 

His  conscience  reproving  him  for  these 
transgressions,  he  undertook  a  journey  to 
Home,  where  he  succeeded  in  obtaining  ab- 
solution from  Pope  Pascal  II'.,  on  condition 
that  he  proved  his  penitence  by  devoting 
his  riches  to  the  Churoh.  On  his  rotum,  he, 
with  the  consent  of  the  king  and  the  pontiff, 
in  April  1094,  removed  the  see  from  Thet- 
ford to  Norwich,  where,  in  redemption  of 
his  pledge,  he  built  the  cathedral  at  nis  own 
•  expense,  laying  the  first  stone  in  the  year 
1096,  and  endowing  it  with  lands  sufficient 
for  the  support  of  sixty  monks. 

His  munificence  did  not  end  here,  for  he 
erected  the  palace,  and  founded  five  parish 
•churches  in  the  county,  and  a  monastery  for 
Cluniac  monks  at  Thetford. 

He  died  on  July  22, 1119,  and  was  buried 
in  his  own  cathedral.  Weever  gives  the 
'  epitaph  on  his  monument. 

He  was  an  excellent  scholar  for  those 
times,  and  composed  several  learned  trea- 
tises, mentioned  by  Pits,  who  calls  him  '  vir 
omnium  virtutum,  et  bonarum  literarum 
studiis  impense  redditus,  mitis,  afiabilis, 
•corporo  venusto,  vultu  decoro,  moribus  can- 
didus,  vita  integer.'  (  Will.  Malmesb,  515- 
048;  Godwin,  426;  Weever,  780-7 ;  Angl 
Sac.  ii.  700 ;  BlomefielcTs  Norfolk,  i.  405, 
and  Norwich,  L  465.) 

LOTIDHAli,  William  de,  was  the  last 
of  seven  justices  itinerant  appointed  in  15 
Henry  Ht.  for  the  county  of  York ;  but  no 
further  information  has  been  obtained  of  him. 

LGXrOHBOBOXrOH,  LoBD.    See  A.  Web- 

DERBURN. 

LOXTTHEB,  Hugh  de,  was  descended  from 
ti  long  line  of  ancestors,  settled  at  Liouther 
in  Westmoreland.  His  father  was  of  the 
same  name,  and  his  mother  was  a  daughter 
of  Moriceby,  of  Moriceby  in  Cumberland. 
He  practised  as  an  advocate,  and  in  19  Ed- 
ward I.,  1291,  was  employed  by  the  kinp. 
(Devon's  Issue  Boll,  103.)  Dugdale  on  this 
-account  represents  him  as  the  king's  at- 
torney-general; but  it  is  to  be  remarked 
that  Kichard  de  Breteville  and  William  Inge 
in  those  years  acted  in  the  same  manner  in 
other  coimties,  and  there  is  no  proof  that 
the  office  then  existed  as  a  separate  ap- 
pointment. 

In  the  second  commission  of  justices  of 
trailbaston,  issued  on  February  18,  1307, 
So  Ed^neird  I.,  Louther  was  named  among 
^ve  to  act  in  Norfolk  and  Suffolk :  and  in 
the  same  year  he  was  assigned  with  John  de 
Instda  to  enquiro  into  a  case  which  was 
brought  by  petition  before  the  parliament, 
.  Accoraing  to  the  oouise  then  usually  adopted, 


LOVEDAY 

of  referring  these  investigations  to  jodgBS 
and  learned  men  in  the  law.  Some  other 
instances  occur  in  2  and  8  Edward  11^  in  the 
latter  of  which  he  acted  as  a  justice  itine- 
rant in  Yorkshire.  (Bot  Pari.  I  209-^1.) 

He  was  returned  a  kniffht  for  the  count? 
of  Westmoreland  in  38  Inward  L,  and  was 
one  of  the  supervisors  of  the  array  for  that 
county  in  4  Edward  H.  (Pari.  Writs,  L 
714,  ii.  1118.)  He  died  in  the  tenth  year  of 
the  latter  reign ;  and  by  his  wife,  who  wu 
a  daughter  of  Sir  Peter  de  Filiol,  of  Sodebj 
Castle  in  Cumberland,  he  left  two  sou, 
Hugh  and  the  next-mentioned  Thomu. 
The  lineal  descendant  of  the  eldest  son 
Hugh  was  in  1696  raised  to  the  peerage  as 
Viscount  Lonsdale  and  Baron  Xowtiier, 
which  titles  became  extinct  in  1750.  Daring 
the  life  of  the  last  lord  there  were  no  less 
than  four  baronets  of  the  family  alive  at  the 
same  time.  The  earldom  of  Lonsdale  was 
subsequently  granted  to  the  representatiTe 
of  the  family,  and  is  now  borne  by  hk 
successor.  (Collinses  Peerage,  v.  695-716; 
Nicolas' s  St^nopsis.) 

LOXTTHEB,  THOMAS  DE,  second  son  of  tiie 
above  Hugh  de  Louther,  was  constituted  a 
judge  of  the  King's  Bench  on  December  15, 
1830,  4  Edward  III.,  and  remained  in  that 
court  only  till  the  following  year,  when  he 
was  appointed  chief  justice  of  the  King's 
Bench  in  Ireland.  (Cal.  Bat.  Pat.  113-120.) 
In  1334  he  was  superseded  by  Kobeitde 
Bourchier,  being,  however,  at  the  same  time 
directed  to  proceed  to  Dublin  to  take  u^ 
himself  the  office  of  chief  justice,  in  case 
Robert  de  Bourchier  declined  to  go,  wi^  a 
mandate  to  act  as  second  judge  if  Bourchier 
went.  {N.  Fosdera,  ii.  891.)  It  seems  pro- 
bable that  he  took  the  second  place  a^ 
cordingly,  for  he  was  again  raised  to  ti» 
chiefship  in  1338.  (Cal  Bat.  Pat.  138.) 
How  long  he  remained  there  afterwsrdfl^or 
when  he  died,  does  not  appear :  but  in  SS 
Edward  UI.  a  commission  was  issued  to  en- 
quire into  a  charge  made  against  a  Thomas 
de  Louther,  and  John  de  Louther,  the  eoo 
of  his  brother,  for  a  breiich  of  the  law  of 
arms  in  forcing  a  Scottish  knight,  made 
prisoner,  to  pay  a  second  ransom  for  his 
release.     (N.  ^csdera,  iii.  418.) 

LOVEDAY.  Roger,  is  introduced  by  Dug^ 
dale  among  tnose  raised  to  the  bench  of  the 
Common  Pleas  on  November  2, 1276, 4  Ed- 
ward I.,  but  it  turns  out  to  be  an  error,  the 
patent  quoted  only  constituting  him  and  two 
others  justices  to  hold  assizes  and  pless  in 
the  liberties  of  the  prioiy  of  Dunstaole.  He 
was  appointed  a  justice  itinerant  in  6  £t 
ward  L,  and  continued  to  act  in  thatdiip 
racter  till  the  fourteenth  year  of  the 
(Pari.  WrUs,  i.  8,  10,  882 ;  C»f«. 
hurg.  136.)  He  was  one  of  the  eip 
whom  the  king  in  the  eighth  ^ 
to  enquire  what  were  the  mr 
the  tenants  of  the  manor  of' 


LOVEL 

xngain  in  the  twelfth  year  he  was  a  com- 
missioner of  enquiry  into  the  state  of  the 
"walls,  ditches,  sewers,  and  bridges  in  Hey- 
land  in  Lincolnshire,  and  the  damage  done 
by  an  inundation  there.     (Abb,  Hacit,  205, 

His  property  was  at  Wytheresfield  in 
SuiFolk;  and  in  15  Edward  I.  he  died, 
leaving  a  son  named  Richard.  His  widow, 
Sibilla,  afterwards  married  William  de 
Ormesby,  the  judge.  {Ibid,  207-307 ;  Col, 
Inguis.  p.  m.  i.  49.) 

LOVEL,  John,  had  the  living  of  Ylingin 
the  diocese  of  London  in  18  Edward  I.,'. and 
complaints  were  made  against  him  to  the 
parliament  by  his  parishioners  for  imdue 
severity.  (Hot.  Part  i.  60.)  He  was  one  of 
five  justices  itinerant  sent  into  the  northern 
<;ounties  in  20  Edward  I.,  1292,  and  two 
years  afterwards  is  introduced  into  Duff- 
el ale's  list  as  a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench, 
lie  seems  to  have  held  that  place  in  23  and 
28  Edward  I. ;  but  in  the  intervening  years 
he  is  called  clerk  of  the  council,  and  appears 
Among  those  known  to  be  clerks  in  Chancery. 
In  20  and  28  Edward  I.  he  was  one  of  the 
J  ustices  appointed  to  perambulate  the  forests. 
{Pari.  Writs,  i.  29-63,  397.) 

LOVELL,  Salathiel,  was  the  son  of 
Bernard  Lovell,  of  Lapworth  in  the  county 
of  Warwick,  and  was  bom  about  the  year 
1C19.  He  was  called  to  the  bar  at  Gray's 
Inn  in  November  1656,  and  was  made  an 
ancient  in  1671.  In  1684  he  appears  as 
one  of  the  counsel  employed  for  Mr.  Sache- 
Terell  and  others  on  their  trial  for  a  riot  at 
the  election  of  mayor  of  Nottingham.  He 
ivas  called  to  the  degree  of  the  coif  in 
1688,  and  in  June  1692  he  stood  for  the 
recordership  of  London,  and  was  elected 
by  the  casting  vote  of  the  lord  mayor.  In 
the  following  October  he  was  knighted  on 
-carrying  up  the  address  of  the  corporation 
on  King  William's  return  from  abroad. 
(StaU  Trials,  x.  61;  Luttrdl,  i.  446,  ii. 
478,  598.) 

lie  performed  the  duties  of  his  office  so 
much  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  court  that 
be  was  promoted  to  be  king's  serjeant  in 
May  1695,  and  a  judge  on  the  Chester 
<;jircuit  in  the  following  year. 

He  was  on  the  veive  of  ninety  years  of 
age  when  he  was  at  kist  appointed  a  fifth 
hsLTon  of  the  Court  of  Excnequer  on  June 
17,  1708.  He  sat  for  the  next  five  years, 
but  from  his  extreme  ago  could  not  be  of 
much  use  to  his  colleagues.  Distinguished 
principally  by  his  want  of  memory,  his 
title  of  recorder  was  converted  into  the 
r.icknanie  of  the  obliviscor  of  London. 
His  preat-prandson,  Richard  Lovell  Edge- 
worth  (X;/(t\  i.  118),  relates  that  a  young 
lawyer  pleading  before  him  was  so  rude  as 
to  say,  *  Sir,  you  have  forgotten  the  law ; ' 
on  which  he*  replied,  *  Young  man,  I  have 
forgotten  more  law  than  you  will  ever  re- 


LUCI 


415 


member.'  This  story,  however,  is  told, 
with  a  difference,  of  oeneant  Maynard  and 
of  other  old  lawyers,  fie  died  on  May  3, 
1713,  leaving  several  childnm.  One  of 
them,  Samuel  Lovell,  also  became  a  Welsh 
judge,  of  whom  a  ludicrous  anecdote  is 
told,  of  his  refusing,  when  overtaken  by 
the  tide  near  Beaumaris,  to  mount  the 
coach-box  to   escape   drowning,  unless  a 

Srecedent  could  be  quoted  for  a  judge's 
oing  so.     (LuUrell,  vi.  316.) 

LOTETOT,  John  de,  of  the  noble  family 
of  that  name,  lords  of  Wirksop  in  Not- 
tinghamshire, was  the  son  of  Oliver  de 
Lovetot,  of  Carcolston  in  that  coimty, 
and  Alicia,  his  wife.  (Barofwge,  i.  569; 
Thoroton^s  Notts,  i.  235.)  He  was  raised 
to  the  bench  of  the  Common  Fleas  in  3 
Edward  I.,  1275,  and  there  are  entries  of 
fines  levied  before  him  from  that  year  till 
1289.  (Dugdah'sOrig.U,)  At  this  time 
he  was  charged  with  extortion  and  other 
crimes  committed  on  the  judicial  seat,  and 
he  was  accordingly  removed  and  impri- 
soned in  the  Tower,  for  his  redemption 
from  which  he  paid  a  fine  of  3000  marks. 
(Stmv's  London,  4ii',  Weever,S67.)  He  died 
in  1294.     (Ptirl.  Writs,  i.  717.) 

LTTCI,  Beoikaxd  de,  of  whose  parentage 
nothing  is  known,  had  the  honor  of  Egre- 
mont,  with  land  in  the  mountainous  terri- 
toiy  of  Copland,  in  Cumberland,  by  his 
wife  Annaoel,  one  of  the  daughters  of 
William  Fitz-Doncan,  Earl  of  Murray,  in 
Scotland. 

In  19  Henry  H.,  1173,  and  two  follow- 
ing years,  he  was  one  of  the  justices  itine- 
rant to  set  the  assize  for  the  imited  counties 
of  Nottingham  and  Derby,  being  at  that 
time  governor  of  Nottingham  for  the  king, 
in  the  rebellion  of  the  Earl  of  Leicester  and 
others  on  behalf  of  Heniy,  the  king^s  son. 

He  attended  with  the  rest  of  the  barons 
at  the  coronation  of  King  Richard  I.,  and 
died  soon  after.  (Madox,  I  123, 125,  701 ; 
Baronage,  i.  566,  612.) 

LUCI,  Richard  de.  The  ancestors  of 
this  eminent  man  held  lands  in  Kent,  Nor- 
folk, and  Suffolk,  for  which  they  performed 
the  service  of  castie-guard  at  ])over.  The 
first  fact  that  history  records  of  him  is  that 
Henry  I.  granted  to  him  the  lordship  of 
Disce,  now  Diss,  in  Norfolk. 

Under  King  Stephen  he  was  entrusted 
with  the  government  of  Falaise  in  Nor- 
mandy, wnich  he  resolutely  defended 
against  the  attacks  of  Geoffrey  Earl  of 
Ajijou,  the  husband  of  the  Empress  Ma- 
tilda. In  the  contest  between  her  and  the 
king  he  distinguished  himself  on  various 
occasions  in  support  of  the  latter,  and  so 
high  did  he  stand  in  the  estimation  of  the 
contending  parties,  that  on  the  solemn 
agreement  made  by  King  Stephen  with 
Henry,  the  son  of  the  empress,  in  1158, 
the  Tower  of  London  and  the  c«&^it6  ^1 


416 


LUCI 


Windsor  were  both  put  into  his  hands,  bv 
the  desire  of  the  whole  clergy,  he  swearinfj 
to  deliver  them  up  to  Henry  on  the  death 
'  of  Stephen,  and  givinf]^  his  son  as  a  hostage 
for  his  performance  of  the  trust 

Madox  (i.  33)  quotes  a  writ,  addressed 
'  Kicardo  de  Luci,  Jtustic,  et  Vicecomiti  de 
Essexa,'  to  prove  that  ho  was  chief  jus- 
ticiary in  the  reign  of  Stephen.  But  it 
affords  no  evidence  to  that  extent.  It 
would  simply  prove  that  he  was  a  justicier, 
a  term  which  in  those  days  was  almost 
svnonymous  with  that  of  baron ;  as  when 
t^o  king  covenanted  with  Milo  of  Glouces- 
ter, *  sictit  jtufticiario  et  harone  nieo*  In  this 
instance  the  word  is  used  as  a  mere  desig- 
nation, and  the  writ  is  addressed  to  him, 
not  as  justicier  or  baron,  but  simply  as 
Bheriff  of  Essex,  to  lands  in  which  county 
it  has  reference. 

Under  Henry  II.  there  is  full  evidence 
that  he  was  placed  in  the  high  office  of  chief 
justiciary,  though  some  doubt  exists  as  to 
the  precise  period  of  his  appointment.  At 
a  very  early  period  Robert  de  Beaumont, 
Earl  of  Leicester,  and  he  held  the  office 
jointly, and  their  separate  precepts  occurring 
in  the  roUs  of  the  2nd,  3rd,  and  4th  years 
of  the  reign,  show  that  each  had  high  power. 
He  accompanied  the  king  in  1101  into 
Normandy,  the  Earl  of  Leicester  being  left 
in  England  to  direct  the  government,  Thev 
appear  to  have  acted  together  till  the  13t{i 
*  year  of  the  reign,  when  the  Earl  of  Lei- 
cester died. 

Bichard  de  Luci  then  became,  without 
any  question,  sole  chief]  usticiary.  From 
that  year  till  24  Henry  II.,  1178,  numerous 
writs  in  his  own  name,  some  of  them  being 
grounded  on  a  king's  writ  de  ultra  marey  and 
the  confirmation  in  the  Exchequer  of  a  con- 
vention relative  to  certain  land,  made  '  co^ 
ram  Ricardo  de  Luci  et  aim  haronibus,^ 
plainly  prove  that  he  then  held  the  highest 
judicial  place  in  the  Curia  Re^. 

Of  his  judicial  acts  as  chief  justiciary 
little  is  recorded  beyond  the  committal  of 
some  London  rioters  to  prison ;  but  there  is 
sufficient  evidence  of  his  activity  and  dili- 
gence in  the  execution  of  the  legal  branch 
of  his  office  (Madox,  i.  146),  at  the  same 
time  that  he  showed  no  negligence  in  his 
ministerial  and  political  duties. 

The  preparation  of  the  celebrated  Con- 
stitutions of  Clarendon,  in  January  1164, 
was  entrusted  to  him  and  to  Josceline  de 
Bfidiol,  both  of  whom  were  accordingly  sub- 
jected to  the  rancour  of  Beckct,  who  two 
years  afterwards  pronounced  sentence  of 
excommunication  agpainst  them,  as  the  fa- 
vourers of  the  king's  t^nny,  and  the  con- 
trivers of  those  heretical  pravities.  This 
sentence  was  repeated  by  Becket  in  1169 
against  him  and  others;  but  it  does  not 
appear  to  have  produced  much  effect  on  the 
laymen  includea  in  it 


LUCI 

In  1167,  on  the  threat  of  an  invanonbjc 
the  Earls  of  Boulogne  and  Flanden,  Richaid 
'de  Luci  made  such  preparations  of  defence 
as  effectually  to  deter  tnem.  His  condnct 
and  valour  as  a  warrior  were  brought  mgre- 
actively  forward  in  1173,  when  tneldng'8 
sons  raised  the  standard  of  rebellion  against 
th  ei r  father.  The  Earl  of  Leicester,  tne  tusi 
of  his  late  coadjutor,  having  joined  thdr 
party,  Richard  de  Luci  besieged  the  town 
and  castle  of  Leicester,  and  soon  reducin{^ 
the  former,  and  demolishing  its  fortifica- 
tions, he  granted  a  truce  to  the  garrison  of 
the  latter,  in  order  to  march  against  Wil- 
liam, King  of  Scotland,  who  had  invaded 
Cumberland  and  was  besie^g  Carlisle. 
Joined  by  Humphrey  de  Bohim,  the  Mug's 
constable,  he  not  only  forced  the  Soots  and 
Galwegians  to  retire,  but,  in  revenge  for 
their  horrible  devastations,  he  set  fire  to 
Berwick  and  ravaged  Lothian.  TheEirf 
of  Leicester  during  this  time  had  arrived  in 
England  with  a  large  body  of  Flemings :  but 
Ricnard  de  Luci  and  Humphrey  de  Bohnn, 
concluding  a  truce  with  the  Scottish  kinfc 
marched  immediately  against  them,  and, 
giving  them  battle  at  Femham  in  Snfiolk, 
on  November  1,  1173,  not  only  defeated 
them  with  great  slaughter,  but  took  the  YmA 
of  Leicester  and  his  countess  prisoners.  The 
justiciary's  activity  was  not  less  prominent 
during  the  succeeding  year,  in  opponngtha^ 
Earls  of  Derby  and  Himtingdon ;  and  the 
return  of  King  Henry  to  England,  and  tiw 
capture  of  William,  Kin^  of  Scotland,  oc- 
curring: about  the  same  time,  the  rebellion 
was  effectually  suppressed  before  the  end  of 
the  year. 

riis  services  were  not  unrewarded  by  the 
kinjr,  who  gave  him  the  hundred  of  Ongsr 
in  Essex,  with  Stanford  and  Greensteed, 
and  many  broad  lands  in  that  county  and 
in  Kent. 

After  a  life  devoted  to  his  countiT,he 
rcpared  himself  a  retirement  at  its  dose, 
y  founding,  in  1178,  an  abbey  at  Leaneior 
Westwood,  in  the  parish  of  Eri^  in  Kent, 
for  canons  regular  of  the  order  of  St  An- 
gustin,  endowing  it  nobly  with  half  of  his 
possessions  there.  Resisting  the  entreaties 
of  his  sovereign,  who  knew  how  to  appre- 
ciate his  abilities,  he  resigned  his  office  at 
the  commencement  of  the  following  year, 
and,  assuming  the  habit  of  one  of  the  canons 
of  the  house,  withdrew  from  the  tuimoiloT 
the  world  to  devote  the  remainder  of  hii 
days  to  piety.  His  seclusion^  however,  was 
not  of  long  duration,  for  he  died  on  Jo^ 
14,  1170,  and  was  buried  in  a  somptoMi 
tomb  in  the  choir  of  his  church. 

To  the  integrity  of  his  character  the  M 
testimony  is  tmbrded  by  the  omdoefe  of  U> 
sovereign,  who,  though  findiiw  Ite  ^ 
arms  agunst  himself,  and  ^jm  li  1 
confidence  of  his  opponenl^  iHa  ■ 

his  admiration  of  noelity  w  Ibp 


I 


■j 


LUCI 

in  An  enemj,  by  adnaitting  him  into  his 
own  counsels,  and  entrusting  him  with  the 
sole  administration  of  the  realm. 

By  his  wife,  Rohaise,  he  had,  according 
to  Dugdale  {Baronage^  1.668),  two  sons  ana 
two  daughters.  Maude,  the  elder  of  his 
two  daughters,  was  married  to  the  before- 
noticed  Walter  Fitz-Robert ;  and  Rohaise, 
the  younger,  was  married  to  Fulbert,  the 
son  of  John  de  Dover,  lord  of  Chilham, 
also  previously  noticed.  Other  authors  give 
a  somewhat  different  account  of  the  family. 
{Weever,  777;  BlomefielcCs  Norfolk,  i.  2j 
Morant^s  Essex,  i.  127,  ii.  115 ;  Lord  Lyt* 
telton :  Pipe  Bolls,  2,  3,  and  4  Henry  II.) 

LUCI,  Robert  be,  was  probably  a  rela- 
tive of  the  great  Richard  de  Luci,  but  in 
what  manner  does  not  appear.  He  was 
joined  to  Richard  de  Wilton,  the  sheriff  of 
Wiltshire,  as  justice  itinerant  to  set  the 
assize  or  tallage  for  that  county,  in  20 
Henry  II.,  1174.  In  the  following  year  he 
was  sheriff  of  the  county  of  Worcester,  be- 
yond which  no  further  information  occurs. 
{Madox,  i.  124-546.) 

LUCI,  Godfrey  de  (Bishop  of  Wik- 
cn  ester),  son  of  Richard  de  I juci,  completed 
the  abbey  of  Lesnes,  in  Erith,  Kent,  which 
his  father  had  founded.  He  was  appointed 
one  of  King  Henry's  chaplains,  ana  from 
canonries  in  St.  Paul's,  Lincoln,  and  York, 
was  advanced  to  the  deanery  of  St.  Martin's 
in  London  {Angl.  Sac,  i.  302),  and  afterwards 
to  the  archdeaconries  of  Derby  and  the  East 
Riding  of  York.  On  September  16,  1189, 
1  Richard  L,  he  was  elected  Bishop  of  Win- 
chester, and  presided  over  that  see  for  fifteen 
years.     {Le  Neve,  135,  283,  326.) 

In  1179,  25  Henry  II.,  he  was  named  by 
the  council  held  atW^indsor,  on  the  divi- 
sion of  the  kingdom  into  four  parts  for  the 
administration  of  justice,  at  the  head  of  the 
six  justiciers  to  whom  the  northern  coun- 
ties were  anpropriated,  and  who,  besides, 
were  specially  appointed  to  sit  in  the  Curia 
Regis  to  hear  the  complaints  of  the  people. 
Prom  this  time  to  the  end  of  that  reign  he 
regularly  acted  as  a  justiciary,  not  omy  in 
the  King's  Court  at  Westminster,  but  on 
the  itinera  in  various  counties.  (Madox,  i, 
113-737.  ii.  146.) 

By  a  bribe  or  fine  of  3000/.  he  is  said  to 
liave  obtained  the  restoration  of  certain 
manors  which  had  been  taken  away  from 
the  diocese,  and  to  have  been  made  custos 
of  the  county  of  Hants,  and  of  the  castles 
of  Winchester  and  Porchester.  But  the 
latter,  on  the  king's  departure,  were  seized 
by  the  chancellor,  W^illiam  de  Longchamp, 
Bishop  of  Ely,  nor  were  they  restored  till 
that  prelate  was  removed  from  the  regency 
of  the  kingdom. 

During  the  last  four  years  of  Richard's 
reign,  Bishop  Godfrey  was  much  engaged 
in  his  judicial  duties,  his  name  appeanng 
£:equently  on  the  fines  levied  both  at  West- 


LUKE 


417 


minster  and  on  the  drcoits.  His  death 
occurred  on  September  4,  1204,  and  his 
character  was  that  of  an  amiable,  discreet, 
and  kind-hearted  man.  CRic,  Devizes,  10, 
39,  54 ;  Godwin,  217.) 

LUCI,  Stephen  de,  was  one  of  the  sons 
of  Walter  de  Charlecote,  upon  whom  Henry 
de  Montford  conferred  the  village  of  that 
name  in  Warwickshire,  and  he  and  his 
brother  William  were  the  first  who  as- 
sumed  the  surname  of  Luci.  He  held  some 
oifice  in  the  court  in  7  and  8  John,  seve^ 
ral  mandates  being  countersigned  by  hinu 
Seventeenyears  afterwards  he  was  sent,  ux 
8  and  9  Henry  HI.,  on  royal  missions  to 
Rome,  in  coniunction,  on  each  occasion^ 
with  Godfrey  de  Craucombe.  (Hot,  Clous* 
I  66,  578,  ii.  42-67.)  On  his  return  he 
was  appointed  custos  of  the  bishopric  of 
Durham,  which  he  held  during  the  two 
years  of  its  vacancy.  It  was  no  doubt  on 
this  account  that  in  1228  he  was  nomi- 
nated one  of  the  justices  itinerant  within 
the  liberties  of  that  bishopric,  for  his  name 
does  not  otherwise  appear  in  a  judicial 
capacity.  His  brother,  William  de  LucL 
to  whom  the  king  granted  the  hundred  ox 
Kineton  in  Warwickshire  to  farm  {Ex* 
cerpt,  e  Rot,  Fin.  130-156),  and  who  was 
afterwards  sherifi"  of  that  county,  was  the 

Srogenitor  of  Sir  Thomas  de  Luci,  the 
ustice  Shallow  of  Shakspeare,  and  the 
property  is  still  retained  by  one  of  his  lineal 
representatives. 

LUKE,  Walter,  is  said  to  have  advanced 
himself  in  the  world  by  marrying  the  nurse 
of  Henry  VHI.,  with  whom  ne  received  an 
estate  at  Cople  in  Bedfordshire,  and  two 
annuities  of  20/.  during  her  life.  Her  name 
was  Anne,  and  she  is  described  in  the 
visitation  of  Huntingdon  of  1513  as  the 
daughter  and  heir  of  Launcelin  of  Launce- 
linsbury  in  that  county,  and  the  widow  of 
William  Oxenbridge.  (Visit.  Hunts,  60; 
Gent.  Mag.  July  1823.  28.)  In  the  Mid- 
dle Temple  he  attained  the  post  of  reader 
in  1514  and  1520.  He  probably  practised 
in  the  Court  of  Chancery,  since  his  name 
as  counsel  does  not  occur  in  any  of  the 
Reports,  and  he  was  one  of  those  assigned 
in  June  1529  to  hear  causes  in  Chancery 
in  aid  of  Cardinal  Wolsey.  He  had  pre- 
viouslv  been  connected  with  the  royal 
household,  for  when  the  king^s  illegitimate 
son,  Henrv  Fitzroy,  Duke  of  Richmond, 
was  in  1525,  at  the  age  of  about  sizyears, 
made  lord  warden  of  the  North,  Walter 
Luke  was  appointed  to  attend  hun  as  at- 
tomev-general.  {Camden  MSS.  iii. ;  Menu 
H.  Fibsroy,  xxiii.)  The  depree  of  Serjeant 
was  conferred  upon  him  m  Michaelmas 
1531,  and  in  the  rollowing  vear,  on  August 
23,  he  was  promoted  to  the  ermine  as  a. 
judge  of  the  King's  Bench,  and  knighted* 
He  sat  a  silent  commissioner  on  the  trials 
of  Sir  Thomas  More  and  the  Bishop  of 


418 


LUKE 


Rochester  (8taU  TridU,  i.  387,  308),  and 
dying  in  1644,  was  buried  in  Cople  Church, 
where  there  is  an  effigy  of  him  and  his 
wife  on  a  brass  plate.  (Geni,  Mag,  Ixxxvii. 
(2),  304)  His  only  son  is  the  next-men- 
tioned Nicholas. 

LUXE.  Nicholas,  the  onlj  son  of  the 
aboye  Sir  Walter  Luke,  received  his  legal 
education  also  at  the  Middle  Temple,  and 
filled  the  office  of  reader  in  1534.  On 
April  14,  1640,  31  Hennr  VIIL,  he  was 
constituted  third  baron  ot  the  Exchequer, 
and  retained  his  seat  there  throughout  the 
reigns  of  Edwud  VL  and  Mary,  receiving 
a  renewal  of  his  patent  on  the  accession  of 
Queen  Elizabeth.  He  died  in  1663,  and 
was  buried  at  Cople. 

His  wife  was  Cecily,  daughter  of  Sir 
Thomas  Walton,  of  Bassingmede.  (Dug- 
dMs  Oriff,  216 ;  Oent.  Mag,  ut  supra.) 

LUSH,  KoBERT,  now  one  of  the  judges 
of  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench,  was  bom  on 
October  13,  1807,  at  Shaftesbury.  His 
&ther  was  Robert  Lush,  Esq.,  of  that 
place,  and  his  mother  was  Lucyjdaughter 
of  —  Foote,  Esq..  of  Tollard  in  Wiltshire. 
After  some  creditable  exertions  in  the 
lower  branches  of  the  profession,  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  by  the  society  of  Gray's 
Inn  on  November  18, 1840,  and  attended 
the  Home  Circuit.  In  1867  he  was  ap- 
pointed a  queen's  counsel,  and  though  he 
never  held  any  official  station,  nor  ever  had 
a  seat  in  parliament,  he  was  for  his  profes- 
donal  merits  alone  selected  as  the  successor 
of  Mr.  Justice  Crompton,  and  received  his 
pitent  as  a  judge  of  the  Queen*s  Bench  on 
October  30,  1§56,  when  he  received  the 
customary  honour  of  knighthood. 

He  married  Elizabeth  Ann,  daughter  of 
Christopher  Woolacott,  Esq.,  of  London. 

LUTWYCHS,  Edwabd,  was  the  son  and 
heir  of  William  Lutwyche,  of  an  old 
Shropshire  family  of  respectability,  and, 
being  called  to  the  bar  at  Gray's  Inn  in 
June  1661,  was  elected  an  ancient  in  1671. 
Receiving  the  distinction  of  the  coif  in 
1683,  he  was  made  king's  serjeant  on  Fe- 
bruary 0, 1684,  and  knighted.  In  October 
1686  James  conferred  upon  him  the  chief 
justiceship  of  Chester,  and  raised  him  to 
the  bench  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  April 
21, 1686,  where  he  continued  to  sit  till  the 
abdication.  He  fell  with  his  sovereign, 
and,  in  consequence  of  his  having  concurrea 
in  the  royal  claim  to  dispense  with  the 
penal  laws  in  Sir  Edward  Hale's  case,  he  was 
excepted  out  of  the  act  of  indemnity  passed 
in  the  next  reign.  Returning  to  the  bar, 
he  was  fined  at  the  York  assizes  in  April 
1603  for  refusing  to  take  the  oaths,  but  he 
continued  to  practise  till  1704,  as  his  're- 
ports and  entnes '  to  that  time  show.  He 
died  in  June  1700,  and  was  buried  at  St. 
Bride's,  London.  (BratnsUmf  207;  LuUreU^ 
iiL  83;  2  Shotoer,  476:  Pari  Hid.  v.  334.) 


LYSTER 

LTDIABO,  Ralph  i>b,  was  appointed  a 
justice  itinerant  for  the  county  of  Somerset 
m  9  Henry  HI.,  1225.    He  was  either  ao 
advocate  in  the  court,  or  in  the  service  of 
Josceline  de  Wells,  ^ahop  of  Bath,  as  be 
was  named  by  that  prelate  in  the  follow- 
ing year  as  his  attorney  in  a  suit  against  a 
man  whom  the  bishop  claimed  as  'natiTum 
suum.'     {Rot.  Clam,  ii.  76, 164.) 

LYXBESOH,  Adax  be^  who  was  of  a 
Lincolnshire  family,  was  m  constant  em- 
|)lojment  in  offices  of  trust  and  respoa- 
sibilitv  under  both  Edward  II.  and  IH. 
In  6  Edward  II.,  1311,  he  was  appointed 
one  of  the  remembrancers  of  toe  £k- 
cheouer ;  and  in  1321  he  was  made  con- 
stable of  Bordeaux,  where  he  remaised 
three  or  four  years,  and  afterwards^  oa  tlie 
accession  of  Edward  IIL,  became  keeper 
of  the  privy  seal.  From  6  to  8  Edwaid 
in.  he  was  chancellor  of  Ireland,  irlieB 
from  this  office  he  was  transferred  to  the 
English  Court  of  Exchequer  as  a  hanrn  on 
November  9, 1334,  and  probably  sat  tiien 
till  his  death  in  13  Edward  ID.  (Jfidbr, 
ii.  267;  PaH.  Writs,  ii.  p.  ii.  1006;  3'. 
Fcedera,  iL  610-696,  812,  891 ;  Co/.  hfM, 
p.  m.  ii.  89 ;  Abb.  Rot.  Orig,  49,  139.) 

LTITDS,  John  de  la,  was  of  aoaent 
descent  and  special  note  in  the  oountf  of 
Dorset,  where  he  was  bailiff  of  the  fonit 
of  Blakemore.  One  of  his  family,  ]^itMlr 
he  himself,  having  killed  a  white  liait 
which  Henry  III.  while  hunting  had  spued 
on  accoimt  of  its  beauty,  was  not  only  im- 
prisoned and  fined,  but  nis  lands  were  sub- 
jected to  an  annual  tax  under  the  nimeof 
the  '  White  Hart  Silver.'  He  resided  it 
Hartley  in  Great  Minton.  (JTntdUii'i 
Ihrsetj  ii.  272-476.)  He  was  emnloyedin 
Gascony  by  the  king,  one  of  his  letten  to 
whom  shows  that  he  acted  as  a  jastideria 
Yorkshire,  in  which  character  his  Bino 
appears  in  Trinity  1266  on  a  fine,  in  ^ 
next  year  on  the  pleas  of  the  comt,  and  ii 
May  1270  in  a  payment  made  for  an  aaua 
to  be  taken  before  him  in  Essex.  (Ai^ 
dale's  Orig.  43 ;  Rvcerpt.  e  RoL  /1m.  ii.  512.) 
In  1260  he  was  joint  cuatos  of  the  dtj  vi 
Tower  of  London.  (CaL  RoL  PtiL  8».) 
On  his  death  in  1272  he  possessed  manon 
and  lands  in  six  counties^  (CaL  Iwfdk 
p.  m.  i.  48.) 

LYADHUltST,  Lord.    iSae  J.  S.  Coput. 

LYSTSR,  Richard,  was  the  gnndaos 
of  Thomas  and  the  son  of  John,  botk  of 
Wakefield  in  Yorkshire.  His  mother  was 
a  daughter  of  Beaumont  of  Whitlev  in  tfao 
same  county.  He  had  his  lenl  truninffii 
the  IVGddle  Temple,  where  he  airived  at 
the  dignity  of  reader  in  Lent  1616  aid 
1622,  and  was  appointed  treaanmia  Utt 
(JhwdaWs  Orig.  216,  221.)  ^  ^_ 

I^  was  pla<»d  in  the  oflioe  of  MHfc>; 
^neral  on  July  Sfl^SI ;  uid  tPHI#  lM 
m  this  post  by  Uhziatoplur 


LYTHEGRENES 

^st  14,  1525 ;  and,  although  he  is  not  in- 
troduced into  the  list  of  attoraey-generals 
in  Dugdale's  *  Chronica  Series,  tnere  is 
little  Qoubt  that  he  then  followed  Ralph 
Swillington  in  that  office,  as  he  is  men- 
tioned with  the  title  in  the  will  of  Cicily 
Marchioness  of  Dorset,  dated  May  6, 1527. 
{Testam.  Vetust.  634.)  This  office  he  held 
till  May  12,  1529,  when  he  was  appointed 
chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  and  knip^hted. 
After  presiding  in  that  court  above  sixteen 
years,  he  was  advanced  to  the  office  of  chief 
justice  of  the  King's  Bench  on  November 
0,  1545,  37  Henry  Vin. ;  and  in  this  cha- 
racter he  attested  the  submission  and 
confession  of  Thomas  Duke  of  Norfolk  on 
January  12,  1547,  a  fortnight  before  the 
king's  death.  (-Sf^ite  7Vwi&,i.  387, 398,458.) 

On  the  accession  of  Edward  \n.  he  was 
re-appointed,  but  resigned  at  the  end  of  the 
first  five  years  of  the  reign,  on  March  21,1552. 

The  remainder  of  his  life  he  spent  at  his 
mansion  in  Southampton,  and,  dying  on 
March  14,  1554,  he  was  buried  in  the 
church  of  St.  Michael  there.  His  first 
wife  was  Jane,  daughter  of  Sir  Ralph 
Shirley,  of  Wistneston,  Sussex,  and  widow 
of  Sir  John  Dawtrey,  of  Petworth  ;  and  his 
second  was  a  daughter  of  —  Stoke. 

LTTHEGBEKES.  JoHN  DE,  was  either  a 
native  of  or  established  as  an  advocate  in 
one  of  the  northern  counties,  his  name  being 
mentioned  so  early  as  52  Henry  III.  as 
employed  on  the  part  of  the  king  in  a  quo 
warranto  against  the  mayor  of  Newcastle- 
upon-Tyne.  (Ahh.  Placit.  170.)  In  8  Ed- 
ward I.  he  was  appointed  sheriff  of  York- 
shire, and  retainea  that  office  for  five  years ; 
and  he  is  noticed  in  the  parliament  of  18 
Edward  I.  as  a  commissioner  to  enquire  into 
the  liberties  claimed  by  the  priors  of  Tyne- 
mouth  and  Cariisle.  {Rot,  Pari  i.  29,  38.) 
In  1293  he  acted  as  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant  for  ourrey;  two  years  afterwards 
lie  was  king's  escheator  beyond  the  Trent, 
but  in  the  next  year  exchanged  the  office 
for  that  on  this  side  the  Trent  In  28  Ed- 
ward I.,  and  two  years  afterwards,  he  was 
employed  in  the  perambulation  of  the  forests 
of  the  northern  counties  (Pari,  Writs,  i. 
807-8),  being  also  recorded  in  the  inter- 
vening year  as  a  justice  itinerant  in  the 
county  of  Kent.  He  was  still  alive  in  Ja- 
nuary 1 '301,  when  his  name  appears  in  the 
Statute  do  Escaetoribus  as  one  of  the  king's 
council.     (St.  (ft  Large^  i.  147.) 

LYTTELTON,  TnoMAS,  was  descended 
from  a  family  established  at  South  Lyttel- 
ton  in  Worcestershire  so  early  as  the  reiffn 
of  Henry  II.  In  that  of  Henry  III.  tne 
successor  of  the  family  became  possessed  of 
the  manor  of  PVankley,  whose  representa- 
tive, Elizabeth,  carried  the  estate  to  her 
husband,  Thomas  Westcote,  of  Westcote, 
near  Barnstaple,  with  a  provision  that  her 
issue  inheritable  should  be  caUed  by  the 


LYTTELTON 


419 


name  of  Lyttelton.  This  eminent  judge 
was  the  son  of  that  marriage,  upon  whom 
the  name  devolved. 

He  was  bom  at  the  family  seat,  and  we 
have  Coke's  authority  that  his  legal  studies 
were  pursued  at  the  Inner  Temple,  and  that 
the  siibject  of  his  public  reading  there  was 
the  statute  of  Westminster  2,  De  Denis 
Conditionalibus.  In  1445  a  suitor  petitioned 
the  lord  chancellor  to  assi^  him  as  counsel 
in  certain  proceedings  against  the  widow  of 
Judge  Fasten,  whom  none  of  the  ^  men  of 
court'  were  willing  to  oppose.  {Paston 
Letters  J  i.  8.)  From  this  it  would  seem  that 
his  practice  was  at  that  time  principally  in 
the  Court  of  Chancery,  which  may  perhaps 
account  for  the  infrequent  occurrence  of  his 
name  in  the  Year  Books,  in  which  Chancery 
cases  are  seldom  recorded.  In  30  Henry 
VI.  he  had  a  grant  from  Sir  William  Trus- 
sel  of  the  manor  of  Sheriff  Hales  in  Staf- 
fordshire for  his  life,  '  pro  bono  et  notabili 
consilio;'  affording  an  example  of  the 
manner  in  which  advocates  were  sometimes 
rewarded  by  their  opulent  clients  in  those 
days,  when  current  coin  was  scarce. 

He  was  called  to  the  degree  of  the  coif 
on  July  2,  1453,  and  was  also  appointed 
steward  (or  judge)  of  the  Court  of  Mar- 
shalsea  of  the  kmg's  household.  His  ser- 
vices were  soon  afterwards  further  retained 
by  the  crown,  by  wanting  him  a  patent  as 
king's  Serjeant  on  May  13,  1455. 

In  the  first  parliament  of  Edward  IV.  he 
was  named  as  an  arbitrator  in  a  difference 
between  the  Bishop  of  Winchester  and  his 
tenants  (Rot.  Pari.  v.  476) ;  and  two  years 
afterwaras  he  was  in  personal  attendance  on 
the  king  with  the  two  chief  justices  on  one 
of  the  royal  progresses.  (Paston  Letters,  L 
175.)  On  the  next  vacancy  he  was  raised 
to  the  bench,  being  constituted  a  judge  of 
the  Common  Pleas  on  April  17,  1466,  and 
he  added  a  disnity  to  the  law  by  his  learning 
and  impartiality  throughout  tpe  remainder 
of  his  Lfe,  uninfluencea  by  the  passions  of 
the  contending  parties,  and  unremoved  by 
either  of  the  royal  disputants  on  the  two 
temporary  transfers  of  the  crown  which  he 
witnessed.  In  15  Edward  IV.  he  was 
honoured  with  the  knighthood  of  the  Bath. 

He  died  where  he  was  bom,  at  Frankley, 
on  August  23,  1481,  and  was  buried  m 
Worcester  Cathedral. 

From  his  obtaining  two  general  pardons 
under  the  Great  Seal  it  has  been  inferred 
that  he  was  alternately  a  partisan  of  the 
houses  of  York  and  Lancaster,  and  thus  re- 
quired a  double  protection.  But  seeing  that 
tne  first  was  granted  in  1454,  before  the 
civil  war  had  commenced,  and  while  he  was 
in  the  king's  service  as  judge  of  the  Mar- 
shalsea,  it  seems  more  probable  that  the  in- 
demnity he  then  sued  for  was  against  any 
irregular  acts  he  might  have  committed 
while  he  was  high  sheriff  oi  eachaAiiat  ^ 


420 


LYTTELTON 


Worcestershire ;  and  as  to  the  second  grant, 
dated  1461,  when  he  was  in  favour  with  King 
Edward  IV. ,  his  desire  of  a  renewal  of  his 
pardon  must  he  considered  rather  as  an  act 
of  prudent  caution  at  the  end  of  a  violent 
civil  convulsion,  and  the  introduction  of  a 
new  dynasty,  a  conclusion  to  which  we 
more  readily  arrive  since  we  find  that  the 
latter  was  gi-anted  to  him  as  *  late  sheriff 
of  Worcester,  or  under-sherili'  *  (Chaufeine^s 
Cant,  ofBayle,  iii.  80).  the  Earl  of  Warwick 
bein^  the  hereditary  high  sheriff. 

Ills  name  is  still  sacred  in  Westminster 
Hall|  and  his  celebrated  work,  'The  Tbea- 
TTSE  ON  Tenures,'  which  Coke  describes  as 
'  the  most  perfect  and  absolute  work  that 
ever  was  written  in  any  human  science/ 
and  for  which  Camden  asserts  that  'the 
students  of  the  common  law  are  no  less 
beholden  than  the  civilians  are  to  Justi- 
nian's Institutes/  will  ever  prevent  its 
being  forgotten.  The  treatise  itself  is,  how- 
ever, now  seldom  read  without  the  valu- 
able Commentary  of  Sir  Edward  Coke,  a 
production  which,  as  no  one  would  dare  to 
enter  the  legal  arena  without  fully  digest- 
ing, has  been  illustrated  successivelv  by 
the  eminent  names  of  Hale;  Nottingham, 
Harnave,  and  Butler. 

Sir  Thomas  greatly  enlarged  his  posses- 
sions by  his  marriage  with  Joan,  one  of  the 
daughters  and  coheirs  of  Sir  William  Bur- 
le^,  of  Bromscrofb  Castle,  Shropshire,  and 
Widow  of  Sir  Philip  Chetwynd,  of  Ingestre 
in  Staffordshire.  By  her  he  hod  three  sons, 
each  the  progenitor  of  a  noble  house — viz., 
the  present  Lord  Lyttelton  of  Frankley, 
from  the  eldest ;  the  present  Lord  Hather- 
ton,  from  the  second  son ;  and  from  the 
third,  Lord  Lyttelton  of  Mounslow,  whose 
name  will  be  next  noticed. 

LYTTELTOH,  Edward  (Lord  Lyttel- 
ton), was  the  great-grandson  of  Thomas, 
the  youngest  of  the  three  sons  of  the  last- 
mentioned  judge,  and  the  son  of  Edward 
Lyttelton,  seated  at  Henley  in  Shropshire, 
who  became  chief  justice  of  North  Wales, 
was  knighted,  and  married  Mary,  the 
daughter  of  Edmund  Walter,  chief  justice 
of  South  Wales,  and  sister  to  Sir  John 
Walter^  the  distinguished  lord  chief  baron 
of  the  Exchequer  in  the  reign  of  James  I. 

Edward  Lyttelton  was  bom  at  Mounslow 
in  1589;  and  took  his  first  degree  in  arts  at 
Christ  Church,  Oxford,  in  1609.  At  the 
Inner  Temple  he  was  called  to  the  bar. 
Lord  Clarendon  (ii.  491)  describes  him  as 
<a  handsome  and  proper  man,  of  a  very 
graceful  presence,  and  notorious  for  courage, 
which  in  his  youth  he  had  manifested  witii 
his  sword.  He  had  taken  great  pains  in 
the  hardest  and  most  knot^  part  of  the 
law,  as  well  as  that  which  was  more 
customaiyy  and  was  not  only  yeiy  ready 
and  expert  in  the  book^  but  exceedingly 
Tetaed  in  records,  in  stnaying  and  examin- 


LYTTELTON 

ing  whereof  he  had  kept  Mr.  Selden  com- 
pany, with  whom  he  had  great  friendship^ 
and  who  had  much  assisted  him,  so  that  he 
was  looked  upon  as  the  best  antiquary*  of 
the  profession  who  gave  himself  up  to  prac- 
tice.    His  early  reputation  in  his  profes- 
sion is  proved  by  his  being  on  his  father*^ 
death,  in  1621,  appointed  to  succeed  him  as 
chief  justice  of  iNorth  Wales. 

Returned  in  1626  to  the  second  parlia- 
ment of  Charles  L,  he  took  an  active  part 
in  the  proceedings  against  the  Duke  of 
Buckingnam,  arguing  that  common  &me 
was  a  sufficient  ground  for  the  house  t? 
act  upon.  In  the  midst  of  the  enauiiy  the 
king,  to  save  his  favourite,  dissolved  the 
parliament.  When  it  met  ap^ain  in  March 
1628  Lyttelton  was  placed  m  the  chair  of 
the  committee  of  grievance^  and  on  April 
3  presented  to  the  house  their  report,  upoB 
which  was  founded  the  famous  Petition  of 
Right.  In  the  subsequent  confereDcei 
with  the  Lords  he  ably  enforced  the  reso- 
lutions, and  replied  to  the  objectioDS  of 
the  crown  officers  with  temper  and  point 
He  was  designated  by  the  lord  president  in 
reporting  the  arguments  as  ^a  srave  ud 
learned  lawyer,*  and  great  must  have  bees 
his  elation  when  he  heard  the  king^s  answer 
to  the  petition, '  Soit  droit  fait  comme  3 
est  d^sirS.'  On  the  dissolution  of  this  pa^ 
liament  in  the .  following  March  serenl 
members  were  imprisoned  for  their  violence 
in  holding  the  speaker  in  the  chair  while 
the  protestation  against  tonnage  and  pound- 
age was  passed.  On  their  application  to 
the  Court  of  King's  Bench,  Lyttelton  v^ 
peared  for  John  Selden,  who  was  one  o{ 
those  arrested,  and  learnedly  contended  for 
his  right  to  be  discharged  on  bail  i^M. 
Hitt.YL,  58-323 ;  StaU  Trials,  iii.  85,  M) 

Though  a  strenuous  advocate  for  tb 
liberty  of  the  subject,  he  had  never  exhi- 
bited an^  asperitjr  in  his  language,  nor 
shown  himself  a  violent  partisan  of  those 
who  opposed  the  measures  of  the  oout 
The  king  could  not  fail  to  see  the  benefiti 
which  would  result  from  his  servioee,  and 
accordingly  earnestly  recommended  hun  ss 
recorder  of  the  city  of  London,  towhid 
he  was  elected  on  December  7,  168L 
About  the  same  time  he  was  appointed 
counsel  to  the  university  of  Oxfora,  and  in 
autumn  of  the  next  year  he  arrived  at  the 
post  of  reader  to  the  Inner  Temple.  la 
October  1634  he  was  made  6olicito^ 
general,  and  knighted.  This  office  he  h^ 
above  five  years,  and  principally  diatis* 
guished  himself  by  his  elaborate  argmiMst 
against  Hampden  in  the  case  of  ship-mon^ft 
in  delivering  which  he  occupied  thnadqii 
(S^ate  Triah,  iiL  923.) 

An  extraordinaij  compluneoat 
by  his  inn  of  court  to  the 
iUustrious  ancestor.    The  mi 
having  applied  to  a  chambv 


LYTTELTON" 

-over  his  own,  to  be  assigned  to  his  kins- 
man, Mr.  Thomas  Lyttelton,  ^the  whole 
x;ompany  of  the  bencn  with  one  voice '  not 
only  granted  his  request,  but  desired  that 
the  *  admittance  should  be  freely  without 
any  fine,  as  a  tc&timony  of  that  great 
respect  the  whole  society  doth  owe  and 
acknowledge  to  the  name  and  family  of 
Lyttelton.'     {Inner  Temple  Books,) 

He  was  promoted  to  the  office  of  chief 
justice  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  January 
27,  1640.  (JRymer,  xx.  880.)  In  the 
April  following  a  new  parliament  was 
called,  and  after  sitting  barely  three  weeks 
was  dissolved.  Another,  the  Long  Parlia- 
ment, met  in  November,  and  one  of  its 
first  enquiries  was  into  the  conduct  of  Liord 
Keeper  Finch,  who,  dreading  the  conse- 
/luences,  fled  tne  country.  The  Seal,  being 
thus  deserted,  was  delivered  to  Lyttelton, 
with  the  title  of  lord  keeper,  on  January 
18, 1041  (Croke,  Car,  665) ;  and  on  the  18th 
of  the  following  month  he  was  created 
Lord  Ljttelton  of  Mounslow.  This  ad- 
vance did  not  add  to  his  reputation  or  his 
peace.  In  the  Common  Pleas  he  had  pre- 
sided with  great  ability ;  in  the  Chancery 
he  was  only  an  indifierent  judge.  At  the 
council  and  in  parliament  ne  felt  himself 
out  of  his  element,  and  was  so  disturbed 
with  the  unhappy  state  of  the  king's  afiairs 
that  he  fell  into  a  serious  illness,  and  was 
absent  from  his  place  for  some  months. 
On  the  impeachment  and  attainder  of  his 
friend  the  Earl  of  Straflbrd  he  was  pre- 
vented from  pleading  on  his  behalf  by  his 
illness.  Soon  after,  on  May  18,  the  lord 
keeper  was  placed  at  the  head  of  a  com- 
mission to  execute  the  office  of  lord  hiffh 
treasurer.  On  his  resuming  his  seat  ne 
had  the  difficult  duty  of  presiding  during 
all  the  violent  measures  tnat  occupied  th6 
house.  His  conduct,  while  it  could  not 
but  be  displeasing  to  the  king,  raising 
doubts  of  his  fidelity,  was  so  satisfactory  to 
the  Commons,  and  so  apparently  compliant 
\vith  their  wills,  that  on  their  nomination 
of  lieutenants  for  the  several  counties  they 
placed  liim  at  the  head  of  his  native  shire. 
(State  Trials,  ii.  1086.)  In  March  1642  the 
king,  ofiended  by  the  parliamentary  pro- 
ceeding, retired  to  York.  He  had  been  for 
fionie  time  suspicious  of  the.lord  keeper's  de- 
votion to  him,  and  was  particularly  disgusted 
with  his  vote  in  favour  of  the  ordinance  for 
the  militia,  and  his  arguments  in  support 
of  its  legality.  (Whitelocke,  69.)  Lord 
Lyttelt^>n,  however,  took  an  opportunity  of 
explaining  to  3Ir.  Ilyde  (afterwards  Lord 
Clarendon),  who  was  secretly  in  the  con- 
fidence of  the  king,  that  he  was  in  great 
perplexity  how  to  act,  that  he  had  no  per- 
son to  confer  with  or  to  confide  in,  and 
that  he  had  given  this  vote  and  others, 
"Which  he  knew  would  be  obnoxious  to 
the  king,  for  the  purpose  of  disarming  the 


LYTTELTON 


421 


rising  distrust  of  the  Commons,  and  of 
preventing  their  proposed  intention  of 
taking  the  Seal  from  hiuL  He  thereupon 
planned  with  Mr.  Hyde  that  he  would 
take  advantage  of  the  customary  recess  of 
the  house,  between  Saturday  and  Monday 
morning,  to  send  the  Great  Seal  to  the 
king,  and  himself  to  follow  after.  This 
important  service,  as  it  was  then  deemed, 
was  successfully  effected,  and  on  May  23 
the  lord  keeper's  escape  was  reported  to 
the  Lords,  wno  imme^ately  ordered  him 
to  be 'taken  into  custody ;  but  at  the  end  of 
the  third  day  after  his  departure  he  kissed 
the  king's  hand  at  York.  This  statement 
would  seem  to  be  contradicted  by  his  sub- 
sequent letter  to  the  Lords,  in  which  he 
says  that  Saturday  was  the^'st  time  that 
he  ever  heard  of  going'  to  xork,  and  that 
he  did  so  by  the  king's  absolute  commands. 
He  endoses  an  affidavit  showing  his  in- 
ability from  illness  to  travel  to  West- 
minster, as  ordered,  and  at  the  same  time 
proves  the  evasiveness  of  the  excuse  by 
*  taking  tiie  boldness '  to  inform  the  Lords 
that  he  has  the  king's  express  commands 
upon  his  allegiance  not  to  depart  from  him. 
Such  weakness  of  punose,  and  such  useless 
attempts  to  be  well  with  both  parties, 
sufficiently  account  for  his  not  bemg  re- 
spected by  either. 

It  was  not  till  a  year  afterwards  that  the 
parHament  voted  that  if  Lord  Keeper 
Lyttelton  did  not  return  with  the  Great 
Seal  within  fourteen  days  he  should  lose 
his  place,  and  whatever  should  be  sealed 
with  that  Great  Seal  afterwards  should  be 
void  (WTiitelockey  70)  :  and  the  two  houses 
passea  an  ordinance  for  a  new  Great  Seal 
on  November  10,  1643.  The  king  was,  at 
first,  much  dissatisfied  with  Lyttelton, 
whose  hesitation  and  fears  were  rather 
annoying.  But  Hyde  convinced  his  majesty 
of  his  lord  keeper's  fidelity,  and  prevented 
his  being  removed  from  his  place,  though 
he  was  not  for  some  time  entrusted  with 
the  actual  custody  of  the  Seal.  Of  Lyttel- 
ton's  loyal  devotion  to  the  crown  all  sus- 
picion was  at  last  removed.  In  March  he 
was  again  appointed  first  commissioner  in 
the  ^asury  (4  Mmort  Pub,  Mec.,  App,  ii. 
1§7);  and  on  May  21,  1644,  he  was  actually 
entrusted  with  a  military  commission  to 
raise  a  regiment  of  foot-soldiers,  oonsistinff 
of  gentlemen  of  the  inns  of  court  and 
chanceiy,  and  others.  Of  this  regiment,  the 
ranks  of  which  were  soon  filled,  he  acted 
as  colonel.  Two  centuries  had  elapsed  since 
a  keeper  of  the  Seal  and  a  soldier  were  united 
in  the  same  person;  and  in  the  two  cen- 
turies that  have  since  passed  no  other  person 
has  served  the  king  in  a  like  doublecapacity. 

Notwithstanding  this  ebullition  of  2^ 
and  spirit,  Lyttelton  was  an  altered  man. 
The  sad  position  of  public  affairs  depressed 
him ;  he  oeaune  melancholy,  and  thA  ^i^^Q& 


422 


LYTTELTON 


of  his  mind  and  the  strength  of  his  hody 
gradually  decayed,  so  that  he  could  not 


Church,  Oxford. 

That  he  was  a  learned  lawyer,  power- 
ful advocate,  and  an  excellent  judge ;  that 
in  his  private  character  he  was  hig^hly 
esteemea;  that  he  was  incorrupt  amidst 
corruption, and  moderate  among  the  violent; 
and  that  he  never  used  power  for  the 
gratification  of  private  malignity,  nor  fbr  the 
prosecution  of  party  purposes,  ooth  friends 
and  enemies  readily  acknowledge.  Deser- 
tion of  the  popular  party  for  place  is  some- 
what harshly  alleged  against  him.  His 
suhsequent  career  must  rather  he  hlamed 
as  weak  than  stigmatised  as  treacherous; 
and  Ms  flight  with  the  Great  Seal  from  the 
parliament,  so  dangerous,  and  indeed  so 
fatal  to  himself,  if  he  had  heen  stopped, 
showed  a  degree  of  personal  courajgfe  that 
must  dissipate  all  douots  as  to  the  principles 
hy  which  ne  was  guided.  He  felt  it  to  he 
hiA  duty  to  resist  the  encroachments  on  the 
constitution,  and  he  did  resist  them;  he 
felt  it  equally  to  be  his  duty  to  support  the 
sovereign  when  his  power  was  threatened, 
and  he  flew  to  him  for  that  purpose.  But 
he  was  not  a  man  for  the  times  he  lived  in. 
He  was  not  made  for  power ;  he  could  not 
cope  with  the  spirits  of  the  day;  he  was 
weak  and  wavenng ;  and  by  endeavouring 
to  be  the  friend  of  all  paraes  he  expe- 
rienced the  usual  consequence  of  bemg 
confided  in  by  none.    But  he  had  dear 


XACDONALD 

friends  on  both  sides  who  did  not  doubt  hLi 
integrity.  Hyde,  who  knew  him  welLwas 
his  friend  to  the  last  Whitelocke,  or  the 
parliament  side,  always  speaks  kmdly  of 
nim,  and  even  in  relating  his  flight  calls 
him  'a  man  of  courage  and  of  excellent 
parts  and  learning^ 

A  volume  of  Keports  in  the  Common. 
Pleas  and  Exchequer,  from  2  to  7  Chsrlei 
I.,  was  published  with  his  name  In  168S; 
but  doubts  have  been  raised  as  to  tbdr 
bein^  of  his  composition. 

His  peerage  died  with  him.  His  fizat 
wife  was  Anne,  daughter  of  John  iMtel- 
ton  of  Frankley ;  and  his  second  wite  was 
Elizabeth,  one  of  the  daughters  of  Sir 
William  Jones,  the  judge  of  the  Eiog'i 
Bench,  and  widow  of  Sir  George  Calverl^, 
of  Cheshire.    (Ath,  Oxon,  iii.  175.) 

LYTTELTOH,  TiMOTHT,  the  brother  of 
the  above  lord  keeper  of  Charles  L,  and 
the  seventh  son  of  Sir  Edward  Lyttelton,  of 
Henley  in  Shropshire,  chief  justice  of  N(nth 
Wales,  was  admitted  into  the  Inner  Templa 
in  162G,  called  to  the  bar  in  1535,  and 
elected  a  bencher  in  1640.  During  tha 
Kebellion  his  history  is  a  blank ;  but  at  tk 
Restoration  he  held  the  office  of  recorder  of 
Bewdley,  and  was  appointed  one  of  tita 
Welsh  judffes.  The  only  subsequent  notioa 
of  him  is  that  he  was  constituted  a  bann 
of  the  Exche<juer  on  February  1,  WOf 
and  that  he  died  early  in  1679,  wad  waa 
buried  in  the  Temple  Church.  (Wodi 
Fasti,  ii.  231 ;  Nash's  Worcesterskirs,  u. 
279 ;  Co/.  St.  Papers  [1660],  212 ;  Gtd, 
Mag,  iii.  09.) 


M 


IEACCIESFIXLB,  Eabl  of.  See  T. 
Pabkeb. 

XAODOHALD,  Archibali),  was  de- 
scended from  the  old  Lords  of  the  Isles, 
one  of  whom  was  created  a  baronet  of 
Nova  Scotia  in  1625.  The  seventh  baronet 
was  Sir  Alexander,  who  by  his  second  wife, 
Margaret,  daughter  of  Alexander,  ninth 
Earl  of  Eglinton,  was  father  of  three 
sons,  the  two  elder  of  whom  succeeded 
in  turn  to  the  title,  and  the  latter  was  in 
1776  raised  to  the  barony  of  Macdonald  in 
the  peerage  of  Ireland,  which  his  repre- 
sentative still  enjoys.  Archib^d,  the 
vounffest,  was  bom  in  1746,  and  received 
his  education  at  Westminster  School. 

On  being^  called  to  the  bar  in  England 
his  connection  with  Scotland  insured  him 
liberal  emjdoyment  in  appeals  from  that 
country  to  the  House  of  Lords ;  and  in  the 
courts  of  Westminster,  though  he  had  not 
great  practice,  he  acquired  such  a  character 
as  a  lawyer  as  to  be  engaged  in  the  great 


Grenada  case  in  1775,  for  his  argument  is 
which  he  was  highly  praised  by  Ixnd 
Mansfield.  (StaU  Trials,  xx.  ^,  d03» 
306.)  His  union  in  1777  with  Looiaa, 
the  eldest  daughter  of  Granville,  aeoooi 
Earl  Gower  (uterwards  Marquis  of  Staf- 
ford), was  a  certain  precursor  of  promotion 
to  one  who  possessed  competent  legal 
qualifications.  In  the  same  year  he  waa 
made  one  of  the  king's  counsel,  and  waa 
returned  to  parliament  for  the  borough  of 
Hindon,  and  in  1780  for  Newcastle-onda- 
Lvne.  He  gave  his  support  to  Lord  North 
while  he  remained  prime  minister;  but  whea 
that  nobleman  aftiBrwards  joined  Mr.  Foe 
in  the  Coalition  Ministry,  he  strumoaaiy 
opposed  the  unholy  alliance,  and  mads  as 
able  speech  against  the  £unous  East  India 
Bill  in  answer  to  Mr.  Erskine.  liMB  fli 
very  fijst  entrance  of  Mr.  Htl 
senate  in  1781  Mr.  MaodonaV 
himself  to  that  remailDablt  i 
pating  lus  future 


1 

i 


3 


! 


MADDINGLEY 

boldly  by  bis  side  in  tb^  doubtful  parlia- 
mentary conflict  that  raged  after  the  dis- 
persion and  ejection  of  the  Coalition  in 
jbecember  1783.  {Pari  Hist,  xix.-xziv^ 
He  was  not  long  in  receiving  bis  rewardf, 
being  appointed  solicitor-general  on  April 
8,  1784.  To  the  parliaments  of  1784  and 
1790  be  was  returned  by  bis  old  consti- 
tuents, and  while  be  continued  in  the 
House  of  Commons  be  was  a  steady  and 
useful  adherent  to  the  minister^  particularly 
in  reference  to  the  king's  illness  in  1789. 

In  1780  be  was  appointed  a  Welsh  judge 
on  the  Carmarthen  Circuit,  and  succeeded 
Sir  Pepper  Arden  as  attorney-general  on 
June  28.  1788,  and  was  then  knighted.  It 
fell  to  nis  lot  to  prosecute  Stockdale  by 
order  of  the  House  of  Commons,  for  pul>- 
lishing  Mr.  Logan's  defence  of  Mr.  Hast- 
ings ;  and  also  Thomas  Paine  as  the  author 
of  *  The  Rights  of  Man ; '  both  of  them 
affording  Mr.  Erskine  opportimities  of 
displaying  his  extraordinary  oratorical 
powers,  m  the  former  case  with  a  suc- 
cess which  be  could  not  expect  in  the 
latter.  In  the  exercise  of  his  office  Sir 
Archibald  was  distinguished  for  bis  pru- 
dence and  humanity,  which  Mr.  Burke 
acknowledged  was  a  striking  feature  in 
bis  character,  though  in  the  latter  years 
of  bis  official  life  the  seditious  spirit  that 
then  prevailed  obliged  him  to  institute 
several  prosecutions.  {State  Trials^  xxi.  61, 
xxii.  247,  285,  380 ;  Pari.  Hid.  xxix.  612.) 

His  promotion  to  the  place  of  lord 
chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer  took  place  on 
February  12,  1793,  a  post  for  which  bis 
discriminating  powers  and  judicial  mind 
peculiarly  fitted  him.  After  a  presidency 
of  twenty  years,  esteemed  by  all  for  his 
careful  and  impartial  administration  of  the 
law,  for  his  patient  attention  to  every 
argument,  never  interrupting  the  speaker, 
as  well  as  for  the  kindness  of  bis  dispo- 
sition and  the  courtesy  of  his  manners,  be 
retired  into  private  life  in  November  1813, 
and  in  the  same  month  was  rewarded  with 
a  baronetcy.  He  survived  bis  resignation 
nearly  thirteen  years,  and  died  on  May  18, 
1 826.   His  grandson  is  no  w  the  third  baronet. 

MADDINOLET,  Robert  de,  of  Mad- 
dingley,  a  parish  in  Cambridgeshire,  was 
the  son  of  x homas  de  Maddingley,  mem- 
ber for  Cambridge  in  several  parliaments 
of  Edward  I.  He  was  one  of  tne  assessors 
of  the  tallage  of  that  and  three  neigh- 
bouring counties  in  0  Edward  II.,  and  was 
iu  several  judicial  commissions  in  that 
locality  about  the  same  period.  In  1314 
he  was  one  of  the  justices  of  assize  in 
Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  and  he  continued  to 
perform  the  same  functions  in  these  and 
other  counties  till  1321,  in  which  year  be 
died.  (Pari.  Writs,  720,  p.  ii.  1129  j  Hot. 
Pari.  i.  374,  448,  450^ 

XALBEBTHOBP,    ROBERT   DE,  was   so 


MALDUIT 


423 


called  from  a  manor  of  that  name  in  Lin« 
colnsbire.  In  6  and  8  Edward  H.  be  is 
mentioned  in  connection  with  property  in 
that  county  (Abb.  Rot.  Orig.  i.  198,  216), 
and  was  occasionally  employed  in  commis- 
sions there  from  10  Edward  U.  till  he  was 
raised  to  the  bench.  This  event  occurred 
about  August  1320,  as  a  judffe  in  the  Kinflfs 
Bench.  From  that  time  till  the  end  of  tbe 
reign  he  was  actively  engaged  in  the  per- 
formance of  his  judicial  duties,  principallj 
in  tbe  country. 

His  re-appointment  on  tbe  accession  of 
Edward  111.  was  delayed  on  account  of 
Queen  Isabella's  indignation  against  him,  in 
consequence  of  bis  being  concerned  in  tbe 
judgment  pronounced,  live  years  before, 
upon  Thomas  Earl  of  Lancaster.  But  be 
obtained  bis  pardon  on  March  7, 1327,  on 
the  testimony  of  tbe  prelates  and  peers  that 
be  gave  that  jud^ent  by  command  of  the 
king,  whom  be  did  not  dare  to  disobey,  and 
to  avoid  danger  to  himself.  Such  is  tbe 
disgraceful  entry  on  the  patent  of  pardon. 
(If.Fcedera,  ii.  690.)  It  may  be  presumed, 
therefore,  that  be  was  then  permitted  to 
resume  bis  judicial  functiona  We  accord- 
ingly find  mm  acting  as  a  justice  of  assize 
in  this  first  year,  and  sittmg  in  court  in 
Hilary  Term  of  tbe  second.    (  Year  Book.) 

On  February  2, 1329,  be  was  named  in 
tbe  commission  to  try  certain  malefactors 
in  tbe  city  of  London  (N.  Fosdera^  iL  756), 
and  on  May  1  following  had  so  entirely  re- 
covered favour  as  to  be  promoted  to  tbe 
office  of  chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench 
during  tbe  temporary  absence  of  Geofi&ey 
le  Scrope.  This  lasted  till  October  28  in 
the  same  year,  when  be  remained  in  that 
court  till  January  18,  1331,  and  was  then 
removed  into  the  Common  Pleas.  The  fines 
levied  before  him  do  not  extend  beyond 
Martinmas  in  tbe  same  year,  and  bis  death 
soon  after  occurred.  (PJot.  Pari  ii.  25, 208 ; 
Pari.  Writs,  u.  p.  ii.  1131  j  Abb.  Rot.  Orig. 
L  198,  u.  59.) 

KALDXriT,  JoHK,  held  a  place  in  tbe  Curia 
Regis  or  Exchequer  in  16  Henry  U.,  1170. 
Two  years  afterwards  be  and  Turstin  Fitz- 
Simon  accounted  for  tbe  profits  of  tbe  see 
of  Canterbury,  which  bad  been  committed 
to  their  care  on  the  murder  of  Becket. 
(Madox,  L  309,  631,  ii.  263.) 

In  1174  be  was  one  of  tbe  justices  itine- 
rant for  setting  tbe  assize  in  the  counties  of 
Nottingham  and  Lincoln,  in  the  latter  of 
which  he  is  also  mentioned  on  the  roUs  of 
22  and  23  Henry  H.  (Ibid.  i.  123, 127, 129.) 

KALDVIT,  William  (Maledoctus),  is 
mentioned  in  only  two  instances  (Madox,  L 
44, 215)  as  a  baron  acting  judicially.  These 
are  in  11  and  30  Henry  IL,  1166  and  1184; 
and  in  both  cases  he  is  represented  as  being 
present  among  those  sittmg  in  the  Exche- 
quer when  charters  or  ag^ements  relatiye 
to  land  were  executed  or  ackno^lft^!;^ 


424 


MALDUIT 


there.  On  each  of  these  occasions  he  is  de- 
scribed OS  chamberlain,  in  which  character 
he  would  have  a  seat  in  that  court  He 
does  not  appear  to  have  been  employed  aa  a 
justice  itinerant.  He  succeeded  to  the  office 
of  chamberlain  on  the  death  of  his  elder 
brother,  Robert,  about  31  Henry  L,  1130-1. 

Robert  and  .William  were  the  sons  of 
William  Mauduit,  who  is  mentioned  in 
Domesday  Book  as  possessing  seven  lord- 
ships in  Hampshire,  and  who  was  afterwards 
appointed  chamberlain  to  Henry  I.,  from 
whom  he  received  in  marriage  Maud,  the 
daughter  of  Michael  de  Hanslape,  with  the 
lands  of  which  he  died  possessed. 

It  is  evident  that  there  were  several  cham- 
berlains in  the  King*s  Court,  and  that  there 
was  one  at  the  head  of  all,  called  magistra 
cameraria,  which  was  an  hereditary  office. 
Whatever  were  their  duties  in  the  king's 
household,  it  is  certain  that  they  were  offi- 
cially connected  with  the  Exchequer,  and 
had  the  care  of  the  receipts  and  payments 
of  the  revenue.  They  also  sat  at  this  time 
as  barons  or  justices  in  the  Exchequer. 

That  there  was  some  interval  during  the 
reign  of  Stephen  in  which  William  Miuduit 
did  not  enjoy  the  office,  or  that  some  doubt 
existed  as  to  the  right  of  possession,  seems 
likely,  from  his  obtaining  from  Henry  II., 
while  Duke  of  Normandy,  a  grant  of  the  in- 
heritance of  the  office  of  chamberlain  of  his 
Exchequer,  with  the  castle  of  Porchester, 
and  all  the  lands  to  the  chamberlainship  and 
the  castle  appertaining,  both  in  England  and 
Normandy.  These  were  confirmed  to  him 
when  Henry  II.  attained  the  crown.  He 
held  the  sheriffalty  of  Rutland  from  20 
Henry  II.  till  the  end  of  the  reign,  and  his 
name  is  recorded  as  chamberlam  up  to  7 
Richard  I.,  1195,  soon  after  which  he  pro- 
bably died,  having  in  the  previous  year 
joined  an  expedition  into  Normandy.  He 
WBS  succeeded  by  his  son,  the  next-men- 
tioned Robert.  {DugdMs  Baron,  i.  398  \ 
Pipe  RoUSf  Uen}*y  II.  and  Richard  /.) 

HALDUIT,  Robert,  who  sat  as  a  justi- 
cier  in  the  Curia  Regis  in  10  John,  1208-9, 
when  fines  were  acknowledged  there,  was  the 
son  of  the  above  William  Malduit  During 
the  last  nine  or  ten  years  of  the  reim  of 
Henry  II.  he  held  the  sheriffalty  of  Wilt- 
shire ;  and  on  his  father's  death  hesucceeded 
to  the  office  of  chamberlain  of  the  Exchequer, 
which  he  exercised  during  the  whole  ot  the  : 
reign  of  John.  {Rot,  de  Liberate^  passim.) 
In  1  John,  for  a  fine  of  100/.,  he  obtained  ! 
the  custody  of  Rockingham  Castle  {Rot. 
de  Oblatis,  9)  ;  and  from  2  to  7  John  he  was 
sheriff  of  Rutland. 

He  accompanied  the  king  in  his  Irish 
expedition  in  1210  (Rot.  de  PrtsstitOf  185, 
&c.),  but  afterwards  joined  the  standard  of 
the  discontented  barons  in  the  contest  for 
their  liberties.  The  Close  RoU  of  17  John 
recordB  his  name  among  those  who  took  up 


MALEBYSSE 

arms  against  the  king,  his  son  William  act- 
ing a  still  more  prominent  part.    The  con- 
sequence of  this  revolt  was  the  loss  of  the 
family  estates,  which  were  seised  into  the 
king^s  hands,  and  the  excommunication  and 
capture  of  William.     Soon  after  the  acces- 
sion of  King  Henry  III.  both  of  them  re- 
turned to  their  allegiance,  their  submiMon 
being  accompanied  oy  a  restoration  of  their 
property.     {Rot.  Claus.  i.  237-346.) 

llobert  died  about  June  1222,  0  Hem? 
HI.  His  widow,  Isabella,  daughter  of 
Thurstan  Basset,  survived  him;  and 
William,  their  son,  married  Alice,  the 
daughter  of  Waleran,  Earl  of  Wannck, 
whose  son,  also  William,  succeeded  to  that 
earldom,  which  continued  in  the  family  till 
the  year  1589,  when  it  became  extinct 
One  of  the  earls,  Henry  de  Beaochamp, 
was  created  Duke  of  Warwick  in*1444^buc 
the  title  died  with  him.  {Baroittufe^  L  ^ ; 
R.  de  Wendover,  iii.  297,  349,  35(5,  iv.  3i  I 

KALEBTSSE,  RiCHABD,  was  the  son  of 
Hugh  de  Malebysse,  who  came  over  from 
Normandy,  and  was  settled  in  3  Stephen 
at  Scawtou  in  Yorkshire.  His  mother 
was  Emma,  daughter  and  heir  of  Henrj  de 
Percy.  He  was  called  Richard  Mslehpse 
of  Acaster,  and  was  one  of  the  foresten  of 
the  county  of  York. 

In  the  be^nning  of  the  reign  of  Richaid 
I.  he  was  m  some  mamier  implicated  in 
the  horrible  massacre  of  the  Jews  at  York, 
for  which  his  lands  were  seized  into  the 
king's  hands ;  and  in  4  Richard  I.  he  paid 
twenty  marks  to  recover  them  till  the  kiif's 
return.  He  was  afterwards  implicated  in 
some  other  disturbances,  which  drew  apos 
him  and  his  brother  Hugh  the  excommuni- 
cation of  the  pope ;  and  in  6  Richaid  L  he 
paid  a  fine  of  three  hundred  marks  to  regain 
the  kind's  favour,  and  for  having  the  foil 
restoration  of  his  lands,  wards,  and  foresb. 

His  latter  offence  was  evidently  too  doM 
a  connection  with  Earl  John ;  for  though, 
when  that  prince  came  to  the  throne,  he 
had  to  pay  another  fine  for  some  of  his 
lands,  he  seems  to  have  at  once  been  ad- 
mitted into  the  royal  confidence.  Li  ti 
John  he  had  the  custody  of  the  castle  of 
Queldric ;  in  the  next  year  he  was  empk^yed 
as  a  justice  itinerant  to  fix  the  tallage  in 
Yorkshire ;  and  in  4  John  he  was  present 
at  Westminster  when  fines  were  acknow- 
ledged there.  (MadoXfi.  Sie,  72^)  Be- 
sides these  judicial  duties,  he  was  sent  a 
one  of  the  embassy  to  accompany  Williani, 
King  of  Scotiand,  to  England  ;  and  in  <> 
John  was  engaged  in  enforcing  the  m- 
ment  of  the  aids  required  by  the  king.  Be 
was  keeper  of  the  forests  of  Galtre%  Do- 
went,  and  Wemerdale,  and  had  pennikM 
to  stub  and  cultivate  eighty  meatm  tilmi 
of  tiie  king's  forest,  betwMD  ^  '^' 
Derwent,  at  Queldxio.  (Jtr* 
41,  56;   RoL   Ckari..4SL)  ^ 


MALET 

6ome  disjprace  by  his  negligence  in  keeping 
the  forest  of  Goitres,  and  before  he  could 
recover  the  land  and  casfles,  which  the 
king  thereupon  summarily  seized^  he  was 
compelled,  in  6  John,  to  pay  a  fine  of  five 
pounds  into  the  royal  treasury. 

Although  he  seems  to  have  been  a  little 
turbulent  in  character,  he  was  apparently 
of  a  generous  nature,  and  in  the  disposition 
of  his  property,  which  was  very  extensive, 
to  have  acted  with  great  liberality.  He 
made  grants  of  lands  to  various  abbeyS| 
and  founded  that  of  Newbo,  near  Grantham 
in  Lincolnshire,  for  monks  of  the  Pra^mon- 
fitratensian  order,  endowing  it  with  a  third 
part  of  the  church  of  Kniveton  in  Notting- 
hamshire, and  with  the  church  of  Acaster. 
{Monast.  vi.  887.) 

He  died  in  11  John,  1209,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  his  eon  John.  One  of  his 
descendants,  Sir  Hercules  Malebysse,  in 
compliance  with  stipulations  entered  into 
on  his  marriage  with  Lady  Beckwith 
Bruce,  assumed  the  name  of  Beckwith, 
^vhich  the  family  has  since  preserved,  and 
within  the  last  century  has  been  highly 
distinguished  in  our  military  annals. 

MALET^  Robert,  was  amerced  in  14 
Edward  I.  for  not  appearing  at  the  Ex- 
chequer with  his  accounts  as  sheriff  of 
the  counties  of  Bedford  and  Buckingham. 
{Madox,  ii.  237.)  But  the  offence  was  no 
doubt  speedily  removed,  for  in  18  Ed- 
ward L,  1289,  he  was  appointed  a  judge  of 
the  King's  Bench.  He  is  mentioned  in 
that  character  as  late  as  1294,  in  which 
year  he  died.     {Abh.  Rot.  Orig,  i.87,88.) 

MALET,  TnoMAS,  was  a  great-grandson  of 
Sir  Baldwin  Malet,  of  St.  Audries,  Somer- 
setshire, solicitor-general  of  Henry  VIH.,  a 
descendant  from  tne  Norman  baron  of  that 
name,  who  fought  on  William's  side  at  the 
battle  of  Hastings.  His  connection  with 
'the  above  llobert  Malet  cannot  now  be 
traced.  He  was  bom  about  1582,  and  took 
his  legal  degrees  in  the  Middle  Temple, 
being  called  to  the  bar  in  1G06,  and  De- 
coming  reader  in  1626. 

In  the  first  two  parliaments  of  Charles  L 
he  sided  with  the  government,  and  in  the 
case  of  the  Duke  of  Buckingham  he  argued 
forcibly  against  common  fame  being  re- 
•ceived  aa  a  sutticient  ground  of  accusation. 
After  filling  the  ofHce  of  solicitor- general 
to  the  queen  he  was  honoured  with  the 
coif  in  1635,  and  was  appointed  a  judge  of 
the  King's  Bench  on  July  1,  1641  (Rymer, 
XX.  517 ),  a  few  days  before  the  impeach- 
ment 01  six  of  his  brethren,  and  was  there- 
upon knighted.  Not  deterred  by  fear  of  the 
parliament,  at  the  very  next  Lent  assizes  he 
threw  no  discouragement  on  the  proposed 
petition  of  the  grand  jury  of  Kent  against 
the  ordinance  for  the  militia  without  the 
kinQ:*s  assent,  and  in  support  of  the  Book 
of  Common  I'rayer  \  and  for  having  shown 


MALET 


425 


this  petition  to  the  Earl  of  Biistol  with- 
i  out  mrst  revealing  it  to  the  house  he  was 
I  committed  to  the  Tower  by  the  Lords  on 
March  28.  1642,  but  released  on  May  2  on 
entering  into  a  recognisance  of  1000^  to 
appear  before  the  Lords  when  called  upon. 
(Pari  Hid.  ii.  1148;  Lordi  Journals.)  In 
that  summer  he  again  went  the  Home  Cir* 
cuit,  and  on  some  members  of  the  House  of 
Commons  coming  to  the  bench  at  Maid- 
stone, where  he  was  sitting,  and  producing 
certain  votes  of  parliament  on  behalf  of  the 
militia  onUnance  and  against  the  king's 
commission  of  array,  he  boldly  refused  to 
permit  them  to  be  read,  as  not  authorised 
Dv  the  commission  under  which  he  sat. 
I^or  this  courageous  conduct  King  Charles 
sent  him  a  letter  of  thanks,  vdth  a  promise 
of  protection.  This  however  the  parlia- 
ment rendered  inoperative,  by  promptly 
despatching  a  troop  of  horse  and  violently 
taking  the  judge  from  the  bench  at  Kings- 
ton in  Surrey.  Carried  prisoner  to  West- 
minster, the  house  immediately  committed 
him  to  the  Tower.  There  he  remained  a 
prisoner  for  above  two  years,  tiU  in  October 
1644  he  was  redeemed  by  the  king  in  ex- 
change for  another,  whose  liberty  the  par- 
liament desired.  They  still  regarded  him 
*  as  the  fomenter  and  protector  of  the  ma- 
lignant faction,'  and  by  an  ordinance  in  No- 
vember 1646  they  disabled  him  and  four  of 
his  colleagues  ^  mm  being  judges  as  though 
they  were  dead.'  (Clarendon,  iii.  153; 
WhiUhckey  107, 181.) 

During  the  succeeding  fifteen  years  he 
suffered  severely  for  his  loyalty,  losing  a 
son  in  the  king's  service,  and  his  projjerty 
being  greatly  reduced  by  sequestrations. 
Two  days  after  the  restoration  of  Charles 
II.,  though  then  seventy-eight  years  of 
1^,  he  was  replaced  in  ms  old  seat  in  the 
King's  Bench.  From  his  speech  on  the 
trial  of  one  of  the  regicides,  snowing  much 
of  the  garrulity  of  old  age,  it  is  evident 
that  he  was  then  nearly  superannuated ;  but 
he  was,  however,  sufnciently  alive  to  his 
interest  to  petition  for  and  obtain  grants 
of  land  in  Somersetshire  and  Devonshire. 
Sitting  in  court  for  the  three  succeeding 
years,  the  king  on  his  petition  on  June  18, 
1668,  dispensed  with  his  further  attend- 
ance, continuing  to  him  the  name  and 
salary  of  a  judge  (Ca/.  State  Papers  [1663], 
348,  435 ;  State  Trials,  v.  1030;  1  Siderfin, 
150),  and  granting  him  a  pension  of  1000/. 
a  vear.  At  the  same  time  ne  was  honoured 
with  a  baronetcy^  the  fiat  for  which,  for 
some  reason  or  other,  he  refrained  from 
having  completed  during  the  two  remain- 
ing vears  of  his  life. 

He  died  on  December  19, 1665,  and  was 
buried  in  Pointington  Church,  Somerset- 
shire. Under  the  recent  sufierings  of  the 
family,  his  descendants  for  the  three  next 
generations  did  not  solicit  the  com^letiou. 


426 


MALINS 


of  the  honour  whicb  King  Charles  had 
awarded  to  their  ancestor.  The  judge's 
greatfnreat-grandson,  Charles  Warre  M^et, 
howeyer,  who  filled  some  high  offices  in 
India,  accepted  in  1791  a  new  patent  of 
baronetcy,  but  afterwards  failed  in  his 
claim  for  precedence  under  the  old  patent, 
and  his  son  now  enjoys  the  new  honour. 
(Malet  Papers ;  CoUinson^s  Somers^,  ii.  377.) 

KALIHS,  Richard,  one  of  the  present 
vice-chancellors,  was  bom  in  1805  at  Eve- 
sham. He  is  the  son  of  the  late  Richard 
Malins,  Esq.,  of  Alston  in  Wamvickshire, 
by  a  daughter  of  Thomas  Hunter,  Esq.,  of 
Tershore.  Educated  at  Gonville  and  Caius 
College,  Cambridge,  he  took  his  degree  of 
B.A.  m  1827,  with  mathematical  honours. 
Before  this  time  he  had  entered  the  Inner 
Temple,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  on  May 
14,  1830.  With  an  extensive  practice  in 
Chancery,  he  obtained  a  silk  gown  in  1840. 
In  1852  he  entered  parliament  as  member 
for  Wallingford,  and  retained  the  seat  till 
July  1865,  supporting  the  conservative  side 
of  politics.  On  December  1, 1866,  he  was  ap- 
pointed vice-chancellor  as  the  successor  of  { 
that  estimable  judge  Sir  R.  T.  Kindersley,  • 
and  was  then  Imighted. 

He  married  Susannah,  daughter  of  the 
Rev.  Arthur  Farwell,  rector  of  St.  Martin's, 
Cornwall. 

MALLOSE,  Peter,  was  probably  a  de- 
scendant of  Gislebert  Mallore,  one  of  the 
Conqueror- s  followers,  and  of  Anchetil  Mal- 
lore, employed  in  the  rei^  of  Henry  II. 
He  married  Matilda,  the  widow  of  Elyas  de 
Rabayne,  and  a  daughter  of  Stephen  de 
Bayeux.  Holding  the  town  of  Melcombe, 
and  certain  lands  at  Dodemerton  in  Dorset- 
shire, in  ferm  under  the  kincr  (Madox^  i. 
335),  he  was  summoned  to  penorm  military 
service  against  the  Scots  in  28  Edward  I. 

Nothing  is  told  of  his  legal  life  before  he 
was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Common 
Pleas,  where  he  sat  for  above  seventeen 
years,  from  1202  to  1309.  {Serviens  ad 
Leffeniy  282 ;  Dugdale's  Orig,  44.)  During 
this  period  he  seems  to  have  been  very  ac- 
tively employed.  Sir  William  Wallace  was 
tried  before  him  in  1304  (  Turner^ a  England^ 
ii.  90,  n.),  and  in  1307  he  was  selected  as 
one  of  the  justices  of  trailbaston  for  the 
home  counties.  He  died  about  July  1310. 
(Co/.  Inquis,  p.  m.  i.  239.) 

MALO  LACTJ,  or  MATTLST^eter  be,  was 
great-grandson  of  Peter,  a  Poictevin,  who, 
beinff  enquire  to  King  John,  is  said  to  have 
owed  his  fortunes  to  undertaking  the  murder 
of  Prince  Arthur ;  in  reward  for  which  act 
Isabel,  the  daughter  of  Robert  de  Tumham, 
was  given  to  him  in  marriage,  with  all  her 
rich  possessions,  principally  in  Yorkshire. 
He  was  the  fourth  baron  in  succession,  and 
his  father  (also  Peter)  married  Nichola, 
dau^ter  of  Gilbert  de  Gant.  grandson  of 

he  £arl  of  Lincoln,  and  died  about  7  Ed- 


MANDEVILLE 

ward  I.,  when  he,  then  only  three  jem  of 
age,  succeeded  to  his 


(Ar^ 
clfueologiaj  xxi.  200.) 

He  was  engaged  in  the  Welah  and  Scot- 
tish wars  under  Edward  L,  and  was  torn* 
moned  to  parliament  from  the  twenty-tiliinl 
year  of  that  reign  till  his  death.    In  2^ 
Edward  I.  he  signed  the  barons'  letter  t» 
the  pope  by  the  title  of  Dominus  de  Mo*-- 
greve.    In  1305  and  1307  he  was  placed  tt 
the  head    of   the  justices  of  tnilbistoa 
appointed  for  lincolndiire,  Torkshire,  and 
eight  other  counties.    (N,  FiBderOy  L  970; 
Rot,  Pari  i.  188-218.) 

He  married  Eleanor,  daughter  of  ThonuB 
Lord  Fumival,  and  died  in  3  Edward  E, 
1310,  leaving  his  son  Peter,  who  succeeded 
him.  On  the  death  of  the  seventh  Peter 
in  1415  without  issue,  the  barony  fell  into 
abeyance  between  his  sisters.  {BaroMgt, 
i.  733.) 

MALTOH,  Robert,  is  only  known  as 
having  been  constituted  a  baron  of  the 
Exchequer  on  November  14, 1413, 1  Heniy 
v.,  and  re-appointed  at  the  commencement 
of  the  following  reign.  (CaL  Bot.  M 
202,  269.) 

HAL1I8  GATinirS,  RooER^  was  one  of  the 
chaplains  of  Richard  I.,  and  ismentioDedhf 
Hoveden  as  his  vice-chancellor  in  1191.  He 
accompanied  the  king  on  his  voyage  to  thfr 
Holv  Land,  and  two  charters  given  under 
his  hand  are  extant,  dated  on  Auich  27  tnd 
April  3  in  that  year,  at  Messina.  (BytMff 
i.  53 ;  Monad,  v.  505.)  In  the  lamentahb 
shipwreck  which  occurred  in  the  following 
May  off  the  island  of  Cyprus  be  m 
drowned;  and  the  king's  Seal,  which  u 
stated  to  have  been  suspended  round  his 
neck,  was  lost  with  him.  Richard  oonvoted 
this  accident  into  an  expedient  to  noM 
money,  by  proclaiming  that  no  giantBuadff 
it  shoidd  be  deemed  valid,  and  thus  com- 
pelling the  holders  of  them  to  pay  the  finei 
a  second  time,  for  a  conlirmation  under  the 
new  Seal.     {Madox,  i.  77.) 

Burke,  in  his  'Dictionaiy  of  Lioded 
Gentry '  (nouL  Machell),  makes  him  ths 
gi-eat-grandson  of  Halthe  Mains  Catahu, 
son  of  *  Catulus  de  Castro  Catuhno,'  in 
Westmoreland,  and  younger  son  of  WiUisin 
Malchael,  or  Mains  CatuluSy  of  Crtcken- 
thorpe.  The  present  family  of  Machell  of 
Beverley  trace  their  descent  from  his  eUff 
brother  John. 

MANCHE8TEB,  Eakl  07.  Sm  E.  Mos- 
TAOU ;  H.  Montagu. 

MANDEVILLE,  GSOFFBET  DB  (EaBL  OF 

Essex),  whose  name  is  corrupted  mmlb^ 
naville,  a  town  in  Normanay  beloiufing  to 
his  ancestors,  was  the  necond  Eail  of  Bi 
after  the  Conquest.    His  gieaA-faaiBii 
of  the  same  name^  was  one  «  ih>^ 
panions  of  the  Cooqiuorair  in  Ui 
against  England^  and  wm  !«■  fc 

many  broad  lands  and  kidf  ilk 


MANDEVILLE 

no  less  than  one  hundred  and  nineteen  are 
noted  in  Domesday  Book.  Besides  these, 
the  Conqueror  granted  him  the  custody  of 
the  Tower  of  London,  with  the  hereditary 
sheriffalty  of  London  and  Middlesex  and 
Hertfordshire.  His  son  William  succeeded 
him,  and  married  Margaret,  the  sole  daughter 
of  £udo  the  Dapifer,  hy  whom  he  had  a 
son,  named  Geoffrey,  who  was  steward  of 
Normandy  by  descent  of  his  mother.  Kinff 
Stephen  raised  him  to  the  dignity  of  Earl 
of  Essex,  but  the  Empress  Maud  won  him 
oyer  to  her  party  by  a  still  more  ample 
charter,  confirming  to  him  all  the  rights  and 
honours  and  lands  which  any  of  his  ances- 
tors had  held,  and  making  to  him  most  ex- 
tensive grants.  His  future  prowess  was 
disgracea  by  so  many  savage  outrages  that, 
although  he  had  founded  the  abbey  of 
AValden  in  Essex,  and  had  made  several 
^rifts  for  pious  uses,  he  was  excommunicated; 
and  being  in  1144  mortally  wounded  in 
battle,  the  rights  of  sepulture  were  refused 
to  his  body  imtil  some  years  afterwards, 
when,  his  absolution  being  obtained.it  was 
buried  in  the  porch  of  the  Temple  Church, 
where  his  monumental  effigy  is  still  pre- 
served. By  his  wife,  Hohese,  the  daughter 
of  Alberic  ae  Vere,  Earl  of  Oxford,  he  had 
Geoffrey,  the  subject  of  the  present  notice. 

Henry  IL  created  him  Earl  of  Essex,  re- 
storing to  him  all  the  lands  of  his  family, 
and  employing  him  both  in  the  council  and 
the  field. 

He  and  Richard  de  Luci  were  sent  in 
1 1  GO-  7  as  j  ustices  itinerant  to  hear  criminal 
and  common  pleas  throughout  England; 
and  they  were  also  entrusted  with  the  ex- 
pedition a&fainst  the  Welsh,  during  which 
the  earl  fell  sick  at  Chester,  and  died  there 
on  October  21, 1107.  He  was  buried  in  the 
abbey  of  Walden.  Leaving  no  children,  he 
was  succeeded  by  his  brother,  the  next- 
mentioned  William.  {Madox,  i.  49,  28,  ii. 
138,  104;  Dugdales  Baron,  i.  201.) 

MAHDEVILLE,  WiLLlAll  BE  ^Earl  of 
Albemarle  axd  Essex),  was  the  orother  of 
the  above  Geoffrey  Earl  of  Essex,  on  whose 
death  he  succeeded  to  that  title.  He  had 
spent  the  chief  part  of  his  youth  with 
I^hilip  Earl  of  Flanders,  whom  he  after- 
wards assisted  in  his  wars  with  the  French 
king.  On  his  attaining  the  earldom  he 
was  welcomed  with  distinction  by  King 
Henry,  whom  he  accompanied  into  France 
in  1173,  as  one  of  the  generals  of  his  army, 
and  was  not  only  marked  for  his  military 
prowess,  but  was  entrusted  by  his  sovereign 
with  many  businesses  of  mcety  and  con- 
fidence. 

In  1177  he  joined  his  patron,  the  Earl  of 
Flanders,  in  his  expedition  to  the  Holy 
Land,  and,  after  spending  two  years  there 
with  no  diminution  of  his  fame,  ne  returned 
to  England  in  1170.  In  the  following  year 
the  king  bestowed  on  him  the  lumd  of 


MANSEL 


42r 


Hawise,  the  only  daughter  of  William  ]» 
Gros,  Earl  of  AlDemarle,  recently  deceased^ 
together  with  the  property  and  the  earldom,, 
by  which  title  he  was  uterwards  usually 
known.  During  the  remainder  of  the  reign^ 
besides  being  sent  on  an  embassy  to  tn& 
emperor,  he  was  employed  in  the  varioua 
wars  in  France,  both  for  King  Henry  and 
the  Earl  of  Flanders ;  and  the  French  kinff 
had  good  cause  to  regret  that  the  one  had 
so  powerful  an  ally,  and  the  other  so  valiant 
a  general. 

On  Henry's  death,  the  merits  of  the  earl 
were  not  overlooked  by  his  successor^ 
When  Ranulph  de  Glanville  retired  shordy 
afterwards  from  the  chief  justiciary  ship, 
King  Hichard  appointed  the  earl  to  thai 
important  office,  in  conjunction  with  Hugh 
Pusar,  the  aged  Bishop  of  Durham.  Thia 
appointment  was  made  at  the  council  of 
Inpewell,  on  September  15,  1189 ;  but  h& 
was  not  destinea  long  to  enjoy  the  dignity 
of  his  new  office,  for  two  montns  afterwar(& 
he  died  at  Rouen  in  Normandy,  before^ 
Hichard  had  commenced  his  process, 

Dugdale  gives  an  account  of  his  works  of 
devotional  benevolence  to  various  houses,, 
and  of  his  sole  foundation  of  the  monastery 
at  Stoneley  in  Huntingdonshire.  But  he 
adds  a  blundering  statement  of  his  marriage 
with  a  second  wife.  Christian,  daughter  to- 
Robei-t  Lord  Fitz- Walter,  who,  he  says^ 
survived  him,  and  afterwards  married  Ray- 
mond de  Burgh ;  having  in  a  previous 
page  stated  that  his  wife  Hawise,  after  his 
death,  married  William  de  Fordbus,  who, 
as  her  first  husband  died  childless,  became 
Earl  of  Albemarle  in  her  right.  {DugdaUs 
Baron,  i.  03^  204 ;  Lord  I^tteUon,  iii.  399, 
441,  449.) 

MAKKSBS,  Lord.  See  T.  M.  Sutton. 

MAN8EL,  JoHi^  is  said  to  have  been 
the  grandson  of  Philip  de  Mansel,  who 
came  in  with  the  Conaueror,  and  the  son 
of  Henry,  the  eldest  of  Philip's  five  sons. 
(Weever,  273;  Burke.)  It  woidd  seenu 
trom  a  letter  written  by  the  king  in  1262 
to  the  college  of  cardinals,  that  he  waa 
brought  up  at  court,  for  the  king  says  that 
he  was  ^sub  alis  nostns  educatus,  cujua 
in^enium,  mores,  et  merits,  ab  adolescentia 
sua  probavimus.'     (Jtynierf  i.  414.) 

He  is  first  noticea  in  a  close  writ,  dated 
July  6, 1234,  18  Henry  HL,  commanding 
Hugh  de  PateshulL  the  treasurer,  to  admit 
his  beloved  clerk  John  Mansel  to  reside  at 
the  exchequer  of  receipt  in  his  place,  and 
to  have  one  roll  of  the  said  receipt.  (Madox, 
ii.  51.)  As  Mansel's  office  appears  to  have 
been  a  new  one,  it  was  prooably  that  of 
chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  which  is  first 
spoken  of  by  name  a  few  years  afterwards. 

He  is  noted  for  one  of  the  greatest  plu- 
ralists  that  were  ever  known.  Being  alreiady 
one  of  the  royal  chaplains,  he  was  in  1242 
presented  to  a  prebend  in  St  Paul's^  and. 


428 


MANSEL 


^as  advanced  in  the  next  year  to  the 
chancellorship  of  that  churcn,  to  which 
stalls  in  the  cathedrals  of  Wells  and  Chi- 
chester were  in  a  short  time  added.  These 
were  grants  by  the  king,  to  whom  his 
activity  of  mina  and  capacity  for  business 
made  him  peculiarly  useful  in  the  straitened 
circimistances  of  the  royal  revenue.  He 
was  accordingly  soon  engaged  in  confi- 
dential and  honourable  employments,  to 
which  he  was  partly  recommended  by 
having  received  a  danfferous  wound  in  an 
attack  on  a  besiegea  castle.  (Lelandts 
CoU.  i.  266.) 

He  had  the  custody  of  the  Great  Seal 
from  November  8,  1246,  to  August  28, 
3247,  on  which  day  the  king  sent  him  on 
an  embassy  to  foreign  parts.  On  his  return 
he  received  back  the  custody  of  the  Seal  on 
August  10,  1248,  and  held  it  till  September 
8,  1249.  In  none  of  these  entries  is  he 
called  chancellor. 

During  this  second  possession  of  the 
Great  Seal  he  obtained  the  valuable  ap- 
pointment of  provost  of  Beverley,  which 
was  the  highest  clerical  dignity  he  ever 
enjoyed.  The  extent  of  his  yearly  income 
from  the  various  benefices  he  held  is  pro- 
bably greatly  exaggerated.  Some  assert 
that  the  number  amounted  to  700,  pro- 
ducing 18,000  marks  per  annum;  while 
others  limit  the  number  to  300,  and  the 
annual  produce  to  4000  marks.  The 
munificence  of  his  expenditure  may  be 
judged  firom  the  stately  dinner  he  gave 
in  1256  at  his  house  'in  TothiU  Fields, 
when  he  entertained  the  Kings  and  Queens 
of  England  and  Scotland,  Prince  Edward, 
and  the  nobles  and  prelates  of  the  king- 
dom. It  is  recorded  that  his  guests  were 
so  numerous  that  he  was  compelled  to 
erect  tents  for  their  reception,  and  that 
seven  hundred  dishes  were  scarcely  sufficient 
for  the  first  course.     (Stoic's  LondoHf  526.) 

In  1253  he  accompanied  William  Bitton, 
Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells,  on  a  special 
mission  to  Spain  to  negotiate  a  marriage 
between  Eleanor,  the  sister  of  Alphonso, 
King  of  Castile,  with  Prince  i&ward. 
King  Henry's  eldest  son ;  and  the  charter 
which  they  brought  back  is  still  preserved 
with  its  golden  seal  among  the  archives  at 
Westminster.^  In  his  commission  for  this 
embassy  he  is  called  'secretarius  noster,' 
being  the  first  occasion  on  which  that  title 
is  used. 

Fabyan  (Chron,  340-343)  says  that  in 
1257  he  was  '  made  knyte  and  chefe  ius- 
tyce  of  Englande,'  and  that  under  that 
name,  in  the  June  following,  he  was  one  of 
the  twelve  peers  appointed  by  the  parlia- 
ment at  Oword  to  correct  the  enormities 
that  had  crept  into  the  government.  He 
adds  that  he  was  thereupon  discharged 
of  his  office,  and  Sir  Hugh  Bygot  ad- 
mitted in  hu  place.    There  iS|  however, 


MANSFIELD 

no  reasonable  grotmd  for  believing  that  he 
ever  was  appointed  chief  justiaary,  and 
the  title  is  never  added  to  his  signatures 
or  his  description  at  the  period. 

When  the  barons  compelled  the  kin^  at 
Oxford,  in  1258,  to  consent  to  the  appoint- 
ment of  twenty-four  of  their  number  to 
draw  up  articles  for  the  government  of  the 
realm,  John  Mansel  was  one  of  the  twelre 
selected  on   the   king's   part,  and  he  is 
charged  with  having  urged  the  king  to 
disregard  the  provisions  then  made,  and 
with  naving  procured  the  pope's  dispeott- 
tion  from  tne  oath  he  had  taken  to  keep 
them.    During  the  conffict  that  followed 
he  firmly  adhered  to  his  royal  master,  and 
was  entrusted  with  the  command  of  the 
Tower  of  London.    About  the  same  time 
he  again  held  the  Great  Seal  for  a  ehoit 
period,  accompanying  the  king  abroad  with 
it  ill  July  126^,  and  resigning  it  on  October 
10  following.     (Hardy's  Cat.) 

The  period  of  his  prosperity  was  now 
drawing  to  its  close.  When  the  Eari  of 
Leicester,  in  1263,  took  up  arms,  bis  fint 
attacks  were  directed  a^^amst  the  king's 
favourites,  and  the  principal  of  these  wis 
John  Mansel,  whose  estates  were  accord- 
ingly plimdered  and  property  wasted.  He 
retired  with  the  king  to  the  Tower  of 
London,  and  thence  accompanied  Prince 
Edmund,  the  king's  younger  son,  to  Dover; 
and  about  the  end  of  June,  finding  himself 
unsafe  in  England,  he  hastily  fled  from  the 
kingdom.  Although  he  was  present  in  the 
following  January  at  Amiens,  when  the 
King  of  France  decided  in  favour  of  Henry 
(Chron,  Bishanger,  12,  17,  118),  he  did  not 
venture  to  return  to  the  English  court,  and 
his  career  is  said  to  have  terminated  in  no- 
verty  and  wretchedness.  The  date  of  Ids 
deatn  is  stated  by  some  to  have  been  1364, 
by  others  1208,  but  it  seems  to  have  been 
even  beyond  the  latter  date,  as  he  is  named 
as  one  of  the  executors  of  King  Henry's 
will,  dated  in  June  1269.  (Rymer,  L  49^) 
The  pkce  of  his  death  has  never  been  re- 
corded. 

Whatever  may  be  considered  of  his  de- 
rical  or  political  character,  it  is  clear  thij 
upon  an  emergency  ho  could  act  the  part  of 
a  brave  and  resofute  soldier.  In  1258  he 
founded  the  priory  of  Bilsington,  near 
Romney,  and  amply  endowed  it  (ATowflrf- 
vi.  492.) 

A  wife,  with  issue,  has  been  given  to 
him,  which  ns  an  ecclesiastic  is  not  very 
probable.  The  confusion  may  have  arisen 
from  there  having  been  another  J«to 
Mansel  at  the  period. 

MAHSFIELD,  Earl  OF.   /S^W.MOOAS* 

MANSFIELD,  Jax£S.  Under  Oa  i^ 
for  the  regulation  of  attorneys  (ikf^ 

II.  c  23),  the  father  of  Sir  M * 

field,  who  was  an  attoni0f 
Ringwood  in  Hampshire^  l«< 


MANSFIELD 

oil  in  NoTomber  1730  as  John  James 
lanfield.  It  has  been  a  question  when 
he  name  was  altered  to  Mansfield,  and 
rhat  was  the  motive.  The  Ringwood 
ittomej  was  the  son  of  a  gentleman  who 
»me  to  England  with  one  of  the  Georges, 
m4  beld  an  appointment  in  Windisor 
DasUe;  and  it  was  asserted  that  the 
attorney  thoi^ht  it  more  advantageous  to 
him  to  Anglicise  his  name  by  calling  himself 
Blansfield.  But  it  is  clear  that  he  had  not 
formed  this  determination  in  1730,  when 
he  was  in  practice.  Neither  had  he  done 
80  up  to  l/o4,  when  his  son  was  nominated 
a  fellow  of  King's  College,  Cambridge, 
nnder  the  name  of  Manfield.  But  on  uie 
latter  taking  his  decree  of  B.A.  in  1765  he 
signed  his  name  Mansfield.  By  this  date 
the  imputation,  which  has  preyailed,  that 
he  maae  the  alteration  with  the  hope  of 
being  supposed  to  be  connected  with  the 
great  lord  chief  justice,  entirely  falls  to  the 
ground,  inasmuch  as  Sir  William  Murray  did 
not  receive  the  title  of  Lord  Mansfield  till  the 
end  of  the  following  year,  November  1756. 

He  entered  the  sodety^  of  the  Middle 
Temple  under  that  name  m  February  1755, 
and  was  called  to  the  bar  in  November 
1758.  He  began  to  practise  in  the  com- 
mon law  courts,  but  ultimately  removed 
intophancery,  where  he  was  very  success- 
inl  In  1768  he  was  one  of  the  counsel  for 
John  Wilkes  on  his  application  to  be 
admitted  to  bail ;  and  four  years  after,  in 
Hichaelmas  1772,  he  was  made  kind's 
coimseL  His  university  appointed  him 
their  counsel,  and  returned  nim  as  their 
lepreeentative  to  the  parliament  of  1774. 
On  the  trial  of  the  Duchess  of  Kingston  for 
higamy  in  1776  he  appeared  for  the  defen- 
dttit,  when,  though  he  failed  in  procuring 
^er  acquittal,  he  succeeded  in  obtaining  her 
xeletse  without  any  punishment  at  all. 

In  September  of  1780  he  accepted  the 
Bolidtor-generalship,  and  while  m  office 
'VIS  engaged  in  tne  prosecution  of  those 
concerned  in  the  riots  of  1780,  and  in  that 
<rfLord  George  Gordon  he  had  the  dis- 
advantage of  replying  to  the  splendid 
speech  of  Mr.  Erskine  for  the  prisoner, 
luting  in  an  acquittal.  The  same  duty 
devolved  upon  him  on  the  trial  of  De  la 
Hotte  for  high  treason,  whose  palpable 
goilt  insured  a  conviction.  On  the  defeat 
^  Lord  North's  ministry  in  March  1782 
^•Mansfield  was  necessarily  superseded, 
and  immediately  placed  himself  in  the 
'^  of  the  opposition.  Soon  after  the 
^^tution  of  the  Coalition  Ministry  Mr. 
^^field  was  again  appointed  sobcitor- 
Jjaeral,  in  November  1783,  but  was  fated 
^  be  aciin  removed  in  less  than  a  month, 
Qe  Coalition  having  in  its  turn  succumbed 
wthemmistryofMr.Pitt.  (FtirL  Hitt,  xid. 
m,  zziiL  9;  Staie  TriaUy  xzi  621^  794.} 

Uk  the  new  parliament  ealled  in  tne 


MANWOOD 


429 


following  May,  Mr.  Mansfield  had  the 
mortification  of  surrending  his  seat  for  the 
imiversity  of  Cambridge  to  the  popular 
minister,  and  never  afterwards  entered  the 
house.  He  remained  unemployed  for  nearly 
sixteen  years,  when  in  1790  he  was  con- 
stituted chief  justice  of  Chester.  Five 
years  afterwards,  at  the  close  of  Mr. 
Addington's  administration,  he  succeeded 
Lord  Alvanley  as  chief  justice  of  the  Com- 
mon Pleas,  in  April  1804,  and  was  there- 
upon knighted.  The  motto  on  his  rings  on 
his  necessarily  taking  the  degree  of  a  ser-> 
jeant  alludes  humorously  to  his  long  ex- 
clusion :  ^  Serus  in  ccelum  redeas.' 

Though  a  good  average  lawyer,  his  pro- 
motion occurred  rather  too  late  in  life ;  and, 
though  anxious  to  dispense  justice  in  the 
cases  that  came  before  him,  he  was  too  apt 
to  give  way  to  the  irritation  of  the  moment. 
Of  this  deficiency  of  temper  the  seijeants 
were  not  backward  in  taking  advantage; 
and  towards  the  end  of  his  career  tney 
worried  him  to  such  a  degree  that  he  could 
not  always  refrain  from  venting  in  audible 
whispers  curses  against  his  tormentors.  So 
great  was  the  annoyance  that  he  resigned 
his  post  in  Hilary  vacation  1814. 

He  lived  nearly  eight  years  afterwards^ 
and  died  on  November  23, 1821. 

MANTXLL,  Robert,  was  for  twelve 
years  from  16  Henry  II.,  1170,  sheriff  of 
the  united  counties  of  Essex  and  Hertford.. 
In  1173  and  the  six  following  years  ho 
acted  as  a  justice  itinerant,  not  only  in 
those  counties,  but  also  in  eight  others; 
and  his  name  appears  as  one  of  the  justi- 
ciers  in  the  Cuyia  Reffis  in  1177.  Besides 
these  duties,  he  seems  likewise  to  have  been 
emploved  as  a  justice  of  the  forest  in  17 
ana  18  Henry  IL,  and  again  in  1  Richard  I. 

His  parentage  is  not  recorded,  but  in 
1184  his  son  Matthew  came  before  the 
Exchequer  as  his  '  future  heir,'  and  acknow- 
ledged that  he  had  no  claim  to  a  certain 
field  called  Holm.  {Madox,  i.  94-701,  u. 
134 ;  Pipe  RoU,  79.) 

MAKWOOD,  RooEB,  was  the  grandson  of 
Roger  Manwood,  twice  mayor  of  Sandwich, 
and  its  representative  in  parliament  in 
1523 ;  one  of  whose  sons,  Tnomas,  was  a 
draper  in  the  town,  and  by  his  wife 
Catherine,  the  daughter  of  John  Gallaway, 
of  Clare  in  Norfolk,  was  the  father  of  three 
sons,  of  whom  this  Ro^er  was  the  second. 
He  was  bom  at  Sandwich  in  1526,  and  was 
educated  in  a  grammar  school  there.  No 
account  is  given  of  any  further  place  of 
study  till  he  was  entered  at  the  Inner 
Temple.  He  was  called  to  the  bar  by  that 
society  before  1555,  when  he  was  appointed 
steward  or  recorder  of  his  native  town,  and 
was  elected  its  representative  in  that  and 
the  following  paruament  in  Mary's  reign, 
and  in  all  those  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  till  he 
was  elevated  to  the  judicial  bench. 


4^ 


MANWOOD 


In  his  progress  towards  that  advance- 
ment he  seems  to  have  owed  much  to  the 
popularity  of  his  manners  and  a  happy 
choice  of  fiiends.  He  was  evidently  a 
favourite  among  his  brethren  of  the  Inner 
Temple,  since  he  was  selected  at  Christmas 
1661  as  one  of  the  chief  officers  in  the 
grand  revel  then  held  there,  over  which 
Lord  Robert  Dudley,  afterwards  Earl  of 
Leicester,  presided  under  the  title  of  Pala- 
philos.  Curiously  enough,  the  r6le  which 
Manwood  then  perform^  was  that  which, 
eighteen  years  later,  he  was  called  upon 
actually  to  fill — that  of  chief  baron  of  the 
Exchequer.  In  Lent  1666  he  attained  the 
degree  of  reader.  {IhtgdMs  Orig,  160, 166.) 

At  this  period  of  his  life  he  testified  his 
gratitude  for  the  favours  he  was  receiving 
from  the  town  of  his  birth  by  establishing 
and  liberally  endowing  a  free  school  there, 
which  was  incorporated  in  1663,  and  still 
exists  under  his  name.  In  1666  he  resigned 
his  office  of  recorder,  but  still  continued  the 
principal  adviser  of  the  corporation,  receiv- 
ing an  annual  salary  of  S/.,  which,  according 
to  the  corporation  papers,  would  appear  to 
have  been  paid  to  nim  even  after  he  had 
attained  his  highest  preferment  He  held 
also  the  office  of  steward  of  the  Chancery 
and  Admiralty  Court  at  Dover. 

Among  his  friends  was  Sir  Thomas 
Gresham,  who  took  great  interest  in  his 
success;  through  whose  recommendation 
he  probably  received  the  grant  of  the  house 
and  park  in  the  queen^s  manor  of  Hawe  in 
the  parish  of  Hackinffton,  near  Canterbury, 
where  he  then  resided,  and  also  in  1667  the 
degree  of  Serjeant.  The  profits  and  privi- 
leges of  the  coif  were  so  great  that  when 
an  opening  occurred  for  his  elevation  to 
the  bench,  in  April  1672,  he  again  employed 
Gresham^s  influence  with  the  minister  to 
avert  it     (Bwrgon'B  Oretham,  ii.  176,  478.) 

The  Serjeant,  however,  saw  reason  to 
change  his  inclination,  on  another  vacancv 
in  the  same  court,  which  soon  after  occuirea, 
for  on  October  14  he  received  his  patent  as 
justice  of  the  Common  Pleas.  He  does 
not  seem  the  most  merciful  of  judges,  for 
in  a  letter  to  Sir  Walter  Mildmav^  dated 
November  18,  1677,  he  recommends  either 
imprisonment  for  life,  or  the  cutting  off 
part  of  his  tongue,  as  the  punishment  to  be 
awarded  to  a  man  who  persisted  in  speaking 
ill  of  the  queen,  after  having  suffered  the 
pilloiy  and  had  his  ears  cut  off.  {Cal. 
StaU  Papers  [1647-80],  666.) 

He  was  promoted  to  the  chief  seat  in  the 
Exchequer  on  November  17,  1678,  and 
knighted.  There  is  no  doubt  that  he  was 
a  man  of  great  activity  and  energy,  both  of  : 
which  were  shovni  in  his  exertions  towards  I 
upholding  Rochester  Bridge,  and  regulat- 
ing the  estates  which  had  been  originally 
devoted  to  its  repair.  He  built  also  a  new 
House  of  Correction  in  Weatgate  Street, 


MANWOOD 

Canterbury,  and  erected  seven  almshouses 
in  St  Stephen's  or  Hackington.    All  diese 
works  he  nad  performed  before  he  arrived 
at  the  post  of  chief  baron ;  so  that  it  is  not 
surprising  that  he  should  have  been  lodced 
upon  wiUi  favour  by  the  court  as  a  man 
peculiarly  fitted  for  his  position.    But,  as  i 
set-off  to  these  good  qualities,  he  was  am- 
bitious and  arbitrary,  and  somewhat  rsffard- 
less  of  the  means  by  which  he  obtained  the 
objects  on  which  he  had  set  his  heart 

On  the  death  of  Sir  James  Dyer,  in  Maidi 
1682,   the  chief  baron  was  suspected  of 
offering  a  large  bribe  to  be  appointed  to  tlie 
vacant  office  of  chief  justice  or  the  Common 
Pleas ;  and  this,  being  privately  conunmu- 
cated   by   Recorder    Fleetwood   to  Lord 
Burleigh,  ^was  the  means  of  keeping  him 
from  that  cushion,'  and  no  doubt  rendend 
the  lord  treasurer  less  inclined  to  doubt  the 
charges    that  were  subsequently  hrongiit 
against  him.    One  of  these  was  that  on  a 
barbarous  murder  being  committed  in  the 
streets  of  Canterbury,  the  chief  baron  had 
expressed  a  solemn  determination  to  pnnoe 
the  murderer  to  justice,  but,  instead  of  thii, 
he  procured  him  a  free  pardon,  after  which 
the  murderer  paraded  the  streets  in  the 
chief  baron's  bvery.     It  was  imputed  to 
the  chief  baron  that  this  impunity  ▼» 
purchased  by  the  payment  of  240^  ur  the 
murderer's   father,   a   rich  brewer  tneR. 
Numerous  charges  of  oppression,  of  more 
or  less  weight,  were  made  from  time  to 
time  bv  vanousjpersons  in  Kent 

In  tne  meantime,  however,  he  was  one 
of  the  commissioners  for  the  trial  of  the 
Queen  of  Scots,  but  does  not  appear  to  hare 
taken  any  active  part  in  the  prooeedingn 
In  those  against  Secretary  Davison,  whxh 
were  consequent  upon  lier  execution,  he 
made  himself  more  conspicuous.  M^ 
^oing  through  the  whole  history  of  Qneen 
Mary,  he  came  at  last  to  the  onence  of  the 
unfortunate  secretary,  which,  making  the 
same  evasive  distinction  as  the  other  com- 
missioners, he  termed  '  a  misprision  becann 
you  prevented  the  time  in  doing  it  befoie 
you  were  commanded,  although  the  thing 
were  lawful ;  for  you  did  jtatum^  but  not 
jugte:    (State  Trials,  i.  1167,  1235.) 

From  various  letters  addressed  bvhim 
to  the  lord  treasurer,  preserved  among  the 
Harleian  MSS.,  it  is  evident  that  fireqoent 
complaints  were  made  against  him  which 
he  was  called  upon  to  justify;  and  by  one, 
in  May  1691,  it  appears  that  he  was  nnder 
the  queen's  displeasure  for  taking  mooer 
for  a  place  in  his  gift,  and  that  he  brought 
forward  as  his  warranty  the  examfde  d 
other  judges,  his  contemporaries,  wM  brf 
pursued  the  same  course.  In  additin^. 
these  public  attadcs,  private  suittkidii* 
conunenced  a^inst  him,  and  mhs  rf  jj 
complainants  had  Bocoeeded  in  lUt'  "lKt0 
In  a  letted  t6  Loid  Borleifl^^h  i    M 


MAP 

1592,  be  speaks  of  the  lord  treasurer's  bit- 
terness against  bim  in  a  recent  interview, 
and,  assuming  a  bigh  hand,  demands  that 
upon  any  future  complaints  of  his  adver- 
saries bis  goods  may  not  be  taken  *  without 
due  course  of  justice  in  some  of  her  majesty's 
public  courts/  meaning  that  he  was  not  to 
De  called  upon  to  answer  before  the  lords  of 
the  council.  Burleigh,  however,  thought 
differently,  probably  considering  that  the 
conduct  of  a  public  officer  was  a  fit  subject 
of  investigation.  |The  chief  baron  was  forth- 
with restricted  to  his  own  house  in  Great 
St.  Bartholomew's,  and  within  a  month  after 
his  former  letter  he  humbled  himself  in 
another,  and  two  days  afterwards,  on  May 
14,  he  signed  at  Greenwich  an  abject  sub- 
mission to  answer  all  complaints  before  their 
'  honourable  lordships.' 

What  was  the  result  of  these  proceeding 
does  not  appear,  but  his  presence  in  court  is 
not  again  mentioned  by  the  reporters,  and 
it  is  not  improbable  that  the  grief  and  anx- 
iety he  suffered  from  his  disgrace  hastened 
his  decease,  which  occurred  on  the  14th  of 
the  following  December. 

Notwithstanding  the  blots  in  his  es- 
cutcheon, it  is  clear  (so  curious  is  the  mix- 
ture of  which  mortality  is  compounded)  that 
lie  was  pious  and  charitable  according  to  the 
fashion  of  the  times,  and  in  many  respects 
a  kind-hearted  man.  The  foundation  during 
his  life  of  a  school  for  the  young  and  a  hos- 
pital for  the  aced  speak  strongly  in  his 
favour ;  and  to  these  may  be  added  his  erec- 
tion of  the  south  aisle  of  the  church  of  St. 
Stephen,  and  his  liberal  augmentation  of 
the  vicarage  of  the  parish  by  a  grant  of  the 
great  tithes,  subject  only  to  a  fixed  payment 
of  10/.  a  year  to  the  archdeacon  of  Canter- 
bury. From  his  will  (a  tedious  and  some- 
what vainglorious  document)  we  learn  that 
he  erected  during  his  life  the  superb  monu- 
ment still  remaining  in  the  church,  which 
is  ornamented  with  ms  bust  in  his  robes  as 
-chief  baron,  and  with  small  figures  of  his 
two  wives  and  of  his  children. 

His  first  wife  was  Dorothy,  the  daughter 
of  John  Theobald,  Esq.,  of  Shepey  in  Kent, 
and  widow  first  of  Dr.  John  Urooke,  and 
next  of  Ralph  Allen,  alderman  of  London. 
By  her  he  left  a  son  Peter,  whose  family 
failed  in  1G53,  His  second  wife  was  Eliza- 
beth ,  daughter  of  Mr.  John  Copinger,  of  All- 
hallows,  near  Rochester,  and  widow  of  John 
Wilkins,  of  Stoke  Parsonage.  {Hdinshedy 
i V.  550 ;  Haded,  ix.  46, 52 ;  Boy^%  Sandwich.) 

MAP,  Walter,  more  commonly  though 
erroneouply  called  Mapes,  the  facetious  poet 
and  satirist,  was  one  of  the  justices  itme- 
rant  in  10  Henry  II.,  1173,  joined  with  John 
Cumin  and  Turstin  Fitz- Simon  in  setting 
the  assize  for  the  king's  demesnes  in  Glou- 
oestershire  (Mado.r^i.  701),  in  which  county 
lie  held  the  living  of  Westbury.  He  was 
probably  omitted  in  future  years,  because 


MAP 


431 


he  always  insisted  on  adding  to  the  ac- 
customed oath  required  to  be  taken  by  his 
colleagues  and  himself,  that  they  would  ad- 
minister right  to  every  one,  an  exception 
against  the  Jews  and  white  monks.  His 
hostility  against  the  latter  originated,  ac- 
cording to  Giraldus,  in  the  encroachments 
made  by  the  Cistercians  of  Newenham  on 
the  rights  and  property  of  his  church  of 
Westbury,  and  was  exhibited  against  the 
whole  order  in  various  Latin  compositions, 
both  in  prose  and  verse,  highly  humorous 
and  severe.  None  of  them,  however,  re- 
main, those  which  have  been  preserved  being 
of  a  more  general  character. 

He  was  Dom  on  the  Marches  of  Wales, 
probably  in  the  county  of  Pembroke ;  but 
of  his  parents  he  states  nothing,  except  that 
they  had  rendered  important  sen-ices  to  King 
Henry  both  before  and  after  his  accession  to 
the  throne.  He  studied  at  Paris,  and  at- 
tended the  school  of  Gerard  la  Pucelle,  who 
lectured  there  about  1160.  Distinguished 
as  well  by  his  wit  and  learning  as  by  his 
courtly  manners,  he  became  on  his  return  a 
favourite  of  the  king,  and  he  repeats  con- 
versations he  had  with  Becket  before  he 
was  made  archbishop  in  1162.  He  was  em- 
ployed by  the  king  in  missions  to  the  courts 
of  France  and  Rome,  and  at  the  latter  he 
was  selected  by  Pope  Alexander  HL  to  ex- 
amine and  argue  with  the  deputies  of  the 
then  rising  sect  of  the  Waldenses.  With 
these  proofs  of  the  consideration  in  which 
he  was  held,  he  received  substantial  marks 
of  the  royal  favour.  Besides  several  smaller 
ecclesiastical  preferments,  he  held  at  various 
periods  canonries  in  the  churches  of  Salis- 
Dury  and  St.  Paul's,  was  precentor  of  Lin- 
coln, and  ultimately  archdeacon  of  Oxford, 
to  which  he  was  advanced  about  the  year 
1196.  He  was  alive  in  9  John,  1207,  as  in 
that  year  the  custodes  of  the  abbey  of  Eyn- 
eham  were  oixlered  to  pay  him  his  accus- 
tomed rent  of  five  marks  per  annum  from 
that  abbey  (Hot.  Claus,  106) ;  but  he  cer- 
tainly diecl  before  Giraldus  Cambrensis  wrote 
the  preface  to  his  ^Hibemia  Expugnata,' 
which  was  dedicated  to  Kin^  John. 

Some  of  his  writings,  which  were  com- 
posed in  short  rhyming  verse,  were  so 
popular  in  his  day  that  vie  copies  of  them 
were  greatly  multiplied,  and  any  effusions 
which  were  remarkable  for  their  wit  and 
sprightliness  were  attributed  to  his  pen. 
Among  the  numerous  compositions  which 
go  imder  his  name,  it  is  difficult  to  ascer- 
tain with  certainty  how  many  he  really 
wrote.  In  the  introduction  to  the  Collec- 
tion of  Poems  attributed  to  him,  published 
by  the  Camden  Society,  Mr.  Wnght  gives 
satisfactory  proof  that  several  of  those 
which  appeared  under  the  name  of  '  Golias 
Epipcopus '  were  written  by  Map,  and  that 
Golias  was  no  real  person,  as  some  writers 
have  believed,  but  a  mere  fanciful  appella- 


432  MABA  MARESCHALL 

tion  given  to  the  burlesque  representative  ;  Henry  I.,  and  the  latter  under  Henir  II, 
of  the  ecclesiastical  order,  and  the  instru-    (Dtigdales  Baron,  i.  609.)    By  the  death 


ment  of  holding  up  to  ridicule  the  vices  of 
the  Romish  Churcn.  The  jovial  character 
of  some  of  these  poems  has  caused  him  to 


of  his  elder  brother  without  issue,  at  the  end 
of  Richard*s  reign,  William  succeeded  to  the 
office  of  marshal,  which  was  confirmed  to 


be  considered  as  a  toper,  but  there  is  no  '  him  in  1  John.     (Jtot.  Chart,  46, 47.) 
other  evidence  to  support  such  an  imputa-  |      He  was  surety  for  King  Richard  that  he 
tion ;  and  the  drinkmg-song  which  is  as-  !  would  meet  the  king  of  France  at  Easter 
ciibed  to  him,  commencing  I  to  proceed  to  the  Holy  Land  (R.  de  JTai- 

Mcum  est  proposituni  in  tabema  mori.  ^f  ;j/''  i"'  1249)    and  Was  the  first  named 

of  the  council  then  appointed  to  assist  the 
is  a  compilation  of  a  much  later  period,  chief  justiciary  in  governing  the  kingtlom 
from  the  '  Confessio  Goliie,'  containing  a  during  the  king^s  absence  on  that  eoteiw 
mock  confession  of  his  three  vices,  of  which  !  prise.  {^Madox,  i.  34.)  At  that  time  he 
ore  was  his  love  of  wine.  ;  was  one  of  the  justiciers,  and  fines  were 

His  prose  works  are  a  treatise  'De  Nugis  '  levied  before  him  in  5  and  10  Ricbaid  I. 
Curialium,'  and  a  tract  entitled  'Valerius  ad  !  {Hunter's  Preface,) 
Rufinum  de  non  ducenda  Uxore,'  the  former  '  King  Richard,  nowever,  showed  him  s 
of  which  has  been  printed  by  the  Camden  '  greater  mark  of  favour  by  giving  him  in 
Society.  (Biof/,  Brit  Liter,  hy  Thomas  ,  marriage  Isabella,  daughter  and  heir  of 
Wn'ffhi,  ii.  295.)  Richard  Strongbow,  Earl  of  Pembroke,  or, 

MAEA,  Henry  de,  or  DE  LA  MABE,  was  as  it  was  sometimes  called,  Striguil  (Ch^ 
raised  to  the  judicial  bench  before  June  '■  stow),  where  the  chief  residence  was,  hr 
1248,  32  Henry  III.,  as  in  that  month  which  he  not  only  acquired  the  title,  hiu 
writs  were  paid  for  to  have  assizes  held  became  possessed  "of  all  the  large  inherit* 
before  him.  These  continued  till  1250,  nnce  of  the  late  earl,  both  in  England  sol 
but  his  name  does  not  occur  upon  fines,  Ii'eland.  He  held  the  sherifiialties  of  Lin- 
except  in  Michaelmas  1251.  {Excerpt,  e  coin  and  of  Sussex  during  part  of  this  reign. 
Rot.  Fin,  ii.  36,  &c. ;  Dttgdale's  Orig,  42.)  ;  On  the  death  of  Richard  I.,  John,  heiuj? 
In  38  Henry  111.  the  castle  and  manor  of !  then  in  Normandy,  sent  William  Mares- 
Marlborough  were  committed  to  him.  chall  to  England  with  Hubert,  Archlnshop 
{Ahh,  Rot,  Orig,  i.  13. J  He  died  in  1257.  of  Canterbury,  to  pave  the  way  for  him; 
(Rrcerpt,  e  Rot,  Fin,  ii.  257.)  I  when  thejr  and  Geoffrey  Fitz-Peter,  the 

MAECHIA,  WiLLiAU  DE  (Bishop  of  ;  chief  justiciary,  called  together  the  noUes 
Batu  and  Wells),  though  called  keeper  and  others  at  Northampton,  and  inducwi 
by  Sir  T.  Hardy,  because  the  Great  Seal  !  them  to  promise  him  their  oaths  of  fealty, 
was  delivered  to  him  on  February  24,  i  During  that  turbulent  reign  he  was  a 
1290, 18  Edward  I.,  by  Bishop  Bumel  the  |  strenuous  supporter  of  his  sovereign,  and, 
chancellor,  was  then  merely  an  officer  of  |  from  his  being  witness  to  charten  and 
the  wardrobe,  the  usual  place  for  deposit-  '  other  documents  from  the  beginning  to 
ing  the  Seal,  and  had  been  a  clerk  there  ,  the  end  of  it,  seems  to  have  been  in  ogo- 
five  years  before.  He  was  promoted  to  stant  attendance  on  the  king,  except  whea 
the  office  of  treasurer  at  the  end  of  the  '■  engaged  in  the  active  services  confided  to 
same  year  (MadoXy  ii.  323),  and  on  the  |  him.  In  1201  he  was  with  the  kioff  ia 
death  of  Bumel  he  was  elected  his  sue-  '  Normandy,  and  in  1200  in  Ireland,  whar» 
cesser  in  the  bishopric  of  Bath  and  Wells  he  was  left  as  lord  deputy,  and  in  1214  ha 
on  January  30,  1293,  being  a  canon  of  the  was  one  of  those  bound  for  the  king  to 
latter  cathedral  at  the  time.  After  sitting  !  make  compensation  to  the  clergy,  and  acted 
there  for  nearly  ten  years,  during  several  of  for  him  in  the  council  held  at  London,  be- 
which  he  continued  treasurer,  ne  died  on  j  coming  surety,  with  the  Archbishop  of 
June  11, 1302,  and  was  buried  at  Wells.  ;  Canterbury  and  the  Bishop  of  Ely,  that 
So  great  were  his  virtues,  and  so  many  the  king  would  satisfy  the  barons.  In  the 
were  the  miracles  reported  to  have  been  following  April  he  was  sent  to  the  banos 
performed  at  his  tomb,  that  the  pope  was  to  know  what  were  the  laws  and  libertiea 
vehemently  urged  to  canonise  him.  His  they  asked  for,  and  was  afterwards  the 
merits,  however,  were  not  deemed  worthy  messenger  to  announce  the  king*s  readinetf 
of  that  honour.     {Godioin,  S74.)  i  to  comply  with  their  deman£.    He  vaa 

MAEE8CEALL,    William     (Earl     of    accordingly  present  at  the  great  day  of  Rod- 
Pembrose),  holds  a  prominent  place  in    nymede,  when  Magna  Charta  was  fdgned* 
history.     He   flourished    in  four    reigns,  i  {R.  de  Wendover,  iii.  137,  283--3Q2.) 
during  three  of  which  he  was  high  in  the  '      During  John^a  reign  he  was  entxuitri 
royal  confidence,  and  acted  with  unshaken  |  with  the  sheriffidtiea  of  GluuLDfltBiial*" 
loyalty.    He  was  the  grandson  of  Gilbert,  i  Sussex,  and  Suirey,  and  with  tlw 
and  the  second  son  of  John,  who  held  the  '  of  the  castlea  of  Gaimartheny  0» 
office  of  marshal  of  the  court  Tmagiatratum    Ooher.    The  king  was  not  do^* 
marisc  cari»  nostra),  the  xonner  under   rosity  to  him,  xewaxding  liiai 


MABESCHALL 

Godericli  Castle  in  Herefoidshirey  and  of 
the  whole  province  of  Leinater,  besides 
several  others  of  minor  importance.  The 
Great  Roll  of  16  John  contains  a  sin^folar  ex- 
ample of  the  mode  in  which  royal  mfluence 
was  purchased  and  exercised :  Koger  Fxtx- 
Nicholas  fined  in  all  the  lampreys  he  could 
set  to  have  the  king's  request  to  Earl  Wil- 
nam  Mareschall  that  he  would  grant  him 
the  manor  of  Langeford,  at  ferm.  {MadoXf 
i.  481.) 

In  1212  Prince  Henry  had  been  specially 
committed  to  his  care  {Bot,  Fat.  05).  and 
on  John's  death  he  was  at  once  appomted 
*  rector  re^  et  regni,'  and  lost  no  time  in 
procuring  Henry's  coronation  at  Gloucester. 
All  the  first  mandates  issued  in  the  long's 
name  were  sealed  with  the  earl's  seal,  be- 
cause the  king  then  had  none. 

Dugdale  inserts  his  name  as  chief  jus- 
ticiary at  the  beginning  of  this  reign,  but 
this  is  a  mistake.  He  held  the  higher  rank 
of  guardian  of  the  ro^al  person  and  resent 
of  the  kingdom ;  while  the  office  of  <mief 
justiciary,  which  had  gradually  lost  much 
of  the  power  originally  attached  to  it,  was 
manifestly  filled  by  Hubert  de  Burgh,  Earl 
of  Essex,  as  it  had  oeen  during  the  last  years 
of  the  reign  of  John. 

No  person  could  have  been  chosen  more 
competent  to  contend  v^ith  the  critical  po- 
sition in  which  the  afiairs  of  the  kingdom 
were  then  placed.  By  the  skill  of  his  ar- 
rangements and  the  activity  of  his  move- 
ments he  defeated  the  invading  prince, 
intercepted  and  destroyed  the  Frencn  fieet 
sent  to  his  aid,  and  compelled  him  to  sue 
for  peace  and  abandon  his  enterprise ;  by  his 
moderation  he  induced  most  of  the  discon- 
tented barons  to  submit  to  the  royal  autho- 
rity ;  and  by  his  energy  in  punishing  those 
few  who  still  resisted  he  compelled  the  re- 
spect that  wasdue  to  thesovereign  power,  and 
in  less  than  two  years  restored  to  the  king- 
dom, which  had  so  long  suffered  from  civil 
contentions,  the  blessing  of  internal  peace. 
One  of  his  first  acts  was  to  confirm  the 
Great  Charter  of  John,  introducing  some 
improvements  and  omitting  those  clauses 
which  trenched  too  deeply  on  the  royal 
prerogative. 

Unfortunately  for  his  country  and  his 
sovereign,  this  great  man  did  not  long  sur- 
vive to  enjoy  the  fruits  of  his  exertions.  He 
died  in  1219,  at  his  manor  of  Caversham, 
near  Reading,  and  was  buried  on  May  16, 
Ascension-day,  in  the  church  of  the  New 
Temple,  in  London,  where  his  monumental 
effigy  still  remains. 

Ills  pious  benefactions  were  numerous 
and  munificent  He  founded  the  priory  of 
Cartmel  in  Lancashire ;  of  Kilrusn  in  Ire- 
land, as  a  cell  to  Cartmel ;  of  St.  Auffustine 
at  Kilkenny ;  and  for  Knights  Hoepitidlers 
at  I^eh-Garmon  in  Wexford;  besides  many 
rich  donations  to  other  houses. 


MABESCflALL 


433 


Dugdale  (Baronage^  L  63, 601)  gives  him 
a  second  wife  in  Alice,  the  daughter  of 
Baldwin  de  Betoiii  Earl  of  Albemarle,  in  5 
John,  an  assertion  which  he  also  makes  In 
his  account  of  the  latter  earL  He,  however, 
contradicts  himself  in  a  following  page  by 
stating  that  an  abbey  which  he  had  com- 
menced for  Cistercian  monks,  in  the  land  of 
Dowysken  in  Ireland,  was  completed  by  his 
vrife  Isabel,  according  to  the  appointment 
of  his  vrill.  The  roll  which  Dugdale  quotes 
shows  his  carelessness,  and  proves  that  Alice 
de  Betun's  husband  was  not  the  earl,  but 
William,  his  son.     {BoL  Chart.  112.) 

He  left  five  sons,  who  successively  held 
the  earldom,  but  dyinff  all  without  issue, 
the  inheritance  descended  among  the  heirs 
of  his  five  daughters.  (N.  Triveti  Atmaleif 
206.) 

MABS80HALL,  JoHK,  was  the  great- 
grandson  of  Gilbert,  mitfshal  of  Henry  L. 
and  nephew  to  the  above  William  Earl  ox 
Pembroke,  Early  in  the  reign  of  King  John 
he  was  connected  vrith  the  court,  several 
documents  being  countersigned  with  his 
name,  and  the  castle  of  Falaise  being  com- 
mitted to  his  keeping  in  4  John.  In  the 
next  year  he  ]^roceeded  to  Ireland  to  take 
the  stewardship  of  his  uncle's  lands  and 
castles  in  Leinster ;  and  in  9  John  he  ob- 
tained the  grant  of  the  office  of  Marshal  of 
Ireland,  the  duties  of  which  he  v^as  after- 
wards permitted  to  perform  by  depufy  {Hot 
de  Liberate,  46 ;  Itot.  FM.  24, 42,  166 ;  Hot. 
Chart.  173 ;  Rot.  Clous,  i.  407)  ;  and  he  was 
vrith  the  king  in  that  country  in  12  and  14 
John.  {Bot.  de  B-testito,  192, 233, 236 ;  Bat. 
Misae,  240.)  In  the  latter  year  the  custody 
of  the  castles  of  Whitchurch  and  Screwiund 
in  Shropshire  was  entrusted  to  him,  to 
which  was  added,  in  the  nextyear,  the 
guardianship  of  the  Marches  of  Wales,  and 
also  the  sheriffalty  of  the  county  of  Lincoln. 
He  held  the  latter  office  in  Norfolk  and 
Suffolk  in  17  John  for  a  short  time,  and  also 
in  Dorset,  Somerset,  and  Worcester  {BoL 
Pat.  100-193),  with  the  charge  of  the 
castles  of  all  these  counties. 

In  the  next  reign  he  v«ras  not  less  acdye 
under  the  protectorate  of  his  unde,  the  Earl 
of  PembroKe.  He  not  only  joined  the  army 
for  the  relief  of  Lincoln,  out  was  united 
with  Philip  de  Albini  in  the  command  of 
the  fleet  which  intercepted  and  destroyed 
the  French  armament  in  August  1217  (B, 
de  Wendover,  iy.  19,  28),  and  thus  forced 
the  retirement  of  Prince  Louis  from  the 
kingdom.  He  was  then  made  sheriff  of 
Hampshire  and  constable  of  the  castle  of 
Devizes,  and  in  2  Henry  HL  was  appointed 
chief  justice  of  the  forests  (Bat.  ClauM.  L 
407),  which  he  held  for  several  years.  In 
3  Henry  IH.  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant 
in  Lincoln,  Nottinghamshire,  and  Derby, 
and  is  mentioned  as  taking  the  acknowledg- 
ment of  a  fine  in  12  Henry  IIL 


YY 


434 


HABESCHALL 


During  the  remainder  of  his  life  he  was 
employed  in  yarious  embassies  for  the  king, 
whose  favour  he  retained  till  his  death, 
which  occurred  about  June  1235.  (J^jt- 
cerpt,  e  Hot,  Fin,  i.  284.) 

His  wife  was  Alina,  one  of  the  daughters 
and  heirs  of  Hubert  de  Rie,  by  whom  he 
left  a  son  John,  in  whose  descendants  the 
barony  remained  for  four  generations,  when 
the  last  baron,  John,  died  in  10  Edward  II. 
without  issue. 

MASE8CHALL,  WnJJAH  le,  was  the 
second  son  of  the  above  John  Mareschall, 
and  succeeded  on  the  death  of  his  brother  in 
1242  to  the  family  property.  (Excerpt,  e 
JRot.  Fin.  i.  284,  387,  391.)  During  the 
troubles  imder  Henry  IH.  he  was  appointed 
by  the  council  one  of  the  barons  of  tne  Ex- 
chequer in  12G4 ;  but,  adhering  to  the  for- 
tunes of  Simon  de  Montfort,  he  forfeited 
his  lands  both  at  Haselberpr  and  Norton  in 
Northamptonshire,  and  died  about  that 
time,     {madox,  ii.  50,  120.) 

KABIBOO,  RiCHAitD  DE  (Bishop  of 
Dttbham),  of  whose  early  history  no  trace 
remiuns,  held  a  subordinate  office  in  the 
Exchequer  in  8  Richard  I.,  1 197.  (Madox, 
i.  714.)  In  9  John,  1207,  he  is  specially 
mentioned  as  a  clerk  in  the  Chamber  of  the 
Exchequer,  and  numerous  entries  on  the 
Close,  Patent,  and  other  Rolls  show  also  his 
frequent  attendance  on  the  person  of  the 
Hng.  (Hot.  Pat.  74,  81,  &c.;  Hot.  de 
PrtBititOy  177,  &c.) 

He  received  the  ecclesiastical  prefer- 
ments with  which  the  clerks  of  the  court 
were  usually  rewarded,  among  which  were 
prebends  in  Ely  and  York,  and  the  archdea- 
conries of  Northumberland  and  Richmond, 
besides  several  livings.  In  1212  he  was 
appointed  sheriff  of  Dorset  and  Somerset, 
and  was  gratified  with  a  royal  present  of 
one  of  three  ships  which  had  been  captured. 
(Rot.  Pat.  95 ;  Rot.  Clous,  i.  118.)  In  14 
John,  1212,  he  was  one  of  the  justiciers  be- 
fore whom  fines  were  levied  at  Westmin- 
ster, and  is  mentioned  as  '  residens  ad  Scac- 
carium.'  (Rot.  Gnus.  i.  132.)  jDugdale  intro- 
duces him  as  chancellor  in  the  same  year ; 
but  this  is  clearly  an  error,  the  Patent  and 
Close  Rolls  of  15  John  containing  merely 
an  entry  that  on  October  9,  1213,  he  de- 
livered the  Seal  to  the  king  at  Ospringe 
(Rot.  Pat.  102  ;  Rot.  Claw.  i.  163) ;  but  this 
entry  proves  nothing  more  than  that  he 
was  the  messenger  by  whom  the  Seal  was 
delivered  into  the  roval  hands.     The  fact 

• 

was  that  Walter  de  Grey,  the  chancellor, 
was  then  about  to  proceed  on  an  embassy 
to  Flanders ;  and  Marisco,  as  an  officer  of 
the  Chamber  of  the  Excheijuer,  where  the 
Seal  was  commonly  deposited,  was  natu- 
rally employed  to  convey  it  to  the  king. 

Prynne  gives  a  charter  dated  Octol^r  3, 
1213,  subscribed  '  Data  per  manum  Ric.  de 
Alarisco;  *  but  if  this  is  to  be  taken  as  a 


MAfilSCO 

proof  that  he  was  chancellor  at  thmt  time, 
the  same  argument  would  be  equally  coo* 
elusive  for  the  three  preceding  yean, 
during  which  there  are  nnmezoua  chaiterB 
authenticated  by  him  in  the  same  manner. 
Not  only  is  it  well  known  that  Walter  de 
Grey  was  then  chancellor,  but  upon  the 
same  evidence  there  would  be  many  com- 

Sititors.  Neither  they,  however,  nor 
ichard  de  Marisoo,  can  be  rmided  at 
anything  more  than  the  official  pemu 
who,  under  the  chancellor,  took  their  tmu 
of  adding  the  formal  authentication  to  tiuw 
instruments.  It  was  not  till  the  following 
year,  on  the  ultimate  resignation  of  Walter 
de  Grey,  that  he  became  chancellor,  and 
the  day  of  his  appointment  may  be  coUectad 
from  the  Charter  Rolls.  On  October  S8, 
1214,  he  subscribed  a  charter  simply  whh 
his  name,  as  he  had  invariably  done  Mne; 
but  to  a  charter  on  the  following  dtf  be 
added  'Cancellarii  Domini  Regis'  (Sd. 
Chart.  202),  and  so  signed  himaeu  oo  otut 
future  occasion.  He  was  therefore  inskiUea 
in  the  office  either  on  the  28th  or  29tk  Octo- 
ber 1214.  From  this  time  till  the  ead  of 
the  reign  he  continued  chancellor. 

On  the  accession  of  Henry  UL  be  w« 
continued  in  the  office,  from  which  he  nu 
not  removed  during  the  remainder  of  hii 
Ufe.  In  the  third  year  of  the  reign  he  im 
placed  at  the  head  of  the  justioes  itaumfc 
m  Yorkshire  and  Northumberland,  and  be 
is  mentioned  as  chancellor  on  the  Close  BoU 
as  late  as  June  15, 1225,  9  Heniy  UL 
(Rot.  Claw.  i.  313.  403,  ii.  73.) 

In  1  Henry  lU.  he  was  raised  to  tbe 
bishopric  of  Durham^  which  had  bea 
vacant  for  nearly  mne  years.  He  a 
called  '  our  beloved  chancellor.  Mart* 
Richard  de  Marisco,  elect  of  DnihaBt' 
on  a  record  dated  June  29,  1217  (M 
Clous,  i.  326),  so  that  he  was  not  oooi»' 
crated  till  after  that  date. 

During  his  rule  of  his  great  diocese  be  ii 
said  to  have  exhibited  such  profuse  pro£- 
gality  as  to  have  excited  the  fear  of  die 
monks  that  he  would  waste  their  property 
as  well  as  that  of  the  church.  Euaoie^ 
ing  upon  their  privileges,  they  retaliated  bf 
chargmg  him  before  the  pope,  not  meietf 
v^ith  the  minor  ofiences  ot  extmTa^nM 
and  waste,  but  with  the  crimes  of  peijiiiTf 
simonv.  sacrilege,  adultery,  and  blood.  He 
was  ooliged  to  proceed  to  Rome  to  vnf^ 
the  charges,  and  there  is  a  record  tbil 
shows  he  was  absent  from  England  n 
January  1221.  (Excerpt,  e  RcL  F^  >• 
59.)  it  is  alleged  that  he  softened  Ai 
pontiff  by  his  presents,  and  induced  bis 
so  to  protract  the  contest  that,  in  fad>y 
sentence  was  pronounced  while  ha  liv*^ 
Before  his  death,  however,  he  reatowijtJ" 
monks  the  rights  and  libertieaaf  tMA^ 
had  deprived  them,  and  gaiveflWliW 
for  their  benefit.    (Ai^  Qmk  M^ 


MAEKHAM 

The  annoyance  occasioned  by  these  liti- 
.gations  was  increased  by  the  disrespect 
with  which  he  was  treated  by  Ralph  de 
Neville,  dean  of  Lichfield,  who  was  em- 
ployed as  his  deputy  in  the  duties  of  the 
Chancery,  and  was  evidently  attempting  to 
supersede  him  in  his  office.  A  letter  is 
extant  among  the  public  records,  in  which 
Kichard  de  Marisco  reprimands  the  dean 
for  suppressing  his  title  of  chancellor  in 
some  letters  he  had  addressed  to  him.  (5 
Heport  Pub,  HeCf  App.  ii.  66.) 

His  death  was  very  sudden.  Travelling 
to  London  to  attend  a  legantine  council,  he 
■Stopped  for  one  night  at  the  monastery  of 
Peterborough,  and  was  found  dead  in  his 
bed  on  the  following  morning.  This  oc- 
curred on  May  1,  1226.  His  body  was 
Temoved  to  Durham,  where  it  was  buried 
in  the  cathedral.     {Godwin,  739.) 

MAKKHAir,  John,  of  Sedgebrook  in 
Lincolnshire,  whose  ancestors  were  settled 
«t  a  village  so  called  in  Nottinghamshire, 
was  the  son  of  Robert  Markham,  a  serjeant- 
at-law  in  the  reipi  of  Edward  EEL,  by  a 
daughter  of  Sir  John  Caunton,  knight.  He 
is  said  to  have  received  his  legal  education 
at  Gray's  Inn,  and  became  a  kmg's  Ser- 
jeant in  1300,  14  Richard  XL  On  July  7, 
1300,  he  was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the 
Common  Pleas.  From  that  time  fines  were 
levied  before  him  tillFebruary  1408,9  Henry 
I y.  (Ihigdale's  Orw,  46.)  He  was  united 
with  Chief  Justice  '[Hiiming  in  the  commis- 
sion to  announce  to  Richud  XL  his  depo- 
sition from  the  throne;  but  he  left  the 
distressing  duty  to  be  performed  by 
Thiming  alone,  adding  no  words  of  his 
own  to  that  judge's  address.  (Hot.  Pari 
iii.  338,  424,  609.) 

It  is  almost  useless  to  notice  that 
Markham  has  been  mentioned  as  the 
judge  who  committed  IMnce  Henry  to 
prison.  (Tyler's  Henry  V,  i.  370.)  The 
tale  is  sufficiently  confuted  by  the  fact  that 
lie  sat  in  the  Common  Pleas,  and  that  he 
never  was  chief  justice  of  either  court 

He  retired  from  the  bench  before  his 
death,  and  by  his  monument  in  MffcrlrhAin 
Church  it  appears  that  he  died  on  De- 
cember 31,  1400. 

He  was  twice  married.  His  first  wife  was 
I^lizabeth,  the  daughter  of  Sir  John,  and 
fiister  and  coheir  of  Sir  Hugh  Cressy. 
From  their  son  Robert  descended  Dr. 
"William  Markham,  Archbishop  of  York. 
The  judge's  second  wife  was  Milicent, 
widow  of  Sir  Nicholas  Burden,  and 
daughter  and  coheir  of  Sir  John  Beke- 
ringc.  She  is  stated  bv  Thoroton  (NotU, 
i.  341,  iii.  230,  417),  and  other  authorities 
to  1)0  the  mother,  by  him,  of  the  next-no- 
ticed Sir  John  Markham;  but  a  case  in 
tb*-  Year  iJook  (\'2  IlvurylV.  fo.  2),  which 
x\-ns  a  writ  of  dower  brou^'ht  by  her  in  the 
jeiir  after  Judge   Markham's  death,  dia- 


M  A  MCH  AM 


435 


tinctly  states  the  defendant  John  to  be 
son  and  heir  of  the  judge  by  Elizabeth, 
his  former  wife.  (WoUotis  Baronet,  iL 
380;  Piim^s  Ptirish  ofBfyth,  185.) 

XABKHAM,  John,  the  son  of  the  above- 
mentioned  John  Markham  by  either  his 
first  or  his  second  wife,  must  have  been 
very  young  at  the  time  ot  his  father's  death 
in  1^)9.  He  probably  studied  the  law  at 
Grav's  Xnn,  and  first  appears  in  the  Year 
Books  as  an  advocate  in  1430,  9  Henry 
VI.  In  Easter  1440  he  was  caUed  to  the 
degree  of  the  coif;  and  within  four  years, 
having  been  in  the  interim  employed  m  the 
king's  service  as  one  of  his  seneants,  he 
was  raised  to  the  judicial  seat  in  the  Kind's 
Bench,  on  February  6, 1444.  He  steadily 
performed  the  duties  of  this  place  durinff 
the  seventeen  remaining  yean  of  the  lei^ ; 
and  thera  is  no  appearance  of  his  havmg 
taken  any  active  part  in  the  civil  contest 
which  then  troubled  the  kingdooL 

On  May  18,  1461,  the  next  term  after 
the  accession  of  Edward  XV.,  he  was  ap- 
pointed chief  justice  of  his  court,  his  long 
service  and  mgh  legal  attainments,  rather 
than  any  political  reason,  pointing  him  out 
as  a  proper  successor  to  the  place.  He  pre- 
sided in  the  court  with  the  highest  reputa- 
tion for  nearly  eight  years,  when  he  was 
superseded  on  January  28,  1469.  The 
cause  of  his  removal  is  thus  stated  by 
Fuller  (  Worthies,  ii.  207^  :— '  Xt  happened 
that  Sir  Thomas  Cooke,  late  lord  mayor  of 
liondon,  one  of  vast  wealth,  was  cast 
beforehand  at  the  court  (where  the  Iiord 
Rivers  and  the  rest  of  the  queen's  kindred 
had  pre-devoured  his  estate),  and  was  onl^, 
for  lormality's  sake,  to  be  condenmed  m 
Guildhall  by  extraordinaiy  conmiissioners 
in  Oyer  and  Terminer,  whereof  Sir  John 
Marldiam  was  not  the  meanest  The  fact 
for  which  he  was  arraigned  was  for  lending 
monev  to  Margaret,  the  wife  of  Henry  VX. 
This  he  denied,  and  the  single  testimony  of 
one  Hawkins,  tortured  on  the  rack,  was 

Produced  agaonst  him.  Jud^  Markham 
irected  the  jury  (as  it  was  his  place,  and 
no  partiality  in  point  of  law  to  do)  to  find 
it  only  misprision  of  treason ;  whereby  Sir 
Thomas  saved  his  ktndsy  though  heavily 
fined,  and  ItYe,  though  long  imprisoned.' 
Fabian  and  Holinshea  tell  the  story  of  the 
prosecution,  but  without  naming  the  judge. 
Stow,  however,  in  his  'Annals,'  supphes  the 
deficiency. 

He  popularly  acquired  the  title  of 
the  '  upright  judge,'  naturally  given  to 
one  who  was  supposed  to  have  sufiered 
for  conscience'  sake;  but  we  have  other 
evidence  to  show  that  his  character  con- 
tinued to  be  esteemed  and  his  authority 
quoted  in  after-ages.  Sir  Nicholas  Throg- 
morton,  on  his  trial  in  1»'>54,  said  to  his 
judges, '  As  to  the  said  alledjjed  four  pre- 
cedents against  me,  X  have  recited  as  man^ 


436 


KABLBOBOUaH 


for  me ;  and  I  would  you,  my  lord  chief 
justice,  Bhoidd  incline  your  judgments 
lather  after  the  example  of  tout  honourable 
predeceseorB,  Justice  Markham  and  others, 
which  did  eschew  corrupt  Judgments, 
judg^g  directly  and  sincerely  after  the  law 
and  the  principles  in  the  same,  than  after 
such  men  as,  swerving  from  the  truth,  the 
maxim,  and  the  law,  did  judire  corruptly, 
maliciously,  and    aflSdctionately/      (^^tate 

The  discarded,  but  not  disgraced,  judge 
retired  to  his  seat  in  Lincolnehire,  called 
Sedgebrook  HaU,  and  there  in  piet^  and 
devotion  spent  tibie  remainder  of  his  life, 
which  terminated  in  1479.  (Col,  Inqms, 
p.  m.  iv.  396.)  He  was  buried  in  the 
church  there. 

By  his  wife  Margaret,  daughter  and  co- 
heir of  Sir  Simon  Leke,  of  Gotham  in 
Nottinghamshire,  he  had  a  son  Thomas, 
one  of  whose  descendants  was  created  a 
baronet  in  1642,  but  the  title  became  ex- 
tinct in  1779.     (  Wottan's  Baronet,  ii.  330.) 

XABLBOBOireE,  Eabl  of.    See  J.  Ley. 

MABMIOH,  RoBBBT,  was  son  and  grand- 
son to  two  barons  bearing  the  same  names. 
The  grandfather  was  a  Norman,  and  received 
from  William  the  Conqueror  the  castle  of 
Tamworth  in  Warwickshire.  The  father 
succeeded  to  this  and  to  other  property, 
among  which  were  the  strong  casUe  of 
Fontney  in  Normandy,  and  the  manor  of 
Scrivelsby  in  Lincolnshire,  which  was  held 
by  grand  serjeanty  to  perform  the  office  of 
champion  at  the  kinjers  coronation.  This 
second  Robert  was  Idlled  at  Coventry,  by 
falling  into  one  of  the  ditches  he  had  made 
to  entrap  the  Earl  of  Chester's  forces  in  8 
Stephen,  1143,  when  this,  the  third  Robert, 
his  son  bjr  his  wife  Milicent,  must  have  been 
quite  an  mfant. 

He  is  first  mentioned  on  the  Great  Roll  of 
14Henry  U.,  1169,  with  a  charge  for  the  aid 
on  msnying  the  king's  daughter  (Madox,  i. 
574) ;  but  it  is  not  till  towards  the  latter 
end  of  the  reisn  that  he  is  mentioned  in 
connection  with  the  court  He  was  then 
entrusted  with  the  sheriffalty  of  Worcester- 
shire, an  office  which  he  continued  to  hold 
in  the  first  year  of  Richard's  reign. 

In  1184  he  was  one  of  the  justiciers  pre- 
sent on  the  passing  of  a  fine,  and  was  a 
justice  itinerant  in  the  thirty-third  year, 
and  on  several  occasions  during  the  reign  of 
Richard.  In  6  John,  1204,  also  he  was 
one  of  the  justiciers  before  whom  fines  were 
levied  in  the  country.  (Madox,  i.  603, 
691, 698.) 

He  accompanied  King  Richard  into  Nor- 
mandy in  the  sixth  year  of  his  reign^  and 
joined  in  the  expedition  into  Poictou  m  16 
John.  To  the  Koights  Templars  he  was  a 
bene&ctor,  b^r  ffivmg  them  a  mill  at  Bar- 
aton  in  Warwickshire. 

His  death  occiuied  before  May  16, 1218, 


MARTIN 

2  Henry  HI.  (Excerpt,  e  JM.  JIm.  L  9.) 
His  first  wife  was  Matilda,  the  daughter  (^ 
William  de  Beauchamp;  and  his  second 
vdfe  was  named  Philippa ;  and  br  both  he- 
had  issue.  The  male  oranch  failed  about 
the  reign  of  Edward  lU. ;  but  a  daughter, 
to  whom  the  manor  of  Scrivelsby  fell, 
marrying  Sir  John  Dymoke,  the  right  oT 
acting  as  champion  at  the  royal  coronation 
is  stul  preserved  to  the  repreaentativa  of 
that  family. 

XAB8H,  Ralph  de,  as  abbot  of  Groyland,. 
stands  at  the  head  of  the  justices  itinerant 
who  were  commissioned  in  66  Henry  IIL, 
1272,  into  the  county  of  Leicester,  but  never 
appears  afterwards  m  a  judicial  character. 
He  had  been  a  monk  there,  and  was  raised 
to  the  abbacy  about  October  1264.  He  died 
on  Michaelmas-day  1281.  (Browne  WtUU.) 

KABTni,  Sakuel,  one  of  the  present 
barons  of  the  Exchequer,  is  of  Irish  ex- 
traction, bein^  the  second  son  of  the  late 
Samuel  Martm,  Esq.,  of  Calmore  in  the 
county  of  Londonderry,  and  of  Arabella  his 
wife.  Bom  on  September  23,  1801,  he  re- 
ceived his  education  at  Trinity  College, 
Dublin,  where  he  graduated  as  Bachelor  of 
Arts  in  1821,  and  was  admitted  to  the  degree 
of  D.C.L.  at  a  later  period  of  his  life. 

He  at  first,  in  May  1821,  entered  as  a  stn* 
dent  at  Gray's  Inn,  but  in  December  1826 
he  transferred  himself  to  the  Middle  Temple, 
by  which  society  he  was  called  to  the  nr 
on  January  29,  1830.  In  the  interim  he 
had  practised  for  two  years  as  a  special 
pleader — a  plan  wisely  adopted  as  an  excel- 
lent introduction  to  the  aostruser  parti  of 
the  science.  With  the  experience  tnus  ob- 
tained he  joined  the  Northern  Circuit  with 
great  advantage,  and  soon  reaped  the  haz^ 
vest  which  resulted  from  his  previoua  repu- 
tation. In  thirteen  years  he  acquired  such 
a  lead  on  circuit  and  in  London  as  to  entitle 
him  to  a  silk  gown,  which  was  given  to  him 
in  1843;  and  after  seven  years  more,  in 
which  he  enjoyed  a  lar^e  share  of  important 
business  in  the  courts,  ne  was  promoted  ta 
the  bench  of  the  Exchequer  in  NoTember 
1860,  when  he  was  knighted.  For  the  three 
previous  years  he  had  represented  Pontefract 
m  parliament. 

In  1838  the  baron  married  Frances,  the 
eldest  daughter  of  Sir  Frederick  PoUock, 
afterwards  lord  chief  baron. 

KABTUr,  William,  was  of  a  familj 
commencing  with  a  Norman  knight  namei 
Martin  de  Tours,  who  acquired  the  lordship 
of  Camoys  in  the  county  of  Pembroke,  ana 
founded  there  the  monastery  of  St.  bog^ 
maels.  He  was  the  sixth  biuron,  and  aided 
Edward  I.  in  his  expeditions  against  Soot- 
land.  He  signed  the  barons'  fetter  to  tiie 
pope,  under  the  titie  of  Dominus  de  Ca- 
mesio.  Wh^  the  justices  of  tnulbastoD 
were  appointed,  on  April  6,  .1305,  he  was 
placed  at  the  head  of  those  sent  into  Con- 


MABTYN 

wall  and  nine  other  counties^  and  so  af;ain 
in  February  1307.  His  demenqr  and  kind- 
nesB  to  the  poor  during  these  commissions 
4ire  commemorated  in  a  Norman  song  of  the 
^e.  Both  before  and  after  tiiis  time  he  is 
mentioned  as  acting  in  a  judicial  capacity, 
as  well  in  civil  as  in  ciimmal  pleas.  {Hot, 
Par/,  i.  188, 196, 218 ;  WrigMs  FbL  &mfs, 
231.)  In  4  Edward  II.  a  writ  of  enquiry 
was  addressed  to  him,  and  in  9  Edward 
II.  he  was  justice  of  South  Wales.  {Abb, 
Placit.  312  J  1  Bewni  Pub.  Bee.  101.^ 

On  his  death,  which  occurred  in  1325^  he 
left,  by  his  wife  Eleanor,  daughter  of  Wil- 
liam de  Mohun,  a  son  William,  who  died 
childless,  and  two  daughters,  among  the 
representatiyes  of  whom  the  barony  is  in 
abeyance.    {Baronage,  i,  729.) 

MABTYN,  JoHiT,  son  of  Richard  Martyn, 
of  Stonebridge  in  Kent,  and  Anna,  daughter 
of  John  Boteler,  of  Graveney,  Esq.,  is  first 
mentioned  in  the  Year  Books  of  8  Henry 
rV.,  from  which  time  he  seems  to  haye  been 
in  considerable  practice.  He  was  summoned 
no  less  than  three  times  to  take  upon  him- 
self the  degree  of  serjeant-at-law,  and  on 
each  occasion  he  disobeyed  the  summons. 
Several  other  apprentices  of  the  law  having 
been  guilty  of  the  same  neglect,  the  parlia- 
ment of  November  1417  took  the  matter 
up,  and  commanded  them  under  a  heavy 
penalty  to  comply  with  the  requisition, 
which  they  did  in  the  following  Trinity 
Term.  {Mot.  Pari  iv.  107.)  He  had  not 
worn  the  coif  long  before  he  was  raised  to 
the  bench  of  the  Common  Pleas.  His  patent 
is  not  recorded,  but  the  first  fine  levied  before 
him  was  in  8  Henry  V.,  1420,  and  the  last 
was  in  15  Henry  VL,  1436.  He  died  on 
October  24  in  that  year,  and  was  buried  in 
Oraveney  Church,  where  his  gravestone  is  of 
A  very  large  size,  richly  inliud  with  brass, 
and  having  the  figures  of  himself  and  his 
wife  represented  upon  it.  {Hasted,  u.  vL 
vii.;   TFeever,  2S2.) 

MA8EBE8,  Fraxcis,  held  the  office  of 
cursitor  baron  of  the  Exchequer  for  above 
Hfty  years,  a  period  longer  than  any  other 
Judffe  has  retained  his  place.  This  vene- 
rable man  died  ^  in  harness'  in  the  ninety- 
third  year  of  his  age,  and  to  the  laist 
persevered  in  wearing  the  costume  of  the 
reign  in  which  he  was  bom.  No  part  of 
his  long  life  was  wasted  in  idleness,  and  his 
numerous  works,  les:al,  political,  scientific, 
and  literary,  prove  that  the  whole  of  it  was 
profitably  employed. 

He  was  of  a  Irench  family,  which  settled 
here  on  the  revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes. 
His  grandfather  was  a  colonel  in  the  army 
of  William  111.,  and  his  father  was  a  phy- 
sician, resident  in  llathbone  Place,  wnich 
the  baron  afterwards  occupied.  He  was 
bom  on  December  15,  1731,  and  after  re- 
ceiving the  elements  of  his  education  at  a 
school  at  Kingston-upon-Thames,  he  became 


MAUGLEBK 


437 


a  member  of  Clare  Hall,  Cambridge.  He 
took  his  desree  of  B.A.  in  1752  as  fourth 
wrangler  and  senior  chancellor'a  medallist^ 
and  proceeded  M.A.  in  1755^  obtaining  a 
fellowship  of  his  college. 

He  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  Temple, 
and  was  then  elected  one  of  the  common 
pleaders  of  the  dtf  of  London,  and  joined 
the  Western  Circmt.  Of  the  extent  of  his 
forensic  practice  there  is  little  record,  be- 
yond the  fact  of  his  being  present  in  1764 
at  the  trial  of  Mr.  Webl^  the  solicitor  of 
the  Treasury,  for  perjury  connected  with 
the  proceedmgs  on  the  general  warrants,  a 
note  of  which  he  supplied  to  the  editor  of 
the  'State  Trials'  (xiz.  1172).  He  was 
sent  out  as  attorney-general  of  Quebec^ 
where,  during  the  American  contest,  he 
distinguished  himself  by  his  loyalty.  On 
his  return  to  England  he  was,  in  August 
1773,  appointed  cursitor  baron  of  theEz- 
chequer,  the  duties  of  which  were  so  slight 
that  he  added  to  them  those  attached  to 
the  deputy  recordershnp  of  London  in  1779, 
and  of  senior  judge  of  the  Sheriff's  Court 
in  1780.  The  former  of  tiiese  two  appoint- 
ments he  resigned  in  1783,  but  the  latter 
he  retained  tin  1822. 

By  his  scientific  and  antiquarian  know- 
ledge he  was  infinitely  more  conspicuous 
than  in  his  legal  attainments;  though  that 
in  the  latter  he  was  by  no  means  deficient 
is  shown  by  hi^  '  Treatiae  on  the  Power  of 
Juries  in  Casesof  Libel  Y1792),his<Essay  on 
the  Briti^  Constitution  n7/2^,andvanous 
other  works.  He  was  electea  a  fellow  of 
the  Royal  Societjr  in  1771,  and  was  also  a 
fellow  of  the  Society  of  Antiquaries ;  con- 
tributing many  leamed  papers  to  the  'Philo- 
sophical Transactions '  of  the  former,  and  to 
the  ^  Archseologia '  of  the  latter.  In  other 
branches — historical,  political,  and  theo- 
logical— his  publications  were  numerous. 

Better  than  all,  his  memory  is  without 
stain;  and  when  he  died  at  Reigate  on 
May  19,  1824,  his  character  for  urbanity, 
integrity,  and  liberality  was  gracefully 
recorded  in  an  elegant  liatin  inscription  on 
a  monument  in  the  church,  erectea  by  his 
friend  Dr.  Fellows.  He  showed  his  attach- 
ment to  the  Church  of  England  by  endow- 
ing a  Sunday  aftemoon  sermon  at  Reigate. 
{Gent.  Mag.  xciv.  (1),  669.) 

IKAUCLEBK,  Walteb  ^Bishop  of  Cab- 
lisle),  was  one  of  King  John's  chaplains, 
and  was  rewarded  with  the  presentation  to 
various  churches.  (Bot.  Pat.  14,  74,  93, 
103.)  He  was  employed  in  various  wavs 
by  the  kins,  being  in  6  John  one  of  t&e 
bailifis  of  the  county  of  Lincoln ;  in  14 
John  he  acted  in  the  Exchequer  in  Ireland 
{Ibid.  47,  06)  ;  and  in  16  John  he  was  sent 
as  an  ambamador  to  Rome  to  urge  the 
royal  complaints  against  the  barons.  A 
letter  of  his  while  engaged  in  this  mission 
is  extant  in  Rymer's  '  Foedera '  (i«  120). 


438 


iiAULE 


In  3  Henry  III.  he  was  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant  into  the  counties  of  Lincoln,  Not- 
tingham, and  Derby,  and  in  5  Henry  lU. 
was  a  justice  of  the  forest.     He  next  was 
sheriff   of   Cumberland   and  constable  of 
Carlisle,  offices  which  he  held  for  several 
years.    In  August  1223  he  was  elected  Bi- 
shop of  Carlisle,  and  was  several  times  sent 
on  special  embassies  abroad    (Rot.  Claus, 
i.  387-662,  ii.  11-212'),   till  in  July  1232 
he  was  raised  to  the  office  of  treasurer.   By 
the  insti^tion,  however,  of  Peter  de  Ru- 
pibus.  Bishop  of  Winchester,  he  was  in  the 
next  year  ejected  from  his  office,  fined  one 
hundred  pounds  of  silver,  and  deprived  of 
various  possessions  which  had  been  pre- 
viously granted  to  him.    His  intention  to 
appeal  to  Rome  was  frustrated  by  his  being 
stopped  at  Dover  at  the  moment  of  em- 
barKation,  with  such  violence  that  Roger, 
Bishop  of  London,    immediately  excom- 
municated the  officers  who  had  impeded 
him,    and    boldly   repeated   the  sentence 
before  the  king.     (i?.  de  Wendoier,  iv.  264, 
272.)    The    bishop    afterwards  recovered 
the  royal  favour,  and  was  not  only  appointed 
catechist  to  Prince  Edward,  but  in  1246, 
when  the  king  went  into  Gascony,  he  and 
"William  de  Cantilupe  were  united  with 
Walter  de  Grey,  the  Archbishop  of  York, 
in  the  government  of  the  kingdom  during 
the  royal  absence.    He    resigned  his  bi- 
shopric on  June   29,  1246,  and  took  the 
habit  of  a  preaching  friar  at  Oxford,  where 
he  remained  till  his  death,  on  October  28, 
1248.    {Godwin,  70^,) 

MAULE,  William  Henry,  was  bom  on 
April  26,  1788,  at  Edmonton  in  Middlesex. 
His  father  was  a  medical  practitioner  there, 
and  his  mother  was  the  daughter  of  one  of 
the  family  of  Rawson  of  Leeds.  In  Octo- 
ber 1806  he  entered  Trinity  College,  Cam- 
bridge, where  he  pursued  both  his  mathe- 
matical and  classical  studies  with  such 
avidity  and  success  that  on  taking  his 
degree  of  B.A.  in  1810  he  came  out  as 
senior  wrangler,  and  in  October  1811  was 
elected  fellow.  In  the  science  of  mathe- 
matics he  was  not  only  an  extraordinary 
proficient,  but  an  original  inventor  in  some 
of  its  branches.  His  friend  Mr.  Babbage 
acknowledges  the  assistance  he  received 
from  his  suggestions,  and  speaks  of  his 
wonderful  powers  and  acuteness.  So  high 
was  his  reputation  in  this  respect  that  he 
was  offered  the  professorship  of  mathe- 
matics at  Haileybury  College,  but,  having 
chosen  the  law  as  his  profession,  he  de- 
clined it. 

He  entered  Lincoln's  Inn  and  was  called 
to  the  bar  in  1814,  joining  the  Oxford  and 
the  Welsh  Circuits.  He  had  acquired  the 
same  mastery  over  law  as  he  possessed  over 
the  other  branches  of  learning;  added  to 
which  he  had  fluency  of  language,  fertility 
o(  illustration,  and  many  of  the  powers  by 


MAULK 

which  barristers  succeed,  together  with  ait 
infinite  deal  of  humour  aiid  wit.  Yet,  not- 
withstanding these  advantages,  hia  adTanM^ 
in  the  profession  was  of  alow  growth,  the 
principal  cause  of  which  was  such  a  feai  (^ 
appearing  to  conciliate  clients  that  he  drove 
tnem  away  by  the  brusqueneaa  of  his  ad- 
dress. But  his  soundness  as  a  lawyer  and 
ingenuity  as  a  disputant  gradually  made 
their  way,  and  he  by  degrees  obtained  a 
considerable  footing  both  in  the  provinoes 
and  the  metropolis.  In  the  citr  parti- 
cularly, from  his  great  excellence  in  com- 
mercial law  and  on  questions  of  maiini 
insurance,  he  had  full  and  profitable  em- 
plovment. 

"(Vith  some  reluctance  and  miimYiDg  he 
accepted  a  silk  gown  in  Easter  1833,  aad 
soon  after  he  was  appointed  counsel  to  the 
Bank  of  England.  Distinguishing  himself 
greatly  in  the  conduct  of  the  Carlow  comity 
election  in  1835,  he  was  invited  to  repre- 
sent the  borough  of  Carlow  in  1837,  aM 
after  a  severe  contest  and  subsequent  peti- 
tion succeeded.  He  took  his  place  in  the 
House  of  Commons  on  the  liberal  side,  and, 
short  as  his  career  in  parliament  was,  he 
gave  promise  of  being  a  most  sucoenful 
debater.  But  in  March  1831)  he  was  raised 
to  the  bench  of  the  Exchequer,  from  which 
he  was  removed  to  the  Common  Pleas  in 
the  following  November. 

During  the  sixteen  years  that  he  sat  in 
that  court  he  displaved  all  the  qualities  of 
an  excellent  judge,  nis  distinguishing  cha- 
racteristic being  practical  common  aena& 
and  ^eat  ingenuity  in  defeating  mere 
techmcalities.  His  judgments  were  re- 
markable for  their  striking'  obserratioo, 
their  jpithv  power,  and  happy  illustoratioitf. 
At  INisi  Frms  he  was  strictly  impartial, 
patient,  and  courteous,  enlivening  the  court 
trequently  with  that  peculiar  irony  which 
was  natural  to  him.  In  trying  priaoneia 
the  exercise  of  the  latter  faculty  sometimes 
bewildei-ed  the  jury,  and  led  them  by  mis- 
taking his  intention  to  deliver  a  verdict 
just  the  reverse  of  what  he  recommended. 

So  frequent  were  his  attacks  of  iUneM 
that  he  was  obliged  to  resign  in  June  1855, 
but  was  immediately  placed  on  the  privr 
council  and  added  to  its  judicial  com- 
mittee. He  was  an  effective  member  (^  it 
for  the  remainder  of  his  life,  which  termi* 
nated  rather  suddenlv  on  January  16, 1858. 

In  his  social  circle  he  was  remarkable 
for  pleasantry  and  humour,  for  kindHneft 
of  disposition,  and  for  cordiality  of  friend- 
ship. Like  all  men  of  intellect,  he  was  an 
admirer  of  real  genius,  and  his  greatest 
aversion  was  against  pert  pretence  and 
ignorant  conceit.  Some  of  his  caustic  bat 
playful  epigrams  in  Latin  and  French  an 
directed  against  them.  His  powers  of  cod- 
versation  were  very  great,  and  his  memoir 
retained  all  the  facetiaa  he  had  ewr  nm^ 


MAULEY 

whBe  the  moU  that  he  uttered  were  a 
nefer-iailiiig  source  of  mirth  in  West- 
miTMrtftr  Hall.    He  died  uxunarried. 

XAVLBY.    See  P.  DE  Malo  Lacu. 

XAmtnJE  (Bishop  of  London)  was  at 
the  time  of  the  Couquest  one  of  William's 
chiqtlains.  and  so  continued  until  he  was 
aupointea  Bishop  of  London  in  1083  or 
1066y  according  to  different  authorities. 

He  is  ffener^hr  named  as  the  first  chan- 
Mllar  of  King  William,  and  Dugdale  (On'g. 
M\  quotes  a  charter  of  confirmation  to 
Westminster  Abbey,  dated  1067,  which  he 
witnesses  as  'Regis  Cancellarius/  That 
document,  however,  on  examination,  is 
found  to  be  a  fozgerj ;  and  no  other  record 
of  that  period,  with  his  name  as  chancellor, 
haying  oeen  found,  his  appointment  must 
be  lemoyed  to  a  later  date.  The  earliest 
that  oocuzs  is  William's  charter  confirming 
the  deed  bjr  which  William  de  Warenne 
and  Gundreda  his  wife  gave  the  prioiy  of 
Lewes  to  the  monastery  of  Cluny  (ArAa^ 
ologia^  zxxii.  123),  and  this  was  granted 
about  1078.  Hib  name  is  also  attached  to 
the  king's  decision  of  the  controversy  be- 
tween Arfastus,  Bishop  of  Thetford,  and 
the  Abbot  of  Burr,  which  was  pronounced 
in  the  year  1081  (Monast,  iii.  l4l),  and  to 
a  charter  granted  to  the  abbey  of  Karile- 
phus  in  1082  (^Ibid.  vi  903),  in  the  latter 
of  which  he  is  styled  *  Cenomanensis  £c- 
clesi»  Archidiaconus.' 

His  retirement  from  the  chancellorship 
took  place  shortly  afterwards,  possibly  on 
his  election  to  the  bishopric  of  Xondon,  if 
it  occurred  in  1083,  but  certainly  before 
1085,  as  his  successor,  William  "Welson, 
was  himself  raised  to  the  episcopal  bench 
in  that  year. 

The  private  character  of  Maurice  does 
not  seem  to  have  stood  very  high,  although 
the  ^unds  on  which  it  is  slightmdy 
mentioned  are  not  named.  But  after  his 
elevation  to  the  bishopric  of  London  he  is 
onivezsally  praised  for  the  liberality  and 
seal  with  which  he  devoted  himself  to  the 
le-ediilcation  of  the  cathedral  of  St.  Paul, 
when  it  was  destroyed  by  the  fire  that  con- 
sumed the  greatest  part  of  London  in  1086. 
He  laid  foundations  so  vast  in  extent  that 
his  contemporaries  woidd  not  believe  that 
the  pile  could  ever  be  completed,  nor  was 
it  tin  some  time  after  his  death,  although 
he  applied  himself  diligently  and  energeti- 
cally to  the  work  during  the  remainder  of 
his  life. 

That  Maurice,  on  the  death  of  the  Con- 
oneror,  did  not  side  with  his  eldest  son 
Aobert,  appears  from  his  attending  the 
first  court  of  William  II.  at  Christmas 
1087,  and  crowning  Henry  I.  in  1100.  He 
iied  on  September  26, 1107.  (Stow's  Lon- 
ite,  36,  61;  Godwin,  175 ;  Madox,  L  7, 8; 
EBi^M  itUrod.  to  Domesday  Book.) 

r,  RiCHABD,  was  tiie  fourth  son  of 


MAYNARD 


439 


John  May,  of  Rawmere  in  Sussex,  Esq. 
This  John  was  brother  to  Sir  Humphrey 
May,  who  held  many  valuable  places  under 
James  1.  and  Charles  L,  from  the  latter  of 
whom  he  had  a  grant  of  the  office  of  master 
of  the  KoUs  in  reversion  after  the  death  of 
Sir  Julius  Csasar,  whom  however  he  did 
not  survive.  Richard's  mother  was  Eliza 
Hill,  daughter  of  a  merchant  in  London. 
He  was  admitted  into  the  Middle  Temple 
in  January  1632,  and  was  one  of  the  per- 
formers m  Davenant's  masque  of  the 
^Triumphs  of  Prince  d' Amour,  represented 
before  Charles,  the  Elector  Palatine,  in 
1635.  Though  called  to  the  bar  in  May 
1639,  we  hear  nothing  further  of  him  till 
the  Restoration.  Having  then  been  elected 
recorder  of  Chichester,  he  was  chosen 
member  for  that  city  in  1073,  and  was  re- 
elected in  1670.  The  honour  of  knight- 
hood was  conferred  upon  him  in  May  1681, 
on  presenting  an  address  thanking  the  king 
for  nis  declaration  on  the  dissolution ;  and 
on  March  17,  1683,  he  became  cursitor 
baron  of  the  Exchequer.  He  was  again 
returned  for  Chichester  in  1685,  to  the 
only  parliament  called  by  James  II.,  before 
the  termination  of  whose  reign  he  died. 
(Hay*8  CMchesUr;  Athen.  Oxon.  iiL  807; 
LuUreU,  i.  91,  557.) 

IKATHAED,  John.  In  the  history  of  Sir 
John  Maynard  we  have  the  remarkable  in- 
stance of  a  man  not  only  raised  to  the  ju- 
dicial bench,  but  placed  on  its  highest  seat 
as  first  commissioner  of  the  Great  Seal  at 
the  age  of  eighty-seven  years ;  a  sufficient 
explaoation  of  which  may  be  found  by  con- 
sioering  the  political  necessity  of  the  time 
of  his  appointment  in  connection  with  the 
political  status  he  held  in  the  preceding 
reigns. 

Bom  at  Tavistock  in  1602,  he  was  the 
son  of  Alexander  Maynard,  a  gentleman  of 
that  town,  who  was  probably  a  barrister 
also,  from  his  being  described  of  the  Middle 
Temple  in  his  soirs  admission  to  that  inn 
in  1619.  In  the  next  year  he  took  the  de- 
gree of  B.A.  at  Oxford,  and  is  steted  by 
Anthony  Wood  in  his  *  Athenae  '  (iv.  292) 
to  have  been  of  Exeter  College,  but  in  his 
'Fasti '  (i.  386)  of  Queen's  CoUege.  He 
was  returned  for  Chippenham  to  the  first 
parliament  of  Charles  I.  in  1625,  while  yet 
a  student  of  the  law;  and  we  find  mm 
speaking  in  opposition  to  the  subsidies  de- 
manded. This  parliament  lasted  but  nine 
months,  and  he  does  not  appear  in  those  of 
1626  or  1628.  In  November  1626  he  was 
called  to  the  bar,  and  got  into  such  early 
practice  as  to  be  reported  by  Croke  two  years 
after,  from  which  time  hb  business  nq[>idly 
increased,  his  intelligence  and  ability  having 
attracted  the  attention  and  gained  the 
friendship  of  Attorney-General  Noy,  which 
greatly  assisted  his  advancement.  (FarL 
Hid.  u.  32.) 


440 


HAYNABD 


In  the  Mrliaments  of  April  and  Novem- 
ber 1640  ne  was  returned  for  Totnea.  In 
both  he  had  for  his  colleague  the  future 
chief  justice  Oliyer  St  Jolm,  witii  whom 
he  was  added  to  the  committee  to  manage 
the  impeachment  of  the  Earl  of  Straifordy 
and  opened  one  of  the  charges  against  him. 
He  was  one  of  the  managers  also  in  the 
prosecution  of  Archbishop  Laud,  and  in  ex- 
posing the  real  grieyances  of  the  country  he 
took  a  yeiy  active  part,  in  conjunction  with 
his  fiiend  and  comnanion  Edward  Hyde, 
the  future  Earl  of  Clarendon,  who  (Xt/^,  L 
67)  gives  him  the  credit  of  conducting  his 
opposition  with  less  rancour  and  malice 
than  his  enterprising  colleagues,  and  cha- 
racterises him  as  of  eminent  parts  and  great 
learning  out  of  his  profession^  and  in  it  of 
signal  reputation.  In  the  course  of  the  re- 
vdutionary  proceedings  contentions  natu- 
raUy  arose  oetween  the  temperate  and 
violent  members  of  the  party,  and  White- 
locke  and  Maynard  were  called  upon  by 
Lord  General  Essex  and  the  Scotch  Com- 
missioners to  give  the  perilous  counsel 
whether  Cromwell  could  not  be  proceeded 
against  as  an  incendiary.  They  so  managed 
however  as  to  escape  the  danger,  and;  tiiough 
of  the  Presbyterian  fjart^,  to  make  Cromwell 
their  Mend.  At  this  tame  he  was  so  popu- 
lar an  advocate  that  he  gained  700/L  m  one 
circuit,  a  sum^  Whitelocke  says,  larger  than 
any  barrister  ever  got  before.  In  1648  he 
was  elected  a  bencher  of  his  inn.  (  TVhite^ 
locke,  32-273 ;  Bramdon,  75.) 

Against  the  motion  made  in  that  year 
that  the  parliament  should  make  no  more 
addresses  to  Charles,  Maynard  spoke  forcibly 
but  unsuccessfully ;  and  on  the  subsequent 
debate  on  the  famous  remonstrance  from 
the  army  demanding  justice  upon  the  king, 
he  is  described  as  arguing  as  if  he  had  taken 
fees  on  both  sides,  one  while  magnifying  the 
gallant  deeds  of  the  army,  and  then '  firmng ' 
tbem  for  their  remonstrance,  as  tending  to 
the  destruction  of  the  kingdom  and  the  dis- 
solution of  the  government.  {Clarendon* s 
Heh.  y.  516  J  Pari  Hist.  iii.  1128.)  From 
this  time  he  seems  voluntarily  to  have  se- 
ceded from  the  house,  and  to  have  taken  no 
part  in  the  violent  measures  that  followed. 
Lord  Campbell  {Chanc,  iv.  12)  and  Towns- 
end  (346)  have  erroneously  confounded  him 
with  Sir  John  Maynard,  K.B.,  member  for 
Lostwithiel,  and  brother  of  the  first  Lord 
Maynard.  Maynard  was  not  summoned  by 
Cromwell  to  the  Barebone's  Parliament  in 
1653,  nor  was  he  a  member  of  that  of  1654 ; 
but  in  Cromwell's  third  parliament  of  1656 
he  was  returned  for  the  borough  of  Ply- 
mouth. 

In  the  interval  he  pursued  his  profession 
with  credit  and  success,  and  in  state  prose- 
cutions he  was  engaged  now  for  and  now 
against  the  Commonwealth.  In  the  case  of 
Cony,  who  brought  an  action  against  a  col- 


HATNASB 

lector  for  violently  seizing  certain  coitonu^ 
Maynard  argued  showing  the  illegality  of 
the   seizure,   whereupon   Gxomwwl  com- 
mitted him  to  the  Tower,  ai^  Ludlow  un- 
justly abuses  him  for  the  aabmiaaion  hewai 
necessitated  to  make  before  he  was  released, 
as  if  a  continuance  of  resistance  to  iirespoo- 
sible  power  would  have  been  beneficial  to 
his  client  or  tiie  country.    It  is  clear,  how- 
ever, that  Cromwell,  though  he  thouj^litit 
expedient  to  support  his  own  imposition^ 
felt  no  animosity  against  Maynara,  wluim 
he  called  to  the  degree  of  the  cdf  in  1664^ 
and  made  seijeant  to  the  Commanwultli 
m  May  1658.    {State  Trialt,  v.  348,  4S2; 
Ludlow,  223 ;  WhUelocke,  673.) 

The  parliament  that  met  in  September 
1656  was  diBsolvod  on  February  4, 1658. 
The  seijeant  does  not  appear  to  have  tdien 
any  part  in  the  proposal  to  give  the  title  of 
king  to  Cromwell;  and  he  himself  ralxe- 
quently  declared  that  he  '  was  not  at  the 
making  of  the  petition  and  advice,'  ooder 
which  the  Commonwealth  was  resettled, 
and  the  lord  protector  reconstituted.  The 
few  instances  of  his  addressing  the  hooN 
were  confined  to  questions  of  form,  abstain- 
ing entirely  from  political  subjects  except 
on  the  day  of  the  dissolution,  when  he  made 
an  able  speech  in  favour  of  calling  the  *  other 
house  *  tne  House  of  Lords.  This  no  dooht 
was  the  cause  of  the  protector's  adviQciiig 
him  two  months  after  to  be  one  of  hie  8e^ 
jeants,  in  which  character  he  walked  in 
Cromwell's  funeral  procession  in  the  fol- 
lowing November.  In  Protector  Richard's 
parliament,  which  sat  only  from  Janoaiy 
27  to  April  22,  1659,  and  was  nrincipBlly 
occupied  in  disputes  relative  to  tlie  protec- 
tor's title  and  to  the  '  other  house,'  he  ^ne 
returned  for  Beeralston^  for  Camelford,  and 
for  Newton  in  the  Isle  of  Wight,  and  elected 
to  sit  for  the  latter  place.  His  language  ia 
speaking  in  favour  of  the  Recognition  Bill 
was  manifestly  contrived  with  a  view  to  a 
future  change.  {Burton,  ii.  184, 169, 458, 
526,. iii.  183,  322,  594.)  On  the  termina- 
tion of  Richard's  power^  Maynard  was  iriaa 
enough  not  to  take  his  seat  at  the  fint 
meetmg  of  the  Rump ;  but  on  its  second  re- 
newal, and  the  appearance  of  Monk  on  the 
scene,  he  not  only  became  one  of  the  thiitj- 
one  members  of  the  coimcil  of  state,  bat 
was  appointed  to  carry  into  effect  a  vote 
discharging  the  declaration  pre viously  re- 
quired from  the  members,  that  they  would 
be  faithful  to  the  Commonwealth,  withoata 
king  or  House  of  Lords ;  thus  removing  odb 
of  the  greatest  obstacles  to  the  retuni<x  the 
king.  {Pari,  Hid,  iii.  1583 ;  Merernvmhi 
No.  609,  March  1.) 

This  accommodation  to  the  spizit  rf  A* 
times  naturally  led  to  his  being  OBti^^    \ 
at  the  Restoration  in  his  degree  fl^'  ' 

It  is  said  that  he  had  abo  " 
offered,  but  that  he  rdbaed  th 


HAYNABD 

So  perfectly,  howeTer,  did  he  make  hie 
peace  with  the  new  goyemment  that  he  was 
4ippointed  in  November  1600  one  of  the 
long's  Serjeants^  and  at  the  same  time  ac- 
cepted the  honour  of  knighthood.  From 
this  time  Mavnard  acted  the  politic  part 
of  siding  with  the  goyemment.  In  the 
Conyention  Parliament,  and  all  the  par- 
liaments durinff  Charles's  reign,  in  which 
he  sat  for  either  Exeter,  Meralston,  or 
Plymouth,  he  cautiously  ayoided  attaching 
himself  to  any  of  the  exbeme  parties  in  the 
state.  In  most  of  the  state  trials  he  took 
his  natural  precedence  as  king's  serjeant, 
4ind  was  the  principal  manager  for  the 
Commons  in  the  impeachment  of  Lord 
Stafford.  He  was  throughout  a  firm  be- 
liever in  Hxe  Popish  Plot,  and  in  the  testi- 
mony of  Oates  and  his  in&mous  coadjutors, 
but  had  a  convenient  forgetfulness  when 
called  upon  at  Oates's  triid  to  speak  in  his 
favour.  (Pari.  Hist.  iv.  149,  162;  State 
Trials,  vii.  1298,  x.  1162.) 

At  the  conmiencement  of  the  reign  of 
James  11.  Maynard  was  in  his  eighty-third 
year,  but  still  preserved  his  activity  and  his 
faculties.  He  represented  Beeralston  in  the 
onl^r  parliament  called  by  that  king,  and 
forcibly  opposed  the  encroachments  of  the 
court  He  refused  to  be  employed  for  the 
crown  in  the  prosecution  of  the  bishops, 
but  was  present  as  one  of  the  king's  Ser- 
jeants at  the  council  called  in  June  1688 
to  prove  the  genuineness  of  the  birth  of  the 
heir  to  the  throne,  which  in  six  months  was 
declared  to  be  vacant  (Pari,  Hid,  iv. 
1374;  Burnet,  iii.  39 ;  StaU  TriaU,  xiL  125.) 

On  the  l^rince  of  Orange's  arrivid  in 
London  and  being  welcomed  by  the  peers, 
the  prelates,  and  the  people^  the  lawyers  of 
course  were  not  backwani  m  their  congra- 
tulations. Maynard  was  at  their  h^ul; 
and  on  his  great  age  being  noticed  by  the 
prince  made  that  solitary  speech  which  has 
handed  him  down  to  the  present  day  with 
the  undisputed  title  of  a  wit  To  the 
prince's  observation  ^  that  he  had  outlived 
all  the  men  of  law  of  his  time,'  he  an- 
swered '  he  had  like  to  have  outlived  the  law 
itself  if  his  highness  had  not  come  over.' 
He  was  one  of  the  lawyers  called  by  the 
Peers  to  consult  on  the  necessary  proceed- 
ings to  be  taken,  and  in  the  convention  or 
parliament  summoned  by  the  prince  which 
met  on  January  22,  1689,  he  took  his  seat 
tuB  member  for  Plymouth.  He  ably  con- 
ducted the  conference  with  the  Lords  on  the 
question  of  the  ^abdication,'  and  was  a 
frequent  speaker  in  the  debate  as  to  voting 
the  convention  a  parliament  A  difficulty 
having  arisen  as  to  tilling  the  office  of  lord 
chancellor,  which  was  declined  both  by 
the  Earl  of  Nottingham  and  the  Marquis 
of  Halifax,  it  was  determined  to  put  the 
<.rreat  Seal  into  commission,  and  Sir  John 
Mavnard  was  selected  as  first  comnussioner 


MAYNARD 


441 


,  on  March  4,  with  Sir  Anthony  Keck  and 
Sir  William  Rawlinson  for  his  oolleaguet. 
Sir  John  did  not  thereby  vacate  his  seat  in 
tiie  House  of  Commons,  but  mixed  in  the 
debates  till  the  dissolution  in  January  1690, 
and  also  in  the  first  session  of  the  new  par* 
liament  that  met  in  the  following  MsSrch. 
£Gs  speeches  were  short,  pithy,  and  effec- 
tive, and  showed  little  of  the  garrulity  of 
a^  Soon  after  the  adjournment  he  re- 
siflned  his  place,  and  on  the  9th  of  the 
following  October  dosed  his  long-extended 
life,  in  the  eighty-ninth  jrear  of  nis  age,  at 
Gunnersbur^  in  the  parish  of  Ealing  in 
Middlesex,  m  the  church  of  which  he  was 
buried.  (Burnet,  iii.  341 ;  LuttrOl,  i.  490- 
506;  Ptirl  Hist.  v.  36-623.) 

Of  the  character  of  a  man  who  passed 
through  so  many  convulsions  opinions  must 
be  expected  to  vary  according  to  the  con- 
flicting views  of  the  actors  in  them ;  but 
in  Maynard's  early  career  we  have  seen  two 
antagonistic  vmters,  Whitelocke  and  Cla- 
rendon, agree  in  their  good  report  of  him. 
To  the  estimation  of  the  latter  ne  probably 
owed  ihe  favours  he  received  at  the  Re- 
storation— ^favours  which  he  endeavoured 
to  repay  by  speaking  against  the  great 
chancellor's  impeachment.  Burnet  speaks 
of  him  only  as  eminent  in  his  profession ; 
but  Burnet's  annotator.  Dean  Swift,  stig^ 
matises  him  as  an  old  rogue,  and  a  knave 
and  fool  with  all  his  law.  With  Roger 
North,  who  perforce  acknowledges  his  l^al 
ascendency,  of  course  he  was  no  (avounte. 
He  used  to  cidl  the  law  'ars  bablativa,' 
and  delighted  so  much  in  his  profession 
that  he  always  carried  one  of  the  ,Year 
Books  in  his  coach  for  his  diversion,  saying 
that  it  was  as  good  to  him  as  a  comedy. 
His  passion  for  law  ruled  him  to  such  a 
degree  that  he  left  a  will  purposely  worded 
so  as  to  cause  litigation,  in  order  that 
sundry  questions,  which  had  been  'moot 
points'  in  his  lifetime,  might  be  settled  for 
the  benefit  of  posterity.  Judge  Jeffireys  is 
said  to  have  availed  himself  of  the  Serjeant's 
legal  knowledge ;  but  one  day,  wh«i  Ma^* 
nard  was  arguing  against  some  judicial 
dictum,  the  coarse  judge  told  him  that '  he 
had  grown  so  old  as  to  forget  his  law.' 
*  'Tis  true.  Sir  George,'  he  retorted, '  I  have 
forgotten  more  law  than  ever  you  knew.' 
(  Woolrych's  Jeffrey b,  99  ;  Forsyth's  Hor^ 
tensiuSy  431.) 

The  editor  of  Burton's  Diary,  and  after 
him  Lord  Campbell^  holds  Maynard  up  to 
public  censure  for  joining  in  the  prose- 
cution of  Sir  Hwry  Vane,  condemned  for 
acting,  as  he  himself  had  done,  under  the 
authority  of  the  Commonwealtii.  But  if 
we  are  to  accept  the  account  in  the  State 
Trials  as  the  true  one,  the  charge  is  en- 
tirely without  foundation,  since  Maynard's 
name  does  not  appear  in  it.  Looking  at 
the  whole  of  his  career,  though  he  was  not 


442 


MEADE 


chargeable  with  anj  extraordinary  faults, 
neither  was  he  distinguished  by  anv  high- 
minded  or  spirited  actions.  After  his 
youthful  ebullition  of  patriotism  he  sub- 
sided into  a  plodding  lawyer,  taking  as 
little  part  in  politics  as  he  could,  accom- 
modatmg  himself  to  all  goyemments,  and 
devoting  himself  with  energy  and  industry 
to  his  professiou ;  never  deviating  from  the 
principles  he  professed,  and  now  and  then  ! 
venting  them :  but  cautious  not  to  oifend 
those  in  power,  and  anxious  only  to  in- 
crease the  amount  of  his  fees  and  to  retain 
the  honours  he  had  earned.  K  it  be  true 
that  he  refused  a  former  offer  of  advance- 
ment, it  cannot  be  supposed  that  he  sought 
his  last  elevation,  which  he  more  probably 
submitted  to  as  a  necessity  arising  from 
the  emergency.  In  short,  though  all  must 
acknowledge  nim  to  have  been  a  great  law- 
yer, none  can  regard  him  as  a  great  man. 

He  married  three  wives.  The  name  of 
the  iirst  is  not  recorded;  the  second  was 
Jane,  daughter  of  Cheney  Selherst,  Esq., 
of  Tentcrden,  and  widow  of  Edward  Aus- 
ten, Esq. ;  and  the  third  was  a  daughter  of 
the  Kev.  Ambrose  Upton,  canon  of  Christ- 
church,  and  widow  of  Sir  Charles  Ber- 
muden.  {Noble's  Grangety  L  172 ;  Gent, 
Mag.  lix.  685.) 

XEABE,  Thoxas,  was  the  son  of  Thomas 
Meade,  or  Mede,  of  Elmdon  in  Essex.  He 
spent  some  time  at  the  universitv  of  Cam- 
bridge before  he  was  placed  at  the  Middle 
Temple,  where  he  arrived  at  the  grade  of 
reader  in  1562,  and  again  in  1567.  In  the 
Easter  of  the  latter  year  he  was  raised  to 
the  degree  of  the  coil,  and  the  date  of  his 
elevation  to  the  judgeship  of  the  Court  of 
Common  Pleas  was  on  November  30, 1677, 
the  first  tine  levied  before  him  being  in 
Hilary  Term  1578.  (Dugdale's  Orig.  48, 
217.)  Having  filled  the  seat  about  seven 
years  and  a  half,  he  died  in  May  1585,  and 
WAS  buried  at  Elmdon  under  a  rich  monu- 
ment. He  left  by  his  wife,  Joane,  the 
widow  of  —  Clamp,  of  Huntingdon,  three 
sons,  whose  descendants  long  flourished  at 
Wendon  Lofts  in  Essex.  The  learned 
divine  Joseph  Mede  was  of  the  same 
family.     {Morant,  ii.  593.) 

MELLOR,  John,  one  of  the  present 
judges  of  the  Queen's  Bench,  was  bom 
on  January  1,  1809,  at  Hollinwood  House 
in  the  borough  of  Oldham^  where  his 
family  had  been  settled  for  many  gene- 
rations. His  father  belonged  to  the  old 
mercantile  firm  of  Oee,  Mellor,  Kershaw, 
&  Co.,  well  known  in  Lancashire  above 
fifty  years  affo.  Soon  after  the  judge's 
birth  the  calls  of  business  required  his 
father  to  reside  at  Leicester,  where  he 
served  the  office  of  mayor  and  acted  for 
many  years  as  a  magistrate^  and  where  he 
at  first  sent  his  son  to  the  ffiammar  school. 
From  this  he  was  removed  to  the  care  of 


M£3JiOB 

the  Rev.  Charles  Berry,  a  learned  and  ac- 
complished Unitarian  minister  at  Leieesta. 
The  doctrines  of  his  master  did  not  shsk^ 
hb  pupiFs  orthodoxy,  while  the  contio- 
versy  tnen  carried  on  between  tiie  8tq>- 
porters  of  conflicting  opinioiia«  of  which 
the  advocate  on  the  otner  siae  was  the 
celebrated  Robert  Hall,  naturalljr  led  him 
to  a  deeper  consideration  of  the  distinctioos 
of  religious  belief,  and  of  the  foundadois 
on  which  the  difierent  sects  are  based,  tJiaa 
is  usual  for  one  so  young.    This  produced 
in  his  mind  an  inveterate  repugnance  to  the 
subscription  to  all  dogmatic  articles  of  re- 
ligion, nis  impressions  on  the  subject  being 
confirmed  and  intensified  by  the  stnoglr 
expressed    remarks    attributed    to  Looi 
Brougham. 

With  these  impressions,  though  it  was 
originally  arranged  that  he  should  go  to 
Lincoln  College,  Oxford,  yet,  as  sabscx^ 
tion  to  the  Tnirty-nine  Articles  was  tha 
required  as  a  condition  of  admisnon,  he  &k 
himself  compelled  to  forego  the  advantage 
to  be  derived  from  a  university  educafioD. 
He  accordingly  continued  his  studies  under 
Mr.  Berry,  and  at  the  same  time,  being 
intended  for  the  bar,  obtained  some  instnie- 
tion  in  the  law  of  real  property  by  eotenng' 
the  ofiice  of  a  conveyancing  attorney  in  th^ 
town.    He  then  became  a  student  in  the 
Inner  Temple,  and  at  the  sametimeapnpil 
of  the  younger  Mr.  Chitty,  who  in  emineDO» 
as  a  special  pleader  equalled  his  father;  hoe 
he  remained  for  four  years,  durinff  whickhe 
attended  the  lectures  given  at  Univenitv 
College  by  that  eminent  jurist  John  Austin. 
He  was  called  to  the  bar  on  June  7,  18S3, 
and  in  the  same  year  married  Elixabeth, 
only  daughter  of  the  late  William  Mosekr, 
Esq.,  of  Peckham  Rye.    Joining  the  Mid- 
land Circuit,  he  became  a  member  of  the 
Leicester  borough  and  Warwick  sesfiions. 
and  acquired  a  considerable  practice  botii 
in  criminal  and  civil  business.    His  readi- 
ness, if  not  his  eloquence  of  address,  hi» 
clear  statement  of  facts  and  prompt  spplior 
tion  of  the  law  to  them,  and  partioilarly 
his  skill  in  the  examination  of  witnesaea, 
soon  established  him  in  the  courts  and 
marked  him  for  early  promotion.    In  1S4^ 
he  became  recorder  of  Warwick,  whidi  he 
resigned  in  1852.    In  1851  he  had  attained 
the  rank  of  queen*s  counsel,  and  fonod  no 
reason  to  regret  the  change,  often  injuiioos 
to  many.    In  1855  he  received  the  appointr 
ment  of  recorder  of  Leicester,  whidi  be 
retained  till  he  was  elevated  to  the  bncb 
at  Westminster. 

In  the  meantime,  after  one  unsneceMlBl 
contest  at  Warwick  in  1852,  and  nfltfaer 
at  Coventry  in  1857,  he  was  elected  b  tbt 
latter  year  member  of  pari  lament  fajBwj^ 
Yarmouth,  and  eat  for  it  till  IIm  AmWm^ 
in  1858,  when  he  cootertad  WlHll|>S 
with  success.    Thzonghovt  Ui 


J 


MELTOK 

career  he  was  an  unflinching  i^Tooate  of 
the  liberal  opinions  to  which  he  had  been 
all  along  attached,  and  a  firm  supporter  of 
Lord  Palmei8ton*8  administrations,  gaining 
the  regard  of  both  parties  by  his  honourable 
bearing  and  his  amiable  and  attractive 
manneiB. 

On  December  3. 1861,  he  was  constituted 
a  judge  of  the  Queen's  Bench,  which  he 
has  ever  since  filled  with  general  approba- 
tion. He  then  received  the  honour  of 
hm^thood. 

Ue  is  the  author  of  two  most  interesting 
lectures — one  'The  Christian  Church  before 
the  Reformation,'  delivered  at  Leicester  in 
1857;  and  the  other  'The  Life  and  Times  of 
John  Selden,'  delivered  at  Nottingham  in 
1859;  both  showing  great  liberality  of  senti- 
ment, and  that  disregard  of  party  and  of 
class  which,  while  it  marks  the  impartiality 
of  the  man,  is  the  best  promise  of  ex- 
cellence in  thejudge. 

MSLTOH,  WiLLiAK  DS  (Abchbishop 
OP  York),  is  supposed  to  have  been  a 
native  of  Melton  m  Holdemess.  In  28 
Edward  I.,  1300^  he  was  parson  of  the 
parish  of  Eepham  in  Lincolnshire  (Oz/. 
jbtmds,  p.  m.  i.  165)  ;  and  in  the  next  year, 
under  the  title  of  'our  beloved  clerk,'  he 
was  employed  to  pay  the  foot  soldiers 
raised  in  Wales.  {Arl.  Writs,  i.  359.) 
It  appears  probable,  also,  that  he  had  been 
employed  in  the  education  of  the  king's  son, 
who  at  this  time  was  about  sixteen  years  of 

Se;  for  in  the  letter  which  that  prince 
dressed  to  the  pope  on  his  behalf,  m  the 
third  year  of  his  reign,  he  uses  these  expres- 
sions: 'qui  a  nostrsB  aotatis  primordiis  nostris 
insistebat  obsequiis.'     (N,  Fcedera,  ii.  107.) 

On  the  accession  of  the  young  king  he 
was  appointed  comptroller  of  the  royal 
wardroDe,  and  was  afterwards  advanced  to 
be  the  keeper  of  that  department.  In  the 
former  character  the  Great  Seal  was 
delivered  to  him  on  January  21, 1308,  to 
be  carried  abroad  with  the  king,  who  was 
proceeding  to  France  to  marry  Isabella,  the 
daughter  of  Philip  le  Bel.  Another  seal 
was  given  to  John  de  Langton,  the  chan- 
cellor, to  be  used  in  England,  which,  after 
the  king's  return,  was  in  the  following 
March  carried  to  the  Exche<][uer  by 
William  de  Melton,  then  beanng  the 
additional  title  of  'Secretarius  Kegis.' 
(Madox,  i.  75.)  Again,  from  May  if  to 
July  6,  1310,  the  Great  Seal  was  placed  in 
the  wardrobe,  under  the  seals  oi  Melton 
and  two  of  the  clerks  of  the  Chancery.  The 
king's  confidence  in  him  is  apparent,  from 
numerous  i^al  mandates,  countersigned 
<  nunciante  W.  de  Melton,'  from  his  being 
emplojred  on  an  embassy  to  France,  and 
from  his  being  raised  to  the  office  of  keeper 
cf  the  wardrobe. 

During  this  time  ecclesiastical  honours 
flowed  rapidly  upon  him.    He  was  made  a 


MERES 


44». 


canon  of  York,  dean  of  St  Martin's, 
London,  archdeacon  of  Barnstaple,  provost 
of  Beverley,  and  was  elected  Archoishop  of 
York  on  January  21, 1816,  but  was  obliged 
to  wait  more  than  two  years  for  his  con- 
secration, notwithstanding  the  king's  nume- 
rous and  urgent  applications  to  the  pope. 
(Godwin,  685.) 

On  July  3,  1325,  18  Edward  U.,  he  was 
constituted  treasurer  of  the  Exchequer; 
but,  as  the  king*s  friend,  was  displaced  on 
the  transfer  of  the  crown  to  his  son  in 
January  1327.  During  the  troubles  in  the 
previous  year  his  chapel  was  broken  into, 
and  his  episcopal  ornaments,  including  his 
pall,  were  stolen ;  and  messengers  were  sent 
to  tne  pope  with  the  king's  request  for  a 
new  one.    (N.  Fcsdera,  ii.  624.) 

The  new  government,  however,  showed 
no  illwill  to  the  arcnbishop.  On  the 
contrary,  in  1  Edward  UI.  they  employed 
him  also  in  treating  for  peace  with  the- 
Scots.  (Ibid,  ii.  797.)  In  4  Edward  lU. 
he  was  indicted  as  an  adherent  of  the  Earl 
of  Kent,  and,  being  fully  acquitted,  obtained 
a  writ  of  conspiracv  acrainst  his  accusers. 
(Hot,  TorL  ii.  31,  54.)  That  his  accusation 
was  not  credited  appears  from  his  restora- 
tion to  the  treasurership  in  the  same  year. 
This  office  he  held  from  November  28, 
1330,  to  April  1,  1331 ;  and  on  August  10, 
1333,  he  was  appointed  sole  keeper  of  the 
Great  Seal  dunng  the  temporary  absence 
of  John  de  Stratford,  the  chancellor.  He 
acted  in  that  character  till  Januanr  13, 
when  he  delivered  up  the  Seal  by  the  king's 
direction.  It  would  seem  that  his  removal 
was  occasioned  by  his  having  confirmed  and 
consecrated  Robert  de  Graystanes  as  Bishop 
of  Durham,  without  first  obtaining  the 
king's  approval,  for  on  March  30  follow- 
ing there  is  an  entry  of  a  grant  of  the 
royal  pardon  to  the  archbishop  for  that 
oiience.     (N,  Fosdera,  ii.  882.) 

He  lived  for  five  years  more,  and  died  at 
Cawood  on  April  22,  1340,  after  presiding 
over  his  province  for  about  four-and-twenty 
years,  and  expending  considerable  sums  on. 
his  cathedral,  in  which  his  remains  were 
deposited.  The  character  that  is  given  to 
him  speaks  as  highly  of  his  private  as  of 
his  public  Ufe,  representing  him  as  pious,, 
charitable,  lenien^  and  hospitable  in  the 
former,  and  zealous,  faithftil,  and  energetic 
in  the  latter. 

XEBE8,  RoesB  de,  was  of  a  Lincolnshire 
family,  established  at  Eirketon  in  the  dis- 
trict of  Holland.  He  was  appointed  one  of 
the  king's  Serjeants  in  40  Edward  UL  On 
November  27,  1371,  he  was  raised  to  the 
bench  of  the  Common  Pleas;  but  there  is 
no  record  of  any  fines  being  levied  before  a 
judge  of  that  name,  nor  of  his  attending  the 
parhament  beyond  November  in  the  next 
year. 

There  are,  however,  some  drcumstancea 


444 


HEBIAY 


which  raise  a  suspidon  that  this  Roger  de 
Meres  was  the  same  with  Roger  de  Kirke- 
(ton,  and  that  he  used  hoth  names  indiffer- 
•ently.  We  know  that  he  had  property  at 
£arketon|  and  it  was  ^uite  a  common  prac- 
tice for  a  man  to  call  lumself  after  his  estate. 
The  name  of  Meres  does  not  at  all  occur  in 
the  Year  Book,  which  is  somewhat  extra- 
•  ordinary  for  one  who  was  clearly  a  Serjeant ; 
but  that  of  Kirketon  is  continually  intro- 
duced, and  the  period  within  which  the  latter 
us  mentioned  not  only  tallies  with  the  career 
of  Meres,  but  notices  him  as  seijeant  in  the 
/right  year,  and  terminates  at  the  precise  date 

muired — viz.,  Trinity  Term,  45  Edward 
.,  1871.  Meres  was  constituted  a  j  ustice  of 
the  Common  Pleas  on  November  27  follow- 
ing ;  and  Duffdale,  while  he  records  no  fines 
.as  levied  before  him,  introduces  Kirketon, 
without  giving  the  date  of  his  appointment, 
from  a  fine  acknowledged  betore  him  in 
■February  1372. 

The  name  of  Roger  de  Meres  appears  as 
a  trier  of  petitions  in  the  parliament  of  that 
year,  and  then  stops;  but  in  the  next  and 
following  parliaments  of  the  rei^  Roffer 
de  Kirketon  is  named  instead  of  hmi.  (£ot. 
Pari.  ii.  309,  317.) 

Roger  de  Kirketon  is  not  mentioned  as  a 
serjeaDt  or  in  any  other  way  in  the  Issue 
Roll  of  44  Edwara  III.,  while  payments  are 
made  to  Roger  de  Meres,  both  as  a  serieant 
and  a  jud^  of  assize.  The  death  of  Ko^er 
de  Meres  is  not  noticed  among  the  inquisi- 
tions post  mortem,  while  that  of  Roffer  de 
•Kirketon  is  in  9  Richard  II.  And  lastly, 
in  15  Richard  IL,  John  de  Meres,  appa- 
rently the  son,  in  the  inquisition  on  nis 
death,  has  the  addition  of ' de  Kirketon'  to 
his  name,  while  a  subsequent  page  (iii.  75, 
1^,  165)  notices  a  Robert  de  Meres  de  So- 
terton,  affording  positive  proof  that  the  name 
of  Kirketon  was  sometimes  used,  and,  by 
the  fstct  of  two  families  of  the  same  name 
existing  in  Lincolnshire,  sufficiently  account- 
ing for  the  assumption  by  one  of  them  of  the 
name  of  his  estate.  As  the  question,  how- 
ever, is  disputable,  thev  are  treated  sepa- 
rately as  two  individuals,  leaving  it  to  the 
curious  to  pursue  the  investigation. 

MEBLAT,  RooER  de,  was  the  son  and 
heir  of  a  Northumberland  baron  of  the  same 
name,  who  died  in  34  Heniy  II.,  by  Alice 
de  Stuteville  his  wife.  The  manor  and 
castle  of  Morpeth  formed  part  of  his  pos- 
sessions, for  which  he  procured  a  market 
and  fair.  In  12  John  he  accompanied  the 
king  to  Ireland  ;(i2a^.efeiV<5«^,  221),  but 
afterwards  joined  the  barons  against  him, 
whereupon  his  castle  and  lands  were  seized 
and  given  to  Philipde  Ulecot.  On  the  ac- 
cession of  Henry  III.  he  joined  those  who 
returned  to  their  allegiance,  and  recovered 
his  possessions.  He  acted  as  one  of  the 
lords  of  the  Marches  between  England  and 
Scotland^  and  asnsted  the  king  in  the  siege 


HERTON 

of  the  castle  of  Bedford  in  8  Henry  IE 
{lUa.  Oaus.  I  246-616.) 

He  twice  was  appointed  a  jnstioe  itine- 
rant—first in  9  Henry  lU.,  1225,  for 
Northumberland,  and  in  the  next  year  for 
Cumberland.    (.Kui  iL  77, 151.) 

He  died  in  1239,  and  was  buried  in  the 
abbey  of  Newminster,  founded  by  his  gnnd- 
father.  His  son,  also  named  Bxlgetf  cued  in 
1266,  without  male  issue.  (BanmoffejLblO.) 

MEB8T0K,  Hekrt,  before  he  was  a  bsron 
of  the  Exchequer  was  an  officer  in  that  de- 
partment In  5  Henry  IV.  an  entry  ocean 
of  his  paying  certain  moneys  to  John  Eul 
of  Somerset,  captain  of  Calais.  (Dam't 
Issue  JSoUf  298.)  Three  years  afterwardi 
he  was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Excheqn^, 
where  he  continued  during  the  rest  of  the 
reign,  and  was  re-appointed  bv  Henry  V. 
(CaLSot.Pat.262,260.)  How  much  longer 
he  kept  his  place  is  uncertain ;  but  he  was 
not  named  as  a  baron  on  the  aooeanon  of 
Henry  VL  He  belonged,  like  most  of  hii 
bretliren,  to  the  clericfd  profession,  and  was 
one  of  the  executorsof  the  kiiu^*s  son  Thomas 
Duke  of  Clarence.    (TesL  vkud.  194.) 

KSSTOK,  Walter  de  (Bishop  of 
Rochester).  This  eminent  benefactor  to 
learning  was  bom  at  Merton  in  SuneT. 
His  fauier  was  William  de  Merton,  trcfi- 
deacon  of  Berks,  and  his  mother,  ChristiDa, 
the  daughter  of  Walter  Fits-Oliver,  of  Ba- 
singstoke. He  was  educated  in  the  coo- 
vent  of  Merton,  and  became  one  of  the 
clerks  in  Chancery,  with  some  other  ]^ 
in  the  court.  As  was  usual  with  those 
officers,  he  received  various  ecclesiasticsl 
preferments,  among  which  were  prebends 
m  St.  Paul's,  Exeter,  and  Salisbury. 

Several  records  show  that  the  Great  Seal 
was  temporarily  placed  in  his  hands,  no 
doubt  as  one  of  the  clerks  in  Chanoerrt 
on  May  7,  1258,  and  on  March  14  snd 
July  6, 1259. 

But  on  Julv  5,  1261,  the  king,  withoat 
reference  to  the  assumed  authority  of  the 
barons,  appointed  him  chancellor.  In  the 
two  following  years  there  are  aeTeral 
letters  amon^  the  public  records  ad- 
dressed to  him  in  that  character,  and 
one  from  the  king,  thanking  him  and 
Philip  Basset  for  their  attention  to  his 
affairs.  (4  &  5  RepoH  Pub.  Hee,)  He 
was  superseded  on  July  12,  1263,  ifj  his 
predecessor,  Nicholas  de  Ely. 

That  he  was  not  reinstated  in  the  fol- 
lowing year,  when  the  kin^  triumphed  at 
Evesham,  arose,  probably,  from  his  being 
then  actively  engaged  in  the  foundaticn « 
the  college  which  has  made  his  name 
familiar  from  that  time  to  the  pnwt 
It  would  appear,  however,  that  ha  Mto& 
as  a  justicier,  as  there  is  an  entrr  of  tV^ 
ment  made  for  an  assize  to  be  aaU  ^ii 
him  on  December  10,  127L    f  • 

Hot.  Fin.  ii  665.) 


MERVIK 

On  the  death  of  Henry  HI.,  in  November 
1272,  King  Edward  being  then  absent  in 
the  Holy  I^d,  the  council  selected  Merton 
to  fill  the  office  of  chancellor.  A  document 
on  the  Close  Roll,  dated  on  the  29thy  is 
attested  by  him  in  that  character.  {F(b- 
dera,  i.   498.)    That  King   Edward    ap- 

IiToved  of  the  choice  is  evidenced  bv  a 
etter  he  addressed  'to  his  beloved  clerk 
and  chancellor,  Walter  de  Merton/  on 
August  9  following,  from  Mellune-supeiv 
Skeneham,  thanking  him  for  his  zeal,  and 
exhorting  him  to  continue  to  discharge  the 
duties  of  the  office.  (6  depart  Ihtb.  Bec,^ 
App,  ii.  89.) 

About  Julv  20,  1274,  he  was  elected 
Bishop  of  Kochester,  and  reoffned  the 
chancellorship  on  September  21  ioUowing. 

After  presiding  over  his  see  little  more 
than  three  years,  he  was  drowned  in  cross- 
ing the  Medway  on  October  27, 1277,  and 
was  buried  in  Kochester  CathedraL  The 
marble  tomb  under  which  he  was  placed 
was  taken  down  in  1698,  and  an  elegant 
monument  erected  in  its  place,  by  Sir 
Henry  Savile,  the  warden,  and  the  fel- 
lows of  Merton  College,  with  an  appro- 
priate inscription. 

Previously  to  his  founding  the  college 
which  bears  his  name  he  had  commenced 
one  at  Maldon,  near  Merton ;  but,  altering 
his  intention  he  began  his  erection  at 
Oxford,  and  removed  to  it  the  warden 
and  priests  of  the  former.  Merton  College 
is  the  most  ancient  establishment  of  that 
nature,  and  was  incorporated  by  three 
charters,  all  of  which  are  preserved  amonff 
its  archives.  The  first  is  dated  January  7, 
1264,  48  Henry  IH. ;  the  second  in  1270 ; 
and  the  third  in  1274,  2  Edward  1.  The 
regulations  by  which  it  was  governed  were 
esteemed  so  wise  that  its  charters  were 
consulted  as  precedents  on  the  foundation 
of  I'eterhouse,  the  earliest  college  in  the 
sister  university.     (6rorfi(?m,  630.) 

KSSynr,  EnMimD,  the  second  son  of 
Walter  Mervin,  Esq.,  of  Fonthill  in  Wilt- 
shire, by  Mary,  daughter  of  John  Mount- 
penson,  Esq.,  of  Batnanton  Welley  in  the 
same  county,  received  his  legal  education  in 
the  Middle  Temple,  where  he  was  elected 
reader  in  1523,  and  again  in  1530,  and  was 
raised  to  the  degree  of  the  coif  in  1631. 
King  Henry,  in  1539,  made  him  one  of  his 
Serjeants,  and  on  November  23, 1540,  con- 
stituted him  a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench. 
Little  is  told  of  him  by  the  reporters,  either 
as  an  advocate  or  a  judge,  but  he  was  con- 
tinued in  his  seat  on  tne  accession  of  Edward 
VI.,  and  is  frequently  named  in  that  reign 
in  the  criminal  proceedings  which  have 
been  preserved  in  the  '  Baga  de  Secretifl.' 
Though  Dugdale  does  not  introduce  him 
as  a  judge  under  Queen  Mai^,  it  is  evident 
that  she  continued  him  in  niB  place,  as  he 
is  one  of  the  special  oonunissioneiB  named 


MIBDLETON 


44S 


for  the  trial  of  Sir  Andrew  Dudley  and 
others  for  high  treason  on  August  18, 1558* 
(4  RepoH  Pub.  Hec,,  App.  ii  218-235.) 

It  may  be  inferred,  therefore,  that  he 
was  in  no  way  concerned  in  the  attempt  ix^ 
change  the  succession  of  the  crown.  He 
was  probably  ill  at  the  time,  and  died  vexr 
shortly  afterwards.    (Dyer' 8  Iteports,  113.) 

He  married  Elizabeth,  daugnter  of  Sir 
Edmund  Pakenham. 

1ES88SVDSV,  Roger  dx,  was  a  fthiyUin 
of  the  king,  and  was  presented  by  hmi  to- 
the  church  of  Colchyrcn  in  London.  (Al^. 
Placit.  130,  139.)  He  was  raised  to  th» 
bench  in  or  before  51  Heniy  IlL,  1267,  at 
Midsummer,  in  which  year  fines  were  le- 
vied before  him.  Although  none  occur  of 
a  sub6e<|uentdate,  he  is  mentioned  as  one 
of  the  justices  of  the  bench  before  whom 
Bobert  de  Coleville  apologised  for  an  aft» 
sault  on  Robert  de  Fulham,  justice  of  the 
Jews,  in  Michaelmas  Term  m  1268.  Na 
writs  were  taken  for  assizes  to  be  held  before 
him  after  that  date.  (Excerpt,  e  JRot.  Fin. 
ii.  463^79 ;  Madox,  L  236.) 

XSTIHGEAX,  John  db,  was  bom  at  a 
village  80  called  in  Suffolk.  In  3  Edward  I., 
1275,  he  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the  kinff'» 
Serjeants,  and  in  1276  he  was  constituted  a 
judge  of  the  King's  Bench,  and  his  name 
frequently  occurs  as  acting  in  the  court  and 
on  the  circuits. 

In  the  sweeping  exposure  of  the  oorrup* 
tion  of  the  bench  made  by  King  Edwiurd  m 
1289,  the  onl^  two  who  were  found  pure 
in  the  administration  of  justice  were  John 
de  Metingham  and  EUas  de  Becking^ 
ham.  Both  the  chief  justices  were  dis- 
graced, and  Metingham  in  Hilary  Term 
1290  was  raised  to  the  head  of  the  Com* 
mon  Pleas,  where  he  presided  till  his  death 
in  1301.  Among  the  benefactors  of  the 
imiversity  of  Cambridge,  prayer  is  directed 
to  be  made  fpro  anim&  Lni  John  de  Me- 
tyngham.'  He  wrote  a  treatise  called  '  Ju- 
mcium  Essoniorum.'  (DuffdMs  Oriy,  44^ 
67;  Rot.  Pari.  i.  6-99:  Madox,  ii.  26: 
Suckling's  Suffolk,  i.  172.) 

ICIDDLSTOK,  Adam  ds,  the  possessor  of 
the  manor  of  tiiat  name  in  the  county  of 
York  in  33  Edward  L,  1306,  was  the  W 
named  of  five  justices  of  trailbaston  ap- 
pointed for  the  ten  nortiiem  counties  (X 
FcBdera,  i.  970]),  and  affain  in  1307.  In 
5  Edward  H.  tne  custody  of  the  castle  of 
Kingston-upon-HuU  and  of  ^e  manor  of 
Mitton  was  committed  to  him  (Abb.  ItoL 
Orig.  L  187) ;  and  by  a  mandate  to  attend 
the  parliament  in  1313,  it  ap]^arB  that  he 
was  then  emploved  as  a  justice  of  aanxe* 
He  is  last  named,  in  9  Edward  H.,  when  he 
was  certified  as  holding  several  lordships  In 
the  counties  of  Notts  and  York.  (AHL 
7rr»^,iL1172.)  The  next-mentioned  Peter 
de  Middleton  was  his  son. 

XIDBLXTOir,  Pbiib  ds,  was  son  of  the 


446 


MIDDLETON 


above  Adam  de  Middleton,  and  was  ap- 
pointed a  justice  itinerant  in  the  county  of 
Bedford  in  4  Edward  UI.,  1330,  and  in 
the  eighth  year  was  made  a  justice  of  the 
forests  in  Yorkshire.  In  9  Edward  III. 
the  latter  countj  was  entrusted  to  his 
custody  as  shenfF;  but  in  the  folio  wine 
year  he  died,  and  his  son  Thomas  succeeded 
to  his  possessions.  {Abb.  Hoi,  Orig,  ii.  88, 
04,  lOo ;  Cal  InmiU,  p.m.  ii.  70.) 

MIDDLETON,  lliCHABD  DE,  was  one  of 
the  justiciers  in  40  Henry  IIL,  1262,  and 
there  is  evidence  that  he  continued  to  act 
in  that  capacity  from  that  time  till  1209. 
(JExcm-pt.  e  Rot.  Fin,  ii.  383-492.) 

At  the  end  of  July  in  that  year  he  was 
appointed  keeper  of  the  Great  Seal,  but 
was  afterwards  raised  to  the  digmty  of 
chancellor,  by  which  title  he  is  designated 
in  a  document  in  Rymer  (i.  492)  dated 
February  20, 1272,  and  in  the  record  men- 
tioning his  death,  which  took  place,  while 
in  office,  on  the  7th  of  the  following  August. 

MIDDLSTOK,  William  de,  held  the 
place  of  keeper  of  the  Rolls  and  Writs  of 
the  Jews  in  2  and  3  Edward  I.,  together 
with  the  key  of  the  Jewish  tallage.  In 
1270  he  was  appointed  Gustos  Brevium  of 
the  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  and  in  11 
Edward  L  the  lands  of  Isabella,  the  widow 
of  Henry  de  Gaunt,  were  committed  to  his 
custody.  In  1286  he  was  associated  with 
the  escheator  in  the  custody  of  the  bishop- 
ric of  Ely  on  its  becoming  vacant,  and 
was  also  appointed  a  baron  of  the  Exche- 
quer, where  he  continued  for  the  four  fol- 
lowing years.  {MadoXj  i.  234,  243,  313,  ii. 
'^^2 ;  Abb.  Hot,  Orig,  i.  45.) 

mLTOK,  Chbistopheb,  was  the  brother 
of  John  Milton  the  poet.  How  wide  the 
difference  in  their  several  careers!  How 
great  the  contrast  between  the  republican 
•and  the  royalist,  the  Puritan  and  the  Catho- 
lic, the  Latin  secretary  of  the  usurper 
Cromwell  and  the  subservient  judge  of  the 
despotic  James!  The  lustre  that  shines 
round  the  head  of  the  poet,  and  which 
time  has  not  dimmed,  has  thrown  so  much 
light  on  the  lineage  of  the  family  that  it 
is  not  necessaiy  to  trace  it  higher  here  than 
to  hi8  parents.  John  Milton,  a  scrivener 
of  London,  living  in  Bread  Street,  Cheap- 
side,  at  the  sign  of  the  Spread  Eagle  (the 
family  crest),  bjr  his  marriage  with  Sarah 
Bradshaw  (a  kinswoman  of  the  Lord  Pre- 
sident Bradshaw),  was  the  father  of  three 
daiighters  and  two  sons,  John  bom  in  1608, 
and  Christopher  bom  in  1615. 

Christopher  after  passing  through  St. 
Paul's  School  was  admitted  a  pensioner  of 
Christ's  College,  Cambridge,  on  February 
ir>,  1631,  but  took  no  degree.  ]3eing 
<iostined  for  the  law,  he  was  entered  at  the 
Inner  Temple,  and  having  been  called  to 
the  bar  on  January  26,  1030,  he  reached  I 
the  grade  of  bencher  in  November  1660, 


MILTON 

and  of  reader  in  1667.  During  the  dril 
wars  he  took  part  against  the  parliament, 
acting  as  *  conmiissioner  for  the  king  for 
sequestering  the  parliament's  frienu  of 
three  counties,  and  afterwards  went  to 
Excester  and  Uved  there,  and  was  there 
at  the  time  of  the  surrender.'  In  an 
entry  on  the  joomals  dated  August  25^ 
1646,  he  is  described  *  of  Reddinge  in  the 
county  of  Berks,  counsellor  at  lawe,'  and 
having  then  taken  the  national  oore- 
nant,  is  allowed  to  compound  for  his '  de- 
linquency '  by  a  fine  of  200^.  on  '  a  certain 
messuage  or  tenement  situate  in  St  Martin  i 
parish  Ludgate,  called  the  dgne  of  the 
Crosse  Keyes,  of  the  yearely  value  before 
theis  troubles,  40/.'  At  this  time  his  bro- 
ther John,  though  he  had  publid^d  some 
controversial  works,  had  not  acquired  tnj 
influence  with  the  ruling  powers ;  bat 
when  the  commissioners  for  sequestn^iooi, 
not  content  with  Christopher's  return  of 
property  in  London,  wrote  in  1651-2  into 
tierjcs  and  Sufiblk  to  enquire  if  he  had  anr 
possessions  in  those  counties,  John  Ifilton 
was  Latin  secretary  to  the  protector.  Thit 
he  did  not  take  any  ostensible  partoo 
behalf  of  his  brother  may  be  attrilwted  te 
a  doubt  whether  his  connection  with  a  'de- 
lin(]^uent'  might  not  endanger  his  politieil 
position;  but  that  he  exerted  his  private 
mfluence  to  mitigate  the  pressure  seenu 
ver}r  probable,  for  it  does  not  appear  ^t 
Chnstopher  ever  paid  more  than  naif  of  hit 
fine,  and  it  is  manifest  that  no  estrange- 
ment existed  between  the  brothers.  On 
the  contrary,  Christopher  acted  in  1653  n 
counsel  before  the  commissioners  of  reli^ 
for  Mrs.  Powell,  the  mother  of  his  brother's 
wife,  and  they  continued  on  friendly  and 
affectionate  terms  up  to  the  time  of  hit 
brother's  death  in  1674.  He  was  also  ea* 
ployed  in  other  causes  against  the  goTen- 
ment  during  the  Commonwealth. 

Showing  himself  thus  no  friend  to  the 
republicans,  it  was  natural  that  King 
Charles  at  the  Restoration,  on  giring  a 
charter  to  the  town  of  Ipswich,  shook! 
constitute  Christopher  Milton  the  fin( 
deputy  recorder  of^  it.  Here  he  took  ^ 
his  residence,  and  it  is  probable  confined 
himself  to  country  practice,  for  he  i>  not 
noticed  in  the  Reports  of  the  time.  Itu 
not  precisely  known  when  he  turned 
Catholic,  which  was  the  faith  of  lusgno^' 
father ;  but  it  was  probably  that  converfl^B 
and  his  high  prerogative  ideas  that  led  to 
his  selection  by  James,  on  April  26, 1688, 
as  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer.  He  vai 
thereupon  knighted,  and  after  sittiia  ia 
that  court  for  a  year  he  was  removed  <■ 
April  17,  1687,  to  the  Comm(m  Dm^ 
receiving  a  dispensation  frt)m  mAmMt% 
the  test.  On  Julj  0  in  tlm  fr>Mi« 
year  he  had  a  wnt  of  eaH^^^  *^ 

tinuance  of  his  salaiy,  on  aoeov  h 


MIIIFIELD 

'which  one  would  think  would  have  heen 
a  sufficient  reason  for  not  appointing  him  ; 
little  more  than  two  years  before,  when  he 
was  seventy-one  years  old.     He  retired  to  ' 
Kushmere  in  Sufi'olk,  where  he  had  a  resi- 
dence as  well  as  in  Ipswich,   and  dying 
live  years  afterwards,  in  March  1693,  was 
l)uried  in  the  church  of  St.  Nicholas  in  the 
latter  town.     He  was  apparently  of  a  quiet  | 
and  easy  disposition,  but  of  no  literary  or  ' 
legal  eminence.  > 

His  wife,  Thomasine,  daughter  of , 
"William  Webber,  of  London,  brought  him 
several  children,  of  whom  his  son  Thomas 
was  deputy  clerk  of  the  crown  in  Chancery. 
(Milton  Papers  [Camden  Soc.];  Dugdales 
On)/.  169;  Bramstan,  225,  &c.) 

HIEFIELD,  William  db,  wa8  of  a  York- 
shire family.  He  held  the  rectory  of  Brad- 
ford, and  was  a  clerk  or  master  in  Chancery 
from  36  to  49  Edward  III.,  1362-1375, 
when  he  died.  On  March  18,  1371,  he  was 
one  of  those  officers  to  whom  the  Great 
Seal  was  entrusted  during  the  absence  of 
the  chancellor,  but  it  is  not  stated  how 
long  they  held  it.  His  property,  on  hia 
death,  was  divided  among  his  sisters.  (Abb. 
Rot.  On)/,  ii.  198,  342 ;  Cal.  Inquis.  p.  m. 
ii.  329,  346;  Hot.  Pari.  ii.  26a-317,  340. J 

HOHUN,  Reginald  de,  was  a  lineal  ae- 
*<cendant  from  William  de  Mohim,  who  for 
his  assistance  in  the  invasion  of  England 
received  from  William  the  Norman  a  large 
number  of  lordships  in  Devonshire,  Wilt- 
.shire,  Warwickshire,  and  particularly  So- 
mersetshire, with  the  castle  of  Dunster  in 
the  latter  county.  He  was  the  son  of  an- 
<^ther  Reginald,  and  of  Alicia,  daughter  of 
William  Briwer.  At  his  father's  death  he 
was  very  young,  and  was  consigned  to  the 
wardship  of  Henry  Fitz-Count,  on  whose 
<lecease,  in  6  Henry  IIL,  he  was  removed 
to  the  guardianship  of  his  grandfather,  Wil- 
liam Briwer ;  and  ne  is  still  mentioned  as  a 
minor  in  8  Henry  IH.  (Excerpt,  eJRot.  Fin. 
1.  79,  169 ;  Pot.  Clous.  L  137,  618,  603.) 

On  July  6,  1234,  18  Henry  HI.,  the  lus- 
ticiers  of  the  bench  were  commandea  to 
admit  him  and  Robert  de  Bello-Campo 
among  them.  In  1242  he  was  appointed 
chief  justice  of  the  forests  south  of  the 
Trent,  an  office  which  he  enjoyed  for  many 
years.  In  1253  he  was  made  governor  of 
Sauveve  Castle  in  Leicestershire,  and  died 
in  1261  or  1262.  He  founded  the  abbey  of 
Newenham,  near  Axminster.  He  married 
iirj<t  ft  sister  of  Humphrey  de  Bohun,  Earl 
ot*  Hereford  and  Essex,  and  had  by  her  a  son 
John,  who  succeeded  him;  but  the  barony 
failed  in  the  reign  of  Edwaixi  HI.  His 
second  wife  was  Isabella,  daughter  of  "Wil- 
liam (l«»  Ferrers,  Earl  of  Derby.  (Baronage^ 
i.  497.)  I 

MOLYNEUX,  Edmuxd,  was  a  member  of  , 
J I  ffiniily  which  can  trace  their  descent  in  ' 
uninterrupted  knightly  succession  from  a  . 


MONMOUTH 


447 


warrior  who  accompanied  William  of  Nor- 
mandy into  England.  Its  present  repre- 
sentative is  the  Earl  of  Sefton,  whose 
immediate  ancestor  waa  made  a  baronet  in 
1611,  to  which  was  afterwards  added  an 
Irish  viscounty  in  1628,  an  Irish  earldom  in 
1771,  and  an  English  barony  in  1831. 

The  judge  was  the  son  of  Sur  Thomas  Mo- 
lyneux,  of  Hau^hton  in  Nottinghamshire, 
by  his  second  wife,  Catherine,  daughter  of 
John  Cotton,  of  Ridware  in  Staffordshire, 
and  widow  of  Thomas  Poutrell,  of  Hallam 
in  Derbyshire.  He  received  his  legal  in- 
struction at  Gray's  Inn,  to  which  society  he 
was  twice  reader,  in  1532  and  1636.  He 
was  invested  with  the  coif  on  November  20, 
1542,  and  while  he  held  that  degree  he  was 
appointed  one  of  the  council  in  the  North. 
On  October  22,  1550,  he  was  constituted  a 
ludge  of  the  Common  Pleas,  and  was 
knighted.  His  death  occurred  towards  the 
end  of  1562 ;  and  his  character  is  very  fa- 
vourably demoted  by  Gregory  King,  Lan- 
caster herald. 

By  his  wife,  Jane,  daughter  of  John 
Cheney,  of  Chesham-bovs  in  the  county  of 
Bucks,  he  left  a  large  family,  which  flou- 
rished at  Thorpe,  near  Newark,  for  many 
generations.  (JFotton^s  Baronet,  i.  149  j 
Thoroton's  Notts,  i.  351 ;  Burnet.) 

MONAGHTTS^  Geoffrey,  was  among  the 
^assidentes  justiciss  regis'  present  in  the 
Exchequer  in  11  Henry  H.,  1165,  on  the 
execution  of  a  charter  between  the  abbots 
of  St.  Alban's  and  Westminster.  That  he 
held  an  office  in  the  Chamber  of  the  Ex- 
chequer in  2, 3,  and  4  Hennr|II.  is  evidenced 
by  entries  on  the  rolls  of  those  years  re- 
cording many  payments  made  to  and  by 
him  on  the  king's  account. 

It  may  be  presumed  that  he  was  a  monk 
no  otherwise  than  in  name,  from  the  fact 
that  he  held  lands  in  five  counties,  and  that 
he  was  relieved  from  the  Danegeld,  &a,  as 
an  officer  of  the  court.  (Madox,  i.  44: 
Pipe  Polls,  17-180.) 

MONMOUTH,  John  de,  was  descended 
from  William  Fitz-Balderon,  recorded  in 
Domesday  Book  as  the  possessor  of  many 
lordships  and  other  lands  in  Gloucestershire, 
Herefordshire,  and  Monmouth.  The  latter 
name  was  adopted  by  his  successors,  the 
fourth  of  whom  was  the  subject  of  the 

5 resent  notice.  He  was  the  son  of  Gilbert 
e  Monmouth,  and  in  3  John  seems  to  have 
been  a  minor  under  the  wardship  of  W^il- 
liam  de  Braiosa.  (Pot.  Cancell.  108,  110.) 
A  few  years  afterwards  he  in  some  manner 
oilbnded  the  king,  and  gave  his  two  infant 
sons,  John  and  Philip,  as  hostages  for  his 
good  conduct  (Pot  Pat.  87),  paying  a  large 
tine  for  his  restoration  to  the  royal  favour, 
which  he  ever  afterwards  preserved.  In  16 
John  he  was  sent  with  others  into  several 
counties,  on  a  confidential  commission  to 
explain  the  king's  affiiirs,  and  was  summoned 


448 


MONSON 


to  proceed  to  Cirencester  with  horse  and 
arms.  A  royal  present  of  a  complete  horse 
-was  the  immediate  reward  of  his  readiness 
on  that  occasion ;  but  others  quickly  fol- 
lowed,  among  which  were  the  custody  of 
the  castles  of  St  Briavel  and  Bremble,  with 
the  forest  of  Dean,  and  grants  of  the  lands 
of  Hugh  Malbisse,  and  of  the  castles  of 
Grosmount,  Skenefnct,  and  Lantelioc,  in 
Wales.  {Ibid.  128-194.)  He  was  also 
keeper  of  the  New  Forest,  together  with 
the  forests  of  Clarendon,  Pancet,  and  Bo- 
cholte.  (Ibid.  814-531.)  His  wife  was 
Cicely,  the  daughter  of  Walter  Walerond, 
to  whom  they  lud  belonged. 

Situated  as  he  was  on  the  Marches  of 
Wales,  he  had  to  sustain  the  attack  of  the 
earl  marshal ;  and  when  the  king,  in  1283, 
had  been  defeated  at  Grosmoun^  he  was 
appointed  one  of  the  conunanders  of  the 
Poictevins  whom  the  king  had  introduced 
to  resist  the  rebellious  earl.  That  active 
general  haying  discovered  that  the  royal 

army  intended  to  attack  him,  placed  an    being  raised  to  the  bench,  to  which  ^e  wa» 
ambush  on  the  line  of  its  march,  surprised  ■,  elevated  on  October  31  of  the  same  term 


KOISSOJX 

mentary  career  as  member  for  ^IsfaMi  k 
1672.  ( Willis's  Pari  NoL)  Takiag  n 
active  part  in  the  debatee,  ne  wm  rhoaw 
on  various  important  committees.  Amoig 
them  was  that  appointed  in  1666^  to  peti- 
tion  the  queen  in  relation  to  the  suooeeiiflft 
and  her  marriage,  her  answer  to  whidi  it 
expressed  with  her  usual  equiyocatioiL  H» 
made  some  strong  remarks  on  the  ewwm 
nature  of  the  reply,  and  with  Sir  Bobcrt 
Bell, '  grated  hard  on  her  royal  preroga- 
tive ; '  out  the  parliament,  in  apte  of  their 
remonstrances,  could  obtain  no  aatiafaction. 
(Camden's  Elizabeth:  ParL  Hkt.  I.  TOOL 
716,  779.) 

Monson's  senatorial  energy  did  not  im- 
pede his  professional  career.  In  1603  he 
was  nominated  a  commissioner  of  the 
North,  and  in  1669  he  was  elected  recorder 
of  Lincoln.  In  Michaelmas  Term  1674  he 
was  created  serjeant-at-law  by  special 
mandate,  being  the  first  barriater  who  ms 
called  to  that  degree  for  the  purpoee  of 


and  totally  defeated  it,  John  of  Monmouth 
only  escaping  by  a  hasty  fiight.  (J2.  de 
Wendover,  iv.  279,  287.)  He  died  about 
September  1248. 

There  is  little  to  record  of  his  judicial 
career.  In  4  Henry  HI.  he  was  one  of 
four  justices  itinerant  who  were  sent  to 
deliver  the  gaol  at  Hereford,  and  in  the 
next  year  he,  with  other  associates,  visited 
that  county  and  eight  others  in  the  same 
capad^.    (Hot.  Clous.  I  437,  476.) 

MOKSOIT  BoBERT,  was  a  younger  son  of 
William  Mionson,  of  an  ancient  knightly 
&juily  seated  at  South  Carlton  in  Lincoln- 
shire, by  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Sir  Robert 
Tirwhit,  of  Kettelby  in  the  same  county. 
Bis  elder  brother,  John,  was  the  ancestor 
of  seversJ  persons  who  are  remarkable  in 
history,  and  of  two  noble  families  which 
still  grace  the  peerage,  Lord  Monson  and 
Lord  Sondes. 

Robert  Monson  was  educated  at  Cam- 
bridge, was  called  to  the  bar  at  Lincoln's 
Inn  on  February  2,  1660,  and  elected 
reader  in  1666  and  in  1672.  One  of  his 
readings  was  on  'The  Act  for  the  True 
Payment  of  Tithes,'  the  ten  lectures  of 
which  it  consisted  being  still  preserved  in 
the  British  Museum.  (Harl.  MSS.  2666, 
p.  29.) 

He  was  elected  member  for  Dunheved 
(Xaunceston)  in  the  last  parliament  of 
Edward  VI.,  1663,  and  for  that  or  other 
Cornish  boroughs  in  four  out  of  the  five 
parliaments  of  Queen  Mary ;  and  in  Eliza- 
oeth's  first  parliament,  his  lather's  recent 
death  having  put  him  into  possession  of 
much  property  near  Lincoln,  he  was  elected 
member  lor  that  city,  which  he  continued 
to  represent  in  the  two  next  parliaments, 
1663  and  1671.    He  finished  his  parlia- 


as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleaa. 

One  of  the  most  repulsive  duties  imposed 
upon  him  was  the  necessitr  of  obeying  the 
order  directed  to  him  and  others  in  1676 
to  bum  John  Peters  and  Heniy  Turwesl. 
(PymeTj  zv.  740.")    In  1676  he  appears  in 
some  manner  to  nave  displeased  tae  que^ 
(Cal.  St.  Papers  [1647],  630),  and  there  is 
no  doubt  that  three  years  after  his  judicial 
life  came  to  an  abrupt  termination.     John 
Stubbs,  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  having  published 
a  book  called  'The  Gulph  wherein  Eogland 
will  be  swallowed  by  the  French  Mamaae,^ 
in  which  he  slandered  the  Duke  of  Anjos 
in   not  very  civil  terms,  was  sentenced 
under  a  statute  of  Queen  Maiy  to  have  lus 
right  hand  cut  ofi^,  which  he  sufiRired  on 
November  3,  1679.    Doubts  were  felt  by 
many  lawyers    as    to  the  force  of   that 
statute;  and  Dalton,  who  expressed  too 
strongly  that  it  was  only  temporaxy  and 
died  with  Queen  Mary,  was  punished  for 
his  indiscretion  bv  being  sent  to  the  Tower. 
Camden    adds  tnat  Judge  Monson,  who 
seems  to  have  uttered  the  same  sentiments, 
'was  so  sharply  reprehended  that  he  re- 
signed  his   place.'    (Camden  in  Ketmeit, 
ii.  437.) 

That  this  'reprehension'  extended  to 
imprisonment  appears  by  a  letter  from  Mr. 
Secretary  Wilson  to  Lord  Burleigh,  dated 
December  3,  1679.  There  is  a  letter  also 
from  the  Archbishop  of  York  to  the  Earl 
of  Shrewsbury,  dated  the  6th  of  the  fol- 
lowing March,  containing  this  passage: 
'  Mr.  Monson  hath  gotten  leave  to  be  at 
his  own  house  in  Lincolnshire,  but  not -re- 
stored to  his  place.'  (ffarL  MSS.  6802, 
art.  69 ;  Lodge's  Illttd.  i.  223.) 

Though  the  judge  was  imprisoned,  he 
was  not  then  deprived,  and  his  name 


MONTAGU 

according  to  the  rustomary  form,  inserted 
in  the  fines  as  being  still  a  member  of  the 
court ;  and  on  his  release  from  incarceration, 
though  he  was  'not/  as  the  archbishop 
says,  '  restored  to  his  place/  yet  he  was  not 
actually  dismissed  from  it,  or,  according  to 
Camden,  did  not  '  resign  *  till  after  Easter 
Term  had  commenced. 

He  survived  these  events  between  two 
and  three  years,  his  death  occurring  on 
September  24,  1683.  He  was  buried  in 
Lincoln  Cathedral,  where,  upon  a  brass 
plate,  this  curious  inscription  was  engraved: 

Quern  tcjcrit  hoc  marmor  si  forte  requiris.  Amice, 

Lunani  cum  Phoebo  juncrite,  nomen  habes. 
Luce  Patrum  clarus,  proprio  sed  lumine  mc^or; 

I  )o  ;^emina  merito  nomina  luce  capit. 
Luriru.s  doctus,  amans,  aluit,  coluit,  recreavit 

Musas  I'us,  vinctop,  sumptibu.s  arte,  domo. 
Tempora  heta  Deus,  post  tempora  nubila  misit ; 

La'ta  dedit  sancte,  nubila  ferre  pie, 
£t  tulit,  et  vicit ;  superat  sua  lumina  \nrtu8  ; 

Ful^et  apud  superos,  Stella  beata  facit. 

By  his  wife  Elizabeth,  daughter  and  heir 
of  John  Dyon,  Esq.,  of  Tathwere,  he  left  no 
isgue.     (Peck's  Desid,  Cur,  b.  viiL  14.) 

MONTAOU,  EnwABD,  was  the  second 
son  of  Thomas  Montagu,  of  Remington  in 
Northamptonshire,  by  Agnes,  daughter  of 
William  Dudley,  of  fclopton  in  the  same 
county.  He  was  bom  at  Brigstock,  and 
was  educated  at  Cambridge.  He  kept  his 
terms  at  the  Middle  Temple,  and  attained 
the  office  of  reader  there  in  1624,  and  again 
in  1531,  upon  his  being  named  as  a  ser- 
jeant-at-law. 

A  story  is  told  that,  being  speaker  of 
the  House  of  Commons,  when  some  hesi- 
tation was  shown  in  passing  a  bill  for  sub- 
sidies, he  was  sent  for  by  King  Heniy,  who 
said  to  him,  '  Ho  !  vrill  they  not  let  my  bill 
pass  ?  Get  it  to  be  passed  by  such  a  time 
to-morrow,  or  else,'  laying  his  hand  on  the 
head  of  Montajj^u,  kneeling  before  him,  *  by 
such  a  time  this  head  of  yours  shall  be  off' 
There  is  very  little  authority  for  the  tale, 
and  if  he  ever  had  any  such  interview  vrith 
the  monarch,  it  must  have  been  as  a  pri- 
vate member  of  the  parliament,  and  not  as 
speaker,  for  he  never  held  the  office. 

On  October  16, 1537,  he  was  made  one 
of  the  king*s  Serjeants,  and  fifteen  months 
afterwards  was  raised,  vrithout  any  inter- 
mediate step,  to  the  office  of  chief  justice 
of  the  King  s  Bench  on  January  21, 1639, 
receiving  at  the  same  time  the  honour  of 
knighthood.  He  presided  over  that  court 
for  nearly  seven  years,  when  he  was  re- 
moved on  November  6, 1545,  to  the  more 
profitable  but  less  exalted  post  of  chief 
justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  a  change 
which  he  is  said  to  have  sought,  observing, 
'  I  am  now  an  old  man,  and  love  the 
kitchen  before  the  hall,  the  warmest  place 
best  suiting  with  my  age.*  That  it  wag 
not  intended  as  any  mark  of  disfavour  by 
his  sovereign  is  evidenced  by  his  being 


MONTAGU 


449 


selected  as  one  of  the  sixteen  executors  of 
the  king's  vrill,  in  whom  were  deposited 
the  mana^ment  of  the  kingdom  during 
the  minority  of  his  infant  son. 

In  the  earlier  contests  for  power  after 
Edward's  accession,  Montagu  sided  vrith 
the  Duke  of  Somerset,  but  afterwards  as- 
sisted Dudley,  Earl  of  Warwick,  in  pro- 
moting that  nobleman's  fall.  His  adherence 
to  the  earl,  who  soon  became  Duke  of 
Northumberland,  eventually  led  him  into 
a  difficulty  which  wa^  nearly  fatal  to  him. 
Continuing  in  his  judicial  post  during  the 
whole  of  this  reign,  he  had  acquired  so 
high  a  character,  both  for  his  legal  know- 
ledge and  his  honest  principles,  that  his 
concutrence  was  deemed  of  infinite  import- 
ance when  Northumberland  had  formed 
the  ambitious  project  of  settling  the  croven 
on  Lady  Jane  Grey.  Accordingly,  when 
the  duke  had  worked  up  the  king  to  his 
purpose,  Montagu  was  summoned  to  court 
witn  Sir  John  Baker,  Justice  Bromley,  and 
the  attorney  and  solicitor  general,  and  in- 
formed of  his  majesty's  desire  to  make 
such  a  disposition.  They  at  once  pointed 
out  the  illegality  of  the  proceeding,  and 
begged  time  for  consideration.  The  next 
day  they  repeated  their  objections,  and 
added  that  it  would  be  high  treason,  not 
only  in  those  who  prepared  such  an  instru- 
ment, but  in  those  who  acted  under  it. 
The  duke,  on  being  informed  of  this  resist- 
ance, burst  into  tne  council  chamber  and 
abused  the  chief  justice  most  outra^ously, 
calling  him  traitor  and  even  putting  him 
and  Justice  Bromley  in  bodily  fear.  Two 
days  after  a  similar  scene  was  acted ;  but 
the  king  commanding  Montagu  on  his 
alle^ance  to  make  quick  despatch,  he, 
*  being  a  weak  old  man  and  witnout  com- 
fort,' at  last  consented,  on  receiving  a  com- 
mission under  the  Great  Seal  requiring  it 
to  be  done,  and  a  general  pardon  for  ol^y- 
ing  the  injunction. 

No  sooner  had  Mary  been  proclaimed 
than  Montagu  was  committed  to  the  Tower, 
and  placed  on  the  list  for  trial.  During  his 
imprisonment,  however,  he  drew  up  a  nar- 
rative of  all  that  had  occurred,  and  aeclared 
that  after  he  had  compulsorily  put  his  name 
to  the  articles  so  prepared  he  had  'never 
meddled  with  the  council  in  anything,  nor 
came  amongst  them  until  the  queen's  grace 
was  proclaimed ;'  but  that,  at  nis  no  little 
cost,  nis  son,  by  his  command,  had  joined 
the  Buckinghamshire  men  in  defending  her. 
llie  result  was  that  after  six  weeks'  confine- 
ment he  was  discharged,  his  pardon  bavin? 
been  cfranted  on  payment  of  a  fine  of  1000^ 
and  tne  surrender  of  King  Edward's  grant 
to  him  of  lands  called  Eltyngton,  or  the 
yearly  value  of  50/.  He  also  lost  his  office^ 
which  was  given  to  Sir  Richard  Morgan. 
(FuUer^B  Church  Hist,  ii.  369;  Mackyn'^ 
Dimy,  S6,  43 ;  Lmfford,  vii.  122.) 


450 


MONTAGU 


The  short  remainder  of  his  life  he  spent 
at  his  mansion  at  Bou^hton,  near  Kettering, 
in  hospitality  and  quiet.  He  died  on  Fe- 
hruary  10, 1557,  and  was  buried  at  Ketter- 
ing, under  a  tomb  with  an  inscription  which, 
if  it  may  be  depended  on  more  than  similar 
testimonials,  must  impress  the  reader  with 
a  very  high  opinion  of  his  character  both  as 
a  judge  and  a  man.  His  will  contains  ample 
proof  of  his  charitable  disposition,  and  shows 
also  a  Tery  large  extent  of  property. 

He  was  thnce  married.  His  first  wife 
was  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  William  Lane,  of 
Orlingbury,  Northamptonshire ;  his  second 
wife  was  daughter  or  George  Kirkham,  of 
Warmington  m  the  same  county;  and  his 
third  wife,  Helen,  daughter  of  John  Koper, 
the  attorney-general,  of  Eltham  in  Kent. 
From  Edward,  his  eldest  son  by  this  last 
marriage,  five  peerages  trace  their  descent, 
two  of  which  still  flourish,  the  dukedom  of 
Manchester  and  the  earldom  of  Sandwich, 
and  three  are  extinct 

MOVTAOU,  Henry  (Babon  Kimbolton, 
Viscount  Mandevil,  and  Earl  of  Man- 
chester), was  grandson  of  the  above  Ed- 
ward Montagu,  being  the  third  son  of  Edward 
his  eldest  son,  who  was  seated  at  Bou^^hton 
in  Northamptonshire,  and  sheriff  of  that 
county,  and  its  representative  in  parliament, 
by  his  wife  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Sir  James 
Harington,  of  Exton  in  the  county  of  Rut- 
land. He  was  bom  at  Boughton  about  1663, 
and  showed  so  much  intelligence  that  even 
at  school  it  was  prognosticated  'that  he 
would  raise  himself  above  the  rest  of  his 
family.'  After  well  employing  his  time  at 
Christ's  College,  Cambridge,  he  became  a 
member  of  his  grandfather's  inn  of  court, 
the  Middle  Temple,  where  he  attained  the 
rank  of  reader  in  1G06.  (Dugdale's  Orig, 
219.)  He  had  been  knighted  previous  to 
the  coronation  of  King  James,  and  had  al- 
ready acquired  distinction  as  a  lawyer  by 
being  elected  recorder  of  London  in  the  year 
of  that  king's  accession. 

He  was  returned 'for  Iligham  Ferrers  in 
1601,  and  distinguished  himself  by  his  cou- 
rageous answer  to  the  absurd  assertion  made 
bv  Serjeant  Heale,  the  aspirant  for  the  office 
01  master  of  the  Rolls,  ^  that  all  we  have  is 
her  majesty's,  and  she  may  lawfully  at  her 


daring  'that  there  were  no  such  prece- 
dents, and  if  all  preambles  of  subsidies  were 
looked  upon,  he  should  find  they  were  of 
free  gift'  In  the  first  parliament  of  King 
James  he  was  elected  one  of  the  represen- 
tatives of  the  city  of  London,  and  took  an 
active  part  in  its  important  discussions,  par- 
ticularly in  that  relating  to  tenures.  {JParl, 
Hid.  i.  921, 1126.) 

In  September  1607  he  was  appointed 
king's  counsel,  and  the  degree  of  me  coif 


MONTAGU 

was  conferred  upon  him  in  FebnuBT  1611, 
when  he  was  immediately  constitated  Idng'f 
Serjeant.  In  this  character  he  is  only  no- 
ticed as  a  commissioner  to  try  the  morieren 
of  Sir  Thomas  Overbury,  and  as  one  of  the 
counsel  engaged  in  the  prosecution  of  the 
great  delinquents.  (J^itate  TnaU,u.9llf9o%.) 

In  his  private  practice  he  had  an  actioa 
brought  against  him  by  one  Brook,  for  words 
charging  the  plaintiff  with  having  b^n  ogd- 
victed  of  felony.  He  pleaded  that  thej  wen 
spoken  by  him  on  a  trial  in  which  he  wu 
engaged  as  counsel  against  the  plaintifi^iDd 
the  court  decided  that  the  justification  wm 
good ;  for  a  counsel  has  a  privilege  to  en- 
force anything  pertinent  to  the  issue  that  ii 
informed  him  oy  his  client,  and  not  to  ex- 
amine whether  it  be  true  or  £edse.  (Cb^ 
Jac,  90.) 

On  being  selected  on  November  16, 1616^ 
to  succeed  Sir  Edward  Coke  as  chief  ioBtioe 
of  the  King's  Bench,  the  speech  of  Lord 
Chancellor  Lord  Ellesmere,  on  sweaiiog 
him  in,  gives  him  a  significant  hint  of  the 
tenure  by  which  he  holds  his  place,  by  ^ 
minding  him  of  the  '  amotion  and  dispooog' 
of  his  predecessor  '  in  the  peaceable  ind 
happy  reign  of  great  King  James,  the  gieit 
king  of  Great  Britain,  wherein  vou  see  tbe 

Srophet  David's  words  true,  *'  he  putteth 
own  one  and  setteth  up  another;"  a  leenn 
to  be  learned  of  all,  and  to  be  rememhezed 
and  feared  of  all  that  sit  in  judicial  places.' 
He  recommends  him  to  follow  the  example 
of  his  grandfather,  Sir  Edward  Montagu,  of 
whose  name  he  takes  advantage  to  introdooe 
allusions  to  the  imputed  faults  of  Sir  Ed- 
ward Coke.  {Moore's  Reports^  826.)  He 
is  said  to  have  procured  the  place  by  con- 
senting to  give  to  the  Duke  of  Buddn^ 
ham's  nominee  the  clerkship  of  the  Coint 
of  Iving's  Bench,  worth  4000/.  a  year,  which 
Coke,  in  whose  gift  it  was,  refused  to  put 
with,  although  by  doing  so  he  might  mt 
retained  his  office. 

It  fell  to  Sir  Henry's  lot  to  be  called  on 
to  award  execution  against  Sir  Walter 
Raleigh  upon  the  sentence  of  death  whid 
had  been  pronounced  fifteen  years  befoia 
His  address  to  the  unfortunate  priaooff 
evidently  showed  his  regrret  in  being  com- 
pelled to  the  performance  of  this  duty,  tod 
its  terms  do  credit  to  his  humanity.  {S^ 
Trials,  ii.  85, 1080.) 

Montagu  did  not  long  rest  satisfied  with 
the  place  of  chief  justice.  He  aimed  atill 
higher,  and  after  sitting  in  the  judicial  «it 
for  four  years  he  succeeded  inobtainixig^ 
more  elevated  and  lucrative  post  of  kxd 
treasurer  on  December  14, 16^.  Biavn 
obliged  to  pay  20,000^  for  the  pl«e^«^ 
one  of  the  charges  against  TTiiihinrtpr 
his  impeachment  was  the  zeo^^mtfi 
money ;  but  his  answer  allepad  *  ^ 

a  voluntary  loan  to  tJie  kii  ■ 

had  not  a  penny  of  it.    Tb  ^ 


MONTAGU 

at  the  time  seems  to  coniirm  this  (Tanner^f 
MSS,) ;  but  this  view  of  the  fact  does  not 
remove  the  venality  of  the  transaction,  nor 
account  for  Montagu  being  deprived  of  the 
oilice  on  October  13  following,  when  the 
unfortimate  Lionel  Cranfield,  Larl  of  Mid- 
dlesex, was  by  the  duke's  interest  named 
as  his  successor.  It  was  ever  considered  a 
place  of  great  charge  and  profit,  and  when 
Montagu  was  asked  what  it  might  be  worth 
per  annum,  he  answered,  '  Some  thousands 
of  pounds  to  him  who  after  death  would  go 
instantly  to  heaven  ;  twice  as  much  to  him 
who  would  go  to  purgatory;  and  a  nemo 
scit  to  him  who  would  venture  to  a  worse 
nlace/  (Lloyd's  State  Worthies,  1028.) 
While  treasurer  he  was  one  of  tiie  com- 
missioners of  the  Great  Seal  from  the  ab- 
dication of  the  chancellorship  bv  Bacon  till 
July  10,  1621,  when  Dean  "Williams  re- 
ceived the  Seal. 

On  his  appointment  to  the  treasurership 
he  was  ennobled  with  the  titles  of  Baron 
Montagu  of  Kimbolton  and  Viscount  Man- 
devil,  and  on  his  removal  he  was  but  poorly 
compensated  for  his  loss  by  being  made 
lord  president  of  the  coimcil.  In  tms  office 
he  remained  for  the  rest  of  James's  reign 
and  for  the  first  three  years  of  Charles's, 
when  he  exchanged  it  for  that  of  lord  privy 
seal,  which  he  enjoyed  for  the  rest  of  his 
life.  King  Charles  also  in  the  first  year  of 
his  rei^,  on  February  5, 1026,  created  him 
Earl  of  Manchester. 

He  was  an  active  minister  of  the  crown 
and  a  faithful  adherent  to  King  Charles, 
maintaining  a  good  reputation  and  credit 
with  the  wnole  nation.  He  did  not  live  to 
^vitness  the  fatal  termination  of  Charles's 
career,  but  died  on  November  7,  1642, 
shortlv  after  the  commencement  of  the 
hostilities  between  the  royalists  and  the 
parliamentary  forces.  He  had  nearly  at- 
tained his  eightieth  year,  and  showed  as 
much  activity  and  sagacity  in  business  as 
at  any  former  period  of  his  life.  Fuller 
f-ays,  '^  When  lord  privy  seal,  he  brought 
the  Court  of  Requests  into  such  repute 
that  what  formerly  was  called  the  alms- 
basket  of  the  Chancery  had  in  his  time 
well  nigh  as  much  meat  in  and  guests 
about  it  (I  mean  suits  and  clients)  as  the 
Chancery  itself.'  In  his  last  years  he 
published  a  book  entitled  'Mancnester  al 
Mondo,  Contemplatio  Mortis  et  Immorta- 
litatis ;  or,  Meditations  on  Life  and  Death,' 
which  conveys  a  most  favourable  impres- 
sion of  the  wisdom  and  piety  of  the  writer. 
He  was  buried  at  Kimbolton  under  a  noble 
monument. 

Like  his  grandfather,  Sir  Edward,  he 
married  three  wives.  The  first  was  Ca- 
therine, daughter  to  Sir  William  Spencer, 
of  Yamton  in  Oxfordshire ;  the  second  was 
Anne,  daughter  of  William  Wineott,  of 
Langham  in  Sufiblk^  Esq.,  and  widow  of  Sir 


MONTAGU 


451 


Leonard  Haliday,  knight,  loM  mayor  of  Lon- 
don ;  and  the  third  was  Margaret,  daughter 
of  John  Crouch,  of  Combuiy,  Herts,  Esq., 
and  widow  of  John  Hare,  of  Totteridge. 

His  eldest  son  and  successor  is  the  next- 
noticed  Edward  Earl  of  Mimchester. 

His  son  Geoige,  by  his  third  wife,  was 
father  of  Charles,  who  in  1694  was  made 
chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  in  1700  was 
created  Baron  HaUfSax,  and  in  1714  was 
advanced  to  the  earldom  of  Halifax. 
These  titles  became  extinct  in  1772. 
(Collinses  Peerage,  ii.  51.) 

MOHTAOU,  Edward  (Eabl  of  Mav- 
chesxeb),  was  son  of  the  above  Henry,  the 
first  earl,  and  during  his  father's  life  was 
called  up  to  the  House  of  Peers  by  the 
title  of  Lord  Kimbolton.  At  the  meeting 
of  the  Long  Parliament,  Lord  Kimbolton, 
having  been  for  some  tune  estranged  from 
the  court,  took  the  popular  side,  and  be- 
came a  favourite  organ  of  the  party  in  the 
upper  house,  and  the  secret  adviser  of  Pym, 
Hampden,  and  the  other  active  spirits  in 
the  lower.  In  the  attempt  made  by  the 
king  to  draw  off  some  of  tne  leaders,  Lord 
Kimbolton  was  designed  to  be  keeper  of 
the  privy  seal  after  his  father's  death,  but 
the  endeavour  failing,  the  plans  of  the 
opposition  were  lurged  on  with  greater  vio- 
lence and  rapidity.  The  hasty  resolution 
of  the  king  to  impeach  Lord  Kimbolton 
and  the  five  memoers,  and  his  unadvised 
appearance  in  the  House  of  Commons  to 
seize  the  latter,  led  to  the  most  fatal  re- 
sults, and  were  among  the  signal  causes  of 
the  civil  war.  Loil  Kimbolton,  on  the 
charge  being  made  by  the  attorney-general, 
stood  forwc^  and  pressed  for  immediate 
enquiry ;  and  on  the  kmg's  withdrawing  the' 
prosecution,  the  Commons,  not  satisfied, 
passed  a  bill  '  for  clearing  the  Lord  Kim- 
bolton and  the  five  members  from  the 
feigned  charge,'  and  impeached  Sir  Ed- 
ward Herbert,  the  attorney-general,  for  the 
part  he  had  tidten  in  the  proceeding.  When 
the  parliament  resorted  to  arms  his  lord- 
ship accepted  a  colonelcy  in  their  forces, 
and  was  present  on  October  12, 1642,  at  tiie 
indecisive  battle  of  Edgehill.  His  father 
dying  on  the  7th  of  the  following  month, 
he  became  Earl  of  Manchester,  and  was 
entrusted  with  the  independent  command 
of  a  considerable  army.  He  proved  his 
capacity  as  a  soldier  by  investing  the  town 
of  Lynn,  so  that  it  fell  into  his  hands,  and 
by  defeating  the  Earl  of  Newcastle's  forces 
in  Lincolnshire  with  great  slaughter.  In 
May  1644  he  took  the  city  of  Lincoln  by 
storm,  and  in  July,  with  Cromwell  under 
him,  was  mainly  instrumental  in  gaining 
the  important  victory  of  Mari^ton  Moor. 
The  consequence  of  this  battle  was  the  fall 
of  York.  After  several  further  successes 
he  was  in  the  second  battle  of  Newbury  on 
October  27,  where  each  party  claimed  the 


452 


MONTAGU 


Tictorj ;  and  the  king  haying  subsequently 
'been  able  to  relieve  Donmngton  Caatle. 
Cromwell,  who  was  jealous  of  the  earl  and 
diflobeyed  his  commands,  took  the  oppor- 
tunity of  making  a  complaint  to  the  parlia- 
ment that  he  was  lukewarm  and  unfaithful 
to  their  interests,  and  wished  to  promote  a 
peace  with  the  king.  This  led  to  recrimi- 
nation on  the  earl's  part,  but  the  mutual 
charges  fell  to  the  ground  without  inresti- 
gation.  The  self-denying  ordinance  soon 
loUowedy  in  consequence  of  which  the  earl 
resided  his  command  in  the  following 
ApnL  and  the  feelinp^  between  the  two 
were  an^hing  but  friendly.  That  Crom- 
well's dislike  was  not  partaken  by  either 
house  is  evident  from  tne  Lords  passing  a 
complimentary  vote  in  favour  of  nim  and 
the  Earls  of  Essex  and  Denbigh,  acknow- 
ledg^g  their  faithfulness  and  industry,  and 
recommending  their  services  for  the  con- 
sideration of  parliament.  The  Lords  also 
chose  the  earl  for  their  speaker,  and  at  the 
end  of  164/>,  in  the  propositions  to  the  king 
for  peace,  the  parliament  named  him  to  be 
maae  a  marquis. 

On  October  80,  1046,  the  Lords  and 
Commons,  not  being  able  to  agree  upon  the 
persons  to  be  named  commissioners  of  the 
Great  Seal,  determined  to  put  it  into  the 
custody  of  the  Earl  of  Manchester  and 
William  Lenthall,  the  speakers  of  the  two 
houses,  ^1  they  had  decided,  and  limited 
their  power  for  a  week  after  the  end  of  the 
then  Michaelmas  Term.  When  that  period 
came  the  same  irresolution  existed,  and  con- 
tinued for  near  a  year  and  a  half,  so  that 
the  earl  and  Lenthall  remained  keepers  till 
March  15, 1648. 

On  the  question  of  the  king's  death  the 
opinion  of  the  House  of  Lords  was  set 
aside,  and  a  few  days  after  the  blow  had 
fallen  that  body  was  entirely  abolished. 
Considering  the  relations  that  existed  be- 
tween the  earl  and  Cromwell,  it  seems  sur- 
prising that  the  latter,  when  he  became 
protector  and  instituted  the  *  other  house,' 
should  have  named  the  earl  as  one  of  his 
peers,  a  nomination  which  was  of  course 
declined. 

When  Cromwell  was  dead,  the  dismissal 
of  his  son  Richard  and  the  restoration  of 
the  Long  Parliament  seeming  to  open  a 
prospect  of  the  king's  return,  the  earl  con- 
certed with  Monk  and  others  the  means  to 
effect  it  The  House  of  Lords  being  re- 
stored in  the  Conyention  Parliament  which 
met  on  April  26,  1600,  he  was  replaced  in 
his  former  position  as  speaker,  and  on  May 
6  was  added  to  three  other  commissioners 
of  the  Great  Seal,  which  they  continued  to 
hold  till  the  same  was  defaced  on  May  28, 
and  the  Seal  of  the  kinffdom  came  again 
into  operation  under  Sir  Edward  Hyde  as 
lord  chancellor.  The  duty  of  conveying 
^)ie  Lozda'  congratulations  on  his  majesty's 


MONTAGU 

safe  arrival  devolved  upon  this  earl,  ndkiB 
address  was  eloquent  and  dignified.  He 
was  rewarded  with  the  Garter,  and  the 
office  of  lord  chamberlain  of  the  household, 
in  which  capacity  he  died  at  Whitehall  oq 
May  6, 1671. 

Lord  Clarendon's  high  character  of  him 
must  be  received  with  some  allowance,  in- 
fluenced as  he  probably  wna  by  the  latter 
Ehase  of  the  earVs  career.   In  niany  pcnntB, 
owever,  it  is  just.     He  was  gentle  and 
generous,  and  had  a  natural  reverence  and 
affection  for  the  person  of  Charles  L,  upoo 
whom  he  had  attended  in  Spain  wnen 
prince.    When  he  saw  the  arbitrary  acto 
of  the  government,  he  joined  the  popular 
party  in  resisting  them,  and  bv  force  of 
circumstances  was  led  on  to  take  part  la 
the  war,  with  a  view  of  remedying  what 
was  wrong.    But  when  he  found  that  the 
object  was  likely  to  be  attained  withoat 
further  bloodshed,  he  became  a  strenuous 
advocate  for  peace,  and  thus  insured  the 
hostility  of  Cromwell  and  his  pa^^t  ^hom 
he  suspected  of  different  views.    The  cruel 
fate  awarded  to  the  king  convinced  him  h 
was  right,  and  the  efforts  he  made  for  the 
restoration  of  the  legitimate  monarch  were 
dictated  as  much  by  abhorrence  of  the^ 
king's  murder  as  by  the  conviction  that  the 
governments  substituted  were  injurious  to 
the  happiness  and  liberties  of  the  people. 

George  I.  gave  his  grandson  a  dukedom 
in  1719,  which  has  been  enjoyed  by  his 
descendants  till  the  present  time.  (Clfl- 
rendon:  IMUtdocke;  Noble:  CoBmisPdir' 
age,  ii.  67.) 

MOITTAGU,  William,  was  the  son  of 
Edward  Montagu,  the  elder  brother  of  the 
above  Henry  the  first  Earl  of  Mancheiter, 
who  was  himself  ennobled  in  1621  by  the 
title  of  Baron  Montagu  of  Boughton.  By 
his  second  wife,  Frances,  sister  of  Sir 
Robert  Cotton,  Bart,  he  had  three  aooi, 
the  youngest  of  whom  was  this  WiUiMB* 
The  third  baron  was  created  Duke  of  Mon- 
tagu by  Queen  Aime,  but  on  the  death  of 
the  second  duke  in  1749  without  male  iffue 
all  the  titles  became  extinct 

William  Montagu  v^as  bom  about  1619» 
and  was  entered  of  Sidney  Sussex  Colle(fe, 
Cambridge,  in  1632,  but  took  no  degrw. 
The  Middle  Temple  caUed  him  to  the^ 
in  1641,  and  made  him  a  bencher  in  16ft 
treasurer  in  1668,  and  reader  in  1664.  He 
became  attorney-general  to  the  queei  in 
June  1662,  and  so  continued  till  he  was 
raised  to  the  bench  on  April  12, 1676,heing 
then  appointed  lord  chief  baron  of  the 
Exchequer,  where  he  preuded  for  ten 
years.  Very  few  incidents  of  his  j''^^  . 
career  are  recorded.  At  the  trial  uiIwp 
of  Ireland 'and  four  others  for  higb  *■■■» 
before  him  and  Chief  Juatioa  So  *    . 

evidence  not  beuug  sufficient  ■*  ** 

the   priaonezBy  WmtebiMd  V 


MONTAGU 

they  were  set  aside  after  all  the  witnesses 
lor  the  prosecution  had  been  heard,  which 
would  in  all  fairness  have  entitled  them  to 
4in  acquittal.  But  the  chief  baron  directed 
the  gaoler  to  keep  them  strictly,  saying 
they  were  ^in  no  wav  acquitted,'  thus 
•deciding,  according  to  the  cruel  practice  of 
the  time,  that,  though  their  lives  had  been 
clearly  in  jeopardy,  thev  might  be  tried 
sprain,  which  was  done  shortly  afterwards, 
and  they  were  both  found  guilty  and 
f'xecuted.  Though  called  as  a  witness  by 
Titus  Oates  on  his  trial  for  perjury  in  1685, 
ho  acknowledged  that  he  *  never  had  any 
gi-eat  faith  in  him.'  In  the  same  year  he 
accompanied  Chief  Justice  Jefireys  on  the 
T^estem  assizes  to  try  the  prisoners  con- 
cemed  in  Monmouth's  rising ;  but  it  does 
not  appear  that  he  personally  took  any 
other  part  in  those  brutal  proceedings  than 
to  urge  a  reluctant  witness  to  speak  the 
truth.  Soon  after,  when  King  James, 
having  madly  resolved  to  do  away  with 
the  Test  Acts,  found  that  the  chiet  baron 
and  some  of  the  judges  were  opposed  to  his 
opinion,  he  determined  to  put  others  who 
were  more  pliant  into  their  places.  Ac- 
cordingly on  April  21,  1686,  Chief  Baron 
Montagu  and  three  of  his  colleagues  re- 
ceived tlieir  discbarge.  {State  Trxals,  vii. 
120,  X.  1108,  xi.  344;  Bramdoti,  103.) 

He  survived  his  removal  for  eleven  years, 
dying  in  1707.  His  wife,  Mary,  daughter  of 
Sir  John  Aubrev,  Bart.,  brought  him  three 
children ;  but  tdeir  issue,  if  they  had  any, 
had  all  failed  in  1749,  when  his  father's 
^'^reat-grandson,  the  second  Duke  of  Montagu, 
died,  and  the  barony  of  Boughton  became 
extinct.     (Pepys,  i.  38 ;  Evelyn,  ii.  323.) 

MONTAOU,  James,  was  ano^er  scion  of  ; 
this  noble  house,  being  the  son  of  the  Hon. 
George  Montagu,  of  Horton  in  Northamp- 
tonshire, one  of  the  above  Earl  Hennrs 
•children  bv  his  third  marriage.  His  mother 
was  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Sir  Anthony 
Irby ;  and  his  brother  Charles,  the  eminent 
statesman  and  poet,  was  created  Baron 
Halifax  in  1 710,  to  which  was  added  an  earl- 
dom in  1714;  but  the  latter  title  became 
«xtinct  on  the  death  of  the  third  earl  in 
1771. 

James  entered  the  Middle  Temple,  and 
wa:3  called  to  the  bar.  On  attaining  the 
i-nnk  of  solicitor-general  he  removed  to 
Lincoln's  Inn,  of  which  he  was  elected  a 
bencher  on  May  2, 1707.  He  sat  in  parlia- 
ment as  member  for  Trepony  in  1695,  and 
for  Beeralston  in  1098,  m  which  year  he 
was  appointed  chief  justice  of  Ely.  He  did 
not  ootain  a  seat  m  the  two  remaining 
parliaments  of  William,  nor  in  the  first 
parliament  of  Anne,  devoting  himself 
entirely  to  professional  avocations.  In 
Michaelmas  Term  1704  he  was  one  of  the 
counsel  who  moved  for  a  habeas  corpus  in  \ 
favour  of  the  Aylesbury  men  committed  to 


MONTAGU 


453 


New^te  by  the  House  of  Commons  for 
biingmg  actions  against  the  returning 
officer,  and  pleaded  strongly  against  the 
absurd  privilege  claimed  by  tne  house. 
For  the  mere  exercise  of  this  duty  as  a 
barrister  the  Commons  on  February  26, 
1706,  committed  him  and  his  colleagues  to 
the  custody  of  the  serjeant-at-arms,  where 
he  remained  till  March  14^  when  the  queen 
felt  compelled  to  prorogue,  and  afterwards 
to  dissolve,  the  parliament,  in  order  to  pre- 
vent the  collision  between  the  two  houses 
of  which  there  was  every  appearance.  In 
the  following  April  the  queen  conferred  the 
honour  of  knighthood  upon  him  at  Cam- 
bridge, and  in  November  appointed  him 
one  of  her  majesty's  counsel  {JStaie  TrtaU^ 
xiv.  808,  850,  1119 ;  LuUrdL  v.  624, 642, 
609.) 

In  the  second  parliament  of  Queen  Anne 
he  was  elected  member  for  the  city  of  Gar- 
lisle,  which  he  continued  to  represent  till 
1714;  but  of  his  speeches  in  the  house 
little  record  remains,  though  he  became 
solicitor-general  on  April  28,  1707,  and 
attorney-general  on  October  6, 1708.  From 
the  latter  office  he  was  removed  in  Sep- 
tember 1710,  but  the  queen  granted  him 
a  pension  of  1000/.  This  pension,  which 
was  represented  by  Colonel  Gledhill  at 
intendea  to  defray  the  expenses  of  Sir 
James's  election  at  Carlisle,  was  in  1711 
made  the  subject  of  a  complaint  to  the 
house,  which  resulted  in  the  complete  dis- 
proval  of  the  charge.  Sir  James,  however, 
was  not  returned  tor  Carlisle  in  the  queen's 
last  parliament  of  1714,  and  before  the  first 
parliament  of  George  I.  he  was  raised  to  the 
judicial  bench.  In  1705  he  was  leading 
counsel  in  the  prosecution  of  Robert  Field- 
ing for  bigamy  in  marrying  the  Duchess  of 
Cleveland ;  in  1710  he  opened  the  charges 
against  Dr.  Sacheverell  in  the  House  of 
Lords ;  and  when  that  trial  was  concluded 
he  conducted  the  prosecutions  of  the  parties 
who  were  found  guilty  of  high  treason  for 
pulling  down  meeting-houses  in  the  riots 
that  followed.  (Pari,  Hist,  vi.  1009  j  l^aie 
Tnalsy  xiv.  1329,  xv.  63,  640-680.) 

On  the  arrival  of  George  I.  in  England, 
Sir  James  received  the  degree  of  the  coif  on 
October  26,  1714,  and  on  November  22  was 
sworn  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer.  While 
holding  that  position  he  was  nominated  one 
of  the  lords  commissioners  of  the  Great 
Seal,  on  the  resignation  of  Lord  Cowper, 
and  held  it  from  April  18  till  Unj  12. 
1718,  when  Lord  Parker  was  appointed 
lord  chancellor.  On  May  4,  1722,  Chief 
Baron  Bury  died,  and  before  the  end  of  the 
month  Sir  James  was  sworn  as  his  suc- 
cessor. He  presided  in  the  Exchequer 
little  more  tnan  a  year,  his  death  oc- 
curring on  October  1, 1723. 

His  first  wife  was  Tufton  Wray,  daughter 
of  Sir  William  Wray,  of  Ashbj,  baronet ; 


454 


MONTEALTO 


and  his  second  wife  was  Elizabeth,  daughter 
of  Roheirt,  third  Earl  of  Manchester.  (Lord 
Raymond,  1319-1331 ;  CMtu's  Peerage,  ii. 
83 ;  Gent,  Mag.  v.  151.) 

MOHTEALTO,  RooBB  de,  was  son  of 
Robert  de  Montealto,  whose  father  built 
a  castle  on  a  little  hill  in  Flintshire,  then 
called  Montalt,  but  now  Mould.  Hb  early 
life  was  engaged  in  opposing  the  aggres- 
sions of  David,  son  of  Liewellyii,  Prince  of 
Wales,  in  which  he  eminently  distinguiBhed 
himsel£  In  34  Henry  111.  he  took  the 
cross,  and  prepared,  at  great  expense,  for 
the  expedition  to  the  Holy  Land ;  but  it  is 
not  related  that  he  went  there.  In  42  and 
44  Henry  lU.  he  was  called  upon,  with  the 
other  barons  marchers,  to  quell  new  in- 
surrections of  the  Welsh ;  and  in  the  latter 
year  he  was  placed  at  the  head  of  the  jus- 
tices itinerant  into  Shropshire  and  Staf- 
fordshire and  the  neighbouring  counties. 
Before  June  27  in  that  year,  12(ik),  he  died, 
leaving  his  wife  Cecilia,  one  of  the  sisters 
of  Hugh  de  Albini,  surviving,  with  two 
sons,  John  and  Robert,  both  of  whom  suc- 
cessively inherited  the  title ;  but  the  barony 
became  extinct  in  1320.    {Baronage^  i.  627.) 

MOVTEFOBTI,  HEmsY  de,  with  the 
addition  of '  Clericus,'  appears  in  4S  Henry 
III.,  12(53,  as  an  escheator  south  of  the 
Trent  (Excerpt  e  Rot.  Fin,  ii.  411),  and 
also  as  one  of  the  conservators  of  the  peace 
in  Kent.     (Haded,  i.  218.) 

There  was  probably  no  close  relationship 
between  him  and  Peter  de  Montfort,  or 
Simon  Earl  of  Leicester,  who  were  both 
slain  in  1265  at  the  battle  of  Evesham,  in 
arms  against  their  sovereign,  since  Henry's 
elevation  to  the  bench  took  place  about 
October  120G,  from  which  date  till  the  end 
of  that  reign  the  Fine  Rolls  contain  fi'equent 
entries  of  writs  for  assizes  to  be  held  before 
him.     (Excerpt,  e  Rat,  Fin,  ii.  446-586.) 

He  was  continued  in  office  on  the  ac- 
cession of  Edward  L,  and  an  entry  on  the 
Liberate  Rolls  of  3  Edward  I.  names  him 
as  a  justice  of  the  bench.  He  died  at  the 
end  of  the  next  or  beginning  of  the  follow- 
ing year.     (Ahh.  Rot,  Orig.  i.  27.) 

MONTFICHET,  Richard  de,  whose  an- 
cestor William  came  over  to  England  with 
the  Conqueror,  and  founded  the  abbey  of 
Stratford-Langton  in  Essex,  was  the  son  of 
another  Richard,  who  had  the  charge  of  the 
forests  of  Essex  under  Henry  II.,  by  his  wife 
Milicent,  and  was  a  minor  on  the  death  of 
his  parents.  On  attaining  his  maj  ority , about 
16  John,  he  was  in  attendance  at  the  court, 
and  in  1215  the  forests  of  Essex  were  re- 
stored to  his  custody  as  his  right.  (Rot, 
Chart,  197-204.)  He  became  so  active  an 
adherent  to  the  rebellious  barons  that  he 
was  one  of  the  twenty-five  who  were  ap- 

?ointed  to  enforce  the  observance  of  Magna 
)harta.    For  this  he  was  put  under  the  ban 
of  fixcommunicationi  ana  his  lands  were 


MORE 

seized  into  the  king*s  hands.  Even  after 
the  death  of  King  John  he  did  not  desert 
the  standard  of  Louis,  till  he  was  taken  pri- 
soner at  Lincoln  in  May  1217,  when,  thft 
cause  becoming  desperate  bj  the  iasae  of 
that  battle,  and  Prince  Louis  returning  to 
France,  he,  with  other  baroiULwas allowed 
to  make  his  peace.  (JS.  d§  Wendovery  in. 
297,  866,  iv.  24 ;  Rot.  Claw.  i.  269,  827.) 
Within  a  few  years  his  impetuosity  agaiii 
led  him  into  trouble.  Contrary  to  the  king*« 
prohibition,  he  chose  to  attend  the  toarai- 
ment  ffiven  at  Blythe  in  7  Heniy  IH,  foi 
which  his  lands  were  again  seized ;  but,aftei 
a  few  months,  and  no  doubt  upon  the  paj- 
ment  of  some  penaltv,  they  were  restored 
to  him.    (Rot.  Clam.  i.  416-539.) 

It  is  evident,  however,  that  this  afiaii 
was  looked  upon  rather  as  the  intemperance 
of  youth  than  as  an  act  of  concerted  disobe- 
dience ;  for  in  9  Henr^  lU.  his  name  wu 
inserted  in  the  list  of  justices  itinerant  for 
the  counties  of  Essex  and  Hertford  {BM. 
ii.  76) ;  and  in  18  Henry  IIL  the  treasniw 
and  barons  of  the  Exchequer  were  com- 
manded to  admit  him  as  their  companion, 
'ad  residendum  ad   Scaccarium  noetrum 
tanquam  baro,  pro  negotiis  nostris  (^  ad 
idem  Scaccarium  pertinent.*  (Af<irfar,iL54.) 
Three  vears  afterwards  h  e  was  constituted 
i  justice  of  the  forests  over  nineteen  countitf, 
and  from  26  to  80  Henry  IH.  he  held  the 
office  of  sheriff  of  Essex  and  Hertford,  in 
which  his  possessions  were  situate,  the  prin- 
cipal of  which  was  the  barony  of  Stanstead. 
i  (Excerpt.  eRot.  Fin.  ii.  471.) 
i      Having  lived  to  a  good  old  age,  he  died 
I  in  52  Henry  HI.,  1208,  but  left  no  iawe. 
'  (Baronage,  i.  438.) 

I  MOBB,  John,  the  judge  who  sat  on  the 
'  bench  for  twelve  years  in  the  reign  of  Heniy 
Vin.,  was  the  father  of  the  illustrious  chan- 
cellor Sir  Thomas  More :  but  whose  son 
John  More  was  has  never  been  mentioned 
by  any  of  the  chancellor's  biographerai  Tht 
inference  from  their  silence,  and  more  par- 
ticularly from  the  expression  used  in  tht 
epitaph  on  the  chancellor,  written  hj  him- 
self, *  familia  non  oelebri  aed  honesta  natos. 
seems  to  lead  to  no  other  conclusion  thai 
:  that  the  family  was  an  obscure  one.  Th< 
subject  having  been  fully  discussed  in  i 
paper  in  the  '  Archaeologia'  (xxxv.  27-.*^3) 
it  is  unnecessary  to  repeat  the  argument  ii 
this  place,  or  to  state  more  than  the  result 
of  the  investigation. 

It  appears  then  that  John  More  was  tk 
son  of  another  John  More,  who  in  4  Edward 
I IV.,  1464,  was  raised  from  the  office  of  bntki 
to  the  society  of  Lincoln's  Inn  to  that  o 
seneschal  or  steward,  an  officer  at  the  ^ 
of  the  servants  of  the  house,  and  waais  IW 
40  Henry  YI.  (the  year  of  that  mamM 
temporary  restoratic^n),  adip'  ^ 

of  the  society,  in  revmd  f 
faithful  services  as  butlf 


MOK£ 

He  was  then  progressively  called  to  the  bar,  ' 
aud  raised  to  the  bench  of  the  society,  and  i 
appointed  a  reader  in  autumn  1480,  and  in 
Lent  1495,  o  and  10  Henry  VII.  His  son, 
John  More  the  judf^,  succeeded  him  as 
butler,  and  in  like  manner  was  admitted  a 
member  of  the  society,  and  called  to  the  bar, 
and  in  November  1603,  19  Henry  VII.,  re- 
ceived the  dejjfree  of  the  coif.  {I)ugdale*8 
Oriff.  113.)  This  origin,  so  far  from  detract- 
ing in  any  degree  from  the  merit  either  of 
the  chancellor  or  the  judge,  must  be  con- 
sidered as  speaking  loudly,  not  only  to  their 
credit,  but  to  the  credit  of  those  to  whom 
tliey  owed  their  elevation;  showing  that, 
even  in  those  days,  virtue  and  learning  met 
their  due  rewa^,  and  contradicting  the 
general  impression  that  none  but  rich  men's 
sons  were  admitted  members  of  the  inns  of 
court.  It  proves  also  that,  at  a  time  when 
the  barriers  between  the  different  grades  of 
society  were  far  more  dilHcult  to  be  passed 
than  in  the  present  day,  such  a  combination 
of  talent  with  integrity  and  moral  worth  as 
distinguished  the  progenitors  of  Sir  Thomas 
could  overcome  all  the  prejudices  in  favour 
of  high  descent  which  were  the  natural  result 
of  the  feudal  system. 

It  is  related  by  the  chancellor's  son-in- 
law.  ]^)per,  that  Sir  John  was  imprisoned 
in  the  Tower  until  he  had  paid  a  fine  of  100/. 
for  some  groundless  quarrel  devised  against 
him  by  the  king.  This  must  have  been  in 
the  year  following  that  in  which  he  was 
made  a  Serjeant,  as  the  real  cause  of  the 
royal  anger  was  that  his  son  Thomas,  the 
future  cliancellor,  had  successfully  opposed 
a  grant  demanded  of  the  parliament  which 
met  in  Januarj'  1504.  Of  Sir  John's  prac- 
tice at  the  bar  there  is  little  evidence. 

Of  the  date  of  his  elevation  to  the  bench 
neither  his  biographers  nor  Dugdale  give 
any  precise  information,  and  the  only  ac- 
count ailurded  by  the  latter  contradicts  his 
biographers  as  to  the  court  in  which  he 
sut.  Their  statement,  however,  that  he 
was  a  judge  of  the  Court  of  King's  Bench 
is  confirmed  by  his  wiU,  dated  in  Februarv 
hyji),  in  whicli  he  so  designates  himselt ; 
and  by  Sir  Thomas's  epitaph,  in  which  he 
dt-'scribes  his  father  as  of  tnat  court,  with- 
out any  allusion  to  his  having  sat  in  any 
other.  Aud  yet  Dugdale  notices  him  solely 
as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas,  and 
proves  that  he  wtis  so  from  Hilary  Term 
1518  to  Hilary  Term  1520,  by  the  occur- 
rence of  hi»  name  in  fines  acknowledged 
between  those  dates. 

It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  he  was  suc- 
cessively a  nuMnber  of  both  benches.  No 
patent  of  his  app<jintuient  either  as  a  judge 
of  this  court  or  of  the  King's  Bench  has 
been  found  ;  but  the  period  of  his  removal 
to  the  latter  must  be  fixed  between  his  last 
fine  and  Navember  28,  1523,  when  he  is 
named  as  a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench  in  a 


MORE 


455 


list  of  his  brethren  chargeable  with  the 
subsidy  imposed  in  that  year  (Ibid.  47 ;  3 
Report  Pub,  J2ec,  App»  ii.  62) ;  and  it  is  not 
unlikely  that  he  was  placed  on  that  bench 
in  Apnl  1520,  when  Richard  Broke  first 
occurs  as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Fleas, 
without  any  other  apparent  vacancy. 

Looking  at  the  period  of  Sir  John's  ad- 
vancement, and  considering  how  little  he 
distinguished  himself  as  a  lawyer  either 
before  or  after  his  elevation  to  the  bencli 
(for  in  the  Year  Books  he  b  mentioned 
only  once  as  a  judge,  and  that  in  a  case 
in  the  Exchequer  Chamber),  it  seems  not 
improbable  that  he  owed  his  appointment 
to  the  character  his  son  had  already  at- 
tained, and  that  this  was  one  of  the  temp- 
tations held  out  to  secure  Sir  Thomars 
services  at  court  The  pleasing  description 
which  his  son  gives  of  him  in  nis  epitaph — 
'Homo  civilis,  suavis,  innocens,  mitis, 
misericors,  aequus  et  integer' — ^presents  a 
higher  idea  of  his  moral  than  of  his  in- 
tellectual qualities,  and  illustrates  the  at- 
tractive pictures  which  are  drawn  of  the 
affectionate  intercourse  existing  in  tlie 
family.  None  who  contemplate  the  cha^ 
racter  of  both  can  fisdl  to  dwell  with 
sympathy  and  pleasure,  as  the  certain  con- 
sequence of  such  a  union  of  hearts,  on  the 
unafi'ected  deference  which  the  son  con- 
tinued to  pay  to  the  father  after  his  own 
promotion,  on  his  defying  ridicule  hj  pub- 
licly begging  the  parenud  blessing  in  his 
way  to  his  court,  and  on  the  unrestrained 
expression  of  his  love  in  the  last  moment 
of  the  judge's  life. 

Sir  John  died  about  November  1530, 
judging  from  his  will,  which  was  proved 
on  the  5th  of  the  following  month,  and^ 
according  to  its  directions,  ne  was  buried 
in  the  church  of  St.  Lawrence  in  the 
Old  Jewry. 

His  age  at  the  period  of  his  decease  was 
not  90,  as  his  great-grandson  Cresacre 
More  erroneously  describes  him,  but  76, 
according  to  the  inscriptions  on  the  family 
pictures  preserved  at  Burford  Priory  and 
at  Nostell  Priory,  painted,  one  of  them 
certainly  by  Holbem,  in  1630,  after  Sir 
Thomas  became  chancellor,  and  just  pre- 
vious to  Sir  John's  death.  They  represent 
all  the  members  of  the  family  then  in  ex- 
istence, and  their  ages  are  inscribed  on  their 
respective  portraits.  Both  of  these  pictures 
agree  as  to  the  then  age  of  Sir  John — viz., 
70 ;  and  this  evidence,  which  is  manifestly 
the  most  trustworthy,  would  make  the 
birth  of  Sir  John  take  place  about  the  year 
145.'i,  so  that  he  would  have  been  29  when 
he  is  first  mentioned  as  butler,  about  50  en 
his  assumption  of  the  Serjeant's  coif,  and 
his  elevation  to  the  bench  would  have 
happened  at  the  more  probable  age  of 
04  or  06. 

His  union  with  three    or   four  vdvet 


456 


MOR£ 


seems  to  prove  that  his  theory  with  regard 
to  the  ladies  was  less  complimentary  than 
his  practice.  It  is  reported  of  him,  'for 
proof  of  his  pleasantness  of  wit,  that  he 
would  compare  the  multitude  of  women 
which  are  chosen  for  wives  unto  a  hag  full 
of  snakes  having  among  them  but  one  eel ; 
now  if  a  man  should  put  his  hand  into 
this  bag,  he  may  chance  to  li^ht  on  the 
eel,  but  it  is  a  hundred  to  one  ne  shall  be 
stung  with  a  snake.'  But  whether  he 
made  this  remark  before  or  after  his  last 
nuptials  is  not  recoi-ded. 

His  first  wife,  according  to  his  great- 
grandson  Cresacre  More,  was  Johanna, 
daughter  of  —  Ilancombe,  of  Holywell, 
Be(uordshire ;  but  whether  he  was  ever 
married  to  this  lady  is  very  doubtful,  and  it 
has  been  clearly  shown  by  entries  in  an  old 
MS.  in  Trinity  College  Library  (Notes  and 
Queries^  4th  S.  ii.  365)  that  John  More 
married,  in  1474,  when  he  was  21,  Agnes, 
daughter  of  Thomas  Qraunger,  at  St.  Giles's, 
Cripplcgate.  Tlie  second  wife  was  Mrs. 
Bowes,  a  widow,  whose  maiden  name  was 
Barton;  and  his  third  was  Alice  Clarke, 
named  in  a  commission  as  relict  of  William 
Huntyugdon  of  Exeter  (Cal,  State  Papers 
ri600-141  292),  the  daughter  of  John 
More  of  Loseley  in  Surrey.  By  his  first 
wife  only,  whether  Hancombe  or  Graunger, 
had  he  any  issue,  and  she  produced  him, 
with  three  other  children  who  probably 
died  early,  one  son,  Thomas  More  the 
chancellor,  and  two  (laughters.  Jane,  the 
elder,  was  married  to  Richard  StafForton, 
or  Staidton.  l^lizabeth,  the  younger,  be- 
came the  wife  of  John  Rastell  the  printer, 
and  the  mother  of  WiUiam  Kastell  the 
judcre. 

Ihe  manor  of  Gobyons  in  North  Mimms 
in  Hertfordshire,  belonging  to  Sir  John  at 
his  death,  he  left  to  his  wife  for  life,  and 
then  to  the  chancellor,  on  whose  attainder 
in  1534  his  mother-in-law  was  illegally 
evicted.  She  died  about  ten  vears  after- 
wards at  Northall  in  that  neigh^wurhood. 

MOBE,  TnoMAS,  the  only  sou  of  the 
above  Sir  John  by  his  first  wife,  whether 
her  maiden  name  was  Graunger  or  Han- 
combe, was  born  on  February  7, 1478,  in  his 
father's  house  in  Milk  Street,  London. 

The  rudiments  of  his  education  he  re- 
ceived under  Nicholas  Holt,  at  St  An- 
thony's School  in  Threadneedle  Street, 
which  bore  the  highest  reputation  of  any 
of  the  London  establishments,  and  produced 
some  other  celebrated  men,  among  whom 
were  Heath,  Archbishop  of  York;  Whit- 
gift,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury ;  and  Dean 
Colet.  More's  father,  who  was  at  that 
time  merely  an  apprentice-at-law,  not 
having  been  yet  callea  to  the  degree  of  a 
Feijeant,  obtained  an  early  introduction  for 
him  into  the  house  of  Cardinal  Morton,  who, 
like  other  ecclesiastics  of  the  age,  received 


MOBE 

young  persons  of  name  and  character  into 
his  family,  nominally  as  pages,  but  realW 
to  be  instructed  under  his  own  eye  in  aU 
the  learning  of  the  time.  More's  quickneaB 
and  ready  wit  soon  made  him  a  favoorite 
with  his  fellows.  In  the  plays  which  it 
was  then  the  custom,  even  in  bishou' 
houses,  to  perform  at  Christmas,  he  wocud 
intermingle  with  the  actors,  and,  adopting 
a  character  appropriate  to  the  piece,  wouM 
improvise  the  part  to  the  sport  and  admi- 
ration of  the  audience.  The  worthy  cv- 
diual,  of  whom  More  always  spoke  witli 
afifectionate  gratitude,  was  not  tne  hut  to 
see  his  merit  and  to  prophesy  his  future 
eminence ;  and,  that  no  opportunity  might 
be  lost  for  improvement,  he  placed  the  pro- 
mising youth  at  the  university  of  Oxtord. 
Both  Canterbury  College  (now  part  of 
Christ  Church)  and  St.  Marv  Hall  are 
mentioned  as  his  place  of  study,  but  tiie 
deficiency  of  the  registers  has  left  the 
question  in  doubt. 

There  is  less  uncertainty  in  fixing  the 
date  of  his  college  career.  His  friendEhip 
with  Erasmus  commenced  in  1407,  when 
that  eminent  man  first  visited  Englandt 
who  in  a  letter  to  a  friend  in  Italy  dated 
I  on  December  5,  1497,  after  eulogising  the 
'  learning  of  Colet,  Grocyn,  and  Linacre, 
who  were  all  at  Oxford  at  that  period,  adds, 
'  Nor  did  nature  ever  form  anything  more 
elegant,  exquisite,  and  better  accompli^ 
than  More.'  This  fascinating  character  is 
peculiarly  appropriate  to  a  youth  between 
nineteen  and  twenty,  and  suggests  the  great 
probability  of  that"  year  being  the  diieof 
his  entrance  at  Oxford.  With  all  the  three 
eminent  men  mentioned  by  Erasmus  he 
formed  an  intimacy,  and  with  their  en- 
couragement, and  Thomas  Linacre  for  his 
tutor,  he  enthusiastically  pursued  his  Greek 
studies,  and  successfully  resisted  the  factks 
in  the  university  which,  under  the  name  of 
Trojans,  attempted  to  prevent  the  introduc- 
tion of  that  language  into  the  system  of 
education  there.  Here  he  also  began  those 
epigrams  and  translations  that  appear  in  hit 
works,  and  devoted  himself  entuely  to  the 
allurements  of  literature.  His  allowance  wis 
scarcely  sufficient  to  provide  necessaries, 
and  of  his  expenditure  of  it  he  was  required 
to  give  a  most  exact  account.  TSTiether 
his  father  so  closely  curtailed  him  from 
frugal  motives,  or  Irom  the  fear  that  hii 
son's  delight  in  these  studies  would  create 
a  distaste  for  the  legal  profession,  for  which 
he  was  designed,  the  son  ever  after  apohe 
of  it  in  terms  of  commendation,  as  nrereo^ 
ing  him  from  indulging  in  idle  plenam 
and  extravagance.  There  is  no  nesAd 
his  having  taken  any  degree,  and  Idi  il^f 
at  the  university  ia  atated  BOilDtM 
exceeded  two  years.  The  pcpU  •*  **■ 
return  to  London  is  unoBiH 
records  of  lincoln'a  Lin  ahir 


MORE 

mission  into  that  society  must  have  taken 
place  either  during  or  liefore  his  residence 
ftt  Oxford.  The  entry  is  under  11  Henijr 
VII.,  1496,  when  he  was  eighteen^  and  is 
as  follows : — 

Thomas  More  admissns  est  in  Societat.  x\j  die 
Fcbrnar.  a9  sup.  dicto.  et  pardonat  est  quatuor 
vacacQes  ad  insUmciam  Johis  More  patris  sui 

Although  his  name  is  not  to  he  found  on 
the  hooks  of  New  Inn,  a  society  then  re- 
cently estahlished,  there  is  no  douht  that 
he  was  placed  there  for  some  time  either 
before  or  after  his  leaving  Oxford.  He 
was  in  due  time  removed  to  Lincoln's  Inn, 
and,  Iiaving  passed  through  the  usual  course 
of  studv,  he  was  admitted  as  an  utter  bar- 
rister, Sut  the  early  books  of  the  society  do 
not  give  the  date  of  the  calls  to  the  bar. 
The  character  he  acquired  as  a  lawyer  may 
be  judged  from  his  oeing  soon  afterwards 
selected  to  deliver  lectures  on  the  science  at 
Fumival's  Inn,  which  were  so  highly  esti- 
mated that  this  annual  appointment  was 
renewed  for  three  successive  years. 

At  this  period  he  seems  to  have  been  im- 
pressed with  strong  religious  feelings,  and 
not  only  to  have  employed  his  time  in 
devotional  exercises,  but  to  have  subjected 
his  body  to  penitential  austerities.  For 
the  purpose  of  pursuing  these  spiritual 
objects,  he  established  himself  near  the 
Charterhouse,  that  he  might  daily  attend 
the  serA'ices  of  that  foundation,  ana  during 
the  four  years  of  his  residence  there  his 
mind  wavered  between  the  choice  of  a 
monastic  life  and  the  adoption  of  the  priest- 
hood. It  was  perhaps  while  in  this  state 
of  mental  probation  that  he  delivered 
lectures  at  St.  Lawrence^s  Church  in  the 
Old  Jewry  on  the  work  of  St.  Augustine, 
*  De  Civitate  Dei/  to  a  crowded  audience 
comprehending  the  most  learned  men,  both 
lay  and  clerical,  in  the  city.  That  these 
lectures  formed  no  part  of  his  legal  require- 
ments may  be  presumed  from  the  absence 
of  any  other  similar  example,  and  it  is  even 
doubtful,  from  a  passage  in  one  of  Erasmus's 
letters,  whether  they  were  not  in  fact  de- 
livered at  Oxford. 

But  time,  or  perhaps  the  attractions  of 
female  8ociety,  cured  him  of  his  disposition 
to    a   pious   retirement.      His   son-in-law 
Iioper  thus  simply  relates  his  course  of  love :  ! 
'  IIu  resorted  to  the  house  of  one  Maister  | 
Col  to,  a  gentleman  of  Essex,  that  had  oft ; 
invited  him  thither,  having  three  daughters, 
whose    honest  conversation   and  virtuous 
education  provoked  him  there  specially  to 
set  his  afl'ection.     And  albeit  his  mind  most 
served  him  to  the  second  daughter,  for  that 
he  thought  her  the  fairest  and  best  favoured, 
vet  when  he  considered  that  it  would  be 
t>oth  great  grief  and   some  shame  also  to 
the  eldest  to  see  her  younger  sister  pre- 
ferred before  her  in  marriage,  he  then  of  a 


MORE 


457 


certain  pity  framed  his  fancy  towards  her, 
and  soon  uter  married  her,  never  the  more 
discontinuing  his  study  of  the  law  at  Lin- 
coln's Inn,  but  applying  still  the  same  until 
he  was  called  to  the  bench,  and  had  read 
there  twice,  which  is  as  often  as  any  judge 
of  the  law  doth  ordinarily  read.' 
This  marriage,  which  took  place  in  1605, 

E roved  a  very  happy  one,  but  was  dissolved 
y  the  death  of  tne  lady  in  little  more  than 
six  years,  after  giving  birth  to  three  daugh- 
ters and  one  son,  whom  Roper  quaintly 
says  *  he  would  often  exhort  to  take  virtue 
and  learning  for  their  meat,  and  play  for 
their  sauce.'  They  lived  in  Bucklersbury. 
It  must  have  been  about  a  ^ear  previous 
to  this  marriage  that  the  incident  related 
by  Koper  occurred  which  distinguishes 
More  as  the  first  public  opponent  to  a  par- 
liamentary grant  of  money  to  the  crown. 
The  last  jmrliament  in  the  reifi^i  of  Henry 
VII.  met  in  January  1504,  and  in  it  a  bill 
was  introduced  demanding  an  aid  of  three 
fifteenths  for  the  recent  marriage  of  the 
king^s  eldest  daughter  Margaret  with  the 
King  of  Scots.  On  the  debate  of  this  bill, 
More,  who  had  been  returned  a  burgess, 
used  'such  arguments  and  reasons  there 
against  that  the  king's  demands  were 
thereby  clean  overthrown.'  The  statute 
itself  shows  that  the  king  excused  not  only 
the  aid,  but  10,000/.  also  of  the  40,000l 
offered  by  the  Commons.  (Stat,  of  Realm, 
ii.  075.)  But  his  majesty  being  informed 
^  that  a  beardless  boy  had  disappointed  all 
his  purpose,'  and  *  conceiving  great  indig- 
nation against  him,  could  not  be  satisfi^ 
until  he  had  some  way  revenged  it  And 
forasmuch  as  he,  nothing  having,  nothing 
could  lose,  his  grace  devised  a  causeless 
quarrel  against  his  father,  keeping  him  in 
the  Tower  till  he  had  made  him  pay  to 
him  a  hundred  pounds'  fine.' 

It  was  not  till  after  the  accession  of 
Henry  VIII.  that  More  was  anpointed  one 
of  the  governors  of  Lincoln's  inn.  In  the 
autumn  of  1511  his  first  reading  took  place, 
and  his  second  in  Lent  1510,  about  two 
years  before  his  father  became  a  judge. 

In  the  interval  between  these  two  dates 
More's  legal  reputation  rose  so  high  that 
there  was  scarcely  any  controversy  in  the 
courts  in  which  he  V7as  not  employed  as 
counsel  for  one  of  the  parties.  On  Septem- 
ber 3,  1510,  he  had  been  made  under-sheriff 
of  London,  on  whom  in  those  days  not  only 
devolved  the  duties  which  that  officer  has 
now  to  perform,  but  he  acted  also  as  the 
judicial  representative  of  the  sheriff  in  all 
those  numerous  cases  which  came  under  his 
jurisdiction,  part  of  which  have  since  been 
decided  by  a  regularly  constituted  judge  of 
the  Sheriff's  Court  An  entry  in  the  city 
records  states  that  on  May  8,  1514,  it  was 
agreed  by  the  common  council  *  that 
^omasMore,  gentleman,  one  of  the  under- 


458 


HORE 


sheriffs  of  London,  should  occupy  his  office 
and  chamber  by  a  sufficient  deputy  during 
his  absence  as  the  king's  amoassador  in 
Flanders.'  As  this  shows  that  he  still  held 
the  office,  and  as  there  is  evidence  of  his 
continuing  in  it  for  several  years  beyond 
this  licence,  and  that  the  nomination  was 
then  in  the  common  council,  there  is  no 
doubt  that,  though  it  might  nominally 
receive  an  annual  confirmation,  it  was  the 
practice  to  select  for  the  sheriff's  assessor 
some  eminent  individual  learned  in  the  law, 
and  not  to  remove  him  but  for  serious  cause. 

Although  in  the  above  entry  he  is  called 
'  the  king's  ambassador  in  Flanders,'  there 
is  no  record  in  Kymer  of  such  an  appoint- 
ment. It  may  be  presumed,  however,  that 
this  was  one  of  the  two  occasions  men- 
tioned by  Koper,  when  he  was  sent,  with 
the  king's  concurrence,  to  arrange  certain 
questions  between  the  English  and  foreign 
merchants  established  in  the  Steel  Yard, 
who  enjoyed  great  privileges  in  this  coun- 
try. The  other  embassy  was  probablv  that 
in  1615  (for  which  he  received  a  similar 
licence  from  the  city),  for  in  a  letter  of 
1510  he  tells  Erasmus,  *  When  I  returned 
from  my  embassage  of  Flanders  the  king's 
majesty  would  have  granted  me  a  yearly 
pension  ;  which,  surely,  if  I  should  respect 
honour  and  profit,  was  not  to  be  contemned 
by  me;  yet  have  I  as  yet  refused  it,  and  I  think 
I  shall  refuse  it,  because  either  I  should 
forsake  my  present  means  which  1  have  in 
the  city,  which  I  esteem  more  than  a  better, 
or  else  I  should  keep  it  veith  some  grudge 
of  the  citizens,  between  whom  and  his  high- 
ness if  there  should  happen  any  controver- 
sies (which  may  sometime  chance),  they 
may  suspect  me  as  not  trusty  and  sincere 
with  them  because  I  am  obliged  to  the 
king  with  an  annual  stipend.'  He  might 
indeed  very  reasonably  hesitate  to  risk  any 
change  in  his  position^  since  he  estimated 
the  gains  from  his  office  and  his  private  busi- 
ness at  400/.  a  year,  which  according  to  the 
then  value  of  money  would  be  considered  a 
splendid  income.  It  is  not  imlikely  that 
the  appointment  of  his  father  as  a  judge 
two  years  aftcni-'ards  operated  more  effec- 
tually in  securing  his  services  to  the  court. 

Hairs  description  of  him  (p.  688)  as  *  &i/r 
Thomas  Mon>  iate  undershrife  and  then  of 
the  kinges  counsaill,'  in  the  account  given 
by  that  chronicler  of  the  London  insurrec- 
tion on  Evil  May-day  1517,  is  clearly  erro- 
neous in  two  parts  of  it,  and  probably  so  in 
the  third.  The  city  records,  as  quoted  by 
Sir  James  Mackintosh,  state  his  resignation 
of  the  undersheriffialty  on  July  23,  1510. 
His  entrance  into  the  privy  council  was 
not  likely  to  precede  that  event,  and  pro- 
bably occurred  immediately  afterwards. 
The  earliest  recorded  notice  of  his  connec- 
tion with  the  court  is  in  April  1520,  when 
he  was  the  last  named  of  four  commis- 


HORE 

sioners  to  settle  proviaions  in  the  treaty  of 
commerce  with  Charles  V.  His  name  is 
there  inserted  without  any  addition,  and  be 
is  only  called  *  Armiger'  in  another  com- 
mission of  June  in  the  same  year,  by  which 
he  was  one  of  those  appointed  to  accom- 
modate certain  questions  with  the  'sodoe' 
of  the  Hanse  Towns.  Between  this  date 
and  May  1522  he  received  his  knighthood, 
being  then  named  as  one  of  the  knights 
assigned  to  attend  the  king  on  the  visit  of 
the  emperor.  {Rymer,  xiii.  714,  722,  768.) 
The  immediate  cause  of  his  elevatian  is 
stated  to  have  been  his  successful  resistance 
in  the  Star  Chamber  to  the  king's  claim 
for  the  forfeiture  of  a  ship  belonging  to 
the  pope,  which  had  been  seized  at  South- 
ampton. The  erudition  which  he  then  dis- 
played, and  his  powerful  arguments  in  the 
cause,  80  pleased  the  king  that  he  would 
listen  to  no  further  excuses,  but  at  ooce 
retained  More  in  his  service,  by  intro- 
ducing him  into  the  privy  coundL  In 
May  1522  and  January  1525  he  was  re- 
warded with  divers  manors  and  lands  to 
the  value  of  GO^  a  year,  the  grants  of  which 
were  annulled  soon  after  his  disgrace.  (Sbd, 
Realm,  iii.  628.) 

His  intimate  relation  both  with  the  long 
and  Cardinal  Wolsey  at  this  period  is  ma- 
nifest from  a  variety  of  letters,  published 
in  Sir  Henry  Ellis's  first  series,  exhiltttiiig 
the  closest  confidential  communication  ob 
political  atlairs.  The  conferences  to  which 
they  relate  generally  took  place  in  the  royal 
closet  after  supper.  He  became  engaged 
in  many  other  diplomatic  missions  besides 
those  before  referred  to,  and  he  appears 
from  his  correspondence  with  Erasmus  to 
have  been  for  a  long  time  stationed  it 
Calais  for  the  convenience  of  continental 
negotiations,  a  position  which  was  not  only 
distateful  to  him,  but  unprofitable  also. 
He  accompanied  Wolsey  in  nis  ostentations 
embassy  to  France  in  1527,  and  it  was  wo- 
bably  on  this  occasion  that  the  cardinal,  oo 
asking  him  to  point  out  anything  that  ▼!> 
objectionable  in  the  treaty  he  had  prepared, 
flew  into  a  rage  because'More  ventured  to 
suggest  some  amendment,  concluding  his 
violence  by  saving,  *  By  the  mass,  thou  art 
the  veriest  fool  of  all  the  council.'  More, 
smiling,  answered  simply, '  God  be  thanked 
the  king  our  master  nath  but  one  fool  in 
his  council.'  His  last  mission  was  two 
years  afterwards  to  Cambray,  in  conjun^ 
tion  with  his  old  friend  Bishop  TunstaD,  a^ 
ambassador  to  the  emperor. 

It  was  on  one  of  these  journeys  that  Moie 
silenced  a  bra^^ing  fellow  who  had  po^ 
a  challenge  in  Bruges  that  he  would  aoiw 
whatever  question  could  be  pi^^PonM^ 
him  in  any  art  whatsoever.  Sr  BiVl* 
demanded  an  answer  to  theftDfl  U 

Averia  capta  in  Witheniai  i^, 

gibiliaP' adding  that  thi  • 


MOR£ 

English  ambassador's  retinae  who  would 
dispute  with  him  thereof.  The  derision  of 
the  city  was  fairly  excited  by  the  arrogant 
presumer  being  obliged  to  aclmowledge  that 
ne  did  not  even  understand  the  terms  of  the 
proposition. 

Not  long  after  the  death  of  his  first  wife 
ho  contracted  a  second  marriage  with  Mrs. 
Alice  Middleton,  a  widow,  who  survived 
him  without  giving  any  addition  to  his 
family.  As  over  his  first  choice,  so  over 
tliisy  a  little  romance  is  thrown ;  for  the 
lady  is  reported  to  have  suggested  to  him 
while  urging  the  suit  of  a  mend  that  if 
he  pleaded  in  his  own  behalf  he  might  be 
more  successful.  *  Upon  this  hint  he  spake,* 
and,  his  friend  wisely  withdrawing,  he  soon 
after  married  her.  From  Bucklersbury  he 
removed  to  Crosby  Place  (BurgofCa  Gre- 
sham,  i.  420),  and  in  1523  to  the  house  he 
built  at  Chelsea.  The  picture  of  his  do- 
mestic life  is  most  delightfully  drawn  by 
Erasmus.  His  family  circle,  mcreased  as 
It  was  by  the  husbands  of  his  daughters 
and  the  wife  of  his  son,  seems  to  have  been 
the  centre  of  happiness.  The  duties  of  reli- 
gion were  never  omitted ;  every  hour  was 
employed  in  useful  study,  or  intellectual 
intercourse,  or  sober  mirth ;  gentleness  was 
the  spirit  that  guided,  and  love  the  bond 
that  united  them. 

While  employed  in  the  study  and  prac- 
tice of  the  law  he  had  not  deserted  the 
literary  path  in  which  he  had  first  de- 
lighted. He  improved  himself  in  all  the 
learning  then  attainable )  he  associated 
with  the  most  eminent  and  intellectual 
men  of  the  time;  he  kept  up  a  constant 
correspondence  with  Erasmus ;  and  he 
even  found  leisure  for  literary  composi- 
tion. The  'History;  of  Richard  III.'  is 
published  among  his  works,  but  doubts 
nave  been  raised  whether  he  was  really 
its  author,  some  attributing  the  compo- 
sition of  the  Latin  original  to  Cardinal 
Morton,  and  only  the  English  translation 
to  More.  His  *  Utopia,'  upon  which  his 
fame  as  an  author  principally  rests,  is  the 
history  of  an  imaginary  commonwealth, 
in  wliich  he  advances  and  advocates 
some  doctrines  in  philosophy  and  reli- 
gion greatly  in  advance  of  the  age,  with 
8o  much  force  and  liberality  that  it  seems 
surprising  that  the  work  escaped  the  cen- 
sures of  the  government.  It  was  written 
in  I^tin,  and  published  about  1516. 

Being  now  a  member  of  the  privy  coun- 
cil, lie  was  selected  as  speaker  of  the  par- 
liament which,  after  eight  years*  discon- 
tinuance of  that  assembly,  met  on  April  15, 
ir>2.*i  His  address  on  being  presented  to 
the  king,  containing  the  protestation  of  his 
own  disability  and  the  claim  for  freedom  of 
debate  so  customary  at  the  present  day,  will 
always  serve  as  a  model  for  future  speakers. 

Though  the  Commons  did  not  make  a 


MOSB 


459 


grant  equivalent  to  the  extravagant  de- 
mand of  the  court,  t^ey  imposed  a  tax 
with  which  Cardinal  Wolaey  was  obliged 
to  appear  content;  and  he  not  only  re- 
quested the  king  to  grant  the  usual  reward 
of  200/.  to  the  speaker,  'because  no  man 
could  better  deserve  the  same  than  he  had 
done,'  but  added  this  complimentary  ex- 
pression to  his  letter:  'I  am  the  rather 
moved  to  put  your  highness  in  remem- 
brance thereof,  because  he  is  not  the  most 
ready  to  speake  and  solidte  his  own  cause.' 

But  the  cardinal  could  not  entirely  sup- 
press his  dissatisfaction.  He  said  to  the 
speaker,  '  Would  to  God  you  had  been  at 
Rome,  Master  More,  when  I  made  you 
speaker.'  'Your  grace  not  ofiended,'  an- 
swered More,  'so  would  I  too,  my  lord.' 
And  Roper  charges  the  cardinal  with  en- 
deavouring to  remove  him  from  his  path  by 
counselling  the  king  to  send  him  ambassa- 
dor to  Spam.  More,  however,  remonstrated 
with  his  majesty,  who  replied, '  It  is  not  our 
pleasure.  Master  More,  to  do  you  hiurt,  but 
to  do  you  ^ood  we  would  be  glad ;  we  there- 
fore for  this  purpose  will  devise  upon  some 
other,  and  employ  your  service  otherwise.' 

The  date  of  More's  appointment  as  under- 
treasurer  of  the  Exchequer  is  uncertain,  but 
he  is  described  in  that  character  in  August 
1525  as  one  of  the  ambassadors  to  conclude 
a  treaty  with  France.  {Rymer,  iv.  50,  69, 
74.)  t'rom  this  office  he  was  raised  to  that 
of  chancellor  of  the  duchy  of  Lancaster  on 
December  25  following  (Mackintosh,  48), 
which  he  held  till  he  became  chancellor  of 
England. 

The  Great  Seal  was  delivered  to  More  by 
the  king,  *■  at  his  manor  of  Flesaunce,  alias 
Estgrenewiche,'  on  October  25, 1520,  eight 
days  after  Cardinal  Wolsey  had  been  de- 
prived of  it.  The  next  day  he  was  in- 
ducted into  his  seat  in  the  Court  of 
Chancer}',  'after  a  noble  exhortation'  by 
the  Duke  of  Norfolk, '  as  well  to  the  chan- 
cellor as  to  the  people,  and  an  answer  of 
the  chancellor.'  No  previous  example  of 
any  introductory  address  on  such  an  occa- 
sion occurs,  and  the  object  of  the  duke's 
speech  seems  to  have  been  to  justify  the 
king*s  selection  of  a  layman  instead  of  an 
ecclesiastic  or  a  nobleman,  by  enlar^png  on 
the  wisdom,  integrity,  and  wit  of  Sir  Tho- 
mas, and  the  extraordinary  abilities  ho  had 
already  shown  in  the  afiiurs  that  had  been 
entrusted  to  him.  More's  answer  was  mo- 
dest and  becoming,  with  a  graceful  and  feel- 
ing allusion  to  the  fall  of  his  predecessor. 

The  contrast  between  his  modesty  and 
the  cardinal's  arrogance  could  not  fail  to 
secure  universal  satisfaction  at  his  appoint- 
ment to  this  high  office,  and  his  whole 
conduct  while  he  retained  it  justified  the 
favourable  opinion  that  had  been  formed  of 
him.  Although  he  presided  in  the  court 
little  more  than  two  years  and  a  half,  his 


460 


MORE 


diligence  in  the  perfoHnnnce  ot  its  duties 
was  so  great  that  he  is  said  on  one  occasion 
to  hare  risen  from  his  seat  because  there 
was  no  other  cause  depending  before  him. 
It  must  not  be  forgotten,  however,  that  the 
number  of  suits  in  that  age  will  bear  no 
comparison  with  those  in  ike  present  day. 
At  tne  time  of  his  elevation  his  father  was 
A  judge  of  the  King's  Bench.  The  two  j 
/cx)urts  were  opposite  to  each  other  in  ; 
Westminster  Hall,  and  every  day  during 
the  sittings  a  rare  example  of  filial  piety 
was  exhibited  to  those  around,  of  the  nead 
•of  the  law  kneeling  before  his  aged  parent 
to  receive  his  blessing  ere  the  business  com- 
menced. The  old  man  died  in  the  course 
of  the  following  year ;  but  his  death  added 
little  to  the  fortune  of  his  son,  for  the 
estate  was  settled  on  Sir  John's  widow 
during  her  life,  which  extended  ten  years 
beyond  that  of  Sir  Thomas. 

Various  anecdotes  are  told  of  him  during 
liis  elevation,  which,  while  they  show  his 
•own  integrity,  raise  a  suspicion  that  cor- 
ruption in  the  judgment-seat  had  not  been 
previously  uncommon.  The  poorest  suitor 
obtained  ready  access  to  him  and  speedy 
trial,  while  the  richest  offered  presents  in 
vain,  and  the  claims  of  kindred  found  no 
favour.  Even  his  son-in-law  Giles  Heron, 
refusing,  in  his  reliance  on  the  chancellor's 
family  affection,  to  fall  into  a  reasonable 
■arbitrement,  was  obliged  to  submit  to  ^a 
flat  decree  against  him.'  The  custom  of 
presenting  new  year's  gifts  often  afforded 
«  cover  to  suitors  in  his  court  for  tendering 
bribes,  which,  when  attempted,  he  would 
with  sly  humour  evade.  A  rich  widow 
named  Croker,  who  had  obtained  a  decree 
against  Loid  Arundel,  presented  him  one 
new  year's  day  with  a  pair  of  gloves  and 
forty  pounds  in  angels  in  them.  Emptying 
the  money  into  her  lap,  he  told  her  tnat,  as 
it  was  '  against  good  manners  to  forsake  a 
gentlewoman's  new  year's  gift,  he  would 
take  her  gloves,  but  refuse  the  lining.' 
Another  suitor  brought  him  n  gilt  cup, 
'  the  fashion  whereof  he  very  well  liking, 
caused  one  of  his  own,  better  in  value,  to 
be  brought,  which  he  willed  the  messenger 
in  recompense  to  deliver  to  his  master.' 
And  on  a  complaint  made  to  the  council 
after  his  resignation,  tliat  he  had  accepted 
a  great  gilt  cup  which  a  party  in  wnose 
favour  he  had  pronounced  a  decree  had 
sent  to  him  by  his  wife,  he  acknowledged 
that  he  had  done  so,  but  *  further  declared 
that  albeit  he  had  indeed  received  that  cup,  i 
yet  immediately  thereupon  caused  he  his 
butler  to  fill  it  with  wine,  and  of  that  cup 
drank  to  her;  and  that  when  he  had  so 
done,  and  she  pledged  him,  then  as  freely 
as  her  husband  nad  given  it  to  him,  even  so 
freely  gave  he  the  same  again  to  her  to  give 
unto  her  husband  for  his  new  year's  pift.' 

Besides  his  regular  attenaance  in  the 


MORE 

court,  he  encouraged  those  who  had  com- 
plaints to  resort  to  him  at  hit  own  house, 
where  he  would  sit  in  his  open  hall,  in 
many  instances  bringing  the  parties  to  t 
friendly  reconcilement  of  their  dispatei. 
He  for  Dade  an^  subpoena  to  be  j;ranted  antQ 
the  matter  in  issue  had  been  laid  before  him 
with  the  lawyers  name  attached  to  it,  when 
if  he  found  it  sufficient  he  would  addliii 
fiat,  but  if  too  trifling  for  discussion  would 
refuse  the  writ  Even  in  the  performanoe 
of  this  duty  he  could  not  restrain  his  ho- 
mour ;  and  it  is  related  that  a  case  having 
been  laid  before  him  by  one  '  Tubbe,'  an 
attorney,  which  he  found  to  be  on  a  veir 
frivolous  matter,  he  returned  the  paper  witn 
the  words,  '  a  tale  of  a '  prefixed  to  the 
lawyer's  signature,  *  Tubbe.*  TheoommoD 
law  judges  having  complained  then,  as  in- 
deed the^  did  for  a  long  time  afterwizds, 
that  their  judgments  were  suspended  Ij 
injunctions  out  of  Chancery,  Sir  Thomii 
caused  a  list  of  those  he  hai  granted  to  be 
made  out,  and  inviting  the  judges  to  dinner, 
discussed  with  them  the  grounds  of  his  de- 
cision in  each  case.  On  their  acknowledging 
these  to  be  just  and  reasonable,  he  recom- 
mended them  themselves  in  future  to  qual^ 
the  extreme  rigour  of  the  law  by  like  eqm^ 
able  considerations,  and  thus  prev^t  the 
necessity  of  the  chancellor's  interference. 

More  8  retirement  from  the  chanoellonldp 
arose  fi-om  no  diminution  of  the  king's  ft- 
vour,  but  was  the  result  of  his  own  earnest 
application.    During  his  whole  tenure  of  it, 
the  question  of  the  kine*s  marriage,  wfaick 
had  been  so  fatal  to  Wolsey,  continued  to 
be  agitated.    The  opinions  of  the  foreifliat 
well  as  the  English  universities  had  Men 
taken,  and  the  chancellor  had  been  caM 
upon  to  present  these,  and  the  answers  d 
many  theologians  and  canonists,  to  the 
House  of  Commons ;  but  still  his  own  coo- 
science  was  not  satisfied,  and,  not  onlj 
dreading  the  evil  consequences  which  m 
thought  he  foresaw  from  these  proceedings, 
but  looking  no  doubt  with  a  suspicious  eye 
on  the  interference  in  ecclesiastical  matteis 
which  Cromwell  was  then  anxiously  urging) 
he  sought  to  be  relieved  from  the  respcma- 
bility  of  measures  which  he  could  not  ccO" 
scientiously  sanction.     Still  so  prudent  had 
been  his  bearing  that  when,  under  pretence 
of  illness,  he  obtained  permission  to  resign 
the  Seal  on  May  16, 15;52,  the  kinggr*^^ 
his  discharge  with  cordial  acknowled^ati 
of  his  services,  and  ^acious  promises  of 
continued  favour,  causing  the  Duke  of  Xo^ 
folk,  on  introducing  his  successor,  to  stj 
that  he  had  been  only  allowed  to  retin  at 
his  own  earnest  entreaty,  and  obliging  tke 
new  chancellor  to  repeat  the  expreMOtii 
the  royal  presence  at  the  opeoiBf  flf  f^ 
liament 

It  is  much  to  the  credit  af^  f^ 

discrimination  that  from  ^  ■" 


MORE 

trance  into  his  service  he  distinguished  him 
with  peculiar  confidence.  He  not  only  re- 
cognised in  Sir  Thomas  that  solidity  of  un- 
derstanding and  that  integrity  of  character 
so  valuable  in  a  counsellor,  but  appreciated 
those  intellectual  powers  and  that  tiyeliness 
of  humour  which  made  him  so  attractive  as 
a  companion.  Thus,  while  he  was  employed 
abroaa  in  most  important  missions,  he  was 
honoured  when  at  nome  with  a  large  share 
of  royal  familiarity.  So  frequently  was  his 
presence  required  by  the  king,  as  well  to 
enter  into  scientific  and  learned  discussions 
as  to  enliven  the  royal  table  by  his  merry 
conversation,  that,  in  order  to  relieve  him- 
self from  a  restraint  which  kept  him  from 
his  own  family,  he  was  compelled  to  assume 
a  more  solemn  deportment,  and  by  gradually 
discontinuing  his  former  mirth  to  secure 
himself  from  such  frequent  invitations. 
The  king's  continued  enjoyment  of  his  so- 
ciety would  be  often  shown  by  his  sudden 
visits  to  More's  house  at  Chelsea,  partaking 
of  his  dinner,  and  treating  him  with  that 
sort  of  playful  kindness  of  which  there  is  no 
other  example  than  the  intercourse  between 
Henry  II.  and  Becket  before  the  latter  was 
invested  with  the  archiepiscopal  mitre. 
More,  however,  was  not  deceived  as  to  the 
real  character  of  his  sovereign.  On  one 
occasion,  when  the  king  had  been  strolling 
for  an  hour  in  the  garden  at  Chelsea  with 
his  arm  round  More's  neck,  his  son-in-law 
Roper  congratulated  him  on  being  *  so  fa- 
miliarly entertained,'  saying  he  had  never 
seen  the  king  do  so  to  any  before  except 
Cardinal  Wolsey,  with  whom  he  had  once 
seen  *  his  grace  walk  arm  in  arm.'  '  I  thank 
our  Lord,'  answered  More, '  I  find  his  grace 
my  very  good  lord  indeed,  and  I  believe  he 
doth  as  singularly  favour  me  as  any  subject 
within  this  realm ;  howbeit,  son  Roper,  I 
may  tell  thee  I  have  no  cause  to  be  proud 
thereof,  for  if  my  head  would  win  a  castle 
in  France  it  should  not  fail  to  go.' 

In  less  than  a  year  after  More's  resigna- 
tion, the  king's  marriage  with  Anne  Boleyn 
was  acknowledged.  3iany  were  the  at- 
tempts made  by  Henry  to  induce  Sir  Tho- 
mas, at  first  by  tiattering  messages  and  large 
promises,  and  afterwards  by  menaces,  to 
give  his  concurrence.  His  inflexible  adhe- 
rence to  his  opinion  gradually  irritated  the 
king  to  such  an  extent  that  in  his  anger  he 
forgot  all  the  services  More  had  rendered, 
and  determined  either  to  force  his  acquies- 
cence or  to  punish  his  refusal.  It  was  only 
by  the  strong  representations  made  by  the 
now  chancellor  (Audley)  and  his  other 
ministers,  of  his  imminent  risk  of  being  de- 
feated in  parliament,  that  the  king  consented 
to  leave  Alore's  name  out  of  the  bill  of  at- 
tainder against  parties  supposed  to  be  im- 
plicated in  the  treason  of  rUizabeth  Barton, 
the  Holy  Maid  of  Kent.  The  desired  op- 
portimity,  however,  was  not  long  wanting. 


MORE 


461 


On  the  king's  marriage  an  act  had  been 
passed,  fixmff  the  succession  of  the  throne 
on  his  issue  oy  Anne  Boleyn ;  and  by  one 
of  its  clauses  an  oath  was  reqioxed  from  all 
the  king's  subjects  to  maintain  that  settle* 
ment.  (.Si^.  Heaitn^  iii.  471.)  This  oath 
More  would  not  have  hesitated  to  t^e,  as 
he  admitted  the  right  of  parliament  to  regu- 
late the  settlement  But  the  form  submitted 
to  him  containing  in  addition  assertions  of 
the  invalidity  of  the  king's  first  marriage, 
and  of  the  validity  of  the  second  and  of  the 
divorce.  More  felt  himself  obliged  to  refuse 
it.  He  was  accordingly  committed  to  the 
Tower  on  April  17, 1634,  and  was  attainted 
for  misprision  of  treason  on  this  account,  by 
a  separate  act  passed  in  the  following  No- 
yembeiy  which  rendered  void  the  kind's 
former  grants  to  him,  and  deprived  him 
of  all  his  other  property  of  every  kind. 
(Ibid.  538.) 

Not  content  with  keeping  his  imfortunate 
victim  in  strict  confinement  for  more  than 
a  year,  the  arbitrary  monarch,  urged  on,  it 
is  feared,  by  the  new  queen,  resolved  to 
pursue  him  to  extremities.    Another  statute 
of  the  same  parliament  enacted  that  the 
king  should  be  reputed  the  only  supreme 
head  on  earth  of  the  Church  of  England, 
and  should  have  the  title  and  style  thereof 
annexed  to  his  imperial  crown ;  and  by  this 
act  it  was  declarea  high  treason  to  attempt 
to  deprive  the  king  of  his  title.     (Ibid.  402, 
608.)    More,  in  all  the  interrogatories  to 
which^he  was  artfully  subjected  with  a  view 
to  entrap  him,  evaded  the  question  either 
by  total  silence  or  by  saying,  '  I  will  not 
meddle  with  such  mattew,  tor  I  am  fully 
determined  to  serve  God,  and  to  think  upon 
his  passion  and  my  passage  out  of  this 
world.'    At  lost,  on  June  12, 1636,  a  depu- 
tation waiting  on  him  to  take  away  nis 
books,  Rich,  the  solicitor-general,  who  was 
one  of  the  partj*,  under  pretence  of  friendly 
remonstrance,  inveigled  More  into  an  argu- 
ment, by  putting  the  case  whether  he  would 
not  acknowledge  Rich  to  be  king  if  par- 
liament had  declared  him  so.    To  this  More 
answered  in  the  affimative,  because  parlia- 
ment could  both  make  and  depose  kings; 
but  in  return  asked  Rich  whether  he  comd, 
in  obedience  to  an  act  of  parliiunent,  say 
that  God  was  not  God.    Rich  agreed  that 
he  could  not,  because  it  was  impossible,  but, 
suggesting  that  this  was  too  high  a  case^ 
cunningly  proposed  one  which  he  said  was 
between  the  two,  asking  him  why,  if  he 
would  acknowledge  a  king  made  by  act  of 
parliament,  he  should  not  take  King  Henry 
as  supreme  head  of  the  Church,  since  he 
was  so  constituted  by  act  of  parliament. 
The  reply  to  this,  as  aUeged  by  Rich,  but 
denied  by  Moore,  was,  that  a  subject  could 
not  be  thus  bound,  because  it  was  not  a 
thing  to  which  he  could  give  his  consent  in 
parliament. 


462 


MORE 


Disgracefully  interpreting  tliese  words  into 
a  malicious  demal  of  his  title,  the  sauguinrnj 
tyrant,  glad  to  find  any  pretence  to  vent  his 
animosity,  caused  an  mdictment  to  be  im- 
mediately prepared.  {Mr,  Bruce  in  Archao- 
ioffia,  xvii.  8(51-374.)  On  the  trial  Rich 
made  himself  infamous  by  his  peijured  re- 
presentation of  this  '  familiar  secret  talk,' 
an  obsequious  jury  declared  More  to  be 
guilty,  and  the  traitor^s  sentence  was  pro- 
nounced against  him  by  the  court — the 
former  no  way  regarding  his  unanswerable 
defence,  and  the  latter  disallowing  all  his 
exceptions  to  the  indictment.  With  a  solemn 
prayer  that  his  judges  might  be  pardoned 
lor  his  condemnation^  he  retired  trom  the 
bar.  On  leaving  the  court  his  son  met  him, 
and  kneeling  down  begged  his  blessing; 
and  as  he  entered  the  Tower,  his  favourite 
daughter  Margaret  rushed  through  the 
crowd,  and  throwing  her  arms  round  his 
neck  covered  him  with  kisses,  but,  over- 
whelmed by  her  grief,  could  utter  nothing 
but  ^  Oh  my  father !  oh  my  father !  * 

Little  time  was  allowed  to  elapse  ere  the 
final  scene  was  enacted.  His  conviction 
took  place  on  July  1,  1535  (Baga  de  Se- 
cretis)j  and  on  the  Gth  his  head  was  severed 
from  his  body  in  the  firont  of  the  Tower. 
Even  in  his  last  moments,  impressed  as  he 
showed  himself  to  be  vrith  tne  awful  so- 
lemnity of  his  position,  he  exhibited  no  fear, 
and,  amidst  the  prayers  that  he  piously  ut- 
tered, could  not  repress  the  humour  which 
had  always  characterised  him.  When  he 
was  informed  that  the  horrible  part  of  the 
sentence  was  changed  into  beheading,  he 
answered  merrily,  'God  forbid  the  king 
should  use  any  more  such  mercy  imto  my 
firiends,  and  God  bless  all  my  posterity  from 
such  pardons.' 

'  Pray,  master  lieutenant,'  said  he  to  that 
officer  as  he  was  ascending  the  scaffold, 
which  seemed  to  give  way,  '  pray  see  me 
safe  up,  and  as  to  my  coming  down  I  will 
shift  tor  myself.'  And  when  he  laid  his 
head  on  the  block,  he  desired  the  execu- 
tioner to  stop  till  he  had  put  his  beard  aside ; 
'  forthat,'  saidhe, '  has  committed  no  treason.' 

His  body  was  buried  in  St.  Peter's  within 
the  Tower,  but  was  at  last  removed  by  his 
daughter  Margaret  to  the  tomb  in  Chelsea 
Church  which  he  had  prepared  during  his 
life.  His  head,  after  remaining  for  some 
time  exposed  on  London  Bridge,  a  disgust- 
ing evidence  of  the  ingratitude  of  princes, 
came  also  into  the  possession  of  his  affec- 
tionate child,  on  whose  death  it  was  buried 
in  her  arms  in  St  Dunstan's,  Canterbury. 

Two  years  after  his  execution  an  annuity 
of  20/.  was  granted  to  his  widow,  Lady  Alice 
More,  and  subsequently  a  lease  of  one  of  his 
houses  at  Chelsea.  (Attditor^s  Patent  Book, 
i.  160  J  26  BepoH  Pub.  Bee.,  App.  2.)  His 
three  daughters  were  all  married  during 
his  life.    The  eldest,  Margaret,  was  united 


HOREVILLE 

to  William  Boper,  whose  memoir  of  hit 
father-in-law  forms  the  staple  of  aUhia  sub- 
sequent biographies.  He  was  son  of  John 
Roper,  Esq.,  ot  St  Dunstan's,  near  Canter- 
bury, at  first  prothonotaiy  of  the  dsaxi  of 
King's  Bench  (in  which  office  WiUiazn 
succeeded  him),  and  afterwards  the  king's 
attomey-generu.  The  second  daughter, 
Elizabeth,  was  married  to  William  Dauncv, 
Esq. ;  and  the  husband  of  the  third  daughter 
was  Giles  Heron,  Esq  .  John^  the  only  son 
and  last-bom  chUd  of  Sir  Thomas,  married 
Anne,  daughter  and  heir  of  Edward  Ctc»- 
acre,  of  Barnburgh  in  Yorkshire ;  and  his 
grandson  Cresacre  More  has  been  proved  bj 
Mr.  Hunter  to  be  the  author  of  Uie  life  of 
his  ancestor,  which  had  been  previously  at- 
tributed to  his  brother  Thomas.  Mr.  Hunter 
conceives  that  the  male  progeny  of  the  chan- 
cellor became  extinct  in  1795. 

XOBETOV,  Eabl  of.     See  RoBSST. 

XOBEYILLE,  Hugh  de^  who  had  the 
barony  of  Burgh-on-the-Sands  in  Cumber- 
land, and  other  possessions  in  that  and  the 
neignbouring  counties,  as  successor  to  his 
father  Roger,  and  his  grandfather  l^moOf 
was  forester  of  Cumberland,  and  added  to 
his  property  that  of  his  wife.  Helewise  de 
Stuteville,  a  relative,  probably  a  sister,  of 
the  Baron  Robert  de  btuteviUe. 

In  conjunction  with  the  latter,  he  wis  t 
justice  itinerant  for  the  counties  of  North- 
umberland and  Cumberland  in  16  Henry  IL, 
1170  {Madoxj  i.  144)  ;  but  although  Robert 
de  Stuteville  acted  in  the  same  capacity  in 
the  following  year,  the  name  of  ilugh  de 
Moreville  no  longer  appears  as  his  associate. 
His  discontinuance  in  this  honourable  office 
arose  from  the  part  he  took  in  December 
1170  in  the  muraer  of  Becket,  as  before  re- 
lated. After  the  assassination,  he  and  his 
colleagues  retired  without  interruption,  and 
repaired  to  a  castle  at  Enaresboroufh,  which 
belonged  to  Hugh  de  Moreville,  wnere  thej 
stayed  many  months,  not  daring  to  retuzn 
to  Henry's  court.  It  is  added  by  William  of 
Newbury, '  that,  being  stung  with  remorse, 
they  willingly  went  to  Rome,  and  were  sent 
by  the  pope  to  Jerusalem,  where,  after  they 
had  for  some  years  performed  not  remissly 
the  penance  enjoined  them,  they  all  ended 
their  lives.'  However  this  may  be  with 
regard  to  the  others,  it  certainly  is  not  trae 
in  reference  to  Hugh  de  Moreville'e  deatL 

During  the  remainder  of  the  reign  of 
Henry  IL,  and  the  whole  of  that  of  Richard 
1.,  no  mention  is  made  of  his  name ;  but  in 
the  first  year  of  King  John  he  is  recorded 
as  paying  fifteen  marks  and  three  good  pal- 
freys for  holding  his  court  with  his  liberties 
<do  Tol  et  Theam,  et  Infangenetheif^  et 
Furto,  et  de  Judicio  Ferri  et  Aquae,'  as  long 
as  Helewise  his  wife  should  continue  in  a 
secular  habit.  (Bot.de  Oblatis^^.'i  He  died 
shortly  afterwards,  leaving  two  aaug^ters, 
one  of  whomi  Ada,  became  the  wife  of  tb» 


MOREWIC 

after-mentioned  justicier,  Thomas  de  Mule- 
ton.  {Dttgdales  Baron,  i.  612 ;  Lord  Lytteln 
Um,  ii.  3,  iOl,  589 ;  Haded,  xii.  331.) 

XOBEWIC,  Huon  de,  the  son  of  Ernulf 
de  Morewic,  held  the  manor  of  Chidington 
in  Northumberland,  by  the  service  of  one 
knight's  fee.  He  was  m  attendance  on  the 
kinu:  at  Waltham  in  1182,  whose  will  then 
made  he  witnessed.  In  30  Henry  II.,  1184, 
he  was  one  of  the  justiciers  and  barons 
before  whom  a  fine  was  acknowledged  in 
the  Kind's  Court  at  Westminster,  and  he 
afterwams  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  in 
Lincolnshire  and  Yorkshire.  (^Pipe  HoU,  60, 
78.)  He  held  the  sheriffalty  of  Cumberland 
in  31  Henry  U.  and  two  followinj?  years. 

On  the  fine  he  is  styled  '  dapifer  regis,' 
an  office  which  he  held  with  Hugh  Bardolf. 
It  is  not  improbable  that  they  were  dapifers 
of  Normandy,  since  an  allowance  was  made 
to  them  in  the  Norman  Roll  of  that  year  for 
100/.  disbursed  for  the  king's  expenses  when 
hewasatGisors.  (^fadoXyl.l6S^  His  death 
occurred  about  1190.    (Baronage,  i.  078.) 

MOBOAN,  Hamon,  although  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  who  actually  fixed  the  | 
assize  of  the  county  of  Hants  m  20  Henry 
II.,  1174,  by  virtue  of  the  writ  of  Richard 
de  Luci,  aoes  not  seem  to  have  been 
originally  appointed,  the  words  '  qui  fuit  in 
loco  constabularii '  being  added  to  nis  name. 
(MadojCy  L  125.)  The  constable  at  that 
time  was  either  Henry  or  Mabel,  sons  of 
Milo  de  Gloucester,  Earl  of  Hereford. 

MOBOAN,  Francis^  is  frequently  con- 
founded with  the  under-mentioned  Richard 
Moi^an.  They  were  not  even  of  the  same 
family.  That  of  Francis  was  settled  at 
Kingsthorpe  in  Northamptonshire,  in  which 
county  he  was  bom.  Ilis  legal  training 
took  place  in  the  Middle  Temple,  where  he 
was  reader  in  1553.  He  was  advanced  by 
Queen  Mary  to  the  degree  of  the  coif  on 
October  16,  1555 ;  and  nis  elevation  to  the 
judgeship  of  the  Queen'sBench  did  not  occur 
till  January  23,  1558  (Bugdale's  Orig,  128, 
217 ;  Dyer,  158),  more  than  eighteen  months 
after  the  death  of  his  namesake  the  chief 
justice.  He  survived  his  appointment  for 
seven  months  only,  during  a  great  part  of 
which  he  was  prevented  by  illness  from  act- 
ing, and  died  on  August  10  in  the  same  year. 
His  funeral  monument  is  in  the  church 
of  Nether  Heyford  in  Northamptonshire. 

He  married  Anne,  the  daughter  of 
Christopher  Pemberton,  and  both  his  sons 
died  without  male  issue.  {Bridges^  North- 
iimjvtonshire,  i.  521 ;  Baker's,  i.  40, 183-189.) 

MOBOAN,  Richard,  of  whose  family  no 
certain  account  is  given,  was  admitted  at 
Lincoln's  Inn  in  1523,  and  called  to  the 
bar  in  1520.  He  became  reader  in  1542, 
and  again  in  1546,  when  he  was  summoned 
to  take  the  degree  of  the  coif.  He  was 
elected  recorder  of  Gloucester  in  1546,  and 
was  returned  member  for  that  city  in  both 


MORLAKD 


463 


the  parliaments  of  Edward  VI.  His  name 
occurs  occasionally  in  Plowden's  Reports, 
but  he  does  not  appear  to  have  acquired 
any  eminence  as  an  advocate,  his  religion, 
wfiich  was  Roman  Catholic,  perhaps  opera- 
ting to  the  injury  of  his  practice. 

Attached  no  doubt  by  tiiis  tie  to  the 
family  of  the  Princess  Mary,  he  was  com- 
mitted to  the  Fleet  in  JIarch  1551  for 
hearing  mass  in  her  chapel  (Stn/pe's  Cran^ 
mer,  ii.  233)  ;  and  on  Kmg  Edward's  death, 
in  July  1553,  he  was  among  the  first  of 
those  who,  disregarding  the  proclamation 
of  Lady  Jane  Grey  as  queen,  immediately 
joined  the  princess  at  Kenninghall  Castle 
m  Norfolk.  He  did  not  wait  long  for  his 
reward  for  this  early  proof  of  his  devotion. 
In  the  same  month  he  acted  as  one  of  the 
commissioners  to  hear  Bishop  Tunstall's 
appeal  against  his  conviction  (Bgmer,  xv. 
334),  and  on  September  5  was  raised  to 
the  office  of  chief  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas  and  knighted. 

One  of  the  earliest  commissions  he  was 
named  upon  was  that  for  the  trial  of  Lady 
Jane  Grey  on  November  13,  when  she 
pleaded  guilty,  and  was  condemned  by  him 
to  buraed  alive  on  Tower  Hill,  or  beheaded, 
as  the  queen  should  please.  (4  Report  Puh, 
Bec.f  App,  ii.  238.)  Morgan  remained  chief 
j  ustice  lor  nearly  two  years  after  this,  his  suc- 
cessor, Sir  Robert  Brooke,  being  appointed 
on  October  8,  1555.  His  death,  however, 
did  not  take  place  till  the  following  year, 
when  he  was  buried  on  June  2,  at  St. 
Magnus's,  London  Bridge.  (Machyiis  Diary, 
106.)  His  removal  from  the  bench  before 
his  death  gives  some  weight  to  the  story 
that  he  became  mad  from  the  bitter  re- 
membrance of  the  dreadful  sentence  he  had 
pronounced  upon  the  Lady  Jane,  and  that  in 
nis  raving  he  cried  continually  to  have  her 
taken  away  from  him.     (Holinshedf  iv.  23.) 

XOBIN,  Ralph,  was  an  officer  of  the 
Exchequer,  and  seems  to  have  been  a  care- 
less keeper  of  the  treasure,  as  Adam  de 
Sanford  accounts  for  him  on  the  roll  of 
1  Richard  I.  for  five  marks  of  the  money 
from  Winchester  which  were  deposited  in 
the  castle  at  Northampton,  and  lost.  (Pipe 
Roll,  34.)  In  2  and  3  Jolm  he  acted  as  a 
iusticier  in  the  country,  when  fines  were 
levied  before  the  court  In  the  first  of  these 
years  he  was  appointed  sheriff  of  Devon- 
shire; but  in  4  John  he  was  ordered  to 
deliver  up  the  castle  of  Exeter  to  William 
Briwer,  for  whom,  in  7  John,  he  accounts 
for  that  county.  (Rot.  Chart.  100 ;  Rot. 
Pat.  12  ;  Madox,  i.  276.)  Fuller  says  that 
he  held  the  same  office  for  Northampton- 
shire in  30  Ilenrv  U. 

XOBLAHD,  WILLIAM,  held  the  office  of 
master  of  the  Rolls  only  during  the  last 
two  months  of  the  temporary  restoration 
of  Henry  VI.,  between  February  12  and 
April  29, 1471.    He  had  previously  beep 


464 


HORTDiEB 


one  of  the  masters  in  Chancery,  and  after 
Edward's  re-conquest  of  the  throne  he  fell 
back  into  his  former  place,  acting  like  his 
brethren  as  a  receiver  of  petitions  in  par- 
liament until  4  Henry  VII.  {Hot  Pari. 
Ti.  ie7-409.) 

In  February  1470  he  was  installed  dean 
of  Windsor,  but  was  deprived  in  October 
1471,  a  few  months  after  Edward's  return. 
(Le  Neve,  375.) 

XOBTIKSB,  William  de,  probably  one 
of  the  many  collateral  branches  of  the  noble 
families  of  Mortuomari,  was  one  of  the  jus- 
tices itinerant  appointed  in  20  Edward  I., 
1292,  for  the  northern  counties,  and  in 
the  thirty-second  year  acted  as  a  justice 
of  assize  in  ten  of  the  inland  counties.  In 
the  following  year  ho  was  named  a  re- 
ceiver of  the  petitions  of  Ireland  and  Guern- 
sey, in  the  parliament  held  at  Westminster 
in  September.  (Rot  Pari  i.  150.)  During 
the  reign  of  Edward  II.  he  continued  to 
act  as  a  justice  itinerant,  and  to  be  sum- 
moned as  such  to  parliament  till  the  ninth 
year.  (Pari  WrAs,  ii.  1205.) 
*  MOBTOV,  John  (ARCHBisnop  op  Can- 
tebbtjry),  was  bom  either  at  Bere  Hegis, 
or  at  Milbome  St  Andrew,  in  the  county 
of  Dorset,  places  not  above  three  miles 
apart  He  was  the  son  of  Richard  Morton, 
ofa  very  ancient  Nottinghamshire  family. 
One  of  the  archbishop's  brothers  was  an- 
cestor of  a  baronet  created  in  1019,  but 
whiwe  male  descendants  failed  in  1698. 

John  Morton  was  educated  in  Ceme 
Abbey,and  he  is  even  said  to  have  been  for 
some  time  a  monk  there.  It  is  certain, 
however,  that  he  was  sent  to  Balliol  Col- 
lege, Oxford,  where  ho  took  the  degree  of 
doctor  in  both  laws.  His  conduct  and 
learning  caused  him  to  be  appointed  one  of 
the  commissaries  of  the  imiversity  in  1446, 
and  moderator  of  the  civil  law  school.  In 
1453  he  was  made  principal  of  Peckwater 
Inn,  and  in  1404  he  was  advanced  to  the 
head  of  the  university  as  chancellor. 

Commencing  his  public  career  as  an  ad- 
vocate in  the  Court  of  Arches,  he  soon  at- 
tracted the  notice  of  Archbishop  Bourchier, 
to  whose  fiiendship  and  estimation  of  his 
talents  he  owed  several  of  his  advance- 
ments in  the  Church  and  the  state.  In 
1450,  while  that  prelate  still  held  the 
Great  Seal,  Morton  was  placed  about  the 
person  of  Edward  Prince  of  Wales,  son  of 
Henry  VI.,  as  his  chancellor  (Cal  Rot,  Pat, 
297),  and  was  also  made  clerk  or  master  in 
Chancery. 

His  ecclemastical  preferments  were  nu- 
merous. Besides  several  prebends  and 
livings,  he  was  from  1474  to  1477  succes- 
sively instituted  into  four  archdeaconries — 
those  of  Winchester,  Huntingdon,  Berks, 
and  Leicester  {Le  iV>i'«)— some  of  which 
he  retained  till  his  elevation  to  the  epis- 
copal bench. 


MORTON 

On  the    dethronement   of  Heuiy  VL, 
neither  his  clerical  nor  official  character 
prevented  him  from  joining  his  nnfortunate 
sovereign  in  the  field  of  Towton,  on  Palm 
Sunday  1401.    He  escaped  from  the  battle, 
and    acconopanied     Queen    Margaret   to 
Flanders.    Beyond  his  being  among  those 
who  were  attainted  of  high  treason  in  the 
parliament  of  the  following  Novemher,  he 
IS  not  mentioned  durinj|[  the  first  ten  yean 
of  Edward^s  reign,  nor  m  the  short  restom- 
tion  of   Henry  VI.    The  tragical  eventi 
which  soon  after  occurred  having  left  do 
immediate  representative  of  the  house  of 
Lancaster,  jSlorton  sued  for  and  obtained 
his  pardon  in  July  1471,  with  the  reveml 
of  his  attainder  in  October  of  the  foUowiiv 
year.    (^Rot.  Pari,  v.  477,  480,  vi.  26.)   h 
IS  not  improbable  that  his  restoration  to 
roval  favour  was  as  much  owing  to  Kin^ 
Edvrard's  admiration  of  his  constancr  to 
the  fallen  fortunes  of  Henry,  as  to' the 
intercession     of    his    friend    Archbishop 
Bourchier ;  for  in  less  than  a  year  after  his 
pardon  he  was  appointed  master  of  the 
Rolls,  his  patent  neing  dated  March  161 
1472.    In  1473  the  Great  Seal  was  seTenl 
times  deposited  with  him  as  keeper;  and 
at  the  end  of  that  year  he  was  sent  with 
Sir  Thomas  Montgomery  on  an  embaasr  to 
Nuys  in  Germany,  then  under  si^  to 
negotiate  a  treaty  with  the  Duke  of  Bo^ 
gimdy.     (Paston  Letters^  ii.  78,  90.) 

There  is  a  second  patent  to  him  as  master 
of  the  Bolls,  dated  May  2, 1475,  more  thsn 
three  years  after  his  first  appointment  On 
comparing  the  two,  the  cause  of  this  re- 
newal seems  to  be  a  doubt  he  entertained 
whether  the  grant  in  the  first  patent  of  ths 
Domus  Conversorum,  *pro  habitations  soi,' 
did  not  prevent  him  from,  residing  in  anr 
other  place,  as  the  only  variation  in  the 
second  patent  is  in  reference  to  that  house, 
the  custody  of  which  was  then  granted  to 
him  ^  per  se  vel  per  sufficientem  depatanua 
suum,  sive  sumcientes  deputatoe  boos.' 
Soon  after  this.  King  Edward  revived  his 
claim  to  the  crown  of  France ;  and  Di« 
Morton  was  one  of  the  negotiators  of  the 
treaty  by  which  Louis  XI.  stopped  the  in- 
vasion fiy  gjiving  to  the  English  king  an 
annual  pension,  and  distributing  laTge  sums 
among  the  most  powerful  in  his  court,  of 
which  Dr.  Morton,  with  such  examples 
before  him,  deemed  it  no  disgrace  to  be  a 
participator.  {Cal,  Rot,  Pat.  321 ;  Bymer, 
xii.  46,  48;  Turner,  iii.  855.) 

If  there  was  any  previous  doubt  enter- 
tained by  the  king  m  reference  to  Marton's 
loyalty,  it  is  manifest  that  it  was  oov 
entirely  dissipated.  The  earUeet  oppor- 
tunitv  was  taken  to  advance  him  in  t^ 
Church.  Bishop  William  Gray  M  Mk 
been  dead  above  four  days  en  ]urtBBM% 
by  the  king^s  request,  elected  »-  > 

ceseor  in  the  see  of  Ely  on  Ai  ^ 


MORTON 

On  January  0, 1479,  he  resigned  the  master- 
flhip  of  the  Rolls  to  his  nephew  Robert 
Morton,  for  whom  he  had  procured  the 
grant  in  reversion  nearly  two  years  before. 
{Bymery  ii.  67.) 

During  the  remaining  four  years  of  Ed- 
ward's reign  the  new  bishop  quietly  per- 
foonned  his  episcopal  duties ;  and  the  king*s 
confidence  in  his  prudence  and  attachment 
is^  said  to  have  been  further  evidenced  by 
his  making  him  one  of  the  executors  of  his 
will,  of  which,  however,  no  record  has 
been  discovered.    That  this  was  so,  and 
that  he  was  therefore  supposed  to  feel  a 
deTOted  interest  in  Edward  s  infant  family, 
is  rendered  probable  by  the  violent  conduct 
of  the  Protector  Richard  towards  him,  for 
which    no    other    reason    appears.      The 
young  king*s  council  had  been  summoned 
on  the  13th  of  June,  to  deliberate  on  the 
coronation ;  and  the  protector,  attending  it, 
bad  courteously  requested  the  bishop  to  let 
bin  have  some  strawberries  from  his  garden 
in  Holbom  for  his  dinner,  and  haa  then 
ntired.    Shortly  afterwards  he  returned, 
nd  that  furious  scene  which  terminated  in 
tbe  hurried  execution  of  I^rd  Hastings  was 
performed,  Bishop  Morton  and  the  Inmate 
jrfYork  being  immediately  arrested,  and 
imprisoned  in  the  Tower.     The   petition, 
however,  of  the  university  of  Oxford  pro- 
cured his  release  from  tliat  fortress,  and 
«e  was  sent  to  Brecon  under  the  wardship 
of  the  Duke   of  Buckingham.     On  that 
liobleman's  subsequent  discontent  and  re- 
^bement  to  Brecon,  the  bishop  contrived  to 
^de  into  his  confidence ;  and  netwoon  them 
they  concocted  the  plan  of  raising  the  Earl 
Of  Kichmond  to  the  throne,  and  uniting  the 
two  factions  of  York  and  Lancaster  by  the 
QuuTiage  of  the  earl  with   Elizabeth,  the 
^dest  daughter  of  the  late  King  Edward. 
fie  urged  nis  dismissal,  under  the  pretence 
Uiat  by  his  presence  in  Ely  he  could  assist 
the  project ;  but  the  duke  would  not  part 
^th  so  wise  and  politic  an  adviser.    The 
bishop  therefore  contrived  his  o^ti  escape, 
Jnd,  obtaining?  a  supply  of  money  in  Ely, 
Unmediately  joined  the  Earl  of  Richmond 
^H  Flanders.     The    duke's    capture,    and 
Sudden  execution  on  November  2,  quickly 
f<dlowed;  and  the  bishop,  in  the  parliament 
of  January,  was  deprived  of  all  his  posses- 
sions.   fJ^trf.  iV;r/.  \'i.  24r,,  2.50,  273.)     The 
^•rl    of   Richmond's    fleet    having    been 
Scattered  by  a  storm,  it  was  not  till  nearly 
two  years   afterwards  that  his  hopes  of 
Acquiring  the  English  crown  were  realised 
Vy  the  defeat  of  Richard  at  Bosworth,  on 
^imist  22, 148j). 

During  the  interval  Bishop  Morton  had 
remained  in  Flanders,  and  nad  been  of 
great  service  to  Richmond  in  advising  him 
of  Richard's  projects  against  him.  The 
eari  had  not  long  assumed  the  crown,  with 
the  title  of  Henry  VII.,  ere  he  summoned 


MORTON 


465 


the  bishop  to  England,  and,  admitting  him 
into  the  council,  loaded  him  with  favours. 
His  attainder  being  reversed  in  the  first 
parliament,  he  was  constituted  lord  chan- 
cellor on  March  6,  148G ;  and  in  July,  on 
the  death  of  Cardinal  Bourchier,  the 
temporalities  of  the  see  of  Canterbury' 
were  placed  in  his  custody  during  the 
vacancy,  in  preparation  for  his  own  elec- 
tion to  the  primacy,  which  immediately 
followed,  the  papal  l)ull  of  translation  being 
dated  on  October  ($.  (Rt/mer,  xii.  302, 317.) 
Thus  placed  in  possession  of  the  highest 
oflices,  both  in  Church  and  state,  he  re- 
tained them  during  the  remainder  of  his  life. 

As  a  minister  of  tbe  former,  one  of  his 
first  eflforts  was  directed  to  the  reformation 
of  the  priests,  who,  living  in  luxurious  extra- 
vagance, were  guilty  of  drunkenness  and 
incontinence,  and  even  worse  crimes.  The 
dissolute  life  led  in  the  monasteries  w&s 
the  next  object  of  his  attention,  and  the 
laxity  of  morals  and  general  profligacy  of 
the  monks  arc  incontestably  proved  by  his 
letter  to  the  abbot  of  St  Alban's.  His 
strenuous  exertions  in  pursuing  his  eccle- 
siastical reforms  naturally  produced  hostility 
on  the  part  of  those  attacked,  and  were 
even  opposed  by  some  of  the  bishops.  Con- 
spiracies formed  against  his  life  werc  said 
to  have  occasioned  the  passing  of  the 
statute  3  Henry  VII.  c.  14,  making  such 
an  oflence  against  any  of  the  king's  servants 
felony.  His  energj-,  however,  was  sup- 
ported by  the  king,  and  approved  bv  tno 
pope,  bv  whom  he  was  rewarded  with  the 
cardinal's  lint,  with  the  title  of  St  Athana- 
sius,  in  141*3. 

As  a  minister  of  the  crown,  historians 
differ  as  to  his  character,  some  asserting 
him  to  be  the  author  of  Henry's  oppressive 
measures,  and  others  vindicating  him  from 
the  charge  by  showing  that  after  his 
death  the  king  did  not  diminish  his  seve- 
rity. The  former,  in  support  of  their  views, 
cite  the  argument  he  used  to  the  imwilling 
to  enforce  the  *  benevolence ' — a  dilemma 
which  received  the  name  of  the  Bishop's 
Fork  or  Crutch,  and  which  Fuller,  with 
his  usual  quniutness,  describes  as  *  perswad- 
ing  prodiffuls  to  part  with  their  money 
1)ecause  thei/  did  spend  it  mast,  and  the 
covetous  because  they  might  spare  it  best ;  so 
making  both  extreams  to  meet  in  one 
medium^  to  supply  the  king's  necessities.* 
The  latter  declare,*  on  the  contrary,  that,  so 
far  from  encouraging,  he  endeavoured  to 
soften  and  restrain  the  king.  The  truth 
probably  lies  something  between  the  two 
extremes.  The  haughtiness  of  his  manners 
would  make  him  impopular ;  but  his  wis- 
dom and  eloquence,  his  zeal  and  discretion 
(which  all  allow  him),  must  have  secured 
the  fevour  of  his  sovereign ;  while  hie  loyal 
devotion  to  the  family  he  had  served  (not 
leaving  it  till  its  total  extinction),  and  his 

u  n 


466 


MORTON 


successful  efforts  to  terminate  the  civil  war 
which  had  so  long  distracted  the  kingdom^ 
are  claims  on  the  admiration  of  posterity 
which  cannot  fail  to  be  acknowledged. 

After  presiding  over  the  province  of 
Canterbury  for  fourteen  years,  ne  died  on 
September  13,  1500,  at  his  palace  of  Knoll 
in  Kent,  whence  his  remains  were  removed 
for  interment  in  Canterbury  Cathedral. 

To  both  his  dioceses  he  was  a  liberal 
benefactor,  restoring  their  cathedrals  and 
repairing  their  palaces,  and  executing  in 
Ely  a  work  of  public  utility  in  draining  the 
fens,  by  a  cut  called  the  New  Leame,  or 
Morton's  Leame,  more  than  twelve  miles 
long.  The  poor  were  not  forgotten  by 
him,  either  in  his  life  or  his  testamentary 
remembrances,  and  both  the  imiversities 
were  partakers  of  his  bounty.  {Godwin, 
ISO,  269 ;  Athen.  Oxon.  ii.  083 ;  Htdchinis 
Dorset,  i.  478 ;  HoUnshed,  iiL  404,  &c. ; 
Turner^  iv.  109, 135.) 

XOBTOH,  Robert  (Bishop  of  Worces- 
ter), was  the  son  of  Sir  Howland  Morton, 
of  Thwining  in  Gloucestershire,  who  was 
a  younger  brother  of  the  above  Archbishop 
John  Morton.  To  that  celebrated  prelate 
he  was  probably  indebted  for  his  advance- 
ment in  the  Church,  and  to  the  judicial 
position  he  filled ;  for  there  is  nouiing  in 
nis  history  which  would  give  him  a  per- 
sonal claim  to  either.  His  uncle,  previous 
to  his  elevation  to  the  episcopal  bench,  had 
procured  for  Robert,  on  May  30,  1477,  a 
grant  in  reversion  of  the  mastership  of  the 
Rolls  on  his  death  or  resignation.  The 
latter  contingency  occurred  on  his  promo- 
tion to  the  oishopric  of  Ely,  and  Robert 
took  possession  of  the  office  on  January  9, 
1470.  He  also  succeeded  his  unde  in  the 
archdeaconry  of  Winchester. 

During  the  four  remaining  years  of  the 
rei^  of  Edward  IV.,  and  the  few  weeks  of 
which  that  of  Edward  V.  consisted,  Robert 
Morton  preserved  his  place ;  but  no  sooner 
had  his  uncle,  then  Bishop  of  Ely,  become 
suspected  of  implication  in  the  Duke  of 
Buckingham's  conspiracy  against  Richard, 
than  his  supposed  crime  was  visited  upon 
Robert,  who  was  at  once  superseded  by 
Thomas  Barowe,  on  September  22, 1483. 

On  the  termination  of  the  usurper's  short 
career,  Thomas  Barowe  retired  firom  the 
mastership  of  the  Rolls,  as  an  intruder,  and 
Robert  Morton  was  of  course  reinstated. 
He  was  named  as  one  of  the  commissioners 
to  perform  the  office  of  steward  at  Henry's 
coronation  (Ht/mer,  xii.  277),  and  he  seems 
to  have  been  otherwise  actively  employed 
in  the  king's  affairs,  since  that  is  stated  to 
be  the  reason  why  his  request  to  have  a 
partner  in  his  office  of  master  of  the  Rolls 
was  complied  with.  He  and  William  EUot 
accordingly  received  a  joint  appointment 
for  their  lives  and  that  of  the  longest  liver, 
by  patent  dated  November  Id,  1485.    On 


MORTON 

October  16  in  the  following  year  he  was 
advanced  to  the  bishopric  of  Worcester. 
Having  then  resigned  the  mastership  of 
the  RoUs,  for  the  next  ten  years  he  per^ 
formed  the  duties  of  his  prelacy  in  a  quiet 
and  unobtrusive  manner.  He  died  (be- 
tween three  and  four  years  before  his  unids] 
in  the  first  week  of  May  1497,  and  wn 
buried  in  St.  PauFs  Cathedral. 

It  is  curious  that  about  six  weeks  befbn 
his  death  he  deemed  it  necessary  to  obtaii 
a  charter  of  general  pardon  for  all  offenca 
he  had  in  any  way  committed.  (Hymar, 
xii.  648.)  This  was,  no  doubt,  applied  fa 
by  the  cautious  recommendation  of  tfai 
archbishop,  for  the  purpose  of  securing  the 
property  of  his  dying  nephew  from  those 
extortions  to  which  too  many  in  that  reign 
were  compelled  to  submit,  under  the  pre- 
tence of  breaches  of  unrepealed  but  ouo- 
lete  laws,  the  power  of  enforcing  wliich 
had  been  revived  by  a  statute  of  the  pie- 
ceding  vear.  (  Godwin,  467 ;  Le  Neve,  290^ 
208 ;  iSte^.  Realm,  v.  475.) 

XOBTOV,  William,  was  great-grandsoB 
of  Sir  Rowland  Morton,  one  of  the  mastea 
of  requests  in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIIL,  md 
son  of  James  Morton  of  Clifton,  in  tl» 
parish  of  Seveme  Stoke  in  Worcestershire^ 
Dy  Jane,  daughter  of  William  Codi,  of 
Shillwood  in  the  same  county.  (  ViMm 
Worcester,  1634.)  Educated  at  SidiMj 
Sussex  College,  Cambridge,  he  took  tl» 
degrees  of  B.  A.  and  M.  A.  in  1622  and  163o^ 
and  was  admitted  into  the  1  nner  Temple.  He 
was  called  to  the  bar  in  1630,  and  is  men* 
tioned  in  Croke's  Reports  in  16.S9.  Thi 
troubles  immediately  succeeded  thatdsto^ 
when  the  young  barrister  exchanged  hit 
gown  for  the  sword  and  joined  the  king, 
who  conferred  on  him  the  honour  of  knidit- 
hood.  He  served  as  lieutenant-colond  h 
Lord  Chandos*s  regiment  of  horse,  and  wii 
entrusted  with  the  government  of  his  loid- 
ship*8  castle  at  Sudeley  when  it  was  at- 
tacKed  in  1644  by  the  parliamentary  genenl 
Waller;  and  bemg  betrayed  by  an  officer 
of  the  garrison,  he  was  made  prisoner  and 
sent  to  the  Tower.  Clarendon  says  fir. 
489)  that  <  he  had  given  so  frequent  teid* 
mony  of  his  signal  courage  in  several  le- 
tions,  in  which  he  had  received  mu^ 
wounds  both  by  the  pistol  and  the  vwsA, 
that  his  mettle  was  never  suspected,  and  bii 
fidelity  as  little  questioned ;  and  after  nuaj 
years  of  imprisonment,  sustained  vnth  gnit 
firmness  and  constancy,  he  lived  to  reoeiit 
the  reward  of  his  merit,  after  the  retnni  d 
the  king.'  Some  years  after  the  end  of  tin 
war  he  was  released,  and  resumed  hif  p^ 
fessioU)  probably  confining  himself  to  CUB* 
ber  practice. 

He  was  made  a  bencher  of  bb  ai  k 
1659,  and  within  a  few  days 
storation  was  munmoned  to  ' 
ofthecoi£    Inl662he 


MOTELOW 

of  Gloucester,  and  was  appointed  '  consi- 
liarius '  to  the  dean  and  chapter  of  Wor- 
cester. In  July  1663  be  was  created  king's 
Serjeant,  and  on  November  23, 1665,  he  was 
nominated  a  jud&re  of  the  King's  Bench. 
This  position  he  filled  respectably  for  nearly 
seven  years,  and  had  the  good  fortune  to 
avoid  censure,  but  was  the  terror  of  high- 
waymen ;  and  they  had  some  reason  so  to 
regard  him,  for  when  Claude  Duval,  the 
French  nage  of  the  Duke  of  Richmond,  took 
the  roaa,  and  was  after  many  wonderful 
escapes  at  last  captured  and  convicted,  the 
judge  prevented  the  mercy  of  the  crown 
being  extended  to  him  by  threatening  to 
resign  if  so  notorious  an  offender  was  al- 
lowed to  escape.  Duval  was  the  most 
popular  of  his  stamp,  and  an  especial  &- 
vourite  with  the  ladies,  to  one  of  whom  he 
returned  300/.  out  of  400/.  he  had  taken 
from  her,  upon  her  dancing  a  coranto  with 
him  on  the  neath  where  he  had  stopped  her 
coach.  Dames  of  high  rank  visited  him  in 
prison  and  interceded  for  his  life,  and  the 
good-natured  king  would  probably  have 
granted  his  pardon  but  for  the  interference  of 
the  j  udge.  (LordMacanlay^BEn^Umd,  L  383.) 
Sir  William  married  Annie,  daughter 
and  sole  heir  of  John  Smyth,  of  Kidlington 
in  Oxfordshire,  and  diea  in  the  summer 
vacation  of  1672. 

XOTELOW,  Hexrt  de,  appears  among 
the  advocates  in  the  Year  Books  from  18 
Edward  III.,  and  was  raised  to  the  bench 
of  the  Common  Pleas  on  July  4,  1367. 
Fines  were  not  acknowledged  before  him 
later  than  Easter  1361,  35  Edward  ILL 
{Dugdale't  Orig,  45.) 

MOTJBBAY,  Jonx  DE,  was  lineally  de- 
scended from  Robert  de  Moabray,  a 
voun^r  brother  of  the  ancestor  of  Mou- 
bray  Duke  of  Norfolk.  He  is  described 
as  of  Kirklington  in  Yorkshire,  and  had 
evidently  very  extensive  practice  as  an 
advocate  irom  17  Edward  III.,  attaining 
the  rank  of  kin^*s  Serjeant  in  the  28th 
year.  He  was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the 
<L'ommon  Pleas  on  July  11,  1359,  and  was 
soon  after  made  a  knight  of  the  Bath. 
The  fines  acknowledged  before  him  extend 
to  1373.     (Dugdale's  Grig.  45, 103.^ 

He  married  Margaret,  sister  of  Sir  Alex- 
ander Percy,  of  Kildare.  {Testam,  Ebor, 
loS ;  XoteA  and  Queries,  2nd  S.  xi.  203.) 

XOTLE,  Walter,  acquired  the  manor 
and  largo  demesnes  of  Stevenstone  in 
Devonshire  by  his  marriage  with  Mar- 
garet, the  heiress  of  that  property.  He 
probably  was  bom  in  Cornwall,  as  his 
father,  Henry,  was  the  third  son  of  Tho- 
mas Moyle,  of  Bodmin.  He  was  after- 
wards established  at  Eastwell  in  Kent,  and 
was  named  a  commissioner  in  that  county 
in  33  Henry  VI.,  1454,  to  raise  money  for 
the  defence  of  Calais.  (Acts  Privy  CotmciL 
vi.  239.) 


MUCEGROS 


467 


He  is  said  to  have  been  a  reader  at  Gray's 
Inn.  In  1443  he  was  called  to  the  degree 
of  the  coi^  and  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the 
king's  Serjeants  in  1454.  (Eat.  Pari.  y.  240.) 
On  July  9,  1454^  he  was  constituted  a 
judge  of  the  Common  Pleas,  where  he 
act^  for  the  next  seventeen  years,  ex- 
tending through  the  remaining  portion  of 
Henry  s  reign,  the  first  ten  years  of  that 
of  Edward  IV.,  and  the  six  months  in 
1470-1  during  which  Henry  reassumed  his 
seat  on  the  throne.     (Dtigdale's  Orig.  46.^ 

Whether  his  non-appointment  on  tne 
return  of  Edward  IV.  was  occasioned  by 
the  act  of  the  king  or  his  own  retiremoit 
does  not  appear ;  probably  the  latter,  as  he 
must  have  been  then  considerably  advanced 
in  age.  He  died  before  Julj  31, 1480,  when 
his  will  was  proved.  In  it  he  grants  two 
acres  of  land  in  Eastwell,  in  trust  for  the 
use  of  the  church  there, '  in  recompense  of 
a  certain  annual  rent  of  21b6.  of  wax,  by 
me  wrested  and  detained  from  the  said 
church  against  my  conscience.*  The  estate 
of  Eastwell  was  carried  by  one  of  his 
female  descendants  in  marriage  to  the 
noble  family  of  the  Earl  of  Winchilsea. 
{Hasted,  vii.  392 ;  CoffiW«  Peerage,  iii.  379, 
yiii.  510 ;  Testam.  Vettut,  349.) 

XOTHS,  John  le,  is  first  mentioned 
when  he  was  fined  twenty  marks  in  26 
Henry  III.,  1242,  for  marrying  Isabella, 
one  of  the  heirs  of  Eustace  de  Fercles, 
without  the  king's  licence.  {Excerpt,  e 
Rot.  Fin,  ii.  4710  In  38  Henry  HI.  he 
was  sheriff  of  the  counties  of  Cambridge 
and  Huntingdon,  and  complaints  were 
made  against  him  that  he  took  money  at 
the  sheriff's  toum  contrary  to  the  custom 
in  those  counties;  and  also  that  he  re- 
ceived a  conveyance  of  sixty  acres  of  land, 
twenty-three  acres  of  meadow,  and  two 
messuages,  from  a  man  charged  with  the 
murder  of  his  father,  of  which  he  was  con- 
victed and  hanged.  {Ibid,  ii.  213 ;  Madox, 
i.  446.)  The  result  of  the  investigation 
does  not  appear. 

But  on  December  5,  1266,  he  and  Bo- 
bert  de  Fulham  were  constituted  justices 
of  the  Jews  {MadoXf  i.  234),  in  whioh 
office  he  did  not  long  remain,  for  at  the 
end  of  the  following  September  there  are 
entries  of  assizes  directed  to  be  held  before 
him  in  conjunction  with  William  de  Poy- 
wick,  which  extend  to  August  1207,  in  the 
counties  of  Hereford,  Gloucester,  and  Wor- 
cester; and  on  December  25,  1268,  his 
name  appears  as  the  king's  escheator  south 
of  Trent,  and  mandates  are  directed  to 
him  in  that  character  till  August  1, 1270. 
{Excerpt,  c  Pot.  Fin.  ii.  444, 457, 481-519.^ 
He  died  about  1274.  ( Cal.  Inqms.  p.m.  i.  54.) 
XiroSOBOS,  MiLO  DE,  is  not  otherwise 
mentioned  than  as  one  of  the  justices  itine- 
rant to  settle  the  assize  of  Herefordshire  in 
20  Henzy  H.,  1174  {Madox,  L  124),  and  ta 


468 


MUCEGROS 


sheriff  of  the  county  with.  William  Torell 
in  29  Henry  IL 

XirCEOBOS,  RiCHABD  DE;  was  the  son 
of  a  gentleman  of  the  same  name  who 
was  sheriff  of  Gloucestershire  in  2  and  3 
Richard  I.,  which  the  son  afterwards  held 
in  0  John^  p&yii^g  250/.  for  holding  it  at 
the  old  rent,  with  100/.  of  increase  for 
every  year.  (Hot,  de  Fin,  385.)  In  that 
year  ho  was  allowed  a  payment  of  ten 
marks  for  the  queen's  esroenses  during  her 
stay  at  Gloucester.  (Ilot.  Claus.  i.  96.) 
In  the  previous  year  the  castle  of  Glou- 
cester^ with  the  prisoners  and  hostages 
there,  was  committed  to  his  custody,  and 
soon  afterwards  the  castle  of  Chichester 
also.    (Rot.  Pat.  71,  74,  79.) 

HiB  employment  as  a  justicier  for  six 
years,  commencing  G  John,  1204,  appears 
from  Tarious  fines  acknowledged  oefore 
him.  (Hunter^ 8  Preface.)  During  the 
intestine  troubles  at  the  end  of  the  reign 
he  adhered  to  the  kin^,  and  was  rewarded 
lyy  a  mandate  to  WiUiam  the  earl  mar- 
shal to  provide  him  with  some  escheats 
from  the  lands  of '  the  king's  enemies,'  and 
by  a  grant  of  the  estate  of  John  Fitz- 
Richard.  He  was  still  alive  in  5  Henry 
III.     (Rot,  Claus.  i,  237,  243,  470.) 

XULSTOV,  Thomas  de,  was  the  son  of 
Lambert  de  Muleton,  whose  possessions 
were  at  a  place  of  that  name  in  Lincoln- 
shire, where  his  ancestors  for  three  genera- 
tions had  resided.  {Baronage^  i.  567.)  He 
was  in  7  John  and  the  two  following  years 
sheriff  of  that  county,  for  which  appoint- 
ment he  paid  a  fine  of  five  hundred  marks 
and  five  palfreys.  (Rot.  de  Fin,  338,  &c.) 
At  the  termination  of  his  office  he  seems  to 
have  offended  the  king,  since  Reginald  de 
Comhill  was  commanded  to  take  his  bodv 
and  imprison  him  in  Rochester  Castle  until 
he  had  paid  what  he  owed  to  the  crown  to 
the  last  penny.  (Rot.  Pat,  85.)  He  was 
not  long  in  disgrace,  but  in  12  John  accom- 
panied the  king  to  Ireland,  and  was  with 
him  in  14  John,  when  ho  appears  to  have 
been  responably  employed.  Ills  attesta- 
tion is  aupended  to  several  charters  during 
this  ana  the  two  following  years.  (Rot 
Chart.)  On  the  rising  of  the  barons  he 
joined  their  party,  and  was  unlucky  enough 
to  be  taken  prisoner  with  his  son  Alan  in 
the  castle  of  Rochester.  He  had  been  pre- 
viously excommunicated,  and  was  now  im- 
prisoned in  the  castle  of  Corff,  and  his  own 
castle  and  other  possessions  were  seized 
into  the  king's  hands,  but  soon  after  the 
accession  of  Ilenry  UI.  thev  were  fully  re- 
stored to  him  on  )iis  retummg  to  his  allegi- 
ance. (Rot.  Clam.  i.  241, 317;  Rot.  Pat,  164.) 

Early  in  the  reign  of  King  John  he  was 
married  to  the  daughter  of  Richard  Del- 
fliet  (Rot.  Cancell.  193),  on  whose  death 
he  contracted  a  second  marriage,  without  I 
^plying  for  the  king'a  licence,  with  Ada,  | 


MURDAC 

the  widow  of  Richard  de  Luci  of  Ene- 
mont,  and  daughter  of  the  before-noHoed 
Hugh  de  Moreville.  This  rashness  met  im- 
mediate punishment  in  the  seizure  of  lU 
his  lands  in  Cumberland,  which  were  odIj 
restored  by  the  ultimate  payment  of  a  huge 
fine  for  liis  transgresdon.  (Rot,  ClauLi 
354,  358,  366.^)  Bv  virtue  of  this  marriage 
he  obtained  the  ol&ce  of  forester  of  Cum- 
berland, which  was  confirmed  to  him  hj 
the  kmg.     (Ibid,  513,  532.) 

Holding  now  large  possessions  in  those 
parts,  he  was  in  3  Henry  II L,  1219,  tf- 
pointed  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  in  tae 
counties  of  Cumberland,  \Vestmoreland,aod 
Lancaster.  His  legal  abilities  were  probab^ 
brought  under  observation  by  this  appoint- 
ment, as  within  five  years  afterwards  ne  mi 
raised  to  the  bench  at  Westminster,  on  whidi 
he  continued  to  sit  until  nearly  the  doee  of 
his  life.  The  fines  acknowledged  before  him 
extend  from  Easter  1224  to  Easter  12S8. 
(Dttgdale's  Grig,  42.)  In  the  earHeryeui 
he  held  a  second  or  inferior  station ;  bat  is 
January  1227  he  was  placed  at  the  head  of 
one  of  the  commissions,  and  he  retained 
this  position  in  all  his  remaining  6kxS^ 
except  that  in  one  instance,  12^,  he  vii 
preceded  by  Stephen  de  Segrave,  who  tint 
was  Justiciarius  Aneliro.  In  1235  Dosdile 
inserts  him  among  the  justices  of  the  Coo- 
mon  Pleas,  the  expression  in  the  reeori 
being  '  Justiciarius  de  Banco ; '  and  he  addi^ 
'  Capitalis  ut  videtur,'  a  suggestion  difBcoh 
to  be  reconciled  with  the  position  ascribed 
to  Robert  de  Lexinton  about  the  same  pe- 
riod, the  more  especially  as  there  is  no  proof 
of  Thomas  de  Muleton's  acting  in  a  judidd 
character  after  that  year.  He  lived,  how- 
ever, till  1240. 

He  was  evidently  of  an  impetuous  di*- 
pa«ition,  somewhat  covetous  and  overbeff- 
mg,  and  disinclined  to  allow  anyobstidie 
to  stand  in  the  way  of  his  ambition.  Of  hii 
learning  in  the  laws  nothing  remains  for  u 
to  j  udge ;  but  the  proofs  of  his  charity  appMi 
in  his  pious  benetactions.  Bv  his  first  wife 
he  haa  three  sons,  one  of  wliom  obtained 
with  his  wife  Anabel,  a  daughter  of  lUchiid 
de  Luci,  the  barony  of  Egremont,  which  fidl 
into  abeyance  in  1334. 

By  his  second  wife,  Ada,  he  had  two  chil- 
dren— Julian,  who  married  Robert  le  ViTir 
sour;  and  Thomas,  who  succeeded  him,iid 
obtained  the  barony  of  Gillesland  ly  ^ 
marriage  with  Maud,  the  daughter  and  h^ 
of  Hubert  de  Vaux.  He  is  now  represented 
in  the  House  of  Lords  by  two  peerajpee- 
viz.,  Lord  Dacre  and  the  t^arl  of  Cariuki 

iniBDAC,  Hugh,  was  a  chaplain  of  Henq 
n.,  and  doubtless  of  the  same  haaSSj  ■ 
Ilenry  Murdac,  Archbishop  of  Yoric  B 
was  one  of  the  justices  itineii]|tMltatoil| 
the  king  at  the.  council  of  Wintf-^^  UH 
and  was  appointed  with  fir~  ~  V 

erdae  judicial  fonctjone  **  M 


MUfiDAC 

the  home  district,  in  which  he  acted  also  in 

the  following  year.    Madox  quotes  an  entry 

in  a  book  in  the  possession  of  the  dean  and 

chapter  of  London,  showing  that  he  was 

present  in  the  Exchequer  in  30  Henry  U., 

when  an  acknowledgment  as  to  certain  lands 

was  made  there.    In  the  next  year  he  had 

the  custody  of  the  abbey  of  Selby,  then  in 

the  king's  hands.    (Madoa-,  i.  138, 215,  ;300.) 

The  archdeaconry  of  Cleveland  was  given 

to  him  in  1200,  and  he  held  it  till  1204. 

(Le  iVtfirc,  328 ;  Hot  Chart,  103.) 

KIJBDAC,  Kalph,  appears  as  one  of  those 
present  in  the  Exchequer  on  an  acknow- 
ledgment relative  to  some  land  being  made 
there  in  30  Henry  II.,  1184,  immediately 
following  that  of  the  above  Hugh  Murdac 
(JMadox,  i.  215),  and  he  acted  as  a  justice 
itinerant  in  some  of  the  subsequent  years  of 
that  reign.  The  Pipe  EoU  of  1  Kichard  I. 
(35-194)  contains  proof  that  he  held  a  high 
{ilace  among  the  justices  itinerant  of  that 
year  also,  in  no  less  than  ten  counties.  He 
"was  sheriff  of  Derbyshire  and  Nottingham- 
shire from  27  Henry  II.  to  1  llichard  I.  In 
the  latter  reign  he  seems  to  have  contri- 
l>uted  some  ime  to  the  royal  coffers  ^pro 
lubendo  amore  Regis  Eicardi,'  an  arrear  of 
^GL  6<.  8r/.  being  charged  on  that  account 
mt  so  late  a  date  as  the  roll  of  11  John,  in 
the  county  of  Oxford.  (Madox,  i.  474.)  He, 
lioweyer,died  about  1  John,  and  the  custody 
<rf  his  land  and  heir  was  given  to  William 
firiwer.    (Roi.  de  Liberate,  13.) 

XUBBAY,  William  (Eabl  of  Mans- 
nxLD),  than  whom  there  never  has  been 
%  judge  more  venerated  by  his  contempo- 
nries,  nor  whose  memory  is  regarded  with 
fiieater  respect  and  aifection,  even  at  this 
Stance  of  time,  as  the  great  oracle  of 
law,  and  the  foimder  of  commercial  juris- 
pmdence,  was  the  fourth  son  of  David  the 
afth  Viscount  Stormont  and  third  Lord 
Salvaird,  being  one  of  fourteen  children 
Ixime  to  him  by  Margery,  daughter  of  David 
Seot  of  Scotstarvet,  of  the  noble  family  of 
Sncdeuch.    He  was  bom  at  his  father*s 
place  of  Scone,  near  Perth,  on  March  2, 
i704-5.    Educated  at  the  grammar  school 
at  Perth  till  he  was  fourteen  years  old,  he 
was  then  sent  to  Westminster  School  in 
Hay  1718,  and  was  elected  king*s  scholar  in 
the  next  year.    Here  his  proficiency  was  so 
^^t,  both  in  his  exercises  and  declama- 
tions, that  at  the  examination  in  1723  he 
was  placed  at  the  head  of  the  list  selected 
for  Christ  Church,  Oxford.  In  his  admission 
there  on  June  18  his  place  of  birth  is  mis- 
takenly written  '  Bath,'  owing  probably  to 
tlie  broad  pronunciation  of  the  word  '  Perth ' 
by  the  giyer  of  his  description.    Though  in- 
tended for  the  Church,  he  felt  a  natural  voc»- 
tion  for  the  bar,  in  which  he  was  conscious 
that  his  &ther  with  his  fourteen  children 
could  not  afford  to  indulge  him.     Fortu- 
nately for  the  world,  he  was  enabled  to  gra- 


MUBBAY 


469 


tify  his  inclination,  by  the  assistance  of  the 
first  Lord  Foley,  whose  son  had  formed  an 
intimacy  with  him  at  Westminster,  and  who 
had  in  his  visits  in  the  holidays  been  at  once 
taken  by  his  amiable  disposition  and  pro- 
misingabilities.  He  was  accordingly  entered 
at  Lincoln's  Inn  on  April  23,  1724.  In  both 
places  he  pursued  his  studies  assiduously. 
In  the  former,  besides  industriously  master- 
ing the  usual  academic  course,  he  especially 
devoted  himself  to  the  improvement  of  his 
natural  powers  of  oratory,  taking  Demos- 
thenes, and,  above  all,  Cicero  as  his  models. 
In  the  latter  his  sedulous  application  was 
successfully  employed  in  acquiring  that 
knowledge  of  practice  and  of  law  by  which 
he  was  enabled  so  soon  to  prove  himself  on 
accomplished  advocate,  and  to  use  his  elo- 
quence, not  in  mere  ornamentation,  but  in 
unravelling  the  contradictory  facts  and  the 
abstruse  points  of  the  cases  which  he  might 
have  to  conduct.  At  Oxford  he  took  his 
degree  of  B.A.  in  1727,  at  the  same  time 
gaining  the  prize  for  a  Latin  poem  on  the 
death  of  George  I. ;  and  in  June  1730  he 
became  M.A.,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  at 
Lincoln's  Inn  on  November  23. 

In  the  interval  between  his  two  degrees 
ho  familiarised  himself  with  the  courts  by 
frequenting  Westminster  Hall,  and  he 
practised  his  argumentative  and  rhetorical 
powers  by  discussing  knotty  questions  of 
law  at  a  debating  society.  As  a  relaxation 
from  his  severer  studies  he  amused  himself 
with  the  current  works  of  literature,  and 
by  associating  freely  with  that  class  to 
which  his  rank  and  nis  talents  gave  him  an 
easy  introduction.  Though  strictly  tem- 
perate in  his  habits,  Ik)swell  tells  us  that 
ho  sometimes  '  drank  champagne  with  the 
wits,*  introduced  probably  by  Alexander 
Pope,  with  whom  he  had  from  boyhood 
contracted  an  intimacy,  and  who  showed 
his  affection  for  his  young  friend  not  only 
by  devoting  some  lines  at  a^  early  period 
of  his  career  to  a  eulogistic  fusion  to  his 
merits,  and  even  by  dedicatinsp  to  him  the 
*  Imitation  of  the  First  Book  of  Horace,'  but 
also  by  teaching  him  to  add  grace  of  action 
to  the  charm  oi  his  voice.  On  one  occasion 
an  intimate  friend,  it  is  said,  surprised  him 
in  the  act  of  practising  before  a  glass,  with 
Pope  sitting  by  as  his  instructor. 

He  commenced  his  career  as  a  barrister 
in  the  Court  of  Chancery;  and  that  for  the 
first  eighteen  months  he  was  entirely  with- 
out adequate  encouragement,  as  has  been 
asserted,  seems  scorcely  probable,  since  he 
is  found  at  the  end  of  that  time  to  be  en- 

fagcd  in  no  less  than  three  appeals  in  the 
louse  of  Lords,  one  of  which  was  on  the 
all-absorbing  subject  of  the  South  Sea 
Bubble.  He  so  distinguished  himself  by 
his  arcumeuts  in  them  that,  whatever  may 
have  been  his  former  progress,  no  doubt  of 
his. advance  could  any  longer  exist    Not 


470 


HUBKAY 


onlj  'was  he  immediately  engaged  in 
numerouB  cases  before  tlie  same  auffust 
tribunal,  but  be  came  into  regular  emjpiloy- 
ment  in  Westminster  Hall,  where  his  rising 
fhme  was  universallT  recognised.  This  was 
fhlly  confirmed  by  nis  eloquent  defence  of 
Colonel  Sloper  in  an  action  of  crim,  con, 
brouffht  agamst  him  by  Theophilus  Gibber, 
and  Dy  his  argument  before  parliament 
miinst  the  bill  to  disfranchise  tiie  city  of 
^linburgh  on  account  of  the  Porteous 
riots,  in  gratitude  for  which  that  corpora- 
tion presented  him  with  the  freedom  of 
the  aty  in  a  gold  box.  The  dean  and 
chapter  of  Christ  Church  also  complimented 
him  with  the  nomination  of  a  student  in 
their  college,  in  acknowledgment  of  his 
successful  efforts  in  the  Court  of  Chan- 
cery on  a  question  of  much  importance 
to  them. 

In  November  1742,  soon  after  the  dis- 
solution of  Sir  Robert  Walpole's  ministry, 
he  was  mnde  solicitor-general,  and  entered 

farliament  as  member  for  Boroughbridge. 
le  held  the  post  of  solicitor  for  twelve 
years,  and  in  May  17M  succeeded  to  the 
place  of  attorney-general,  which  he  held 
for  two  years  more. 

His  success  in  the  House  of  Commons 
was  as  brilliant  as  it  was  at  the  bar. 
During  these  fourteen  years  he  continued 
to  sit  for  Boioughbridge,  and  from  his 
entrance  into  the  senate  till  the  hour  of  his 
removal  from  it  he  acquired  by  the  force  of 
his  arguments,  by  the  clearness  of  his 
expositions,  and  by  the  eloquence  in 
language,  manner,  and  action  in  which 
they  were  clothed,  an  undisputed  ascen- 
dency, out-shining  every  otner  speaker, 
except  his  chief  antagonist  and  rival  Mr. 
Pitt,  whem  he  equalled  in  everything  but 
the  power  of  invective.  To  him  the  Pel- 
ham  administration  wore  indebted  for  the 
most  effective  sup^x)!*!  of  their  measures; 
and  in  that  q£  the  Duke  of  Newcastle  he 
was  the  trusted  leader  and  almost  the 
entire  prop  of  the  government  When  the 
weakness  of  that  government  was  nearly 
overcome  by  a  powerful  opposition,  the 
death  of  Sir 'Dudley  Kyder,  chief  justice  of 
the  King's  Bench,  occurred;  and  so  essential 
to  the  existence  of  the  ministry  was  the 
continuance  of  the  attorney-general  deemed 
in  the  House  of  Commons  that,  though  Sir 
Dudley  died  in  May  1750,  the  office  was  not 
filled  up  till  November,  the  interval  being 
occupied  by  the  offer  to  Sir  William  of 
every  species  of  inducement  in  the  shape  of 
tellerships,  reversions,  and  a  large  pension, 
to  induce  him  to  forego  his  acknowledged 
xiffht  to  the  office.  Murray  however  resisted 
tS.  temptation,  and  at  last  was  obliged  to 
tell  the  duke  that,  if  not  immediately  ap- 
pointed chief  justice  and  created  a  peer,  he 
would  no  longer  sit  in  the  house  as  attome^- 
generaL    The  duke  was  obliged  to  submit. 


MURRAY 

but,  with  the  loss  of  hia  able  lieuteDint, 
was  soon  forced  to  resign  hia  command. 

In  the  exercise  of  his  official  dntiei  &» 
solicitor  and  attorney  general  he  bad  never 
outraged  popular  feeling  by  undue  aevezitr: 
and  against  the  few  proaecutiona  which  Le 
sanctioned,  or  his  manner  of  conduciing 
them,  no  possible  objection  could  be  ndsed. 
His  success  in  those  he  instituted  wast> 
be  attributed  to  his  rule  neyer  to  pvoaecut-; 
where  there  was  any  risk  of  failure.  In 
the  proceedings  against  those  implicated  b 
the  rebellion  of  1745  he  was  necenazily 
concerned  for  the  crown,  but  'waa  carefal 
to  avoid  everything  that  could  aflgravate 
the  crimes  of  the  prisoneia,  or  in&me  the 
passions  of  those  who  were  to  try  them. 
In  all  the  trials,  and  more  particuiariT  in 
that  of  Lord  Lovat,  he  exercised  a  d^p^ 
of  candour  and  humanity  which  drew  forth 
the  admiration  uf  all  his  hearers.  In  k- 
ference  to  that  rebellion  an  absurd  charge 
was  made  andnst  him,  that  he  had  in  hi^ 
youth  joined  some  Jacobite  friends  in  drinli- 
mg  the  health  of  the  pretender  on  his 
knees.  Although  the  King  treated  the 
imputation  with  the  contempt  that  it 
deserved,  the  folly  of  one  of  the  parde? 
implicated  forced    an  enquiry   before  the 

Srivy  coimcil,  in  which  Murray  iudignantlj 
enied  its  truth.  The  result  of  course  wa» 
a  complete  acquittal  from  every  port  of  it 
His  last  appearance  as  a  barrister  was  one 
of  the  most  graceful  of  his  life.  On  the 
ceremony  of  taking  leave  of  Lincoln's  Imt 
for  the  purpose  of  beinff  called  to  the  degree 
of  the  coif,  lie  delivered  a  farewell  address, 
in  which,  after  a  well-merited  and  eloquen; 
eulogy  of  Lork  Hardwicke,  the  chancellor 
under  whom  he  had  practised,  he  piiid  sn 
elegant  compliment  to  the  Hon.  Chazles 
Yorke,  the  treasurer,  who  had  delivered 
to  him,  with  warm  congratulations,  the 
customary  offering  of  the  society. 

He  received  his  appointment  as  lo^t 
chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench,  and  his> 
patent  of  creation  as  Lord  Mansfield  of 
Mansfield  in  the  countv  of  Nottingham,  on 
the  same  day,  November  8,  1750.  From 
that  date  for  the  long  period  of  thirty-two 
years  he  presided  over  his  court  with  such 
extraordinary  power  and  effidencv  that,  by 
his  leaming,  discrimination,  and  judgmoit, 
he  not  only  gained  the  admiration  of  all 
who  were  competent  to  appreciate  them,  but 
by  the  fairness  and  impartiality  of  his  de- 
cisions, and  by  the  patient  courtesy  of  hi^ 
manners,  his  private  virtues,  and  the  firm- 
ness he  displayed  in  txying  circumstances, 
he  lived  down  and  nullified  the  charges  and 
insinuations  which  jealousy  and  party  spirit 
at  one  time  raised  against  him.  He  intro- 
duced some  reforms  in  his  court,  and  re- 
moved some  impediments  in  its  practice, 
which  had  much  delayed  the  deosion  of 
the  causes  and  unnecessarily  increased  the 


MURR.VY 

expense  of  the  suitors ;  and  by  his  punctu- 
ality and  despatch  he  kept  down  all  accu- 
mulation of  arrears,  and  thus  was  enabled 
to  meet  the  vast  increase  of  business  which 
was  caused  by  the  advancinff  commerce  of 
the  country.  In  dealing  wi^  the  number^ 
less  cases  arising  from  this  increasing  com- 
merce, he  not  only  carefully  weighed  the 
justice  of  the  particular  claim,  but  laid  down 
the  principle  upon  which  all  similar  ques- 
tions should  be  in  future  decided,  and  in  the 
end  established  such  a  system  that,  in  the 
words  of  Mr.  Justice  BuUer,  he  acquired 
the  character  of  being  ^  the  founder  of  the 
commercial  law  of  the  country.'  Though 
his  decisions  both  in  this  branch  of  law,  and 
on  other  questions  in  reference  to  colonial 
and  international  principle,  are  most  cu- 
rious, satisfactor}'.  and  iustructiye,  a  detail 
of  them  would  fail  to  be  interesting.  But 
some  of  those  which  will  be  ever  connected 
with  his  name  deserve  to  be  commemorated. 
He  tirst  pronounced  that  a  slaye  once 
brought  into  England  became  free;  that 
Turks,  Hindoos,  and  others  of  different  faith 
from  our  own,  may  be  sworn  as  witnesses 
according  to  the  ceremonies  of  their  own 
religion ;  that  governors  of  English  proyinces 
are  amenable  in  English  courts  for  wrongful 
acts  done  while  governors  against  indi- 
yiduals ;  and  that  the  property  of  wrecks 
does  not  belone  to  tlie  king  or  his  grantee, 
where  it  can  be  identified  by  the  real  owner, 
although  no  living  thing  comes  to  shore 
with  the  wreck. 

Though,  besides  the  three  judges  whom 
he  found  on  the  bench  of  his  court,  there 
were  no  less  than  eight  who  took  their 
places  afterwards  as  his  colleagues,  it  is  a 
strong  evidence  of  the  soundness  of  his  law 
that  during  the  thirty -two  years  of  his  pre- 
sidency tliere  were  only  two  cases  in  which 
the  whole  bench  were  not  unanimous ;  and, 
what  is  still  more  extraordinar}',  two  only 
of  his  judgments  were  reversed  on  appeal; 
but  some  ot'them  were  not  entirely  approved  ' 
by  the  legal  community.  The  system  on 
which  he  acted  was  censured  as  introducing 
too  much  of  the  Koman  law  into  our  juris- 
prudence ;  and  he  was  charged  with  over- 
stepping the  boundar}'  between  equity  and 
law,  and  of  aIlo>\nng  the  principles  of  tlie 
former  to  operate  too  6ti*ongly  in  his  legal 
decisions.  IIow  far  these  criticisms  were 
iustitied  still  remains  a  question ;  but  recent 
legislation  proves  how  little  his  system  de- 
served censure.  I^rd  Thurlow  used  to  say 
that  Lord  Mansiield  was  'a  surprising 
man;  ninety-nine  times  out  of  a  hundred 
he  was  right  in  his  opinions  and  deci- 
sions ;  and  when  once  in  a  hundred  times 
he  was  wrong,  niuetv-nine  men  out  of  a 
hundred  would  not  discover  it.  He  was  a 
wonderful  man.' 

He  was  particularly  attentive  to  the  stu- 
dents who  attended*  his  courts  admittiDg 


MUItRAY 


471 


them  to  sit  on  the  bench  with  him,  and 
explaining  the  jioints  that  happened  to  be 
raised.  £i  his  time  the  king's  counsel  used 
the  same  courtesy  towards  the  young  aspi- 
rants, but  after  the  accession  of  Lord  Ken- 
yon  the  practice  was  discontinued  both  by 
the  bencn  and  the  bar. 

In  the  upper  house  of  parliament  he  shone 
with  as  much  brilliancy  as  he  had  done  in 
the  lower.  During  the  greater  part  of  his 
senatorial  life  the  '  Parliamentary  History ' 
contains  comparatiyely  few  of  his  speeches, 
because  the  prohibition  against  reporters 
was  rigidly  enforced.  But  tSose  whicn  have 
been  by  other  means  given  to  the  world 
amply  confirm  the  general  opinion  of  their 
elegance  and  effectiveness,  and  justify  the 
universal  admiration  which  they  elicited. 
His  contests  with  his  old  antagonist  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  the  Earl  of  Chatham, 
were  renewed  with  even  more  yirulence 
than  formerly,  and  when  they  were  expected 
to  occur  were  attended  by  crowds  desirous 
of  witnessing  the  gladiatorial  exhibition. 
Though  he  was  as  often  the  victor  as  the 
vanquished  in  these  trials  of  strength,  it 
would  have  been  better  for  his  fame  if  he 
had  more  strictly  confined  himself  to  ju- 
dicial questions.  However  transcendent  his 
talents,  political  controversy  should  be 
avoided  by  a  judge,  whose  decisions  should 
never  be  subjected  to  the  suspicion  even  of 
political  bias.  The  last  intended  display 
oetween  the  two  combatants  was  on  the 
subject  of  the  American  war  in  1778,  but 
was  prevented  by  the  fatal  seizure  of  the 
great  statesman  at  the  commencement  of  his 
address. 

Though  several  times  pressed  to  accept 
the  oilice  of  lord  chancellor,  he  persisted  m 
his  refusal  to  change  his  court,  from  his 
love  of  the  position  he  held  and  his  con- 
scious aptitude  for  his  duties,  as  well  as  from 
the  uncertainty  attendant  on  the  possession 
of  the  Great  Seal.  Soon  after  he  became 
chief  justice  he  by  virtue  of  that  office  re- 
ceived the  seal  of  chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer during  the  three  months'  vacancy 
occasioned  by  the  removal  of  Mr.  Legge,  but 
he  performed  no  other  than  its  formal  duties, 
ana  ten  years  after  he  again  temporarily 
held  that  office  on  the  death  of  the  Hon. 
Charles  Townshend.  On  the  establishment 
of  the  joint  ministry  of  Mr.  Pitt  and  the 
Duke  of  Newcastle  in  1757,  the  coalition 
between  whom  he  was  the  principal  instru- 
ment in  effecting,  he  consented  to  become, 
with  questionable  propriety,  one  of  the 
cabinet  council.  He  remained  so  for  some 
years ;  and  this  was  no  doubt  the  cause  of 
the  unpopularity  under  which  he  laboured 
in  the  early  part  of  the  reign  of  George  IU« — 
an  unpopularity  which  was  not  diminished 
by  the  suspicion  that  he  was  the  secret  ad- 
viser of  his  sovereign,  by  his  continued  de- 
fence of  ministerial  meaaores  in  the  Houae 


472 


MUKRAY 


of  Lords,  and  by  liis  acting  subsequently  for 
a  long  period  as  speaker  of  that  assembly — 
an  unpopularity  which  was  kept  alive  and 
greatly  increased  by  the  virulent  attacks 
made  against  him  by  Junius^  which  con- 
tinued till  that  bold, powerful,' and  impudent 
writer  was  in  1772,  by  means  vet  unknown, 
effectually  silenced.  Yet  during  the  whole 
period  his  fame  as  a  great  magistrate  was 
spreading  over  the  whole  of  Europe  as  well 
as  in  his  own  country ;  and  there  even  the 
populace  might  have  seen  his  disregard  of 
political  influence,  in  his  affirmation  of  the 
verdict  against  those  who  had  illegally 
acted  under  the  general  warrant  against  the 
*  North  Briton,'  and  in  his  reversal  of  the 
outlawry  of  the  demasrogue  Wilkes,  its  dis- 
reputable author.  Though  assailed  with 
abuse,  lampoons,  and  personal  threats,  the 
most  uncharitable  of  his  libellers  could  not 
but  be  impressed  by  the  noble  and  dignified 
speech  made  by  him  on  granting  that  re  versal. 

His  liberal  opinions  on  the  subject  of  re- 
ligion, and  the  {>rinciples  of  toleration  which 
he  advocated  in  all  cases  in  which  the 
question  arose,  whether  relating  to  Dis- 
senters or  Koman  Catholics,*  while  they 
raised  him  in  the  estimation  of  the  honest 
and  well-disposed,  had  a  contrary  effect  on 
the  bigoted  class  of  society,  by  whom  the 
old  story  of  his  beiug  a  Jacol^ite  was  re- 
vived, with  the  additional  stigma  of  his 
being  a  Jesuit  in  disguise.  The  sad  effect 
of  these  mistaken  notions  appeared  in  the 
disgraceful  No  Popery  riots  of  1780,  in 
which  he  was  not  only  personally  attacked 
and  insulted,  but  his  house  in  Bloomsbury 
Square,  containing  his  valuable  library,  was 
burnt  down  to  the  ground  by  the  mob. 
Nothing  more  tended  than  his  conduct  on 
that  occasion  to  establish  his  character,  and 
to  dissipate  and  overcome  the  prejudices 
against  him,  which  some  men  still  continued 
to  foster.  The  courage  also  which  he  dis- 
played when  the  houses  of  parliament  were 
threatened,  the  philosophic  calmness  with 
which  he  met  iiis  personal  calamity,  his 
generous  justification  of  ministers  in  calling 
m  the  military  to  quell  the  riots,  and  par- 
ticularly his  impartiality  and  total  absence 
of  resentment  in  the  trial  of  Lord  George 
Gordon,  whose  violent  harangues  had  first 
evoked  the  outbreak,  excited  universal  ad- 
miration, and  increased  the  respect  with 
which  ho  was  regarded. 

For  six  years  alter  this  event  he  continued 
to  exercise,  almost  without  a  day's  inter- 
mission, the  functions  of  his  high  office, 
when,  being  then  eighty-one  years  of  age, 
his  weakness  and  infirmity  prevented  him 
attending  the  court.  He  did  not  imme- 
diately resign,  but,  with  the  expectation  of 
being  enabled  still  to  act,  he  delayed  his  re- 
tirement for  nearly  two  years,  leaving  a  most 
efficient  substitute  to  perform  his  duties. 
Thia  was  Mr.  Justice  BuDer,  whom  he  hoped 


MUSARD 

to  see,  and  endeavoured  to  induce  the  mi- 
nister to  appoint,  his  successor.  But  when 
he  found  that  Mr.  Pitt  had  detennined 
otherwise,  and  that  his  declining  streiuth 
totally  prevented  him  from  again  takingms 
seat,  he  closed,  on  June  4,  1788,  a  leal 
career  which  had  extended  over  fifty-ei^ 
years,  twenty-six  as  an  advocate,  and  thirty- 
two  as  a  judge,  in  both  capacities  achievinfr 
such  a  cnaracter  as  few  can  equal,  and  none 
will  ever  surpass.  Both  branches  of  tlie 
profession  expressed  in  affecting  addreasM 
their  respect,  their  veneration,  their  attach- 
ment to  his  person,  and  their  regret  at  hii 
retirement— sentiments  in  which  the  whole 
community  imited. 

The  aged  lord  survived  for  nearly  fire 
years,  enjoying  life  at  his  beautiful  seat  at 
Caen  Wood,  near  Highgate,  in  social  and 
intellectual  converse,  and  with  unabated 
health  and  undecayed  memory,  bat  with 
increasing   feebleness,  till  his    exhausted 
frame  at  last  gave  way  on  March  20, 179S^ 
having  just  entered  the  eighty-ninth  year 
of  his  age.   He  was  buried  in  Westminsta 
Abbey,  in  the  same  grave  as  his  wife^ 
Lady'  Elizabeth  Finch,   daughter  of  tlie 
Earl  of  Winchilsea,  whom  he  had  manied 
in  17lVi,  and  who,  after  a  happy  union  rf 
forty-six  years,  had  preceded  him  by  nine 
years.    By  the  gratitude  of  one  of  those 
whom  he  had  benefited  by  his  advocacy  a 
splendid  monument  was  erected,  the  work 
of  Haxman. 

When  he  had  graced  the  seat  of  justice 
for  twenty  years,  the  king  in  1770  re- 
warded his  judicial  and  political  services 
by  creating  him  Earl  of  Manstield  in  Not- 
tinghamshire, a  title  which  under  a  special 
remainder  is  now  enjoved  by  a  dfti«cendant 
{ Lives  by  HaUiday,  Jiurke^  WMy,  Lord 
CampheU,  and  Itoscoe.) 

MUSABD,  Kalph,  was  the  great-grand- 
son of  Ilascoit  Musard,  a  ^baron  who  is 
recorded  in  Domesday  Book  as  having 
large  possessions  in  various  counties.  Then 
were  afterwards  held  by  his  son  Richard, 
his  grandson  Hascoit,  and  then  by  this 
llalph,  who  succeeded  to  them  on  the 
deam  of  the  latter.  In  17  John  he  was 
appointed  sheriff  of  Gloucester,  an  office 
which  he  retained  till  the  end  of  9  Henrr 
HI.  (Hot.  Pat.  148 ;  Hot.  Ciam.  L  276, 
&c.)  He  adhered  to  King  John  during  all 
his  troubles,  as  is  evident  from  the  granu 
which  were  made  to  him  out  of  the  fo^ 
feited  lands.  Under  Henry  HI.  he  vm 
several  times  from  the  fifth  to  the  eleventh 
year  appointed  a  justice  itinerant  for  va- 
rious counties.  (Hot.  Ciatis.  i.  274,  iL  151f 
203,  213.) 

He  married  Isabella,  the  widow  of  Job 
de  Neville,  without  licence  ci  the  laVi 
whose  pardon  he  procured  bj  a  fln  flf  iM 
hundred  marks.  It  would  tmm  tfcrt  ihi 
must  haye  been  his  aeoood 


HUSCHAMPE 

m  OQ  liis  death,  only  ten  years  afterwards, 
in  14  Hennr  uLj  Kobert,  his  son^  was  of 
iiill  age,  and  entered  on  some  of  his  father's 
lands.  {JExoerpL  eHot.  Fin.  i.  43, 19d,  203.) 
The  male  line  of  the  family  failed  in  1300, 
39  Edward  1.     (Baronage,  \  512.) 

WBOHAMPSy  Chbistopheb^  the  third 
flon  of  William  Muschampe,  of  Camber- 
-well,  SarreYy  b^  his  second  wife,  Elizabeth, 
daughter  of  Richard  Sandes  and  relict  of 
Bichard  Mimes,  is  another  of  the  barons  of 
the  Exchequer  of  whom  little  is  told,  ex- 
cept Uiat  nis  patent  of  appointment  is 
dated  November  8,  1577,  and  that  he  was 
Imried  at  Carshalton  in  Surrey  on  June  4, 
1570,  thus  making  his  tenure  of  office  only 
idKmt  nineteen  months.  By  his  wife 
Dennys  he  had  several  sons.  (Jdanningand 
JBray  $  Surrey,  iii.  414.) 

XUTFOBB,    John    de,   of  a    knightly 

funily  settled  in  the  parish  of  that  name 

in  Suffolk^  in  pursuing  the  profession  of 

the  law,  arriyed  at  that  emmeuce  to  be 

engaged  in  conducting  the  king's  causes  in 

22  and  30  Edward  I.    Although  it  does 

not  appear  that  the  office    of   attomey- 

ipenenu  was  then  established  in  a  separate 

udividnal,  an  entry  on  the  Rolls  of  Par- 

Hament  (i.  107)  in  ^  Edward  1.,  in  which 

John  de  Mutford  is  directed  to  be  called 

Wore  the  treasurer  and  barons  of  the  £x- 

diequer,  to  inform  them  of  the  king's  right 


NARES 


473 


in  the  matter  of  a  petition  then  presented, 
seems  to  show  that  his  duties  were  very 
similar  to  those  now  performed  by  that 
officer.  In  that  same  year  (the  last  of  the 
king)  he  was  appointed  one  of  the  justices 
of  tmlbaston  to  act  in  Cornwall  and  nine 
other  counties.     {Hot,  Pari,  i.  218.) 

From  the  commencement  of  Edward 
Il.'s  reign  he  attended  the  parliament 
among  tne  judges,  and  we  find  him  on 
various  occasions  acting  as  a  justice  itine- 
rant, and  commanded  to  cause  his  pro- 
ceedWs  to  be  estreated  into  the  exchequer. 
In  5  Inward  U.  he  was  sent  to  Ireland  as 
one  of  the  commissioners  to  quiet  the  dis- 
contents and  disturbances  there,  and  two 
years  afterwards  was  summoned  to  appear 
before  the  council  ready  to  proceed  on  the 
king's  service  to  parts  beyond  the  seas. 

After  being  in  continual  and  active  em- 
ployment as  a  justice  of  assize,  he  was 
raised  to  the  bench  at  Westminster,  being 
constituted  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas 
by  patent,  dated  April  20,  1316,  9  Edward 
II.  In  this  court  he  continued  to  act 
during  the  remainder  of  the  reign,  and  for 
the  first  three  years  of  that  of  Edward  III., 
the  last  fine  acknowledged  before  him 
being  dated  in  Hilary  i3&,  in  which  year 
he  died  and  was  buried  in  Norwich  Ca- 
thedral. (Ibid,  341-^50 ;  Pari.  Writs,  ii. 
1213 ;  Blomefield'8  Norwich,  ii.  39.) 


N 


lASES,  Geobge.  This  judge's  father, 
who  was  for  many  years  steward  to  the 
£ttls  of  Abingdon,  had  two  sons,  both  of 
whom  became  eminent  in  the  professions 
they  had  selected.  The  elder  was  Dr. 
Junes  Nares  of  musical  celebrity,  and  the 
younger  was  Sir  George  Nares  of  legal 
^e.  George  was  bom  at  Hanwell  in 
Middlesex  in  1716,  and  having  been  first 
M&t  to  the  school  of  Magdalen  College, 
Oxford,  was  afterwards  admitted  into  New 
CoUe^  Becoming  a  student  at  the  Inner 
Temple,  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1741. 
me  marriage  in  1751  with  Marv,  daughter 
pf  Sir  John  Strange,  master  of  the'Kolls, 
u  aa  indication  of  his  early  success  in  his 

EiesBion.     His  practice  seems  to  have 
I  principally  in  the  criminal  courts,  to 
judge  from  the  speeches  he  made  in  de- 
ftfice  of  Timothy  Murphy,   convicted  of 
fageiy  in  1753,  and  of  Elizabeth  Canning, 
OQDvicted  of  peijury  in  1754. 
In  1759  he  received  the  degree  of  the 
Oqi^  and  was  made  king's  serjeant  at  the 
4|me  time.     From  1763  to  1770  he  was 
Engaged  on  the  part  of  the  crown  in  most 
Cf  the  cases  arising  out  of  the  general  war- 
tet  iasued  against  the  authori  publisher; 


and  printers  of  No.  45  of  the  '  North  Bri- 
ton ; '  and  the  unpopularity  which  he 
shared  with  all  the  opposers  of  Mr. 
Wilkes  may  perhaps  account  for  Mr. 
Foote  holding  him  up  to  ridicule  under 
the  character  of  Serjeant  Circiut  in  his 
farcical  comedy  of  the  *  Lame  Lover.'  In 
May  1768  he  was  elected  member  for  the 
city  of  Oxford,  which  soon  after  chose  him 
its  recorder.  In  the  fourth  session  of  that 
parliament  he  was  appointed  a  judge  of  the 
Common  Pleas  on  January  25,  1771,  and 
was  at  the  same  time  knighted.  After 
filling  that  honourable  post  with  great 
credit  for  more  than  fifteen  years,  he  died 
at  Bamsgate  of  a  gradual  decay,  on  July 
20,  1786,  and  was  buried  at  Eversley  in 
Hampshire.  His  cheerfulness  of  disposi- 
tion and  pleasing  manners  endeared  him  to 
his  contemporaries,  enhanced  as  they  were 
by  the  strict  integrity  of  his  life  and  his 
unaffected  piety. 

Sir  George  left  several  children,  one  of 
whom  became  regius  professor  of  modem 
history  in  the  university  of  Oxford.  (Gent. 
Mag,  Ivi.  622 :  ^aU  Trials,  xix.  451,  702, 
1153;  Harris  s  Lord  Hardwickcy  iii.  349; 
Blackatone's  Bep,  734.) 


474 


NEEDHAM 


KEEDEAM,  John,  was  the  second  son  of 
Kobert  Needham,  of  Cravach,  and  Dorothy, 
daughter  of  Sir  John  Savage,  K.G.,  of 
Gli&n  in  Cheshire,  from  whose  eldest  son 
descended  the  present  Earl  of  Kilmorey. 
John  became  common  serjeant  of  London 
in  1449,  and  was  elected  member  for  that 
city  in  the  parliament  of  the  following  year. 
He  was  called  to  the  degree  of  the  coif  in 
1453,  and  on  July  13,  1454,  was  appointed 
one  of  the  king's  Serjeants.  From  that 
time  his  name  appears  in  the  Year  Books, 
till  he  was  advanced  to  the  bench  as  a 
judge  of  the  Common  Fleas  on  May  9, 
1457,  35  Henry  VI.  On  the  deposition  of 
that  monarch,  Edward  IV.  continued  him 
in  his  place,  and  he  was  still  there  at  the 
end  of  ten  years,  when  Henry  was  restored 
in  October  1470.  It  is  a  clear  proof  that 
at  that  time  politics  little  influenced  the 
legal  appoiotments,  since  wo  find  not  only 
that  he  was  included  in  Henry^s  new  pa- 
tent to  the  judges  of  the  court,  but  tnat 
after  Edward's  return  in  the  following 
April  he  was  removed  into  the  Court  of 
Kmg^s  Bench.  His  judgments  are  re- 
corded as  late  as  Hilary  Term  1479.  He 
was  knighted  by  Henry  VI.,  and  Phillips 
{Grandeur  of  the  Law  [1G84],  31)  says  that 
he  had  a  seat  at  Shevmgtou,  or  Sheinton, 
in  Shropsliire,  and  was  chief  justice  of 
Chester.  {Duy dale's  Orifj,  40 ;  Hot,  Pari 
vi.  3,  107.) 

N££L£,  lUcHARD,  was  a  judge  under 
five  sovereigns,  and  was  buried  at  Prest- 
would  in  Leicestershire,  being  described  on 
his  tomb  as  lord  of  that  manor. 

He  was  a  member  of  Grav's  Inn,  whence 
he  was  called  serjeant  in  Michaelmas  146^3, 
3  Edward  IV.,  and  was  made  king's  ser- 
jeant in  the  next  year.  His  first  elevation 
to  the  judicial  ermine  was  on  the  restora- 
tion of  Ilenrv  VI.,  when  lie  was  added  to 
the  other  judges  of  the  King's  Bench  on 
October  9, 1470.  Edward  I\ .,  on  his  re- 
turn, did  not  degrade  him,  but  removed 
him  into  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  on 
May  20,  1471,  whert*  he  remained  through 
the  short  reigns  of  Edward  V.  and  Kichard 
III.,  and  for  the  first  ten  months  of  that  of 
Henry  VII. :  when  he  died. 

By  his  wife  Isabella,  daughter  of — But- 
ler, of  Warrington  in  Lancashire,  he  left 
two  sons.  ( 1'.  jB,  ;  GougKs  Monum.  ii.  204.) 

NEVILLE,  Alan  de  (Nova-villa),  is 
mentioned  as  one  of  the  '  assidentes  justi- 
ciae  regis '  in  the  Exchequer  in  11  Henry 
n.,  1165,  before  whom  a  charter  was 
executed  between  the  abbots  of  St.  Alban's 
and  Westminster ;  and  from  12  Henry  II. 
for  many  years  he  filled  the  office  of  jus- 
tice of  the  forests  throughout  all  England. 
{Madox,  i.  44, 144,  &c' 

According  to  Dugdale.  he  was  the  bro- 
ther of  Gilbert  de  Neville,  of  Lincolnshire, 
Butlandy  and  OzfoTd&biie,  \rat  m\)i:^  vyccL^ 


NEVILLE 

confusion  as  to  the  latter.  HeheldthefSamt 
of  Savemac  in  Wiltshire,  and  was  one  of 
those  lords  of  the  council  who,  for  the 
energy  of  their  measures  in  support  of  the 
king  against  Becket,  were  exoommnnicated 
in  IIOS;  but  he  afterwards  received  ^eo- 
lution  from  Gilbert  Foliot,  Biahq)  of  Lon- 
don, on  condition  that  he  should  go  to 
Rome  and  submit  himself  to  the  pope.  He 
died  in  2  Kichard  I.,  leaving  two  sooa,  the 
under-mentioned  Alan,  and  Geoffirey.  {Dfi^ 
dale's  Baron,  i.  287.) 

NEVILLE,  Alan  de,  Junior,  was  em- 
ployed as  a  justice  itinerant  during  hit 
lather's  life,  l>eing  so  called  in  the  Great 
Holh,  which  mention  his  pleas  in  twelve 
coimties  from  10  to  25  Henry  H.,  1170- 
1179.  He  seems  to  have  acted  also  as 
justice  of  the  forest,  nerhaps  as  depntjto 
his  father.  This  omce  was  aftemirds 
possessed  by  several  members  of  the  fiuoilj; 
but  the  account  which  Dugdale  gives  is  too 
indistinct  to  decide  on  the  precise  relatiao- 
ship  they  bore  to  this  justicier.  {Madu, 
i.  18^3,  144,  &c. ;  Baronage,  ut  supra.) 

NEVILLE,  Geoffrey  de,  the  joanger 
brother  of  the  under-mentioned  Robert  do 
Neville,  of  Baby,  was  in  54  Henry  UL,  1270, 
appointed  governor  of  Scarborough  CastK 
and  succeeded  his  brother  as  warden  of  ^ 
king's  forests  beyond  Trent  (Co/.  JRot,  M 
42),  being  in  that  vear  at  the  head  of  the 
justices  itinerant  iar  pleas  of  the  forest  in 
the  northern  counties.  In  8  Edwaid  L, 
1'280,  also,  he  sat  at  Blithworth  in  Not- 
tinghamshire, concerning  forest  matters. 
(Thoroto)i,  i.  178.)  He  died  in  1285, 
leavinjj  by  his  wife,  Margaret,  the  daughter 
and  heir  of  Sir  John  LongnUers,  of  Honbj 
Castle  in  Lancashire,  a  son  named  John, 
the  father  of  a  long  line  settled  at  that 
place.     {Baronage f  i.  291.) 

NEVILLE,  JoLLAX  de,  and  his  elder 
brother,  John,  are  called  by  Dugdile 
(Baro7iage,  i.  288 )  the  grandsons  of  lUlph 
de  Neville,  the  founder  of  the  priorv  of 
Hoton  in  Yorkshire,  and  the  sons  of  flagh 
de  Ne\rille,  whose  prowess  in  slaying  a  lion 
in  the  Holy  Land  was  recorded  in  this  rene: 

Viribus  Hugonis  \'ire8  pcriere  Iconis. 

By  the  entries  on  the  rolls,  however,  it  is 
manifest  that  they  were  the  sons  of  another 
Jollan,  who  perhaps  was  the  son  of  thit 
Hugh,  as  he  nad  livery  of  his  property  in 
1  John,  which  Dugdale  fixes  as  the  dtte  of 
Hugh's  death.  This  last-mentioned  JoUsn, 
the  father,  was  connected  with  the  Exche- 
quer, the  Kot.  de  Oblatis  of  2  and  7  John 
containing  entries  that  evidence  his  empkiy* 
ment.  He  died  in  9  John,  leavinff  two 
sons.  John  and  this  JoUan,  who  OB  Mb^ 
deatn  without  issue  in  4  Hfi>nT]ILa|^ 
ceeded  to  his  property.  {SaL  CfMiLm 
490,11.43.)  He  appeaw  —  >  J W0m  t^ " 
VTm^YOL-mi^andagiiuiinUii   iMi 


MORTON 

On  January  0, 1470,  he  resigned  the  master- 
ship of  the  Rolls  to  his  nephew  Robert 
Morton,  for  whom  hd  had  pioonred  ike 
grant  in  reversion  nearly  two  years  before. 
(RymeTf  ii.  67.) 

Daring  the  remaininff  four  years  of  Ed- 
ward's reign  the  new  bidiop  quietly  per- 
formed his  episcopal  duties ;  and  the  king's 
confidence  in  his  prudence  and  attachment 
is  said  to  have  been  further  evidenced  by 
his  making  him  one  of  the  executors  of  his 
will,  of  which,  however,  no  record  has 
been  discovered.  That  this  was  so,  and 
that  he  was  therefore  supposed  to  feel  a 
devoted  interest  in  Edwaitl  s  infant  UaoXLjy 
is  rendered  probable  by  the  violent  conduct 
of  the  Protector  Richard  towards  him,  for 
which  no  other  reason  appears.  The 
young  king's  council  had  been  summoned 
on  the  ISth  of  June,  to  deliberate  on  the 
coronation ;  and  the  protector,  attending  it| 
had  courteously  requested  the  bishop  to  let 
him  have  some  strawberries  from  hisffaiden 
in  Holbom  for  his  dinnei^  and  had  then 
retired.  Shortly  afterwards  he  returned, 
and  that  furious  scene  which  terminated  in 
the  hurried  execution  of  Lord  Hasting  was 
performed.  Bishop  Morton  and  the  Pnmate 
of  York  being  immediately  arrested,  and 
imprisoned  in  the  Tower.  The  petition, 
however^  of  the  university  of  Oxford  pro- 
cured his  release  firom  that  fortress,  and 
he  was  sent  to  Brecon  under  the  waniship 
of  the  Duke  of  Buckingham.  On  that 
nobleman's  subsequent  discontent  and  re- 
tirement to  Brecon,  the  bishop  contrived  to 
glide  into  his  confidence ;  and  oetween  them 
they  concocted  the  plan  of  raismg  the  Earl 
of  Kichmond  to  the  throne,  and  uniting  the 
two  factions  of  York  and  Lancaster  by  the 
marriage  of  the  earl  with  Elisabeth,  the 
eldest  dauffhter  of  the  late  King  Edward. 
He  urged  nis  dismissal,  under  the  pretence 
that  by^  his  presence  in  Ely  he  could  assist 
the  project ;  but  the  duke  would  not  vmxt 
with  80  wise  and  politic  an  adviser.  The 
bishop  therefore  contrived  his  own  esc^ipe, 
and,  obtaininf^  a  supply  of  money  in  Ely, 
immediately  joined  tne  Earl  of  Richmond 
in  Flanders.  The  duke's  capture,  and 
sudden  execution  on  November  2,  quickly 
followed;  and  the  bishop,  in  the  parliament 
of  January,  was  depriv^  of  all  nis  posses- 
sions. (-Bo<.  iViril  vi  24/5,  260,  273.)  The 
Earl  of  Richmond's  fieet  having  been 
scattered  by  a  storm,  it  was  not  till  nearly 
two  years  afterwaids  that  his  hopes  of 
acquiring  the  English  crown  were  realised 
by  the  defeat  of  Richard  at  Bosworth,  on 
August  22, 1485. 

During  the  interval  Bishop  Morton  had 
remuned  in  Flanders,  and  nad  been  oi 
great  service  to  Richmond  in  advising  him 
of  Richard's  projects  against  him.  The 
earl  had  not  long  assumed  the  crown,  with 
the  title  of  Henry  VIL,  ere  he  ivmmaned 


HOBTOK 


465 


r 

the  bishop  to  England,  and,  admitting  hint 
into  the  council,  loaded  him  with  favouza' 
His  attainder  bang  levened  in  the  fint 
parliament,  he  was  constitated  lord  chin- 
cellor  on  March  6^  1486;  and  in  July,  on 
the  death  of  Cardinal  Bourchier,  the 
tempotralities  of  the  aee  of  Canterbury 
were  placed  in  his  coatody  during  the 
vacancy,  in  preparation  for  nia  own  elec- 
tion to  the  primacy,  which  immediately 
followed,  the  papal  mill  of  translation  bdnff 
dated  on  October  a  {Bym«r^  xiL  302, 817.) 
Thus  placed  in  poasesaion  of  the  highest 
offices,  both  in  Church  and  state,  he  re- 
tained them  during  the  remainderof  his  lifis. 

As  a  minister  of  the  former,  one  of  hia 
first  eflbrts  was  directed  to  the  reformatioa 
of  the  priests,  who,  living  in  luxurious  extra- 
vagance, were  guilty  of  drunkenness  and 
incontinence,  and  even  worse  crimes.  The 
dissolute  life  led  in  the  monasteries  was 
the  next  object  of  his  attention,  and  the 
laxity  of  morals  and  general  profligacy  of 
the  monks  are  incontestaUy  proved  by  hia 
letter  to  the  abbot  of  St  Alban*s.  Hia 
strenuous  exertions  in  pursuing  his  ecde- 
siastical  reforms  naturally  produced  hostility 
on  the  part  of  those  attacked,  and  wera 
even  opposed  by  some  of  the  biriiopa.  Con- 
spiracies formeid  against  his  life  were  said 
to  have  occasions  the  paseing  of  the 
statute  8  Henry  VII.  c  14,  ma£ing  such 
an  offence  ajgainst  any  of  the  king's  servants 
felony.  lus  energy,  however,  was  sup- 
ported by  the  kii^,  and  improved  by  the 
pope,  by  whom  he  was  rewuded  with  the 
cardinal's  hat,  with  the  title  of  St  Athana- 
sius,  in  1483. 

Ajb  a  mimster  of  the  crown,  historiana 
differ  as  to  his  character,  some  asserting 
him  to  be  the  author  of  Henrys  oppressive 
measures,  and  others  vindicating  mm  from 
the  chaige  by  showing  that  after  his 
death  the  king  did  not  diminish  his  seve- 
rity. The  former,  in  support  of  their  viewa, 
cite  the  argument  he  used  to  the  unwilling 
to  enforce  the  <  benevdlence ' — a  dilemma 
which  received  the  name  of  the  Blahop'a 
Fork  or  Crutch,  and  which  Fuller,  with 
his  usual  quaintness,  describes  as  ^  perswad- 
ing  prodtialt  to  part  with  their  mciiBy 
because  Aey  did  tpend  U  fnodf  and  the 
covdoM  because  they  miffkt  tpare  U  bni;  so 
making  both  extreams  to  meet  in  one 
ntediumj  to  supply  the  king's  necessities.' 
The  latter  declare,  on  the  contrary,  that,  so 
fiur  from  encouraging,  he  endeavoured  to 
soften  and  restram  ue  king.  The  truth 
probably  lies  somethinj^  between  the  two 
extremes.  The  haughtmess  of  his  manners 
would  make  him  unpopular;  but  his  wis- 
dom and  doqumoe,  his  zeal  and  discretioa 
(which  all  lulow  him),  must  have  secured 
the  &your  of  his  sovereign ;  while  his  loyal 
devotion  to  the  funilv  he  had  served  (not 
leaying  it  till  its  total  extinction),  and  hia 


476 


NEVILLE 


high  in  the  king's  confidence ;  but  on  the 
arrival  of  the  queen's  uncle,  William  of 
Provence,  Bishop  of  Valence,  all  the  royal 
favours  were  bestowed  on  the  foreign  pre- 
late and  his  connections.  No  doubt  the 
chancellor  joined  in  the  dissatisfaction  ex- 
pressed by  the  barons ;  and  Matthew  Paris 
relates  that  the  king  attempted,  in  1236,  to 
remove  him  from  the  chancellorship.  De- 
pending on  the  support  of  the  barons,  and 
conscious  of  their  approval  of  his  conduct 
in  his  office,  he  at  once  refused  to  resi^, 
alleging  that  he  had  been  entrusted  with 
the  office  by^  the  parliament,  and  could  not 
quit  it  without  tneir  authority.  But  the 
Toyal  indignation  against  him  was  greatly 
increased  two  years  afterwards  by  his  being 
elected  Bishop  of  Winchester,  where  the 
king  had  earnestly  desired  to  place  his 
favoured  relative.  Henry  not  only  induced 
the  pope  to  annul  the  election,  but  took 
away  the  Great  Seal  from  the  bishop,  and 
committed  it  to  the  custody  of  Geoffirey  the 
Templar  and  John  de  Lexinton,  reserving, 
however,  to  the  bishop  as  chancellor  the  pro- 
fits of  the  office.  Matthew  Paris  adds  that 
the  king  afters\'ardfl  endeavoured  to  induce 
him  to  resume  the  Seal,  and  on  his  refusal 
placed  it  in  the  hands  of  Simon  the  Norman. 

It  was  not  till  1242  that  Ralph  de  Neville 
was  restored  to  the  king's  favour,  from  which 
year  till  his  death  there  are  several  docu- 
ments to  which  his  name  is  attached  with 
the  title  of  chancellor.  (JRymer^  i.  244,  253.) 

That  event  occurred  on  February  1, 1244, 
at  the  magnificent  mansion  he  had  erected 
for  the  residence  of  himself  and  his  suc- 
cessors, Bishops  of  Chichester,  while  in 
London.  This  house  was  situate  *  in  vico 
novo  ante  Novum  Templum '  {Rot  Clam,  i. 
107),  now  called  Chancery  Lane,  and,  be- 
coming afterwards  the  hospitium  or  inn  of 
the  Earls  of  Lincolu,  was  ultimately  trans- 
ferred to  the  students  of  the  law,  and  is 
still  designated  by  the  name  of  its  last 
possessor.  The  memory  of  the  original 
founder  is  preserved  in  the  name  of  the  lane, 
corrupted  from  Chancellor's  Lane,  and  in 
that  part  of  the  estate  which  alone  remains  to 
the  see,  and  is  now  called  Chichester  Rents. 

That  Ralph  de  Neville  was  an  ambitious 
man  none  can  deny ;  that  he  accumulated 
vast  riches  is  equally  certain ;  but  that  he 
misused  the  one,  or  that  the  other  led  him 
into  degrading  courses,  there  is  no  evidence. 
On  the  contrar}',  the  highest  character  is 
given  him  by  contemporary  historians,  not 
only  for  his  fidelity  to  his  sovereign  in  times 
of  severe  trial,  but  for  the  able  and  irre- 
proachable administration  of  his  office.  He 
was  as  accessible  to  the  poor  as  to  the  rich^ 
and  dealt  equal  justice  to  alL 

To  his  diurch  he  was  a  signal  benefactor, 

defending  its  rights  on  many  occasions, 

obtaining  variouB   giants  for  its  benefit, 

devotiiig  large  suniB  to  tii«  i^'^gain  oi  \}i[i^ 


NEVILL 

cathedral,  increasing  the  endowmentB  of 
the  dean  and  chapter,  and  bequeathing  to 
I  his  successors  the  estate  he  had  purchased 
and  the  palace  he  had  erected  in  London. 
(Qodwiny  604;  Angl  i&ic.  L  488;  Lt  Ken; 
DugdaU's  Orig,  231.) 

lOEVILLE,  Robert  de,  was  a  deik  in 
the  Exchequer;  and  in  15  John  he  coun- 
tersigned a  mandate  on  the  part  of  Richud 
de  Marisco,  to  whom,  in  18  John,  he  had  a 
letter  of  safe  conduct  to  ffo  and  return,  no 
doubt  on  the  business  of  his  office.  Anoth£r 
charter  is  also  countersigned  by  him  in  3 
Henry  HI.  Madox  gives  the  copy  of  a 
fine  taken  before  him  in  the  Kinf  s  Coort 
at  Westminster  in  the  latter  year,  m  whidi 
he  is  designated  as  a  justicier.  He  was,  as 
was  then  usual  with  the  officers  of  the  Ex- 
chequer, an  ecclesiastic,  and  in  16  John  had 
letters  patent  of  presentation  to  the  church 
of  Wigborough  m  the  diocese  of  London. 
He  died  about  1229.  {Bot.  Clous,  i.  137, 
883;  Rot,  Pat  129,  198;  Madox,  ii.  43; 
Excerpt,  e  Rot,  Ihi,  i.  190.) 

NEVILLE.  Robert  de,  was  of  the  noble 
house  of  Raby^  being  the  son  of  Geofireyde 
Neville^  whose  father,  Robert  Iltz-Maldied, 
lord  of  JRaby,  married  Isabel,  the  daughter, 
and  ultimately  the  heir  of  the  first  Geoffrer 
de  Neville.    Robert  de  Neville  had  livoy 
of  his  grandfather's  lands  in  38  Heniy  m', 
pa}'ing,  besides  his  fine  to  the  king,  a  sum 
of  15l,  Os,  Sd.  to  the  queen,  in  the  nature 
probably  of  aurum  regin«.    (Excerpt,  e  Bot. 
Fin,  ii.  185.)     In  &  Henry  HL  he  wis 
made  warden  of  the  king's  forests  beyond 
Trent,  and  in  the  next  year,  1262,  was  at 
the  head  of  the  justices  itinerant  for  the 
northern  counties,  the  pleas,  however,  bong 
confined  to  the  forests.     He  then  was  ap- 
pointed captain-general  of  the  king's  forces 
m  those  parts^  sheriff  of  Yorkshire,  and 
governor  of  the  castles  of  York  and  DeTizei 
Although  he  for  a  time  joined  the  rebellions 
barons,  he  contrived  to  regain  the  roTal 
favour,  and  was  afterwards  entrusted  mtb 
the  custody  of  the  castles  of  Pickering  isd 
Bamburgh".    He  died  in  1282,  having  h«d, 
by  his  wife  Ida,  the  widow  of  Roger  Be^ 
tram,  a  son,  two  of  whose  representatiTes 
now  sit  in  the  House  of  Lonu  as  BuIb  d 
Abergavenny  and  Westmoreland.    (Bartitt' 
age,  i.  291 ;  Nicota^s  Si/ni^$is,) 

NEYILL,  Richard  (Earl  of  Salis- 
bury), the  only  lay  chancellor  in  the  reign 
of  Henry  VI.,  was  one  of  the  .twenty-two 
children  of  Ralph  Nevill,  the  first  Eiri  of 
Westmoreland.  That  nobleman  manied 
two  wives,  by  the  first  of  whom  he  had  two 
sons,  the  elder  succeeding  to  his  honoBii> 
The  second  wife  was  Joane,  daughlv  d 
John  of  Gaunt,  Duke  of  Lancaster.bjOUh^ 
rine  Swinford.  She  produced  am  4^ 
sons,  of  whom  the  eldest  waa  AbSilliM 
Nevill,  bora  about  1400. 

"Q!^  \x\amed  Alice,  the  onl  ^ 


1 


NEVILL 

Thomas  de  Montacute^  Earl  of  Salisbury, 
and  upon  the  death  of  her  father  in  142o, 
had  a  grant  of  the  title  for  his  life.  En- 
fipaged  from  his  earliest  youth  in  the  pro- 
fession of  arms,  he  had  served  with  con- 
siderable personal  distinction  in  the  French 
wars ;  so  that  the  appointment  of  so  inex- 
perienced a  person  as  chancellor,  at  a  period 
when  legal  and  statesmanlike  attainments 
were  required  for  the  execution  of  its  duties, 
could  not  fail  to  excite  wonder.  It  was  in 
fact  a  mere  political  proceeding,  and  arose 
thus : — When  the  late  chancellor,  Arch- 
bishop Kempe,  died  on  March  22, 1454,  the 
king  was  afflicted  with  one  of  those  sicknesses 
to  which  he  was  subject,  and  which  rendered 
him  altogether  incompetent  to  attend  to 
the  affairs  of  government.  The  parliament 
accordinglv  a  few  days  afterwards  named 
Richard  i)uke  of  York  protector  of  he 
kingdom,  one  of  whose  first  acts  was  to  in- 
vest the  earl  with  the  office  of  chancellor, 
in  which  character  he  is  named  in  an  ordi- 
nance dated  March  30  (Hot.  Pari,  v.  450), 
but  the  Great  Seal  was  not  delivered  to 
him  till  April  2.  It  was  a  curious  com- 
mencement of  his  judicial  career,  that  on 
the  next  day  he,  vnth  four  other  lords,  was 
appointed  to  '  entende  with  all  diligence  to 
them  possible,  to  the  saufgarde  and  kopyng 
of  the  see,'  for  the  resistance  of  the  king's 
enemies.    {Ibid.  144.) 

Ills  tenure  of  office  was  very  short,  and 
was  undistinguished  by  any  important  inci- 
dent On  the  king's  recovery  no  time  was 
lost  in  removing  the  protector  and  his  chan- 
cellor, the  successor  of  the  latter  being  sworn 
in  on  March  7,  1465. 

Then  commenced  the  civil  war,  and  in 
less  than  three  months  the  first  battle  of 
St.  Albans  was  fought,  in  which  the  Buke 
of  Somerset  was  killed ;  and  the  king,  being 
defeated  and  left  in  the  Duke  of  York's 
power,  was  compeUed  to  pardon  all  the 
rebels,  among  whom  was  the  Earl  of  Salis- 
bury. At  the  end,  however,  of  the  miser- 
able events  of  the  succeeding  years,  the 
duke  was  defeated  and  killed  in  the  battle 
©f  Wakefield  on  December  80,  1400,  and 
the  earl  himself  taken  and  beheaded  the 
next  day  at  Pontefract.  His  eldest  son,  Ri- 
chard, the  famous  Earl  of  Warwick,  suc- 
ceeded in  placing  the  duke's  son  on  the 
throne  by  the  name  of  Edward  IV.,  and  his 
youngest  son  George  became  the  next-men- 
tioned chancellor  of  England.  (Bcwotiagey 
i.  ;^2.) 

KEVILL,  George  (Archbisuof  of 
York),  was  the  youngest  son  of  the  above 
Richard  Earl  of  Salisbury',  and,  being  de- 
signed for  the  Church,  was  educated  at 
Balliol  College,  Oxford,  of  which  university 
he  was  afterwards  chancellor.  One  of  the 
first  acts  of  the  council,  after  his  father's 
acceptance  of  the  Seals,  was  to  recommend 
him  to  the  first  vacant  bbhopric,  although 


NEVILL 


477 


he  was  not  yet  twenty-two  years  of  age. 
The  bishopric  of  Exeter  became  void  beforo 
the  dose  of  the  following  vear,  and  though 
the  earl  had  been  removed  from  the  chan- 
cellorship, he  and  his  son  Richard  Earl  of 
Warwick  had  such  ascendency  that  George 
Nevill  was  elected  (Hymery  xi.  376)  ;  but 
the  pope  would  not  permit  him  to  be  con- 
secrated till  he  had  attained  the  age  of 
twenty-seven. 

He  presided  over  that  diocese  about  nine 
years,  during  which  there  is  nothing  to 
show  that  he  took  any  active  part  in  the 
imhappy  contests  with  the  crown  until  the 
fatal  Dattle  of  Northampton  had  placed  the 
kin^  in  the  hands  of  nis  enemies,  who, 
taking  care  to  have  their  friends  about  him, 
obliged  him  to  nominate  Bishop  Nevill  as 
his  chancellor.     Accordingly  on  July  25, 

1460,  fifteen  days  after  the  battle,  he  re- 
ceived the  Seal,  and  took  it  home  to  his 
house  in  St.  Clement  Danes,  being  that 
which  was  afterwards  called  Essex  House, 
on  the  site  of  which  Essex  Street  and  De- 
vereux  Court  now  stand.  In  the  next 
parliament  the  Duke  of  York  openly 
claimed  the  crown;  an  illusory  compro- 
mise was  arranged;  the  civil  war  again 
broke  out,  resulting  in  the  death  of  the 
claimant,  and  the  momentary  triumph  of 
the  royalists  in  the  fields  of  Wtdcefield  and 
St.  Albans ;  but  succeeded  vrithin  five 
d^s  hj  the  successful  entry  of  the  Earl  of 
Warwick  into  London,  and  in  less  than  a 
fortnight  bv  the  proclamation,  on  March  4, 

1461,  of  Edward,  the  duke's  son,  as  king. 
Six  days  after  this  event  the  bishop  took 

the  oath  as  chancellor  to  Edward  IV. 
(Bi/tner,  xi.  473.)  For  the  next  six  years 
he  uninterruptedly  retained  the  Great  SeiJ, 
during  which,  in  1465,  he  was  raised  to  the 
archbishopric  of  York.  A  coolness  had 
already  commenced  between  King  Edward 
and  the  Nevills,  arising  from  the  precipi- 
tancy with  which  the  relatives  of  the  new 
queen  were  advanced,  and  the  jealousy 
created  by  their  sudden  rise,  and  by  the 
powerful  infiuence  they  acquired.  This 
feeling  became  more  apparent  by  the  Earl 
of  Warwick's  resistance  to  the  marriage  of 
Margaret,  the  king*s  sister,  to  Charles,  the 
son  of  the  Duke  of  Burgundy,  which  the 
Wydevilles  had  suggested ;  and  the  earl  was 
further  disgusted  by  being  sent  to  negotiate 
a  pretended  treaty  for  a  union  with  one  of 
the  French  princes,  which  he  soon  found 
was  never  intended  to  be  effected. 

During  the  earFs  absence  in  France  a 
parliament  was  held,  from  which  for  the 
first  time  the  chancellor  absented  himself. 
Five  days  afterwards,  June  8,  1467,  the 
king  went  to  his  house  and  demanded  the 
Great  Seal  The  act  of  resumption,  how- 
ever, passed  in  this  parliament,  excepted 
all  the  grants  which  had  been  made  to 
NevilL    (Bot.  Pari  v.  671, 004,  607.)    In 


478 


NEVILL 


the  course  of  the  next  year  he  was  instru- 
mental in  promoting  a  reconciliation  be- 
tween his  brother  the  earl  and  the  king, 
and  for  his  ffood  services  therein  he  was 
rewarded  wim  the  manor  of  Penley  and 
other  lands  in  the  counties  of  Hertford  and 
Buckingham.     {Rtpner,  xi.  640.) 

This  reconciliation  could  scarcely  be  ex- 
pected to  be  permanent.  In  disobedience 
to  the  king,  Warwick  soon  after  gave  his 
daughter  in  marriage  to  the  Duke  of 
Clarence;  the  kin^^s  brother,  and  the  arch- 
bishop accompanied  them  to  Calais  to 
solemnise  the  nuptials.  Thus  united  to 
the  duke,  the  Warwick  faction,  taking 
advantage  of  a  rising  soon  after  under  Robin 
of  Redesdale  in  Yorkshire,  vented  its 
animosity  against  the  WydeviUes  by  ex- 
ecuting the  queen's  father  and  brother,  and 
proceeded  with  such  spirit  that  King 
Edwurd,  in  1469,  found  himself  a  prisoner 
to  the  duke,  the  earl,  and  the  archbishop  at 
Olney  (Oundle),  and  was  therefore  placed 
for  security  in  the  custody  of  the  latter  at 
Middleham.  How  the  kmg  obtained  his 
release  from  confinement  is  somewhat 
doubtful ;  but  the  better  opinion  seems  to 
be  that  it  was  with  the  consent  of  Warwick, 
who  proved  that  he  had  not  yet  cast  off 
his  allegiance  to  Edward  by  attacking  and 
defeating  Sir  Humphrey  Nevill  on  his 
raising  the  standard  for  King  Henry.  The 
archbishop,  who  had  treated  the  kmg  with 
the  greatest  courtesy  during  his  detention, 
accompanied  him  to  London,  where  the 
king  issued  a  general  pardon  to  all  concerned 
in  the  outbreak. 

Apparently  restored  to  favour,  the  arch- 
bishop had  invited  the  king,  in  the  follow- 
ing I^bruary,  1470,  to  meet  Clarence  and 
Warwick  at  an  entertainment  at  the  Moor 
in  Hertfordshire ;  but  a  hint,  whether  true 
or  false  is  uncertain,  being  whispered  in  the 
royal  ear  that  treachery  was  intended,  the 
king  revived  the  dissensions  by  secretly 
departing  from  the  house.  Though  peace 
for  the  moment  was  with  difficulty  re- 
stored, Clarence  and  Warwick  soon  flew  to 
anus,  and  eventually  restored  King  Henry 
to  the  throne,  from  which  thev  had  assisteci 
in  expelling  him  ten  years  before. 

That  Archbishop  Nevill,  as  was  natural 
under  the  ministry  of  his  powerful  brother, 
was  restored  to  his  former  office  of  chan- 
cellor there  is  no  doubt ;  for,  though  the 
record  of  his  appointment  does  not  exist, 
his  name  appears  with  that  designation  in 
three  several  documents,  dated  respectively 
December  20, 1470,  and  February  13  and 
16,1471.  (i?ywer,  xi.  672, 681, 692.)  He 
was  also  rewarded  with  the  grant  of  the 
manors  of  Wodestoke,  Hangburgh.  Wot- 
ton,  and  Stonefield,  and  the  hunored  of 
Wotton  for  life.  But  even  these  favours 
could  not  make  him  moTe  faithfiU  to  his 
hrotheT    Warwick   thtui  \a   liBii  \^i^ 


NEVILL 

shown  himself  first  to  King  Heniy  and 
then  to  King  Edward.  The  latter  son 
re-appeared  on  the  scene  to  ledaim  ths 
kingdom ;  and  the  city  of  London  and  tbe 
person  of  Henry  being  entzuated  to  the 
archbishop,  Eawaid  found  means,  h? 
tempting  the  prelate*s  avarice  or  exdtiii^ 
his  fears,  to  secure  his  treacherous  asaiflt- 
ance.  Edward  marched  to  the  captti], 
where  the  recorder  Urswyke,  by  the  arch- 
bishop's order,  admitted  him  on  Amil  11 
through  a  postern  in  the  walla;  andHeniy, 
who  had  oeen  purposely  kept  out  of  sane* 
tuaiT,  became  agL  tL  ^ner  of  hii 
rival.  Two  days  after,  the  axchbiihof^ 
regardless  of  the  ruin  in  which  he  iB- 
volved  his  brother,  took  the  oftth  of  fideli^ 
to  Edward  on  the  Sacrament  at  St  Finli 
Cross,  and  immediately  received  a  M 
pardon  for  all  offences  ne  had  pievkHHij 
committed.  {Ibid.  709,  710.)  It  woold 
seem,  however,  from  a  passage  in  a  letter 
of  Sir  John  Paston  {Letters,  iL  60),  who 
fought  for  Eong  Henry  at  Bamet  on  tb 
next  day^  that  tlie  archbishop  was  then  t 
prisoner  m  the  Tower.  This  might  peiiufi 
have  been  done  as  a  cover  to  nia  tieaioi^ 
the  same  letter  mentioning  that  he  was  in 
possession  of  a  pardon,  or  perhaps  Edwiid 
could  not  trust  nim  at  large  when  leaving 
London  on  so  momentous  an  expeditioD. 

The  successful  battles  of  Bamet  aad 
TewkesbuiT,  and  the  murders  of  King 
Henry  and  his  sod,  having  secured  the 
throne  to  Edward^  that  monarch  took  m 
early  opportunity  of  getting  rid  of  the 
archbishop,  whose  fidelity  we  cannot  be 
surprised  that  he  doubted.  Under  the 
mask  of  friendship  he  had  agreed  to  hunt 
at  the  Moor  with  the  prelate,  who  accord- 
ingly prepared  a  magnincent  entertainment, 
embellished  with  all  the  plate  he  possessed, 
besides  much  that  he  had  borrowed  to  do 
honour  to  the  occasion.  But  on  the  daj 
before  he  was  summoned  to  the  king's  pie- 
sence,  and  immediately  imprisoned  on  a 
pretended  charge  ;  the  nches  which  he  hti 
thus  foolishly  exposed  were  confiscated,  and 
the  revenues  of  his  bishopric  seized  intothf 
king's  hand.  In  the  list  of  the  plunder  s 
magnificent  mitre  is  mentioned,  the  jewels 
of  which  were  so  large  and  precious  that 
they  were  appropriated  by  the  King  to  fonn 
a  crown  for  himself.  His  confinement, 
which  was  sometimes  in  Calus  and  some- 
times at  Guisnes,  lasted  for  about  thiee 
years  5  but  eventually,  through  the  inte^ 
cession  of  his  friends,  he  procured  his  re- 
lease, and  returned  to  England  in  December 
1475.  He  did  not  long  survive  his  libera- 
tion. Although  only  m  the  prime  of  ^ 
lie  simk  under  his  disgrace ;  and  dying  it 
Blithlaw  on  June  8, 1476,  was  bnaadiikii 
own  cathedral  withoat  tomb  or 
He  is  spoken  of  as  a  patron 
moii^  VoiTi^t^UtietarY  charaotx 


NEVIL 

act  the  unfayouiable  sentence  which  eyery 
honest  man  must  pronounce  against  him, 
on  the  manifest  proofs  which  his  life  ofiers 
of  fickleness,  deceit,  and  treacheiy.  ( God- 
vjiuy  413,  693 ;  Lingard:  Drake^B  Eborac,) 

HEVIL,  EnwAKD,  was  the  'second  son  of 
Henr^  Nevil,  of  Bathwick  in  Somersetshire. 
Admitted  a  member  of  Gray's  Inn  in  1650, 
he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1658,  and  became 
an  ancient  in  1676.  He  receiyed  the 
honour  of  knighthood  in  June  1681,  when, 
as  recorder  of  Bath,  he  presented  the 
address  of  that  corporation  thanking  Charles 
II.  for  his  recent  declaration.  That  king 
having  raised  him  to  the  degree  of  the  coif 
in  January  1684,  King  James  on  his  acces- 
sion made  him  one  of  his  Serjeants,  and  on 
October  11,  1685,  further  promoted  him  to 
be  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer.  This  seat  he 
occupied  only  six  months,  bein^  too  honest 
to  support  the  royal  assumption  of  the 
dispensmg  power.  He  accordmgly  receiyed 
his  quietus  on  April  21,  16^3,  and  re- 
mained unemployea  during  the  rest  of  the 
reign.  But  on  the  settlement  of  the  courts 
by  Kin^  William  he  was  immediately  re- 
placed m  his  former  position,  and  sworn  in 
on  March  11,  1680.  (2  Shoioer.  434: 
LuUreUy  i.  97-^»09.) 

When  interrogated  by  the  parliament  of 
1689  he  gaye  a  detailed  account  of  what 
took  place  previous  to  his  discharge.  CParl, 
Hist,  v.  311.) 

In  October  1691  Sir  Edward  was  re- 
moved from  the  Exchequer  to  the  Court  of 
Common  Pleas,  and  on  King  William's 
death  was  re-appointed  to  the  same  place  by 
Queen  Anne,  under  whom  he  sat  for  a 
little  more  than  three  years.  He  died  at 
Hammersmith  on  Augfust  8,  1705.  He 
assisted  in  several  of  the  state  trials,  and 
seems  to  have  acted  an  honest  and  in- 
dependent part  on  the  bench.  {State  Trials, 
xi.  and  xii ;  LuttreU,  ii.  299,  y.  580.^ 

HEWBALD,  Gkoffret  de.  Dugdale,  by 
a  misreading  of  the  patent  he  quotes,  states 
that  on  November  2,  1276,  4  Edward  L, 
Geoffrey  de  Newbald  was  appointed  one  of 
the  judges  of  the  Common  Pleas,  the  re- 
cord plainly  proving  that  he  was  merely 
constituted  a  justice  to  hold  pleas  in  the 
liberties  of  the  priory  of  Dunstable.  He 
was  soon  removed  to  a  more  important 
station,  for  on  August  22,  1277,  ne  was 
raised  to  the  office  of  chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer.  {Madox,  ii.  52,  62,  321.)  He 
is  recorded  as  attending  the  Court  of  Ex- 
chequer as  late  as  9  Edward  I. 

NEWDIGATE,  KicnARD,  was  of  a  family 
of  extreme  antiquity,  which  derived  its 
name  from,  or  perhaps  gave  its  name  to, 
tlie  town  of  Newdigate  in  Surrey,  where 
its  property  was  situated  as  early  as  the 
reign  of  Kmg  John.  The  descendant  of  a 
Tounp^er  branch  was  settled  in  the  rei^  of 
lUizaoeth  at  the  manor  of  Arbury  in  War- 


NEWDIGATE 


479 


wickshire,  where  Chief  Justice  Sir  Edmund 
Anderson  had  erected  a  mansion,  which 
thenceforward  became  the  seat  of  the  New- 
digates.  The  jud^  was  the  second  son  of 
Sir  John  Newdigate,  and  Anne,  the 
daughter  of  Sir  Edward  fltton,  of  Gawa- 
worth  in  Cheshire,  Bart,  and  on  the  death 
of  his  elder  brother  became  inheritor  of  the 
estate. 

He  vTas  bom  on  September  17,  1602, 
and  after  receiving  his  education  at  Trinity 
College,  Oxford,  was  admitted  a  member 
of  Gray's  Inn.  (Aihen,  Oxon,  iv.  842.)  He 
had  considerable  practice  as  an  advocate  in 
Chancery  and  on  the  circuits,  and  in  1644 
was  engaged  by  the  state  witn  Prynne  and 
Bradshaw  in  the  prosecution  of  Lord  Mac- 
guire  and  others  lor  being  concerned  in  ^e 
Irish  massacres.  In  1647  he  yrdA  one  of 
the  counsel  assigned  for  the  defence  of  the 
eleven  members  against  the  charges  made 
by  General  Fairfax  and  the  army  (  WhiU' 
locks,  106,  259;  StaU  Trials^  iv.  654,  858), 
which,  however,  having  answered  the  pur- 
pose for  which  they  were  brought,  were 
dropped  without  trial  These  employ- 
ments, at  least  the  former  of  them,  Mr. 
Newdigate  probably  owed  in  some  measure 
to  his  relationship  to  John  Hampden,  who 
was  his  second  consin,  and  to  his  connec- 
tion with  Oliver  Cromwell,  whose  aunt 
had  married  Hampden's  father. 

Seven  years  after,  on  January  25, 1554, 
soon  after  Cromwell  became  protector,  he 
was  made  a  serjeant  and  sent  the  Home 
spring  circuit,  and  on  May  30  he  accepted 
a  seat  on  the  Upper  Bench.  He  is  said  to 
have  been  one  or  those  lawyers  who,  when 
summoned  before  Cromwell  and  offered 
judgeships,  declined  to  act  imder  his  com- 
mission; but  on  being  answered  by  the 
protector,  'If  you  gentlemen  of  the  long 
robe  will  not  execute  the  law,  my  re£ 
coats  shall,'  they,  dreading  such  an  altem»> 
tive,  consented  to  serve.  Newdigate  soon 
showed  that  he  would  not  be  suDservient 
to  the  ruling  powers.  On  the  trial  of 
Colonel  Halsey  and  others  at  York  he 
directed  the  jury  to  acquit  the  prisoner, 
sajdng  that  tnough  it  was  high  treason  to 
levy  war  against  the  king,  no  statute  de- 
clared it  to  be  so  for  levying  war  against 
the  protector.  This  mode  ot  interpreting 
the  law  was  not  likely  to  be  satisfactory  to 
Cromwell,  and  consequently  Judge  New- 
digate was  removed  from  the  bench  on 
May  1,  1655,  '  for  not  observiug  the  pro- 
tector's pleasure  in  all  his  commands.' 
Godwin  gives  a  somewhat  different  account. 
(Godwin,  iv.  26, 179, 180;  Whitdocke,  591, 
625.) 

By  an  entry  in  Burton's  Diary  (iL  127) 
it  apjpears  that  Newdigate  resumed  his 
practice  at  the  bar,  but  the  date  of  hia 
restoration  to  the  bench  has  been  generally 
misrepresented.    Because  Whitelocko  does 


480 


NEWDIGATE 


not  mention  him  again  till  May  15,  1059, 
it  has  been  supposed  that  he  was  not  re- 
appointed till  tnat  time,  the  fact  being  for- 
gotten that  Ilichard  Cromwell  had  iust 
then  been  removed  from  the  protectorship, 
and  that  the  Long  Parliament  had  agam 
seized  the  government.  It  thus  became 
necessary  to  re-appoint  the  judges,  whose 
commissions  under  Richard  were  of  course 
void,  and  oulv  one  of  the  four  then  named 
by  Whitelocl^o  was  a  new  judge,  while 
the  other  three  had  probably  nothing  more 
than  new  patents.  With  respect  to  New- 
digate,  it  is  certain  that  he  was  re-appointed 
before  Michaelmas  Term  1657.  for  nis  deci- 
sions are  recorded  in  Siderfins  Keports  (ii. 
11)  from  that  date  to  the  restoration  of  the 
king,  and,  as  these  Reports  commence  with 
that  term,  he  might  nave  been  replaced  in 
his  seat  a  long  time  before.  Indeed,  when 
Cromwell's  reinvestiture  in  the  office  of 
protector  took  place  on  the  26th  of  the  pre- 
vious June,  Newdigate  attended  the  cere- 
mony as  one  of  the  judges  of  the  Upper 
Bench.  ( IVTtiielocke,  678 ;  Burton,  ii.  512.) 
It  si'ems  probable,  therefore,  that  Crom- 
well's displeasure  did  not  last  long,  and 
that,  either  from  his  family  connections,  or 
from  his  anxiety  to  supply  the  bench  with 
respectable  and  independent  judges,  he 
allowed  but  a  short  time  to  elapse  after 
Newdigato's  removal  before  he  restored 
him  to  his  place. 

On  the  resignation  of  Chief  Justice 
01}Tine,  the  parliament  advanced  Newdi- 
gate to  the  presidency  of  the  Upper  Bench 
on  January  17,  \m).  ( IVkit^locke,  629.) 
Siderfin  reports  (ii.  179)  some  of  the  cases 
that  were  heard  before  him  as  chief  justice, 
and  among  them  is  that  of  Sir  Robert  Pye 
and  another,  who  applied  for  their  Habeas 
Corpus,  having  been  imprisoned  some  time 
on  suspicion  of  treason  without  prosecu- 
tion. The  court  said  they  could  not  be 
deniwl  bail,  if  the  counsel  for  the  common- 
wealth would  not  proceed  against  them, 
'  for  it  is  the  birthright  of  every  subject  to 
be  tryed  according  to  the  law  of  the  land.' 
In  direct  contradiction  to  this  apparently 
authentic  report,  Ludlow  (356)  relates 
that  Newdigate  demanded  oi  the  coimsel 
of  the  commonwealth  what  they  had  to 
say  against  the  Habeas  Corpus  being 
granted,  and  on  being  answered  that  they 
had  nothing  to  say  against  it,  the  judge, 
'though  no  enemy  to  monarchy,  yet 
ashamed  to  see  them  so  unfaithful  to  their 
trust,  replied  that  if  they  had  nothing  to 
say,  he  had ;  for  that  Sir  Robert  Pye  being 
committed  by  an  order  of  parliament,  an 
inferior  court  could  not  discharge  him.'  A 
curious  instance  of  the  manner  in  which 
party  prejudice  will  misrepresent  a  true 
narrative  I 

The  Long  Parliament  being  at  last  dis- 
solved by  its  own  act,  preparations  were 


NEWHAKEBT 

made  for  the  restoration  of  the  monaidiyy 

and  the  Convention  Parliament  was  sun- 

moned  for  April  25, 1600.    Chief  Jii8tk& 

Newdigate  was  returned  for  Tamworth— a 

plain  proof  of  the  sentiments  he  entertuned, 

and  that  he  felt  that  his  judicial  status  oo 

longer  existed.    Having  only  acted  minii- 

terially,  and  never  having  exhibited  inj 

political  hostility,  no  sooner  had  Cbariei 

returned,  than  a  writ  was  issued  to  the  kti 

chief  justice  to  take  upon  him  in  a  refrokr 

manner  the  degree  of  serjeant.     (1  Sider' 
/n,3.) 

Seventeen  years  after  the  Restoratioo, 
they  who  had  known  the  Serjeant's  worth 
and  experienced  his  lenity  were  azudou 
that  he  should  receive  aome  further  honov 
from  the  king  in  recognition  of  his  loyiltf. 
With  that  view  a  baronet^  was  confemd 
upon  him  on  July  24,  1677,  without  fees; 
but  the  ^ood  old  man  did  not  long  emoj 
the  dignity,  dying  on  October  14^  iM 
He  was  buried  under  a  splendid  monuineBt 
at  Harefield  in  Middlesex,  an  ancient  patzi- 
mony  of  the  family. 

I      By  his  wife,  Juliana,  daughter  of  Sir 

t  Francis  Leigh,  of  King's  Newman,  Wa^ 
wickshire,  and  sister  of  the  Earl  of  Chi- 
chester, he  had  a  large  family.  The  nult 
line  failed  in  180(^  by  the  death  of  the 
celebrated  Sir  Kogcr  Newdigate,  the  fifth 
baronet,  without  issue;  but  the  eitatei 
devolved  on  the  representatives  of  a  femile 
descendant,  who  adopted  the  family  name, 
and  they  are  now  possessed  by  ChailM 
Newdegate  Newdegate,  Esq.,  M.P.  for 
North  Warwickshire.  (Wottons  BarmL 
iii.  618.) 

NEWENHAM,  TnoHAS  de.  There  wne 
two  Newenhams  who  held  office  about  the 
same  time  in  the  reign  of  Edward  HL, 
being  probably  brothers.  The  one  ▼» 
John  de  Newenham,  who  was  chamberlain 
of  the  Exchequer  (Isstio  JtoU^  i.  255),  and 
the  other  Thomas  de  Newenham,  who  wis 
one  of  the  senior  clerks  in  the  Chanoerr. 
The  latter  is  mentioned  in  this  chancier 
from  45  Edward  IH.,  1371,  to  15  Richaid 
II.,  1391,  during  the  whole  of  which  period 
his  name  appears  on  the  Parliament  Rolls 
(ii.  303-iii.  284)  as  a  receiver  of  petitifflM. 
On  two  occasions  he  was  appointed  with 
two  others  to  hold  the  Great  Seal  during 

!  the  absence  of  the  chancellors  in  1377 
and  1386. 

KEWKAEKET,  Adah  de  (Novo  Me^ 
cato),  held  lands  of  the  honor  of  Tickhifl. 
He  accompanied  the  king  to  Ireland  in  1^ 
John  (JRot,  de  Prtpsiito,  187,  &c.),  but  in 
15  John  he  was  imprisoned  in  Cortf  Castlfly 
probably  for  implication  with  the  btno% 
and  gave  his  two  sona,  John  andAdlHi 
as  hostages,  who  were  released  on  AiW* 

'  dertaking  of  Saheroa,  Earl  of  WiBBhirt»' 
{Hot.  Pat,  105.)    That  lie  anooMdaililt-' 
moving  the  su^dona  aganM*  ||F^ 


\ 


ITEWTON 

prefiomed  from  bis  being  in  the  next  year 
appointed  with  tbree  others  and  the  sheriff 
of  Torkshire  to  take  an  assize  of  mort 
d'anoeator  between  two  parties  in  that 
Bounty.  Under  Henry  III.  he  was  em- 
ployed as  a  principal  landed  proprietor  in 
oouecting  the  quinzime  in  Yorkshire,  and 
acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  in  S,  9, 1(5,  and 
18  Henry  III.  in  Tarious  counties.  (JRoi, 
Ctowt.L2a3,  887,  ii.  77, 147.) 

VSWTOH,  RiCHABD,  the  original  name 
of  whose  family  was  Cradock,  or  Caradoc, 
18  stated  to  have  been  the  first  to  assume 
the  name  of  Newton.  His  father  was  John 
Cradock,  and  his  mother  was  Margaret,  the 
danghter  of  Howell  Moythe,  of  Castle  Ordin 
and  Fountain  Gate ;  or,  as  another  pedigree 
wys.  Christiana  Ley.  He  adopted  tne  name 
Of  iSewton  before  3  Henry  VI.,  1424,  as  he 
was  then  summoned  by  that  name  to  take 
tiie  degree  of  serjeant-at-law.    After  that 
date  he  was  apparently  very  fully  em- 
ployed, and  in  1426  he  acted  as  a  justice 
enrant  in  Pembrokeshire.     (Itot,  Pari,  iv. 
474.)    On  October  5,  1429,   he  was  ap- 
pointed one  of  the  king's  Serjeants,  and 
haTing  held  that  office,  and  filled  the  re- 
iponsiDle  position  of  recorder  of  Bristol,  he 
was  constituted  a  judge  of  the  Common 
Fleas  on  November  8, 1438.  He  was  raised 
to  the  head  of  that  court  on  October  14, 
1439,  and  he  presided  there  for  nearly  nine 
yean.    The  last  fine  acknowledged  before 
him  was  in  November  1448,  and  Sir  John 
Frisot  was  appointed  in  his  place  on  Jime 
!«,  1449.     (i%(fafc>  Oriff,  46.) 

His  death  occurred  between  these  two 
dates,  and  he  was  buried  either  in  Bristol 
Cathedral  or  in  the  Wyke  chapel  of  Yatton 
Church  in  Somersetshire.    There  are  hand- 
wme  monuments  in  each,  but  neither  has 
•Dy  arms  or  inscriptions  left.    Although 
the  former,  which  has  no  effigy,  has  been 
generally  appropriated  to  the  judge,  the 
evidence  in  favour  of  the  latter,  which  is 
•domed  with  an  effigy,  seems  the  more 
weighty.    The  canopied  altar-tomb  in  the 
ttthedral  of  Bristol  is  in  the  style  of  the 
ttxteenth  centurv;  while  that  at  Yatton, 
tile  figure  on  which  undoubtedly  represents 
t  judge,  and  is  peculiarly  curious  as  exhi- 
biting the  first  example  of  a  collar  of  SS 
^om  by  a  judge,  is  of  the  fifteenth,  being 
the  century  in  which  Newton  died.    His 
Mfe  is  represented  with  him ;  and  in  the 
lame  church  is  a  second  monument    of 
tather   later   date,  with    the    figures    of 
Inother  couple;  and  the  tradition  of  the 
^laoe  is,  that  one  is  the  tomb  of  Sir  Richard 
Newton  and  his  wife,  and  the  other  that  of 
da  son  Sir  John  and  his  wife.  An  entry  in  the 
ihnTchwaidens'  books  tends  to  confirm  this 
ndition.    It  acknowledges,  imder  the  date 
1451,  the  receipt  of  205.  'de  Domina  de 
BVyke  per  manum  J.  Newton  filii  sui  de 
egato  iUomini  Ricardi  Newton  ad  ...  • 


NICHOLAS 


481 


campansB ;'  and  there  is  a  further  entry  in 
the  same  year  of  the  cost  of  re-casting  and 
hanging  the  '  ^ete  belle.'  The  Bomina 
de  Wyka  is  evidently  the  widow  of  Sir 
Richard,  being  so  called  from  living  at  the 
manor-place  of  Wvke,  which  had  been 
partlv  built  by  her  nusband,  and  was  then 
and  for  some  time  afterwards  in  possession 
of  the  family. 

His  decisions  have  no  great  weight  in 
Westminster  Hall,  as  he  is  reputed  to  have 
been  a  most  unconscientious  prerogative 
lawyer,  his  bias  towards  the  rights  uf  the 
crown  rendering,  wherever  they  are  con- 
cerned, a  close  examination  of  his  judgments 
necessary. 

Different  accounts  are  given  of  his  matri- 
monial connections.  One  says  that  he  had 
two  wives — ^the  first  being  Emma,  daughter 
of  Sir  Thomas  Perrott,  of  Harleston  and 
Yestlington ;  and  the  second  being  Emmota, 
daughter  of  John  Harvey,  of  London. 
(NicholWa  Leicestershire,)  Another  states 
that  he  had  only  one  wife,  naming  the  first 
of  the  above  two.  Neither  of  these  ac- 
counts can  be  quite  relied  on.  A  pedigree 
in  the  British  Museum  gives  him  only  one 
wife,  Emmota,  the  dau^ter  of  John  Her- 
vev,  of  London.  From  him  descended  Sir 
John  Newton  (the  last  of  the  family),  of 
Barr's  Court,  Bitton,  Gloucestershire,  who 
was  advanced  to  the  dignity  of  a  baronet 
on  August  16, 1660,  a  title  which  expired 
in  1743.  ( WotUni's  Baronet,  iii.  145,  and 
ex  inf.  of  the  Rev.  H.  T.  Ellacombe.) 

KICHOLAS,  Robert,  is  said  by  Anthony 
Wood  to  be  of  the  same  familv  with  Sir 
Edward  Nicholas,  secretary  ot  state  to 
Charles  L,  and  Dr.  Matthew  Nicholas,  dean 
of  St.  Paulas,  who  were  both  bom  at 
Winterboum-Earles  in  Wiltshire.  {Athen. 
Oxon,  iii.  129.)  He  is  described  of  All- 
canning  in  that  county  in  his  admission  to 
the  Inner  Temple  in  1614.  In  1640  he 
was  elected  member  of  the  Long  Parliament 
for  the  neighbouring  borough  of  Devizes, 
and  was  an  active  manager  of  the  impeach- 
ment against  Archbishop  Laud.  He  treated 
the  arwibishop  with  most  unseemly  viru- 
lence and  insult,  using  such  foul  and  gross 
language,  and  calling  him,  among  other 
opprobrious  names,  '  pandar  to  the  whore 
of  Babylon,'  that  the  archbishop  desired 
the  L9ids, '  if  his  crimes  were  such  as  he 
might  not  be  used  like  an  archbishop,  yet 
that  he  might  be  used  like  a  Christian  -^ 
and  thev  accordingly  checked  the  member 
in  his  harangue.  {SttUe  TrialSy  iv.  525, 
&c.)  He  gave  another  specimen  of  his 
harshness  and  intolerance  in  1648  by  start- 
ing up  when  a  member  objected  to  Lord 
Goring  being  included  among  the  delin- 
quents, and  saying,  '  What,  Mr.  Speaker, 
snail  we  spare  the  man  who  raised  a  second 
war  more  dangerous  than  the  first,  and 
cudgelled  us  into  aj  treaty? '     {RtrL  Hist. 

II 


482 


laCHOLS 


iv.  1068.)  Although  his  motioD  was  nega- 
tived, the  Commons  showed  their  likinff  to 
the  man  hy  making  him  a  serjeant-at-law 
on  Octoher  30, 1048^  and  they  vei^  i^ijro- 
priately  appointed  hmi  one  of  their  assist- 
ants on  the  king*8  trial.  (  WTUtehcke,  34G, 
860.)  But,  though  his  name  is  included  in 
the  act  as  one  of  the  king's  judges,  he 
appears  to  have  abstained  from  attending 
at  the  trial     (State  Trials,  iv.  1052.) 

On  June  1,  1649,  he  accepted  the  office 
of  judge  of  the  Upper  Bench,  and  in  April 
of  the  following  year  he  and  Chief  Justice 
KoUe  were  muQh  commended  by  the  Com- 
mons for  settling  the  people*s  minds  to  the 
government  by  their  charts  to  the  gxttnd 
jury  on  the  Western  Circuit.  When  Oliver 
Cromwell  assumed  the  protectorate,  Nicho- 
las was  removed  from  the  Upper  Bench 
into  the  Exchequer,  and  was  sworn  a  baron 
in  Hilary  Term  1653-4,  an  appointment 
which  he  still  held  on  the  succession  of 
Protector  Richard  in  September  1658,  when 
he  was  resworn.  His  next  change  was 
made  by  the  Rump  Parliament,  who  re- 
stored him  to  his  former  place  on  the  Upper 
Bench  on  January  17, 1659-60.  (  ff'Me- 
hcke,  405,  448,  693 ;  Excheqtwr  Books,) 

Soon  after  the  return  of  king  Charles  he 
obtained  a  pardon,  but,  being  of  the  Rump 
Parliament,  he  was  omitted  from  those 
seijeonts  who  were  confirmed  in  their 
dejrree.     (CaL  StaU  Papers  [1660],  283.) 

HICHOLS,  AuGUSTiNfi,  of  an  old  and  re- 
spectable Northamptonshire  family,  was  the 
second  son  of  Thomas  Nichols,  Esq.,  of 
Hardwick  in  that  county,  and  Anne,  the 
daughter  of  John  Pell,  fisq.,  of  Eltington. 
Bom  at  Ecton  in  1559,  he  entered  as  a 
student  of  the  Middle  Temple,  in  which  he 
became  reader  in  1602.  In  the  following 
January  he  received  a  writ  sunmioning  him 
to  take  the  degree  of  the  coif,  which  in 
consequence  of  the  death  of  Queen  Eliza- 
beth was  renewed  by  King  James,  by 
whom  he  was  knighted.  He  was  elected 
recorder  of  Leicester  in  1603,  and  his  argu- 
ments in  Westminster  Hall  are  reported 
till,  on  November  26,  1612,  he  was  elevated 
to  the  bench  as  a  judge  of  the  Common 
Pleas.  On  being  appointed  chancellor  to 
Charles  Prince  of  Wales  it  became  neces- 
sary for  him  to  have  a  renewal  of  his  patent, 
in  order  that  he  might '  take  fee  and  livery 
of  the  prince,'  the  usual  oath  prohibiting^  "a 
judge  trom  being  paid  by  any  out  the  kmg 
nimself.  {Ihtgda!Us  Ortg,  219 ;  Crohe^  Jac, 
Prom,)  He  died  at  Kendal  in  August 
1616,  while  on  the  summer  circuit:  'judex 
mortuus  est^  jura  dans,'  as  Fuller  describes 
him.  He  was  buried  there,  and  has  fair 
monuments  both  in  that  church  and  in 
his  own  church  at  Foxton,  both  with  the 
same  epitaph. 

King  James  commonly  called  him  '  the 
judge  that  would  give  no  money;'  and 


NIGEL 

Fuller  (  WorthieSf  ii.  163)  speaks  glowingly 
of  his  cnaracter. 

He  nuurried  Mary,  the  widow  of  Edwiid 
Bagshaw,  Esq. ;  but,  having  nochildieD  by 
her,  his  estate  at  Foxton  in  Northampton- 
shire devolved  on  his  brother's  son  Frauds, 
who  was  created  a  baronet  in  1641,  but  the 
title  failed  in  1717. 

KIGEL  (Bishop  of  Ely)  was  the  nephew 
of  Roger,  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  the  great 
justiciary  of  Henry  1.  The  influence  of  thai 
prelate  procured  for  him,  first,  the  office 
of  treasurer  of  England,  and  next,  the  bi- 
shopric of  Ely,  to  which  see  he  was  elected 
in  May  1133. 

On  the  death  of  King  Henry,  historians 
differ  as  to  the  part  he  took  in  Uie  usurpa- 
tion of  Stephen.  There  is  little  do^M, 
however,  that  the  king  suspected  hit  fide- 
lity, and  that,  though  for  a  short  time  at 
the  beginning  of  that  reign  he  was  con- 
tinued in  the  ofiice  of  treasurer,  his  deten- 
tion was  intended  when  his  uncle  Roger, 
and  his  cousin  Alexander,  Bishop  of  Lin- 
coln, were  seized  at  the  council  of  Oxford 
in  1139.  His  escape  to  the  castle  of  Devizes, 
and  his  refusal  to  deliver  it  into  the  king*a 
hands  until  his  uncle  had  been  subjected  to 
three  days'  fast,  are  related  in  the  account 
of  Roger,  Bishop  of  Salisbury.  Nigel's 
suspension  or  ejection  from  his  bishopric 
for  several  years  was  the  consequence  of 
his  resistance. 

With  the  accession  of  Henry  II.  his  pros- 
perity returned.  He  probably  resumed  the 
office  of  treasurer  until  he  purchased  it  for 
his  son  Richard,  whom  Alexander  Swore- 
ford  describes  as  his  successor.  That  at  an 
early  period  he  held  a  high  judici^  posi- 
tion appears  from  a  writ  being  directed  in 
his  name  alone  to  the  sheriff  of  Gloucester 
in  which  he  is  styled  *  Baro  de  Scaccario.* 
(MadoXj  i,  209.)  In  116o  his  name  stands 
the  first  of  those  before  whom  a  charter  or 
contract  between  the  abbots  of  St.  Albania 
and  Westminster  was  executed,  in  which 
the^  are  described  as  '  assidentibus  justiciis 
regis.'  (Ibid.  44.)  At  this  time  Kichard, 
his  reputed  son,  was  treasurer,  and  is  so 
called  in  the  charter.  This  Richard,  who 
was  afterwards  Bbhop  of  Lincoln,  is  sup- 
posed to  have  been  the  author  of  that  valu- 
able *■  Dialogus  do  Scaccario '  which  Madox 
has  printed  at  the  end  of  his  'History  of  the 
Exchequer.'  In  that  work  a  high  character 
is  given  of  Kigel,  as  most  learned  in  his 
office,  representing  him  as  having  an  in- 
comparable knowledge  of  the  business  of 
the  Exche<juer,  and  as  restoring  the  science 
and  renewmg  the  forms  which  had  been 
almost  lost  in  the  struggles  of  the  preceding 
reign.  It  adds  also  that  his  suggestions  for 
the  raising  of  money  were  distinguished  for 
their  mildness.     (Aid.  ii.  337,  388.) 

Hardy  introduces  his  name  in  his  Cata- 
logue of  Chancellors  immediately  foUoniii^ 


KOEL 

ij  Plantagenet  This,  how- 
t  be  the  case,  aa  Niffel  was 
^eoffiey  waa  chancellor^  and 

that  Ms  introduction  at  all 
is  founded  on  a  mistake  in 
e  charter  which  is  the  only 
g^ht  forward. 

ors  before  his  death,  which 
%y  1169,  he  was  afflicted  with 
I  public  cares  are  stated  to 

him  inattentive  to  his  pas- 
ut  that  he  did  not  altogether 
I  is  proved  by  his  foundation 
for  regular  canons  at  Cam- 
ite  where  St.  John's  College 
Ibid.  i.  m,  78 ;  AnffL  Sac.  i. 
250,  340.) 

<IAM,  was  a  descendant  of 
ily  of  Noel,  the  ancestor  of 
ito  En&land  with  the  Cen- 
ts amply  rewarded.  One  of 
ves  lH$came  Earl  of  Gains- 
>82,  a  title  which  became 
;  another  was  made  a  baronet 
16  judge  was  the  second  son 
el  the  fourth  baronet,  by  his 
ighter  of  Sir  John  Clobery, 
1  and  Bridstope  in  Bevon- 

in  1695,  and  educated  in  the 
1  of  Lichfield.  Entering  the 
he  took  the  degree  of  bar- 
721;  and  having  been  chosen 
mford,  he  was  elected  mem- 
•ough  in  1722.  In  1747  and 
returned  for  the  Cornish 
itLooe.  The 'Parliamentary 
10  examples  of  his  senatorial 
le  Ileports  record  very  few 

ones.  He  was  nonunated 
in  17:^,  and  on  the  trial  of 

1746  he  was  one  of  the 
le  House  of  Commons,  and 

(teech  in  answer  to  some  of 
's  objections.  (State  Trials, 
e  received  the  post  of  chief 
'.rin  1749,  which  he  retained 
ppointed  a  jud^  in  West- 
Fne  latter  elevation  he  owed 
3  of  Lord  Hardwicke,  who, 
ad  resigned  the  Great  Seal,  j 
dng  on  his  behalf.  (ITar-  j 
1.)  Mr.  Noel  was  accord- 
d  a  judge  of  the  Common 
1757,  and  continued  in  that 
ith  on  December  8,  1762. 
)ole  calls  him  '  a  pompous 
olidity;*  and  the  satirical 
ausidicade '  seems  to  regard 
li^ht. 

Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Sir 
•e,  Bart.,  he  left  only  four 
&W«  Peerage^  vi.  211 ;  Wotr 
\.  91.) 
iRL  OF.    /S^s^  Roger  Bigot. 


NOBTH 


483 


Duke  of.    See  Hbkbt. 


V0SMAnnr8,ar  DX  OAVmirPX,  Sncoir, 
was  a  great  favoorite  of  King  Henry  IH.^ 
who  gave  him  the  archdeaconry  of  Nor- 
wich, and  on  the  di^gprace  of  Ralph  de 
Neville,  the  chancellor,  in  12S8,  placed  the 
Great  Seal  in  his  hands.    He  did^ot,  how- 
ever, retain  its  custody  yerv  long,  for  in  the 
next  year  he  was  dismissed  from  his  office 
and  expelled  the  court     He  was  also  re- 
moved from  all  of  his  preferments^  except 
the   archdeaconry,   and  the  com    of   lus 
church  of  Rossington  was  seised,  but  he  was 
afterwards  allowed  to  redeem  it  on  finding 
security  for  fifty  marks.     (Excerpt,  e  Rot. 
Fin.  i.  350;  Ahb.  Itoi.  Orig.  L  8,  9.)    The 
cause  of  his  disgrace  is  represented  to  have 
been  his  refusal  to  seal  a  patent,  granting  to 
Thomas  Earl  of  Flanders  a  tax  of  four- 
pence  upon  every  sack  of  wool  that  waa 
transported    from    England  into  his  do- 
minions.    He  died  in  1249.     (JPhOipoffe 
Catal.  18.) 

HOBMAWIUsThomas  db,wbs  of  aYork- 
shire  family,  of  whom  Gerard  and  Margery 
his  wife,  who  were,  perhaps,  his  parents, 
paid  for  an  assise  in  that  comity  in  5^  Henry 
lU.^  1269.  {Excerpt,  e  Eot.  Fin.  ii.  491.) 
He  IS  called  '  senescallus  regis '  in  the  king's 
grant  to  him,  in  4  Edward  L,  of  the  custody 
of  the  castle  of  Bamburgh ;  and  the  title  is 
continued  in  numerous  instances  till  the 
tenth  year,  when  he  was  appointed  to  the 
same  duties  under  the  designation  of  king's 
escheator  beyond  Trent  He  retained  the 
latter  office  till  the  twenty-third  year,  except 
that  he  exchanged  it  for  a  short  time  for 
the  southern  escheatorship.  (Abb.  Hot. 
Orig.  i.  26-88.)  It  was  probably  in  this 
official  capacity  that  in  11  Edwfud  I.,  1283, 
he  received  the  king*s  commands  to  remove 
the  sheriff  of  Cumberland,  his  commission 
for  which,  and  his  letters  to  the  barons  of 
the  Exchequer  communicating  his  having 
obeyed  the  order,  are  mentioned  in  the  Year 
Book  of  that  reign  (fo.  12^.  He  was  one 
of  the  justices  itinerant  lor  pleas  of  the 
forest  only  in  1286,  but  his  name  appears 
as  a  regular  justice  itinerant  in  12Mand 
1203.  He  died  in  1295.  (Cal.Ingui8.p.m. 
i.  124.) 

NOKTH,  Francis  (Lovld  Guilford), was 
of  a  family  long  connected  with  the  law. 
Edward,  the  first  Lord  North  of  Kirtling. 
was  king*8  seijeant  under  Henry  VIH.,  and 
married  the  widow  of  Lord  Chief  Barron 
Sir  David  Brooke.  His  eldest  son  Roger 
married  a  daughter  of  Lord  ChanceUor 
Rich,  and  his  second  son  Sir  Thomas  was 
of  Lincoln's  Inn  in  the  time  of  Queen  Mary. 
His  grandson  married  the  daughter  of  Sir 
Valentine  Dale,  master  of  the  requeste  in 
Elizabeth's  reign ;  and  the  lord  keeper  now 
to  be  noticed  was  the  second  son  of  the 
fourth  Lord  North,  by  Anne,  daughter  of 
Sir  Charles  Montacru. 
He  was  bom  on  Octob«i  2*2^  \^1 « '^^^m^ 

11^ 


484 


NORTH 


nearly  thirty  years  old  when  his  grandfather 
died,  and  his  father  having  fourteen  chil- 
dren to  provide  for,  his  introduction  into 
the  world  was  necessarily  accompanied  hy 
a  very  limited  provision.  How  ne  rose  to 
the  eminence  he  attained,  and  how  he  acted 
throughout  his  career,  has  been  pleasantlj 
told  by  Roger  North,  whose  biograjjhy  of  his 
illustrious  brother  is  the  foundation  of  all 
succeeding  memoirs. 

The  early  politics  of  his  father  as  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Long  Parliament,  and  his  subse- 
quent di^pist  at  its  proceedings  (for  he  was 
secluded  by  Pride's  JPurge),  sufficiently  ac- 
count for  the  changes  in  Francis's  education. 
It  was  commenced  under  the  tutelage  of 
one  Mr.  Willis,  a  rigid  Presbyterian,  who 
kept  a  school  at  Isleworth ;  he  next  was 
sent  to  Bury  School,  where  Dr.  Stevens  the 
master  was  a  cavalier ;  and  lastiy  he  was 
matriculated  at  St.  John's  College,  Cam- 
bridge, in  June  1653.    At  each  ne  was  a 
diligent  student,  and  his  advances  in  all 
branches  of  learning  are  particularly  re- 
corded.    On  November  27,  1666,  he  was 
removed  to  the  Middle  Temple,  occupying 
the  moiety  of  a  petit-chamber  which  his 
father  bought  for  him.     His  uncle,  Mr. 
Challoner  Chute,  who  died  shortly  after  as 
speaker  of  Protector  Richard's  parliament 
of  1660,  was  then  treasurc^r  of  the  inn,  and 
swept  the  admission-fee  into  the  new  stu- 
dent's hat,  saying,  *  Let  this  be  a  be^nning 
of  your  ffettmg  money  here.'     With  his 
limited  allowance  he  was  obliged  to  avoid 
the  expensive  practices  then  prevalent  among 
his  fellows,  his  principal  relaxation  being 
music,  in  which  he  was  a  CTeat  proficient. 
He  used  to  say  that  if  he  had  not  had  his 
base  or  lyra  viol  to  divert  himself  alone,  he 
had  never  been  a  lawyer.    Knowing  that 
he  should  be  dependent  on  his  profession, 
he  pursued  his  studies  with  unremitting 
assiouity,  yet  not  neglecting  those  sciences 
without  some  knowledge  of  which  no  one 
can  become  great  in  the  law.    After  ac- 
quiring some  experience  by  keeping  the 
courts  of  his  grandfather  and  of  other  rela- 
tions, he  was  called  to  the  bar  on  June  28, 
1061,  and  began  his  practice  in  a  chamber 
in  Elm  Court,  soon  having  a  fair  share  of 
business,  and  being  lucky  enough  to  recover 
for  his  college  an  estate,  for  which  it  had 
long  had  an  unsuccessful  litigation. 

Sir  Geoffrey  Palmer,  the  attorney-general, 
was  his  greatest  patron  and  friend,  not  only 
directing  his  reading  while  a  student,  but 
encoura^^  his  practice  as  a  barrister,  by 
givinghim  junior  oriefsin  state  prosecutions, 
and  sometimes  even  employing  him  as  his 
substitute.  Among  other  duties,  the  attor- 
ney-general encaged  him  to  argue  for  the 
crown  before  the  House  of  Lords  on  the 
writ  of  error  brought  by  the  five  members 
who  had  been  convicted  of  a  breach  of  the 
peace  in  liolding  the  S^^eakoii  YVn^Yi  ^Qr^m 


NORTH 

in  his  chair.  Although  unmicceisful,  he  » 
pleased  by  his  manner  and  reasoning  that 
he  was  immediately  made  king^s  ooumd, 
and  thereupon,  after  a  little  demur  bj  the 
benchers  on  account  of  his  youth,  whidi 
subjected  them  to  a  rebuke  oy  the  cooit, 
he  was  called  to  the  bench  of  the  Middk 
Temple  on  June  6, 1668.  On  the  Norfolk 
Circuit  his  success  was  greatly  aided  bvhis 
bein^  placed  as  chairman  on  the  commiwami 
for  dividing  the  Fens,  and  being  constitated 
by  Bishop  Lane  jud^e  of  the  Isle  of  £1t. 
He  was  a  favourite  with  Chief  Justice  HjJe 
and  many  others  of  the  judges ;  and  Cuef 
Justice  Hale,  though  prejudiced  agaimt 
him,  had  so  good  an  opinion  of  his  taknti 
tha^  seeing  him  pushing  through  the  aawi 
to  get  into  the  court,  he  called  out  to  the 
people  to  '  make  way  for  the  littie  gentle- 
man,' addinjr,  '  for  he  will  soon  maJce  vif 
for  himself. 

In  May  1671  he  was  selected  to  fill  the 
ofiSce  of  solidtor-^neral,  when  he  reodved 
the  honour  of  knighthood.  He  soon  after 
estabUshedhimself  in  the  Court  of  Chanoerr, 
having  previously  practised  prindpallT  n 
the  King's  Bench.  This  change  of  court 
was  probably  influenced  in  a  great  meanifr 
I  by  the  appointment  of  Sir  Matthew  Hale  la 
^e  head  of  the  latter ;  for  it  appears  plainlj 
that  each  had  such  a  violent  cuslike  to  the 
other  as  was  likely  to  lead  to  frequent  cod* 
tentions.  In  the  autumn  following  he  he- 
came  reader  to  his  inn,  when  he  took  the 
Statute  of  Fines  for  his  subject  His  brother 
Roger  records  that  the  expense  of  hia  tota 
was  1000/.  at  least,  the  extravagance  of 
which  and  of  some  other  recent  ones  de- 
terred others  from  continuing  the  practice, 
and  from  that  time  public  reaves  oeaaed. 

In  March  1672  he  married  I^yFraneea 
Pope,  a  daughter  of  Thomas,  third  Earl  of 
Down.  Soon  after  he  was  returned  to  pa^ 
liament  for  the  borough  of  Lynn,  and  iraen 
he  was  made  attorney-general  on  Xovemher 
12, 1673,  he  was  allowed  to  keep  hia  aeat, 
no  notice  being  taken  of  the  disquahficatkm 
which  the  possession  of  that  office  waa  for- 
merly deemed  to  impose. 

On  January  28, 1675.  Sir  Frauds  joyfiilly 
accepted  the  office  of  chief  justice  of  the 
Common  Fleas,  being  already  tired  oi  the 
bustle  and  turmoil  of  his  former  place,  al- 
though the  profits  of  it  grreatly  exceeded 
those  of  the  chief  justice,  hia  brother  reve- 
senting  the  former  as  amounting  to  7000^  a 
year,  while  the  latter  did  not  exceed  400IX 
One  of  the  first  attempts  of  the  new  diief 
justice  was  to  restore  tne  proper  huwMmd 
the  Common  Pleas,  which  had  been  almoit 
entirely  diverted  urom  that  court  to  tike 
King*s  Bench;  by  means  of  the  ae  ^^^ 
Betted  in  the  writ  of  Latitat.  In  tUi  ^ 
succeeded  by  a  similar  introdnoikBJi  A*' 
Common  Pleas  writ,  fhu  walilv  fl» 
\  Xsvssanaaa  of  the  two  OQiiit%i^ 


NORTH 

l>enefit  of  the  suitors  in  each.  Soon  after 
he  was  appointed  the  ridiculous  scene  called 
the  DumD-day  was  enacted,  the  result  of 
which  satisfied  the  rebellious  Serjeants  that 
their  new  chief  would  not  allow  the  court 
to  be  insulted  with  impunity.  His  brother 
enlarges  on  Sir  Francises  labours  to  improve 
the  rules  and  regulate  the  practice  of  his 
court,  and  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  chief 
deserved  the  praise  of  an  able  and  honest 
administrator  of  justice,  acting  with  exem- 
plary prudence  in  part^r  cases,  neither  show- 
ing any  bias  towards  either  side,  nor  affect- 
ing to  conceal  the  loyal  principles  which 
guided  him.  The  only  exception  that  can 
be  suggested  is  his  conduct  on  the  trial  of 
Stephen  Colledge,  when  he  refused  to  re- 
store the  papers  provided  for  the  prisoner's 
defence  which  had  been  forcibly  taken  from 
him.  The  judge's  friendly  biographer  at- 
tempts a  justincation,  but  in  a  lame  and 
unsatisfactory  manner ;  and  Burnet  (ii.  284) 
<;autiously  says  that  if  the  judge  '  had  lived 
to  see  an  impeaching  parliament  he  might 
have  felt  the  ill  effects  of  it.'  (State  TrwU, 
vii.  551.) 

For  four  years  he  enjoyed  the  quiet  of  a 
judicial  life  unbroken  by  the  anxieties  of 
politics.  But  in  1679  he  was  joined  to  the 
newly-formed  council  of  thirty,  by  whom 
the  government  of  the  country  was  to  be 
administered,  being  selected  as  one  of  the 
members  to  counterbalance  those  of  the 
country  or  opposition  party  at  the  same 
time  introduced.  When  that  council  was 
•dissolved  Sir  Francis  was  admitted  into 
the  cabinet ;  and  for  advising  and  assisting 
the  Attornev-General  Levinz  in  the  pre- 
paration of  tue  proclamation  against  tumul- 
tuous petitions,  by  which  the  addresses  of 
the  so-called  abhorrers  were  encouraged, 
the  new  parliament,  without  hearing  mm, 
ordered  an  impeachment  against  him  on 
November  24,  1080.  The  committee  ap- 
pointed to  prepare  it,  however,  must  have 
^ound  it  no  easy  taak,  as  they  failed  to 
produce  it  before  the  dissolution  on  Ja- 
nuary 18.  {Pari,  nut.  iv.  1229^  Having 
acquired  the  entire  confidence  of  the  kinff, 
he  became  one  of  his  majesty's  chief  ad- 
visers, and  during  the  last  years  of  the  life 
of  Lord  Chancellor  Nottingham,  who  enter- 
tained for  him  a  sincere  friendship,  he  was 
of  great  assistance  to  his  lordship  in  his 
illnesses,  and  frequently  acted  for  him  as 
lipeaker  of  the  Ilouse  of  Lords.  On  that 
nobleman's  death  there  was  no  doubt  as  to 
bis  successor,  and  accordingly  Sir  Francis 
was  made  lord  keeper  on  December  20, 
1082,  at  the  same  time  a  pension  of  2000/. 
a  year  being  added,  according  to  the  prac- 
tice which  had  previously  been  adopted. 
The  king  on  presenting  the  Great  Seal  to 
liim  accompanied  the  gift  with  this  pro- 
phetic warning:  *Here,  take  it,  my  lord, 
jou  will  find  it  heavy,'  the  truth  of  which 


NOBTH 


485 


was  afterwards  acknowledged  by  the  reci- 
pient, who  declared  that  since  ne  had  had 
the  Seal  he  had  not  exnoyed  one  easy  or 
contented  minute.  He  held  it  as  long  as 
King  Charles  lived,  and  under  King  James 
till  his  own  death ;  and  in  less  than  a  year 
after  his  appointment  he  was  called  to  the 
peerage  by  tne  title  of  Baron  Guilford,  on 
September  27,  1683. 

While  lord  keeper  he  devoted  himself  as 
far  as  his  leisure  would  permit  him,  to  the 
correction  of  some  of  the  abuses  for  which 
the  Court  of  Chancery  was  even  then  no- 
torious. But  the  period  of  hia  presidency 
was  too  short,  for  one  so  cautious  m  making 
innovations,  to  effect  all  the  improvements 
he  contemplated.  He  succeeded  however 
in  restraining  unnecessary  motions,  too  com- 
monly made  for  the  purpose  of  delay,  and 
introduced  many  wnolesome  regufations 
that  rendered  the  proceedings  less  expen- 
sive and  oppressive  to  the  suitors.  To 
Roger  Nortn  s  encomium  of  the  justice  of 
his  decisions  no  substantial  objection  is 
found  by  other  writers,  though  party  spirit 
vented  some  Mvolous  strictures  at  the  time. 

During  the  latter  part  of  his  career,  as 
well  under  the  reign  of  Charles  H.  as  after 
the  accession  of  James  II.,  Sir  George  Jef- 
freys exerted  the  utmost  art  and  cunning  to 
supplant  him,  seizing  every  opportunity  to 
insult  and  entrap  him,  and  using  language 
the  most  coarse  and  contemptuous.  But 
the  reliance  which  both  kings  placed  on 
his  wisdom  and  his  honesty  foiled  all  such 
underhand  endeavours;  and  though  it  is 
probable  that  the  lord  keeper's  disinclina- 
tion to  support  James's  encroachments  on 
the  constitution  would  have  eventually  oc- 
casioned his  removal^  such  a  consummation 
was  prevented  by  his  death  seven  months 
after  the  close  of  Charles's  reign.  For  the 
greatest  part  of  that  short  period  he  was 
afllicted  by  illness,  which  at  last  obliged 
him  to  retire  to  his  seat  at  Wroxton,  where, 
after  several  weeks  of  suffering,  he  died  on 
September  5,  1085.  Both  Lord  Guilford 
aud  his  wife,  who  died  some  years  before 
him,  were  buried  in  the  vault  of  the  Earls 
of  Down  in  Wroxton  Church.  She  brought 
him  three  sons  and  two  daughters.  His 
grandson,  the  third  lord,  was  created  in 
1752  Earl  of  Guilford,  having  also,  by  the 
death  of  his  cousin  the  sixth  Lord  North 
without  children  in  1734,  succeeded  to  that 
barony.  Both  titles  were  held  together  till 
the  death  of  the  third  earl  in  1802  with 
only  three  daughters,  between  whom  the 
barony  of  North  remained  in  abeyance  till 
1841.  when,  two  of  them  having  died,  it 
devolved  upon  the  third,  the  present  iMk- 
roness.  Two  of  the  last  earrs  brothers 
enjoyed  the  earldom  successively,  and  upon 
the  death  of  the  last  of  them  it  descended 
to  his  cousin  Francis,  the  grandson  of  the 
fijrst  earl|  and  son  of  Brownlow  Norths 


4g6 


NORTHAMPTON 


Bishop  of  Winchester,  whose  grandson,  a 
minor,  is  its  present  possessor. 

Of  the  life  and  character  of  the  lord 
keeper  there  are  two  leading  hiographers, 
neither  to  he  entirely  depended  on.  The 
one  is  Roger  Norths  his  affectionate  hrother 
and  constant  companion,  who,  detailing 
every  incident  of  his  life  and  recording  his 
inmost  feelings  and  thoughts,  cannot  speak 
of  his  actions  hut  in  terms  of  praise.  The 
other  is  Lord  Campbell,  who,  writing  nearly 
two  centuries  after  his  death,  and  using 
precisely  the  same  materials,  speaks  of  him 
with  all  the  bitterness  of  party  prejudice, 
ridiculing  his  respectahility,  sneenng  at  his 
caution,  disparaj^ng  his  law,  and  in  general 
giving  a  jaundiced  colouring  to  his  most 
worthy  acts,  evidently  judging  the  faint 
praise  which  he  sometimes  is  obliged  to 
Destow.  A  much  fairer,  and  abler,  sum- 
mary of  his  character  is  given  by  Henir 
Koscoe  in  his  'Lives  of  Eminent  British 
I>awyers*  (p.  110). 

HOKTHAKPTOV,  Henry  de,  was  the 
son  of  Peter  de  Northampton,  and  is  some- 
times called  Henry  Fitz-Peter.  He  held 
the  church  of  St  Peter  at  Northampton 
(Bot.  Claw.  i.  620),  and  was  a  canon  of  St. 
Paul's  (Bugdalt^s  Grig.  21),  preferments 
which  he  had  probably  received  as  an  officer 
in  the  Exchequer. 

He  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  in  1  Ei- 
chard  I.  (Pipe  BoU,  69, 194),  after  which 
his  name  does  not  Appear  in  a  judicial  cha- 
racter till  4  John,  1202,  in  which  year,  and 
10  John,  fines  were  levied  before  him  as  a 
justicier  both  at  Westminster  and  in  the 
country. 

In  6,  7,  and  8  John  he  was  loinod  with 
Robert  de  la  Saucey  in  the  sheriffalty  of 
Northamptonshire  {Rot.  Pat.  54) :  but  in 
the  troubles  at  the  end  of  tlie  reign  he 
either  sided  with  the  bnrons,  or  was  sus- 
pected of  doing  so,  for  in  November  1215 
Jiis  lands  and  houses  in  Northampton  were 
given  away  by  the  king,  and  in  the  foUow- 
inj?  March  he  had  letters  of  protection. 
{Ihid.  109.) 

He  founded  a  hospital  within  the  pre- 
cincts of  the  cathedral  church  of  St.  Paul. 
(Manast.  vi.  767.) 

HOBTHBUBG,  William  de,  is  only  men- 
tioned as  one  of  the  justices  appointed  in  3 
Edward  I.,  1275,  to  take  assizes  beyond  the 
Trent,  and  in  6  and  7  Edward  I.  as  a  jus- 
tice itinerant  in  several  counties,  and  again 
in  that  character  at  Lancaster  in  23  Edward 
I.,  but  apparently  in  reference  to  a  plea  of 
earlier  date.     (Abb,  Rot.  Ong.  i.  92.) 

HOBTHBUBGH,  Koger  de  (Bisnop  of 
Lichfield  and  Coventry),  was  early 
employed  in  the  service  or  Edward  U., 
whom  he  accompanied  to  Scotland  in  1314 
as  keeper  of  the  royal  signet  (custos  tar^ 
giaB),  and  was  taken  pnaoiitt  with  that  in 
Aia  poaBeenon  at  the  bloody  );^t\X«  oi^«ii-\ 


NORTHWOLD 

nockbum.  (Cont,  of  TrivePi  AxnaU,  iL  14.) 
In  April  1316  he  was  keeper  of  the  mrd- 
robe,  and  in  1320  he  was  employed  oo  t 
mission  to  Carlisle,  to  treat  foratnieevitii 
the  Scots.  (Archisoloffia,  xxvL  834.)  Oa 
April  16, 1321,  the  king,  m  conaeqiienee  of 
the  chancellor*8  illness,  delivered  the  Gnu 
Seal  into  his  custody,  as  keeper  of  tiie 
wardrobe.  It  would  appear  that  writs  were 
then  sealed  in  his  presence  and  that  (tf  tit> 
of  the  clerks  in  Chancery,  after  whidi  the 
Seal  was  replaced  in  the  waidrohe,  where  it 
remained  at  that  and  a  subsequent  peziod. 
(Pari  WritSy  ii.  p.  ii.  731, 1231.) 

In  1317  the  King  presented  him  with 
the  archdeaconry  of  Richmond,  and  rab* 
sequently  procured  his  election  to  the 
bisnopric  of  Lichfield  and  Coventrr  on 
April  12,  1322.  Over  that  see  he  presided 
for  nearly  thirty-eight  years,  with  nothing 
to  distinguish  the  remainder  of  hie  life, 
except  that  he  held  the  office  of  treasarer 
for  two  short  periods  in  the  second  and  f(n^ 
teenth  years  of  the  reign  of  Edward  III  He 
died  in  1359,  and  is  commemorated  amoo^ 
the  chancellors  and  benefactors  of  Cam- 
bridge.   (^irtVi,  320 ;  Le  Nece,  124,824.) 

HOKTHINGTOH,  Earl  of.  See  B. 
Henley. 

HOKTHWZLL,  WILLLA.M  DE,  was  m  hohr 
orders,  and  held  the  office  of  deik  of  the 
kitchen  in  the  household  of  Edward  IL 
(Pari  Writs,  ii.  p.  ii.  82.)  He  was  gn- 
dually  advanced  m  his  position,  and  in  U 
Edward  III.  he  was  clerK  or  keeper  of  the 
wardrobe.  He  is  so  called  as  late  i» 
March  2, 1340  (N.  Fa^dera,  ii.  1116),  ind 
doubtless  still  held  the  office  when  he  nu 
constituted  a  baron  of  the  Excheauer  od 
June  21  in  the  same  year.  He  did  net 
remain  there  lon^p,  as  certain  bills  dated  in 
August,  September,  and  November  1340 
are  mentioned  as  being  under  his  seal  tf 
treasurer  of  the  kings  household  [KoL 
Each,  i.  165),  and  there  is  no  doubt  tlut 
on  receiving  this  last  appointment  he  i«- 
tired  from  his  seat  as  baron. 

NOKTHWOLD,  Hugh  de  (Bishop  of 
Ely),  was  a  justicier  in  12  HenrvUL 
1228.  (Duffdale'sOriff.42,)  Hewaselected 
abbot  of  St  Edmimd*8,  having  been  p«- 
viously  a  monk  there,  in  1214.  tHot.  roL 
124,  140,  142.) 

In  January  1229  he  was  nomioat^ 
Bishop  of  Ely,  being  only  a  few  months 
after  he  had  acted  as  a  judge.  He  held  the 
see  till  his  death,  on  August  0,  1254.  His 
charity,  his  hospitality,  his  munificent  ex- 
penditure in  the  erection  of  his  church,  and 
nis  splendid  entertainment  to  the  king  and 
the  nobles  on  its  dedication  in  1262;  •■* 
the  admiration  of  bis  oontemponrifls;  v^ 
Matthew  Paris,  in  speaking  of  Ut^ 
says  <  flos  magistromm  obnt  it  *■ 
rum,  quia  sicut  abbas  abbs' 
^'il>ax^t«x.^  \tk  et   epuoopw 


NOBTHWOOB 

conucsvit.'  {Godwm,266'yB.lFaii^$  Mi- 
tred Ahheys.) 

VO&TH WOOD^  Roo£R  i)E.of  Northwood- 
Chaflteners,  a  manor  near  Milton  in  Kent, 
granted  in  the  reign  of  Kin?  John  to 
Stephen,  the  son  of  Jordan  de  Shepey^ 
who  built  a  mansion  there  and  assumed  its 
name,  was  the  son  of  Roger  de  Northwood, 
who  was  with  King  Richard  in  the  Holy 
Land,  by  Bona  Fitzbemard  his  wife.  In 
42  Henry  HI.  he  accounted  for  the  pro- 
ceeds of  the  sheriffalty  of  Kent  as  one  of 
the  executors  of  Reginald  de  Cobbeham, 
and  was  possessed,  besides  the  above  manor, 
of  a  variety  of  other  property  in  the  same 
county.  In  41  Hen^  lU.  he  procured  the 
tenure  of  his  lands  to  be  chansrea  from  gavel- 
kind to  knight*s  service.     (Masted' s  Kent) 

He  was  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  in 
2  Edward  I.,  and  in  5  Edward  I.  he  was 
excused  from  his  service  in  the  army  against 
Wales  on  account  of  his  residence  in  the 
Exchequer,  and  there  is  sufficient  proof  of 
his  continuing  in  the  office  till  his  death, 
which  occurred  in  the  thirteenth  year. 
{Madoxj  i.  726,  ii.  20-320;  Cal,  Liquis.  p.  m. 
L  86.)  His  son  John  was  summoned  to 
parliament,  as  were  his  successors,  till  49 
Edward  lU.  The  male  lino  failing  in 
1416,  the  barony  fell  into  abeyance  among 
the  representatives  of  his  sisters.  {Baron- 
age^  ii  70.) 

HOBTOH,  Richard,  was  the  son  of  Adam 
Conyers,  sealed  in  the  bishopric  of  Dur- 
ham, who  adopted  the  name  of  Norton 
from  his  wifb^  the  heiress  of  Norton  in 
Yorkshire. 

He  appears  as  an  advocate  in  the  Year 
Book  from  1  Henry  IV.,  1399,  and  his  first 
public  appointment  was  that  of  justice  of 
assize  for  Durham  in  1406,  when  it  is  most 
probable  that  he  was  a  serjeant-at-law, 
although  his  writ  of  summons  is  not  re- 
corded, his  name  occurring  in  1403  among 
several  known  to  be  of  that  degree,  as 
lending  the  king  100/.  to  meet  the  emer- 
gencies of  the  state.  {Ada  Privy  Councily 
1.  203.)  He  was  made  one  of  the  king's 
seneants  in  1408.     (Duffdale's  Oriy.  46.) 

V^'ithin  three  months  after  the  accession 
of  Henry  V.  he  was  appointed  chief  justice 
of  the  Common  Pleas,  on  June  26,  1413, 
and  remained  in  his  seat  till  his  death  on 
December  20,  1420.  (JRot.  Pari.  iv.  35- 
123.)  By  his  wife  Elizabeth,  daughter  of 
Sir  John  Tempest  of  Studley,  he  left  a 
fumily  behind  nim,  two  of  whose  descen- 
dants were  attainted  for  treason — Richard 
Norton^  some  time  governor  of  Norham 
Castle,  in  1569,  who  died  in  exile;  and 
Thomas  Norton,  executed  at  Tvbum  in 
1670.     (Smiees*  Durham,  i.  Ivii.  clx.) 

VOBWICH,  Ralph  de,  is  called  'clericum 
noatrum '  in  a  safe-conduct  granted  to  him 
in  18  John,  when  he  was  sent  to  Ireland. 
There  he  was  employed  in  matters  relating 


NORWICH 


487 


to  the  Exchequer,  frequently  going  thither 
during  the  first  six  years  of  the  following 
reign,  and  being  united  with  the  chief 
justice  there  and  the  Archbishop  of  Dublin 
m  assessing  the  aid  in  4  Henry  III.  While 
in  England  he  had  the  management  of  the 
duty  on  wool ;  and  the  lands  of  Eustace  de 
Vesd,  of  Robert  de  Berkeley,  and  of  the 
Earl  of  Hereford  were  successively  com- 
mitted to  his  charge.  In  8  Henry  HI.  he 
had  the  church  of  Acle  in  Buckingham- 
shire, and  in  the  next  year  was  parson  of 
that  of  BrehuU  in  Oxfordshire. 

After  actinff  with  Elyas  de  Sunning  as 
justice  of  the  Jews,  he  was  constituted  one 
of  the  *kinff*s  justices  of  the  Bench'  on 
April  29,  1230,  and  fines  were  levied  before 
him  till  Hilary  1234.  (Dugdale's  Orig, 
43 ;  BjU.  Pat,  l85 ;  Eat.  Claw.  i.  187,  &c, 
ii.  47,  62.) 

NOBWICH,  Walter  de,  the  son  of 
Geoftrey  de  Norwich,  was  possessed  of 
very  large  estates  in  Norfolk,  Sutiblk, 
Lincoln,  and  Hertford,  over  which  he 
obtained  a  charter  of  free  warren,  together 
with  a  fair  at  Ling  in  Norfolk.  No  mention 
is  made  of  the  commencement  of  his  career 
in  the  Exchequer;  but  he  was  remem- 
brancer in  35  Edward  L  In  this  ollice  he 
acted  in  the  first  years  of  the  next  reign, 
and  was  raised  to  the  bench  as  a  baron  of 
the  Exchequer  on  August  29,  1311,  5  Ed- 
ward n.  On  October  23  he  was  appointed 
locum  tenens  of  the  treasurer  of  tne  Ex- 
chequer, and  on  March  3,  1312,  was  again 
named  baron. 

As  he  still  continued  to  act  as  treasurer's 
lieutenant,  we  can  no  otherwise  account  for 
these  two  nominations  as  baron  than  by 
supposing  that  Roger  de  Scotre  his  prede- 
cessor, though  not  so  described  in  his 
patent,  held  the  highest  place  in  the  court, 
and  that  Walter  de  Norwich's  second 
patent  advanced  him  to  till  it.  The  sugges- 
tion derives  support  from  the  fact  that  only 
five  days  afterwards  John  Abel  was  made 
a  baron  in  the  place  of  Walter  do  Norwich, 
who  is  described  in  that  patent  as  *  nunc 
capitalis  baro,'  which  is  tne  first  occasion 
on  which  that  title  is  used. 

The  interval  between  this  and  the  eighth 
year  of  the  reign  was  devoted  to  the  per- 
formance of  the  double  duties  of  baron  and 
of  treasurers  lieutenant ;  but  in  the  latter 
year,  on  being  raised  to  the  ofiice  of 
treasurer  on  September  26, 1314,  he  vacated 
his  seat  on  the  oench. 

He  retained  the  treasurership  till  May 
30,  1317,  when  he  was  relieved  from  tho 
office  on  account  of  illness,  and  not  only 
received  the  honourable  appointment  of 
chief  baron,  but  was  also  commanded  to 
assist  at  the  privy  councils  of  his  sovereign 
whenever  he  was  able.  He  is  called  by 
this  title  in  13  Edward  IL,  as  present  on 
the  deliveiy  of  the  Ovc^it  ^^«\.   "^^-^^a 


488 


NOBWICH 


immediately  re-appointed  chief  baron  on 
the  accession  of  Edward  lU.,  and  kept  his 
seat  in  the  court  till  his  death  in  the  third 
year  of  that  reie;n. 

By  his  wife,  Margaret,  he  had  three  sons, 
John,  Koger,  and  Thomas;  the  elder  of 
whom  was  summoned  as  a  baron  to  parlia- 
ment, but  the  title  became  extinct  oefore 
the  end  of  the  reigm  by  failure  of  his  issue. 
(MadoXf  i.  76,  ii.  49,  84 ;  Barmiage^  ii.  90 ; 
N,  Fcedera^  ii.  428 ;  JBloniefield's  Norwich, 
i.  76;  Norfolk  A.  749.) 

NOKWICH,  Roger,  was  admitted  a  mem- 
ber of  Lincoln's  Inn  on  February  3, 1503, 
and  attained  the  rank  of  reader  in  1518 ; 
and  again  in  1521,  on  his  being  cidled  to  the 
degree  of  the  coif,  which  he  assumed  in  the 
following  Trinity  Term,  and  was  apnointed 
king's  Serjeant  on  July  11, 1523.  On  No- 
vember 2:2,  1530,  although  there  was  then  no 
vacancy  in  the  court,  he  was  raised  to  the 
bench  as  a  puisne  judge  of  the  Common 
Pleas,  but  evidently  as  the  designated 
successor  of  Chief  Justice  Sir  Kobert 
Brudenell,  who  was  a  veiY  old  man,  and 
on  whose  death  in  the  following  January 
Kobert  Norwich  was  immediately  promoted 
to  his  place.  His  presidency  lasted  till  the 
beginnmgofl535.  (Duffdale^ sOripAr, 261.) 

HOTTIKGHAII,  Earl  of.    See  H.  Finch. 

HOTTIKGHAIC,  Robert  be,  had  fines 
acknowledged  before  him  from  Hilair  to 
Midsummer,  29  Henry  lU.,  1245.  (Dug- 
dale's  Orig.  43.)  It  is  probable  that  he 
then  died,  as  no  further  mention  occurs  re- 
lative to  him,  and  no  records  have  been 
discovered  by  which  his  personal  history 
can  be  traced. 

NOTTIHGHAIC,  William  be,  is  recorded 
twice  as  a  justice  itinerant  into  the 
northern  counties,  in  40  and  54  Henry  III., 
1262, 1270 ;  but  both  confined  to  subjects 
relating  to  forest  mattei-s.  He  was  sheriff 
or  under-sherifi"  of  Lincolnshire  in  49 
Henry  III. 

NOTTIKGHAIC,  Robert  be,  possibly 
the  son  of  William  de  Nottingham,  who 
acted  for  the  king  in  the  Exchequer  in  6 
Edward  11.  {Madox,  i.  732),  was  appointed 
remembrancer  of  the  Exchequer  on  June 
21,  1322,  15  Edward  II. ;  and  on  October 
15,  1327, 1  Edward  III.,  was  raised  to  the 
office  of  second  baron  of  that  court;   but 


ODO 

on  April  16,  1329,  Robert  de  WodehoM 
was  made  second  baion.  Whether  ttii 
arose  from  the  death  or  xetirement  fA 
Robert  de  Nottingham  does  not  vdwb, 
{Pari  Jrri^,ii.p.ii.  194.) 

HOTTIHGEAM,  Williajc,  was  probiUr 
a  native  of  Gloucestershire,  as  he  possened 
there,  at  the  time  of  his  death,  seveal 
manors,  besides  many  other  lands  in  the 
county.  (Cal,  Inquis,  p.  m.  iv.  417.)  He 
was  appointed  the  king^s  attorney  on  Jmn 
30,  1452,  30  Henry  VI.,  which  office  he 
filled  till  the  end  of  that  reign.  In  7  and 
13  Edward  IV.  he  is  styed  '  oone  of  oor 
counseillours ; '  and  on  April  3,  1479,  be 
was  appointed  lord  chief  oaron.  He  en- 
joyed tiie  place  for  little  more  than  four 
years,  surviving  his  royal  master  about  two 
montns,  a  new  chief  baron  being  named  on 
June  15,  1483. 

HOTTOH,  William  be,  was  of  a  York- 
shire family,  and  probably  a  native  of  the 
place  of  tnat  name.    He  became  an  ad- 
vocate of  considerable  eminence,  to  judge 
from  the  frequent  recurrence  of  his  aiga- 
ments  in  the  Year  Books.     In  20  Edniid 
III.  he  had  a  confirmation  from  the  king  d 
a  messuage  and  above  200  acres  of  lead, 
part  of  the  manor  of  Fishlake  in  Yorkshiie^ 
by  the  service  of  one  rose.    In  the  flame 
year  he  was  one  of  the  king*8  seijeants,  and 
on  October  12,  1355,  he  was  constituted  a 
judge  of  the  King's  Bench.     He  wassab- 
jected    in  135d  to  excommunication  £or 
neglecting  to  appear  to  the  pope*8  citation 
to  answer  for  the  sentence  he  had  pro- 
nounced against  the  Bishop   of  Ely,  for 
harbouring  the  man  who  had  slain  one  of 
Lady  Wake*s  servants. 

His  period  of  service  in  the  King*8  Bendi 
was  terminated  in  35  Edward  HI.,  when  lie 
was  constituted  chief  justice  of  die  Com- 
mon Pleas  in  Ireland  ;  and  two  years  afie^ 
wards  he  is  noticed  as  one  of  the  council  d 
the  king's  son,  Lionel  Earl  of  Ulster,  then 
lieutenant  of  that  county. 

He  and  his  wife  Isabella  were  benefactors 
to  the  priory  of  Bretton  in  Yorkshire,  and 
of  Royston  in  Hertfordshire.  {CaL  BeL 
Pat  153,  174;  N.  Foedera,  iii.  101,  297, 
622 ;  Abb.  Rot.  Orig.  212 ;  Bot.  Parl\L 
455 ;  Bamefs  Edward  III.  551 ;  Cd.  In- 
quis.  p.  m.  ii.  168, 100.) 


O 


^  ODO  (Bishop  op  Bateux  and  Earl  op   cumstances  tiU  William  succeeded  to  the 

Kent)  was  a  younger  son  of  Arlotta^he    dukedom,  after  which  the  confiscated  §► 

of  William  the  Conqueror,  by  Her-  !  tates  of  the  rebellioiia  nobles  enaUii  Ihi 


mother 

luin  de  Conte villa,  whom  she  married  after  j  duke  to  enrich  his  uterine 
her  connection  with  Robert  Duke  of  Nor-  ',  elder  of  them,  Hobert  Eazl  </  * 
jnandy,    Herluin  was  iik  but  modenX.^  dc-  ^y^^TSR^xda  notioed.    Odo^  tk« 


luiltlMia    Sfti 


ODO 

tained  the  earldom  of  Eu  on  the  banishment 
of  William,  its  former  earl,  who  had  oppo- 
sed the  duke's  succession:  to  which  was 
added,  in  1049,  the  valuable  bishopric  of 
Bajeux.  His  disposition,  however,  exhibit- 
ing more  of  the  soldier  than  the  priest,  he 
was  employed  to  lead  part  of  his  brother's 
forces  against  the  King  of  France,  to  whose 
defeat  he  is  said  to  have  greatly  contributed. 
In  William's  enterprise  against  England, 
also,  he  not  only  accompanied  him,  but 
contributed  a  supply  of  forty  ships. 

Forbidden  by  his  dericai  character  from 
bearing  offensive  arms,  he  is  represented  in 
the  tapestry  of  Bayeux  on  horseback  and  in 
complete  armour,  but  without  any  sword. 
He  bears  a  staff  only ;  and  the  superscrip- 
tion, '  Hie  Odo  Eps  baculum  tenens  con- 
fortat,'  is  meant  to  mtimate  that  his  peculiar 
duty  was  to  encourage  the  soldiers.  After 
the  battle  the  castle  of  Dover  and  the 
whole  county  of  Kent  were  committed  to 
his  care. 

Early  in  1067  King  William,  returning 
to  his  Norman  dominions,  left  Odo  and 
William  Fitz-Osbeme  regents  and  justi- 
ciaries of  England ;  Kent,  of  which  he  was 
then  created  earl,  being  particularly  placed 
under  Odo's  care.  The  conduct  of  the  vice- 
roys was  harsh  and  rapacious,  occasioning 
many  insurrections,  which  were  quickly 
suppressed.  After  Fitz-Osbeme's  death  Odo 
was  still  continued  regent,or,as  Malmesbury 
calls  him,  *  vice  dominus/  on  another  visit 
of  the  kinff  to  Normandy,  in  1073 ;  and  his 
energy  and  address  were  exhibited  in  assist^ 
ing  Kichard  de  Benefacta  and  William  de 
W  areune,  the  chief  justiciaries,  in  crushing 
the  conspiracy  of  Roger  Fitz-Osbeme.  Ean 
of  Hereford  ( the  son  of  his  former  coadjutor 
in  the  government),  and  Balph  de  Guader, 
Earl  of  SiifTolk  and  Norfolk. 

The  king,  with  his  accustomed  muni- 
ficence, not  only  rewarded  Odo's  services 
with  the  honoui's  already  mentioned,  which 
raised  him  to  the  second  rank  in  the  king- 
dom, but  by  more  substantial  gifts  enabled 
Lim  splendidly  to  support  it.  Ilis  share  in 
the  distribution  of  crown  lands  amounted 
to  184  lordships  in  Kent  alone,  with  above 
260  in  other  counties.  With  the  immense 
riches  thus  amassed,  he  aspired  to  a  still 
higher  dijrnity,  and  conceived  the  mad  pro- 
ject of  purchasing  the  papacy.  He  bought 
a  magnificent  palace  at  liome,  and  engagmg 
many  of  the  English  nobles  in  the  enterprise, 
he  prepared  a  number  of  ships  for  the  con- 
veyance of  them  and  his  treasures  there,  to 
await  the  death  of  the  reigning  pope,  Gre- 
gory VH.  Talking  advantage  of  the  king's 
absence  in  Normandy  in  1079,  he  had  col- 
lected his  friends,  and  was  ready  to  s^  firom 
the  Isle  of  Wight,  when,  adverse  winds  de- 
layinf]^  the  expedition,  the  king  received 
intelligence  of  nis  project,  and,  hastening  to 
the  scene,  ordered  the  ambitious  prelate  to 


OPO 


489 


be  arrested.  The  fear,  however^  of  incur- 
ring ecclesiastical  censure,  by  laying  violent 
hands  on  a  bishop,  restrained  his  officers 
from  obeying  the  royal  commands,  so  that 
the  kin^  was  reduced  to  the  necessity  of 
being  his  own  officer,  and  made  the  arrest 
himself.  Odo  claimed  the  privilege  of  his 
order,  and  appealed  to  the  pope;  but 
William  was  too  determined  in  his  purpose 
to  desist,  and  on  the  suggestion  of  Lanmmc, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  answered, '  I  do 
not  arrest  the  clergyman  or  the  bishop,  but 
my  own  earl,  whom  by  my  own  will  I  made 

fovemor  of  my  kingdom,  and  from  whom 
require  an  account  of  his  stewardship.' 
Odo  was  accordingly  committed  to  safe  cus- 
tody in  the  castle  of  Houen,  where  he  re- 
mained a  prisoner  till  the  end  of  his  brother's 
reign,  and  all  his  property  was  confiscated 
to  the  king's  use. 

Even  on  his  death-bed  William  could 
scarcely  conquer  his  resentment  against  his 
ungrateful  brother,  and  in  the  first  instance 
excepted  him  from  the  general  liberation 
whicn  he  then  commanded  of  all  persons  in 
confinement.  By  the  importunity  of  his 
nobles,  however,  he  was  at  last  induced, 
reluctantly,  to  consent  to  his  enlargement ; 
but  not  without  expressing  surprise  at  their 
intercession,  and  prophesying  that  new 
troubles  would  arise  from  the  release  of  so 
restless  a  disturber. 

On  the  Conqueror's  death,  in  September 
1087,  Odo  returned  to  England,  and  was 
restored  to  his  earldom  of  Kent  and  the 
vast  possessions  which  he  had  forfeited. 
He  wiis  present  at  the  court  which  William 
liulus  held  at  the  following  Christmas,  on 
which  occasion  he  is  described  as  'justi- 
ciarius  et  princeps  totius  Angliae.' 

Whatever  friendship  the  kmg  might  pro- 
fess for  him  at  this  time,  it  is  probable  that 
it  did  not  last  long.  Odo  soon  found  that 
he  no  longer  possessed  the  influence  he  had 
formerly  exercised,  and  that  the  counsels  of 
Lanfranc  prevailed.  Instigated  b^  disap- 
pointment and  jealousy,  he  excited  the 
Norman  barons  to  join  in  raising  Robert, 
the  king's  elder  brother,  to  the  English 
throne.  A  conspiracy  was  formed,  and  by 
the  following  Easter  the  standard  of  rebel- 
lion was  raised  in  various  counties.  WiUiam, 
however,  wisely  attacked  Odo,  the  principal 
insurgent,  at  Fevensey,  where  he  had  re- 
tired to  await  the  arrival  of  Robert,  and 
after  seven  weeks'  siege  compelled  him  to 
surrender,  granting  him  his  life  and  liberty 
on  condition  that  he  would  deliver  up  the 
castle  of  Rochester  and  leave  England  for 
eyer.  On  being  taken  to  Rochester  for  this 
purpose,  Eustace  Earl  of  Boulogne,  to 
whom  he  had  entrusted  his  command,  pre- 
tended he  was  a  traitor,  and  took  him  and 
his  guard  prisoners;  whereupon  William, 
justly  indignant  made  a  vigorous  attack  on 
the  castle,  which,  after  an  obstinate  defence, 


490 


ODYHAM 


he  took ;  and,  thouprh  the  lives  of  the  gar- 
rison were  spared,  Odo  was  compelled  to 
evacuate  the  place  amid  the  taunts  of  the 
conquerors.  In  the  vexation  of  the  moment 
he  could  not  restrain  his  threats  of  revenge; 
but  no  opportunity  was  afforded  him  of 
carrying  them  into  execution. 

Retiring  to  Normandy,  he  assisted  Robert 
in  the  management  of  his  dukedom,  and, 
according  to  some  writers,  accompanied  him 
in  his  expedition  to  Jerusalem,  and  was 
killed  at  tne  siege  of  Antioch.  According 
to  others,  he  died  and  was  buried  at 
Palermo,  in  his  way  to  Rome.  If  the  event, 
as  it  is  generally  allowed,  occurred  in  the 
year  109(5,  the  latter  account  is  most  pro- 
bable, as  the  siege  of  Antioch  did  not  begin 
till  October  1097. 

His  career  affords  the  best  evidence  that 
the  Church  was  not  the  profession  he  should 
have  selected.  His  talents  and  his  tenden- 
cies were  of  a  military  character,  and  he 
was  formed  to  shine  in  the  active  duties  of 
the  field.  Energetic  in  counsel,  he  was 
daring  and  prompt  in  the  execution  of  his 
conceptions.  Althoupfh  ambitious  and 
worldly,  and  making  riches  and  power  the 
principal  objects  of  his  pursuit,  ne  was  at 
the  same  time  bountiful  to  the  poor,  and  an 
encourager  of  learning.  He  expended  his 
splendid  revenue  with  a  liberal  hand ;  spent 
large  sums  in  the  erection  of  his  cathedral, 
and  in  beautifying  his  episcopal  city.  Even 
in  the  contradictory  accounts  of  the  histo- 
rians, some  of  whom  were  his  contem- 
poraries, enough  is  shown  to  prove  that,  if 
ne  had  some  vices,  there  were  many  virtues 
to  counterbalance  them.  {Dvgdales  On)/, 
20 ;  Baronage^  i.  22  \  Madox,  i.  8;  Ilidchins's 
Dorsetsh.  i.  11 ;  Will.  Malmesb.  450,  &c.; 
Roger  de  Wendorer,  ii.  20,  Szc. ;  Rapin : 
Daniel:  Turner:  Lingard]  &c.) 

ODTHAM,  Walter  de,  was  on  July  25, 
1284,  entrusted  with  the  Great  Seal  in 
conjunction  with  Hugh  de  Kendal,  during 
the  absence  of  Bishop  JBumel,  the  chancellor. 
On  this  account  they  are  placed  in  iSir  T. 
I).  Hardy's  catalogue  among  the  keepers  of 
the  Seal.  Both  of  them,  however,  were 
simply  clerks  in  Chancer}'.  {Mudox,  ii.  257.) 

OFFOBD,  Andrew  de,  was  the  brother 
of  the  undermentioned  John  de  Offord,  and, 
like  him,  was  employed  in  diplomatic 
missions.  From  17  to  2l>  Edward  III.  he  is 
named  on  embassies  to  Rome,  Castile,  Por- 
tugal, Flanders,  and  France.  (A".  Feeder  a, 
ii.  1224,  iii.  308.)  It  was  probably  during 
the  chancellorship  of  his  brother  that  he 
was  made  a  clerk  or  master  of  the  Chancery, 
although  he  is  not  distinctly  named  among 
those  officers  till  a  later  period.  On  August 
4,  1353,  when  the  chancellor,  John  de 
Thoresby,  went  to  York,  he  left  the  Seal 
in  the  hands  of  David  de  Wollore,  M.R., 
Thomas  de  Brayton,  and  Andrew  de  Offord, 
but  how  long  ne  lem&Vned  t^Mienl  ^o^  x\.cA. 


OFFORD 

appear.    Offord  was  a  receirer  of  petitions 
in  the  parliaments  of  28  and  29  Edward  IH 
(JKo^.  Pari  ii.  254,  2G4).  and  died  in  1358. 
He  was  at  first  described  aa  juris  drilii 
professor,  afterwards  aa  canon  of  York,  ud 
'  lastly  as  archdeacon  of  Middlesex,  to  Wiiick 
I  he  was  admitted  in  1349.     {Le  Neve^  193.) 
OFFOBD,  JoHK  DE  (AlBCHBISHOP  of  Ca5- 
terburt),  is  sometimes  called  Ufford,  and  it 
is  the  fashion  to  call  him  one  of  the  sons  of 
Robert  de  Ufford,  the  first  Earl  of  Suffolk. 
It  is  doubtful,  however,  whether  be  was  in 
any  way  connected  witn  that  family,  as  be 
is  not  mentioned  in  the  earVe  wilL    There 
was,  however,  a  John  de  Ufford,  who  wm 
contemporary  with    the  chancellor.     He 
:  was  the  son  of  Rfdph  de  Ufford,  the  brother 
I  of  Robert,  the  first  earl,  but  he  is  in  ereiy 
way  dbtinguished    from    the   chancellor. 
He  is  always  called  a  knigh^  and  was  sum- 
moned to  parliament  aa  a  baron  b  1360, 
j  eleven  years  after  the  death  of  the  chan- 
!  cellor,  and  his  own  death  occurred  in  the 
j  following  year.    The  discrepancies  in  the« 
'  dates  appear  to  settle  the  question,  but  if 
\  any  doubt  remained  it  would  seem  to  be 
extinguished  by  the  following  fiict.    Ihe 
first  earVs  grandfSather,  whose  name  vas 
Robert,  assumed  the  name  of  Ufford,  from 
a  place  in  Suffolk.     There  is  evidence  to 
prove  that  the  chancellor's  family  deriyed 
its  name  from  the  manor  of  Oflbrd  in  Sw^ 
titigdonshirCf  and  that  he  is  apparentlj  the 
younger  son  of  John  de  Offoiti,  who  had 
propertv  at  Offord-Damevs  in  tliat  countr. 
and  that  in  5  Edward  III.,  1331,  he  had 
the    custody  of  that    manor  during  the 
minority  of  his  nephew,  the  infant  heir. 
(Raronagc,  ii.  47 ;  Abb.  Placit,  206 ;  M 
Rot.  Orig.  ii.  50.) 

In  the  early  part  of  the  reign  of  Ed^ 
III.  John  de  Offord  was  dean  of  the  Arches 
{yetccome's  St.  Albam,  229),  and  from  the 
eighth  to  the  eighteenth  years  he  was  cod- 
tinually  engaged  in  important  foreign  em- 
bassies to  the  courts  of  France,  Swtland, 
and  Avignon.  At  first  he  is  described  u 
juris  civilis  professor  and  as  canon  of  St 
Paurs,  in  12  Edward  HI.  as  archdeacoo 
of  Ely,  and  on  August  3, 1344,  as  dean  of 
Lincoln.  From  October  4,  1342,  he  is 
mentioned  as  keeper  of  the  privy  seal  and 
on  one  occasion  as  the  king's  secretair. 
(X.  F(vdera,il  880,  1239,  iii.  18, 176.)  In 
these  negotiations  he  exhibited  so  much 
i  wisdom  and  tact  as  to  point  him  out  as  a 
:  fit  recipient  of  the  honours  with  which  he 
was  afterwards  invested. 

On  October  20,  1345,  he  was  appointed 
chancellor,  and  held  the  Seal  till  hu  de^ 
being  the  third  chancellor  during  this  itifB^ 
who  died  in  office.  In  September  ISIBifr 
was  raised  to  the  aichbiahopric  flfPM*^ 
bury,  Pope  Clement  VL  and  fl*  ■■*• 
kinff  unitmg  to  set  adde  the  r**^  J 

\QlT\iQm%&Bcadwaidln;  bo*  * 


OGEB  OBMESBY  491 


oever  to  obtain  full  poflsession  of  his 
di^ty.  Before  his  installation  he  was 
seixed  with  the  mortal  disease  which  for 
MTOial  months  had  devastated  England, 
and  was  one  of  the  last  of  its  victims,  dying 
at  Tottenham  on  May  20, 1849.  He  was 
buried  privately  at  Canterbury.  (Godwin, 
111 ;  Angl  Sac,  L  42,  876,  794.) 

OeSB  was  one  of  the  dapifers  of  the 
household,  of  whom  so  many  are  noticed 
among  the  justiciers  of  the  reign  of  Henry 
LI.  The  omce  is  believed  to  be  the  same 
Bs  seneschal  or  steward,  and,  as  there  were 
several  at  the  same  time,  some  perhaps 
were  of  England  and  others  of  Normandy. 
In  14  Henry  II.  the  honor  of  Eye  was 
committed  to  hb  charge.    He  was  then 


the  king's  part,  and,  as  he  continued  sheriff 
for  four  years,  the  knights  probably  thought 
that,  as  there  were  no  symptoms  of  any  of 
them  obtaining  the  appomtment,  they  were 
not  called  upon  to  perform  their  nart.  Cer- 
tainly none  of  them  enjoyed  the  omce  at  that 
period,  although  Joitian  Oliver,  twenty- 
eight  years  afterwards,  in  24  Henry  HI., 
held  it  for  one  year.  In  6  Henry  IH.  he 
was  one  of  the  kinff*s  escheators  for  the 
county  of  Devon.  From  the  ninth  year  to 
the  twenty-second  he  was  appointed  a  jus- 
tice itinerant  in  that  and  several  other 
counties.  (Rot.  Claui.  i.  478,  ii.  76,  205, 
206 ;  Excerpt,  e  Hot.  Fin.  i.  239,  2^3.) 

0SME8BT,  WiLLiAJC  DE,  was  apoointed 
a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench  in  24  Edward 


sheriff  of  Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  and  held  '  I.y  l^SdO.  He  had,  however,  acted  pre- 
that  office  for  several  years.  viously  as  a  justice    itinerant    into    the 

His  name  appears  in  1170-1  as  one  of  northern  counties  in  20  and  21  Edward  I. 
the  justices  itinerant  in  those  counties  with  On  the  reduction  of  Scotland  in  1296  he 
Guy  the  dean ;  probably  only  as  sheriff,  as  ;  was  constituted  justiciary  of  that  country,. 
was  common  at  that  time,  for  the  purpose  \  and  by  the  ri^ur  with  which  he  extorted 
of  assisting  in  settling  the  assessments  to  I  the  penalties  imposed  by  King  Edward  on, 
the  tallages  and  aids  uien  imposed.  {Ma^  \  those  who  refused  to  take  the  oath  of  fealty 
doxj  i.  144,  145,  573.)  i  to  him  he  naturally  excited  the  deep  and 

He  wasthefather  of  the  before-mentioned  general  odium  of  that  people.  Wallace,  in 
Oger  Fitz-Oger.  the  following  year,  surprised  him  while 

OKETON,  John  de,  was  a  justice  itine-  holding  his  court  at  ocone,  and,  his  followers 
rant  into  various  counties  from  52  to  56  being  dispersed,  he  himself  barely  efH.*aped. 
Henry  HI.,  and  from  the  very  numerous  i  ( Triveti  Annales,  856 ;  Tytler's  ikotlandj  i. 
entaies  on  the  Fine  Roll  up  to  October  20,    128, 128.) 

1272,  57  Henry  III.,  of  payments  made  for  On  his  return  to  England  he  resumed 
assizes  to  be  held  before  him,  there  can  be  his  duties  in  the  King's  Bench,  in  which  ho 
little  doubt  that  he  w^as  a  regular  justicier.  is  mentioned  till  the  end  of  the  reign,  and 
{Excerpt,  e  Rot.  Fin.  ii.  490-588.)  IJe  held  also  as  chief  of  the  justices  of  trailbaston 
the  office  of  sheriff  of  Yorkshire  in  44  assigned  for  the  counties  of  Norfolk  and 
Benry  III.,  and  for  several  subseauent  Sutlblk  in  1306.  (Abb.  Placii.  242,  251>, 
fears ;  and  there  is  an  entry  in  52  Henry  2i)4 ;  Rot.  Pari.  i.  166,  198 ;  Pari  Writs, 
IIL  that  he  could  not  levy  the  ferm  for  the    i.  407-8.) 

x>un^,  'propter  turbationem  regni.'  (Ma-  ,  Some  doubt  may  arise  as  to  his  having 
ioXy  ii.  160.)  I  been  re-appointed  to  his  seat  in  the  King's 

OKHAM,  John  DE,wasjoinedinthecom-  i  Bench  on  the  accession  of  Edward  II.,  as 
mission  with  the  escheator  ultra  Trentam  no  such  writ  was  directed  to  him  to  take 
to  take  into  the  king's  hands  the  property  the  oaths  as  was  addressed  to  his  fellows  on 
3f  Anthony,  Patriarch  of  Jerusalem  and  Bi-  September  6, 1307 ;  and  his  name  does  not 
)hop  of  Durham,  on  his  death  in  4  Edward  judicially  appear  in  the  Abbreviatio  Placi- 
LL  (Abb.  Rot.  Orig.  i.  175.)  During  the  torum  after  the  death  of  Edward  I.^fPlt  is 
bur  following  years  he  was  clerk  to  Inge-  true  that  he  was  summoned  to  attend  the 
ard  de  Warlee,  keeper  of  the  wardrobe  iirst  parliament,  and  stands  in  his  proper 
[Rot.  Pari.  ii.  437),  and  held  the  office  of  place  in  the  list,  but  this  was  bv  a  previous 
jofferer  of  that  department.  (Cal.  Rot.  writ,  dated  August  26  j  and  though  he  is 
Pat.  74.)  On  June  18,1317,  he  was  con-  summoned  to  all  the  subsequent  parliaments 
itituted  one  of  the  barons  of  the  Exchequer,  up  to  11  Edward  U.,  he  is  generally  placed 
ind  is  not  named  in  that  character  beyond  in  that  part  of  the  list  appropriated  to  the 
L322.  He  became  custos  of  the  deanery  of  justices  itinerant.  That  ne  acted  in  the 
iie  free  chapel  of  St.  Martin,  London,  in  latter  capacity  during  the  remainder  of  his 
L9  Edward  III.     (Abb.  Rot.  Orig.  i.  2{)0.)      life  there  can  be  no  question ;  and  it  is  not 

OLIYEB,  Jordan,  was  one  of  the  knights  unlikely  that  he  was  allowed,  at  the  com- 
)f  Somersetshire  and  Dorsetshire  who  were  mencement  of  the  new  reini,  to  retire  from 
(ummoned  before  the  barons  of  the  Ex-  the  heavier  duties  of  the  King's  Bench  to 
iiequer  in  14  John  for  not  keeping  the  fine  his  estates  in  Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  in  which 
vhich  they  had  made  with  the  king  for  counties  he  was  principally  employed  as  a 
laving  the  sheriffs  of  those  counties  from  justice  of  assize  during  the  whole  period, 
unong  themselves.  (Rot.  Clous,  i.  131.)  (Ptirl.  Writs,  i.  766,  u.  1246.)  He  died 
This  tine  was  made  with  William  Malet  on    about  1317,  and  waa  Y>\me4  «2t  \\i<^  t^^wrj  ^ 


492 


OSBEBT 


St  Benet'e,  at  HtJme  in  Norfolk,  to  which 
he  was  a  benefactor.  [Taylor* $  Index 
Monad.  2.) 

In  the  pleas  of  2  Edward  II.  he  is  spoken 
-of  as  the  husband  of  Sibilla,  late  the  wife 
of  Roger  Lovedaj,  a  justice  itinerant 
in  the  previous  reign  (Abb.  Placit.  307) ; 
and  among  the  escheats  or  inquisitions  post 
mortem  of  7  Edward  II.  (L  264)  occurs  the 
name  of  Elena,  the  wife  of  William  de 
Ormesby.  This  may  perhaps  be  explained 
by  supposing  that  there  mi  At  be  two  Wil- 
liams ae  Ormesby^  both  of  Norfolk ;  a  sus- 
picion which  receives  some  probability  from 
the  fact  that  while  the  judge  was  sum- 
moned with  his  fellows  to  the  parliament  at 
Carlisle  in  35  Edward  I.,  a  burgess  of  the 
same  name  was  returned  to  the  same  par- 
liament for  Yarmouth  in  Norfolk.  They 
might,  however,  be  still  the  same  person, 
for  there  is  no  proof  that  judges,  or  at  all 
events  justices  itinerant,  were  then  pre- 
cluded from  sitting  among^the  Commons. 

OBBEBT  (P  Bishop  of  Exbteb)  has  not 
hitherto  been  introduced  among  the  chan- 
cellors, and  is  now  inserted  on  the  autho- 
rity of  a  charter  granted  by  King  Wil- 
liam I.  to  the  monastery  of  St.  Augustine 
at  Canterbury,  among  the  sifipatures  to 
which  appears '  Signum  Osberti  Cancellarii.' 
Two  other  signatures  are  those  of  Scotland 
the  Abbot,  and  William,  Bishop  of  London ; 
^md  as  the  former  was  appointed  in  1070 
and  the  latter  died  in  107o,  the  date  of  the 
charter  must  have  been  between  those  two 
years,  or  in  one  of  them.    {Momid.  i.  144.) 

If,  as  is  most  probable,  he  were  the  Os- 
bert  who  was  made  Bishop  of  Exeter  in 
1074,  the  period  within  which  he  held  the 
chancellorship  is  reduced  even  to  a  shorter 
compass.  The  bishop  was  a  Norman  by 
birth,  son  of  Osbem  de  Crespou,  and  is 
described  by  Malmesbury  as  'frater  Gu- 
lielmi  pre-excellentissimi  comitis,'  the  Earl 
of  Hereford,  and  brought  up  in  the  court 
of  King  Edward.  He  ruled  the  see  for 
nearly  thirty  years,  and  died  in  1103.  He 
sometimes  is  called  Osbem,  imder  which 
name  he  attested  the  charter  to  St  Martin's 
in  London,  in  10C8,  as  chaplain,  aud  he 
used  both  names  indiscriminately  as  bishop. 
(/Jirf.  iii.  141,  iv.  10,  17,  20,  vi.  1325  j  Le 
Neve,  80 ;  Godwuiy  401.) 

08G0DBT,  Adam  de,  was  appointed 
keeper  of  the  Rolls  of  Chancerv  on  Octo- 
ber 1,  1295,  23  Edward  I.  He*^  no  doubt 
had  been  previously  one  of  the  clerks  of 
the  Chancery,  and  irom  several  entries  re- 
lating to  the  deposit  of  the  Seal  during  the 
temporary  absence  of  the  chancellor,  it  is 
plain  that  he  was  still  considered  as  the 
chief  of  them.  He  remained  uninter- 
ruptedly in  the  office  till  10  Edward  II., 
1316,  a  period  of  nearly  twenty-one  years. 
In  both  reigns  he  frequently  performed  the 
functions  of  the  chanceUoi  w^eu  c^oa^rA*^ 


OSMUND 

sometimes  alone,  and  sometimea  in  exasastr 
tion  with  two  or  three  of  the  other  deiki. 
In  that  of  Edward  I.  he  held  it  tbee 
times  under  the  seals  of  three  clerks,  dming 
the  vacancy  or  absence  of  the  chaxicellan. 
and  from  the  third  to  the  eighth  veirof 
Edward  U.  the  Seal  was  frequently  de- 
posited with  Osgodby  in  the  same  manner. 
At  first  it  was  merely  in  the  absence  of 
the  chancellor,  but  between  the  resignation 
of  Walter  Reginald,  Bishop  of  Woicestei, 
as  chancellor,  and  his  appointment  as  keener 
of  ihe  Seal — ^viz.,  between  December  9,  Idll, 
and  October  6, 1312— Adam  de  Oagodbj, 
Robert  de  Bardelby,  and  William  de  Ayii- 
mynne  are  distinctly  described  as  keepen 
of  the  Seal  (^Rot  Pari  i.  337),  and  tnoB- 
acted  all  the  business  connected  with  it. 
While  Reginald  continued  keeper  Ae 
Great  Seal  was  always  secured  by  the 
seals  of  these  three.  {Pari.  WriUj  il  p. 
ii.  1249.) 

At  the  parliament  held  at  Carlisle  in 
January  1307,  36  Edward  I.,  he  acted  as 
proctor  for  the  dean  and  chapter  of  York, 
oeing  then  a  canon  of  that  cathednL 
{Rot.  Pari.  i.  190.) 

Like  all  his  brethren  in  the  Ohanoeoy, 
he  was  an  ecclesiastic,  and  held  the  liying 
of  Gkwgrave  in  Yorkshire.  On  November 
7, 1307, 1  Edward  H.,  the  king  granted  to 
him  the  office  of  custos  of  the  nouse  of 
Converts  in  Chancery  Lane  during  plet-  | 
sure,  but  by  a  patent  in  the  seventh  rear 
secured  it  to  nim  for  life.  It  was  not, 
however,  till  the  year  1877  that  this  office 
was  permanently  annexed  to  that  of  keeper 
of  the  Rolls. 

His  death  occurred  in  August  1310, 
leaving  property  in  Yorkshire,  to  which 
Walter  de  08p)dby,  probably  his  brother, 
succeeded.    (Cal.  inqttis.  p.  m.  i.  194,279.) 

OBKUND  (Eabl  of  Dobset,  Bishop  op 
Salisbttbt)  is  described  as  the  nephew  of 
William  the  Conqueror,  being  son  of  hia 
sister  Isabella,  the  wife  of  Henry,  Count  of 
Seez  in  Normandy.  To  this  title  he  suc- 
ceeded, and  came  over  as  a  layman  in  the 
retinue  of  his  uncle,  who  is  said  to  hare 
created  him  Earl  of  Dorset,  and  to  have 
selected  him  for  his  superior  judgment  as 
one  of  his  principal  advisers,  and  placed 
him  in  the  office  of  chancellor. 

The  date  of  his  appointment  is  uncertain, 
but  it  is  evidently  not  so  early  as  is  usually 
assigned.  ArfjEistus  was  chancellor  in  1068, 
if  not  before,  and  Osbert  somewhere  h^ 
tween  1070  and  1074.  "William's  charter 
of  confirmation  to  the  cathedral  church  of 
St.  Paul  (Duffdale's  St.  PauTs,  61)^ 
which  the  name  '  Osmund  the  Chaoedkr* 
is  attached  as  one  of  the  witnotsMi  M* 
have  been  granted  after  1070,  imiyfcii 
Lanfranc  the  archbishop  is  anotlMrwteMi^ 
and  he  was  not  oonaecrated  til  *^ 

\0«!Qi>uA  ^in^XMhly  aaceeodM  > 


OVERTON 


OXFORD 


49» 


elevation  to  the  prelacy  about  1075.  one  of 
the  dates  ^iven  Dj  Thynne  and  Pnilipot ; 
and  there  is  every  reason  to  presume  that 
he  retained  the  Seal  till  his  own  appoint- 
ment as  Bishop  of  Salisbury  in  107o,  as  no 
other  chancellor  occurs  in  the  intervening 
period. 

There  is  another  charter  with  his  name 
as  chancellor,  confirming  the  land  of  Stan- 
ing  in  Sussex  to  the  abbey  of  Fescamp 
in  Normandy  {Monast,  vi.  1082),  but  it 
affords  no  evidence  of  having  been  granted 
either  at  an  earlier  or  a  later  date. 

On  the  death  of  Herman,  Bishop  of  Salia- 
bury,  Osmund,  having  become  an  eccle- 
siastic, was  appointed  his  successor.  His 
first  efforts  were  devoted  to  the  completion 
of  the  cathedral  commenced  bv  Herman, 
which  he  effected  in  the  year  1092,  found- 
ing a  deanery  and  thirty-dx  canonries  in 
it,  and  nobly  endowing  it  with  various 
churches  and  towns. 

He  died  in  December  1099,  and  was 
buried  in  the  cathedral  he  erected,  but  his 
remains  were  removed  in  1457  to  the  new 
cathedral. 

The  title  of  Osmund  the  Good,  which  he 
acquired  in  hb  life,  is  the  best  illustration 
of  his  character ;  he  was  a  prelate  of  the 
severest  manners  and  strictest  moderation, 
filling  his  office  with  dignity  and  reputa- 
tion, the  patron  of  learned  men,  and  an 
impartial  assertor  of  the  rights  of  his  see. 
He  was  canonised  by  Pope  Calixtus  in 
1457,  above  350  years  after  his  death. 

To  bring  into  some  uniformity  the  ser- 
vices of  the  Church,  he  compiled  the  bre- 
viary, missal,  and  ritual  which,  under  the 
name  of  '  The  Use  of  Sarum,'  was  after^ 
wards  generally  adopted,  and  continued  to 
be  employed  till  the  Reformation.  He  is 
also  stated  to  have  written  the  life  of  St 
Aldhelm,  first  Bishop  of  Sherborne.  {God- 
lairif  330 ;  Jftttchtns^s  Dorset,  i.  10^  &c  ;  Le 
Neve,  256 ;  Biog.  Brit,  LUerarioy  li.  23.) 

OVEBTOH,  THOMAS,  is  another  of  the 
barons  of  the  Exchequer  of  whom  there  is 


reader  in  1583.  Six  years  afterwards  he- 
was  raised  to  the  degree  of  the  coif,  and  on 
January  25,  1593,  was  made  queen's  Ser- 
jeant On  January  21,  1594  he  was  pro- 
moted to  the  bench  as  a  judffe  of  the' 
Common  Pleas,  where  he  sat  till  nis  death 
on  December  21,  1598.  (Jhtgdale's  Orig, 
45, 233.)  Wood  describes  him  as  a  learned 
man,  and  a  j^reat  lover  of  those  who  pro- 
feasedUeaming:  and  the  Reports  which 
he  collected  in  the  £jiig*s  Bench  and  Com- 
mon Pleas,  and  which  were  printed  with 
some  additional  cases  in  1650,  manifest  his 
legal  erudition  and  hisindustxy  both  before 
and  after  he  was  raised  to  the  bench.  He 
was  buried  in  Westminster  Abbey  under  a 
noble  monument. 

His  first  wife  was  Sarah,  daughter  of 
Humphrey  Baskerville,  by  whom  he  hikd 
five  sons  and  five  daughters.  His  second 
wife  was  Alice,  the  widow  of  William 
Elkins,  meroer  and  alderman  of  London. 
She  survived  him,  and  erected  and  en- 
dowed a  hospital  at  Islington  for  ten  poor 
women,  and  a  school  for  thirtj  boys,  in 
nateful  remembrance  of  her  escape  from 
death  in  her  childhood,  when  an  arrow, 
shot  at  random  while  she  was  sporting  in 
the  fields,  pierced  the  hat  that  she  wore. 
{Stow^B  London,  110.) 

The  judge's  son  was  Sir  Roger  Owen,  who 
distinguished  himself  among  the  literary 
men  of  the  day,  and  was  an  active  member 
of  parliament  Both  he  and  several  of  his 
successors  filled  the  office  of  sheriff,  and 
the  estate  of  Condover  still  remains  with 
the  family.  (Athen,  Oxon,  i.  672 ;  Darius 
Wettminker  Ahhey,  ii.  83.) 

OXFOBD,  CoNSTAi^Tius  DS,  a  justice 
itinerant  appointed  by  the  writ  of  luchard 
de  Luci, in  conjunction  with  Alard  Banastre, 
the  sheriff,  to  assess  the  tallage  on  the 
county  of  Oxford  in  20  Henry  IL,  1174 
(Madox,  i.  124),  was  probably  a  priest,  or 
other  ecclesiastical  person  of  Oxiord ;  for 
the  religious  orders  very  commonly  cast  off 
their  family  names,  and  adopted  either  that 
of  the  monastery  to  which  they  belonged, 
or  the  locality  in  which  their  clerical  duties 
were  exercised. 

OXFOBD,  Eabl  of.  See  R.  de  Yese. 
OXFOBD,  JoHK  OF  (Bishop  of  Nob- 
wich),  was  so  called  from  the  place  of  his 
birth,  being  son  of  a  burffess  of  tiiat  city 
named  Henry.  Educated  for  the  ecclesias- 
tical profession,  he  was  appointed  one  of 
the  king's  chaplains,  in  wnich  office  ho 
must  soon  have  distinguished  himself, 
His  mother  was  Mary,  one  of  t^e  daughters  since,  though  holding  no  higher  diflpity, 
of  Thomas  Ottley,  ^^'f  of  that  town.  He  '  he  presided  at  the  famous  coimcil  of  Cl»- 
received  his  education  at  the  university  of  rendon  in  January  1104,  and  was  after- 
Oxford,  but  Wood  is  uncertain  whether  at  |  wards  sent  with  Geoffrey  Ridel  to  the  pope 
Broadgate's  Hall  (now  I'embroke  College)  ,  to  obtain  his  confirmation  of  the  ancient 
or  Christ  Church.  After  taking  his  degree  customs  of  the  realm  as  they  were  there 
he  was  removed  to  Lincoln's  Iim,  where  he  propounded, 
was  called  to  the  bar  in  1570,  and  became       In  this  embassy  they  of  course  failed; 


no  distinct  information,  except  that,  accord- 

tneauer, 
admitted  to  that  office  in  Hilary  1402,  3 


ing  to  a  list  kept  in  the  Exd 


he  was 


Henry  IV.,  and  that  his  place  was  vacant 
in  the  ninth  year.    (Liber,  9  Henry  IV,) 

OWEH,  Thomas,  was  bom  at  Condover 
in  Shropshire,  the  seat  of  his  father.  Ri- 
chard Owen,  a  merchant  of  the  neighbour- 
ing town  of  Shrewsbury,  who,  according  to 
the  pedigrees  of  the  family,  could  trace  his 
descent  from  the  ancient  Kimn  of  Wales. 


494 


OXFORD 


but  in  the  following  year  he  was  afrain 
despatched  with  another  associate,  and  in 
their  way  to  Rome  they  attended  a  diet  at 
Wurzburgh,  which  had  been  assembled 
for  the  Acknowledgment  of  the  opposition 
pope,  Pascal  III.  They  are  charged  with 
having  midertaken  that  the  king  should 
support  this  pope,  a  charge  which,  though 
they  denied  it,  was  made  the  pretence  by 
Becket,  in  1166,  for  excommunicating  John 
of  Oxford,  and  for  excluding  him  from  the 
deanery  of  Salisbury,  to  which  he  had  been 
just  previously  admitted.  John,  however, 
being  again  sent  to  Rome  in  the  same  year, 
succeeded  so  well  in  exculpating  himself 
that  the  pope  reinstated  him  in  his  deanery, 
and  absolved  him  from  Becket*s  sentence. 
The  negotiation  for  his  sovereign  also  he 
conducted  with  equal  ability  and  success, 
obtaining  from  the  pontiff  the  appointment 
of  two  cardinals  as  legates  a  latere  to  hear 
and  determine  the  dispute  with  Becket, 
which  was  in  fact  a  suspension  of  the 
legatine  power  previously  granted  to  him ; 
and  bringing  home,  in  aiddition,  the  pope's 
dispensation  for  Prince  Geoffrey  to  marry 
his  third  cousin,  the  heiress  of  Bretagne. 
So  high  was  his  credit  with  Henry  that  in 
1107  ne  was  entrusted  with  a  confidential 
embassy  to  the  Empress  Maud,  the  king's 
mother,  to  counteract  the  efforts  which 
Becket  was  then  making  to  induce  her  to 
interfere  in  his  quarrel,  efforts  which  were 
rendered  of  no  avail  by  her  death  towards 
the  end  of  the  year.  In  1170  he  was  again 
employed  in  another  embassy  to  the  papal 
court,  then  at  Beneventum,  in  reference  to 
Becket's  affair ;  and  when  the  agreement 
between  the  king  and  that  prelate  was  at 
last  effected,  he  was,  to  the  great  annoyance 
of  the  latter,  appointed  to  accompany  him 
to  England.  This  duty  he  performed  in 
good  faith,  and  prevented  the  interruption 
to  his  landing  at  Sandwich  threatened  by 
Gervase  de  Comhill,  the  sheriff  of  Kent 

On  December  14,  1176,  he  received  the 
reward  of  his  services  by  being  consecrated 
Bishop  of  Norwich,  and  in  the  next  year 
was  sent  to  accompany  the  king's  daughter, 
Jane,  to  her  intended  husband,  the  King  of 
Sicily. 

In  1179  he  with  three  other  English 
biHhops  attended  the  Lateran  council  held 
against  schismatics.  On  his  return  he  was 
one  of  the  three  prelates  to  whom,  on  the 
retreat  of  Richara  de  Luci  to  the  abbey  of 
Lesnes,  the  execution  of  the  office  of  chief 
Justiciary  was  entrusted,  the  other    two 


OXFORD 

being  Richard  Tocliffe,  Bishop  of  Wm- 
Chester,  andQeofi&ey  Ridel,  Bishop  of  £^. 
They  were  at  the  same  time  placed  at  the 
heaa  of  three  of  the  four  dividons  (Di^ 
dale^B  Orig,  20)  in  which  England  was 
then  arranged  for  the  administration  of 
justice.  It  IS  curious  that  this  appointment 
was  in  direct  opposition  to  one  of  IIm 
canons  of  the  Lateran  council,  from  whidi 
John  of  Oxford  had  just  returned,  and 
naturally  produced  a  remonstrance  fioa 
the  pope,  which  led  to  a  justification  bj 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  of  their  afr> 
ceptance  of  the  office.  Whatever  may  have 
been  the  cause,  however,  it  is  certam  tint 
the  bishops  were  soon  removed  from  ^ 
presidencjr  of  the  court,  which,  in  the 
course  oi  the  following  year  was  confemd 
on  Ranulph  de  OlanviUe,  one  of  their  kr 
associates.  That  John  of  Oxford  continnsd 
to  perform  judicial  duties  after  this  event ii 
evident  from  the  roll  of  Richard  L,  iriiidi 
proves  that  he  acted  either  in  that  or  tbe 
preceding  year  as  a  justice  itinerant  in 
several  countiee.  (Pipe  RolL  27,  60,  211, 
238.) 

Seized  with  the  mania  of  the  a^  lie 
devoted  himself  to  the  crusade  in  11^, kt; 
being  attacked  by  robbers  on  hb  ww  to 
the  Holy  Land,  and  despoiled  of  all  Ui 
property,  he  turned  his  steps  to  Rome, 
where,  representing  the  inadequacy  of  his 
means  to  support  the  expense  of  the  oodcr- 
taking,  he  procured  an  absolution  from  his 
vow. 

The  remainder  of  his  life  was  devoted  to 
his  episcopal  duties,  and  to  the  restontkn 
of  his  church,  which  had  been  injured  bye 
fire.  Many  houses  also  which  had  ben 
destroyed  at  the  same  time  he  caused  to  be 
rebuilt,  and  to  his  other  benefactions  to  fiw 
poor  he  added  the  erection  of  a  hospital 

He  died  on  June  2,  1200,  and  nu 
buried  in  his  own  cathedral.  The  hietoiy 
of  his  life  supports  the  character  he  ac- 
quired of  being  an  able  negotiator,  a  grace* 
nil  orator,  and  a  man  of  sound  judgment 
and  quick  discernment.  To  his  otiier  ooco- 
pations  he  added  that  of  an  author,  hsTing 
written  a  history  of  all  the  kings  of  Britnn, 
besides  some  occasional  works,  among  iriiieh 
were  a  book  '  Pro  Rege  Henrico  oontra  S. 
Thonoam  Cantuariensum,'  an  aoooant  of 
his  journey  into  Sicily,  and  some  ontione 
and  epistles  to  Richard,  Archhishopcf 
Canterbury.  (Godwin,  428 ;  Weever,  789; 
Angl.  Sac,  i.  409 ;  Lord  LytteUon^  iL  363^ 
416,  &c.,  iv.  100 ;  Bic.  DeviaeSy  12.) 


495 


PAGE,  FRANas,  was  the  son  of  the  Rev. 
"Nicholas  Page,  the  vicar  of  Bloxham  in 
•Oxfordshire,  and  was  bom  about  1661. 
Admitted  at  the  Inner  Temple,  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  in  1690,  and  was  raised  to 
the  bench  of  that  society  in  1717.  He 
Taried  his  legal  studies  by  entering  into  the 
-political  controversies  of  the  time,  taking 
the  whig  view  of  the  subjects  in  discus- 
sion, and  adding  some  pamphlets  to  those 
^hich  then  almost  daily  issued  from  the 
press.  In  1705  he  appeared  as  one  of  the 
counsel  for  the  electors  of  Aylesbury  who 
liad  been  committed  by  the  House  of 
'Commons  for  proceeding  at  law  against 
the  returning  officers,  who  had  illegally 
refused  their  votes.  The  Commons,  having 
then  resolved  that  the  counsel  had  thereby 
been  guilty  of  a  breach  of  privilege,  ordered 
their  committal  to  the  custody  of  the 
serjeant-at-arms.  Page  evaded  the  arrest, 
and  Queen  Anne  was  obliged  to  dissolve  the 
parliament  in  order  to  prevent  a  collision 
Detween  the  two  houses  on  the  question. 

He  was  member  for  Huntingdon  in  the 
two  parliaments  of  1708  and  1710,  and 
soon  after  the  accession  of  George  I.  he 
Teceived  the  honour  of  knighthood,  and 
was  not  only  made  a  seijeant,  but  also 
king's  seijeant,  in  1715.  An  early  oppor- 
tunity was  taken  of  promoting  him  to  the 
bencfc,  and  on  May  l5,  1718,  he  took  his 
seat  as  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer.  He 
purchased  an  estate  and  built  a  mansion  at 
Steeple  -tVston  in  Oxfordshire,  not  many 
miles  from  Banbury,  with  the  elections  of 
which  borough  he  interfered  so  much  that 
he  was  charged  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
in  February  1722,  with  corrupting  the  cor- 
poration by  bribery,  and  the  evidence  was 
so  nearly  balanced  that  he  was  only  ac- 
quitted by  a  close  maiority  of  four  votes. 
•On  November  4,  172o,  he  was  removed 
from  the  Exchequer  to  the  Common  Pleas, 
and  in  the  middle  of  September  1727,  three 
months  after  the  accession  of  George  11., 
he  was  again  translated  to  the  King's  fiench. 
Though  then  sixty-six  years  of  age,  he 
remained  on  the  bench  fourteen  years  more, 
dying  on  October  31, 1741.  He  was  buried 
at  Steeple  Aston  under  a  monumental  pile 
with  fuil-length  figures  of  himself  and  his 
second  wife  by  the  eminent  sculptor  Schee- 
macker.  This  he  caused  to  oe  erected 
during  his  life,  and  in  order  to  its  construc- 
tion he  destroyed  the  ancient  monuments 
in  the  church. 

He  has  left  behind  him  a  most  unenviable 
reputation.  Without  the  abilities  of  Judge 
Jeffreys,  he  was  deemed  as  cruel  and  as 


coarse.  The  few  reported  cases  in  the  State 
Trials  at  which  he  presided  do  not  indeed 
appear  to  wariunt  this  character,  nor  does 
hia  learned  judgment  in  RatclifFe's  case, 
reported  in  1  Strange  (269)  j  but  he  could 
not  have  been  known  among  his  contem- 
poraries by  the  sobriquet  of  the  '  hanging 
jud^e,*  nor  have  obtained  the  inglonous 
distinction  of  being  stigmatised  by  some  of 
the  best  writers  of  the  age,  unless  there 
had  been  pre^ant  grounds  for  the  imputa- 
tion. Pope,  m  his  Imitation  of  the  First 
Satire  of  the  Second  Book  of  Horace,  thus 
introduces  him : — 

Slander  or  poison  dread  from  Delia's  rage, 
Hard  words  or  hanging  if  your  judge  be  Page. 

Long  before  Page's  death  Pope  had  gibbeted 
him  in  the  '  Dunciad '  (book  iv.  Imes  26- 
30):— 

Morality,  by  her  fidse  guardians  drawn, 
Chicane  in  furs,  and  Casuistry  in  lawn. 
Gasps,  as  they  straighten  at  each  end  the  cord, 
And  dies,  when  Dulneas  gives  her  [Page]  the 
word, — 

leaving  blank  the  name  in  the  last  line.  If 
it  were  not  vouched  by  Dr.  Johnson  in  his 
Life  of  Pope,  it  would  be  scarcely  credible 
that  the  conscious  judge  had  the  folly  to  fit 
the  cap  on  himself  and  to  send  a  complaint 
to  the  poet  by  his  clerk,  who  told  the  poet 
that  the  judge  said  that  no  other  word 
would  make  sense  of  the  passage.  The 
name  is  now  inserted  at  fuU  length. 

Dr.  Johnson  also  enlarges  in  his  Life  of 
Savage  on  the  vulgar  and  exasperating 
language  hj  which  Judge  Page  obtained 
the  conviction  of  the  unfortunate  poet  for 
the  murder  of  Mr.  Sinclair.  No  wonder 
that  Savage,  after  he  was  pardoned,  re- 
venged himself  by  penning  a  most  bitter 
'  character '  of  the  ludge,  who  escapes  no 
better  under  Fielding's  lash,  in  'Tom 
Jones'  (book  viii.  c.  xi).  When  Crowle 
the  punning  barrister  was  on  the  circuit 
with  Page,  on  some  one  asking  him  if  the 
judge  YraBjust  behind,  he  repbed,  *  I  don't 
know,  but  I  am  sure  he  never  was  Jttst 
before,* 

When  old  and  decrepit,  the  judge  perpe- 
trated an  unconscious  joke  on  himself.  As 
he  was  coming  out  of, court  one  day, 
shuffling  along,  an  acquaintance  enquired 
after  his  health.  *  My  dear  sir,'  he  answered , 
' you  see  I  keep  lusngiiig  on,  Jumging  on* 

He  was  very  desirous  of  rounding  a 
family,  but  though  he  was  twice  married 
he  left  no  issue.  The  name  of  his  first 
wife,  who  was  buried  at  Bloxham,  has  not 
been  preserved;   that  of  his  second  was 


496 


PAGE 


Frances,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Wheate, 
of  Glymptony  Bart.  He  left  his  estates  to 
Francis  Bourne,  on  condition  that  he  took 
the  name  of  Francis  Page  only ;  but  his 
object  of  perpetuating  his  name  was  frus- 
trated by  his  devisee  dying  unmarried,  and 
his  property  passing  away  to  strangei*s. 
(Noble's  Granger  J  iii.  203 ;  Notes  and  Qtie- 
ries,  3rd  S.  i.  153.) 

PAGE,  JoiTN"  or  William,  is  called  by 
Dugdale  William,  and  by  Rymer  John,  but 
there  is  no  account  oi  him  before  he  is 
inserted  in  the  *  Chronica  Series '  as  being 
appointed  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  on 
October  20,  1638.  That  he  was  a  cursitor 
baron  there  is  no  doubt,  for  he  is  never 
mentioned  in  the  judicial  proceedings  of 
the  court,  and  his  name  as  oaron  appears 
in  a  commission  at  a  distance  of  five  from  the 
regular  barons.  He  only  held  his  office  for 
four  years,  dying  suddenly  on  November  0, 
1642.  (Rymer,  xx.  400,  433 ;  Peck's  Desid, 
Cur,  b.  xiv.  10.) 

PAOITT,  James,  belonged  to  the  branch  of 
the  Pagitt  family  which  was  settled  in  North- 
amptonshire, where  his  great-grandfather, 
Thomas,  is  described  of  Barton-Segrave, 
and  his  grandfather,  Richard,  of  Cranford. 
His  father  was  Thomas  Pagitt,  an  eminent 
lawyer,  twice  reader  at  the  Middle  Temple, 
and  treasurer  there  in  1600.  His  mother, 
Barbara  Bradbury,  died  in  1583,  and  was 
buried  in  St.  Botolph's,  Aldersgate.  {Matt' 
land's  London,  1076.)  He  was  bom  about 
1581,  and,  receiving  his  legal  education  at 
the  same  inn  of  court  as  bis  father,  was 
called  to  the  bar  in  1602.  Apparently  })laced 
at  an  early  age  in  the  Exchequer,  he  is  de- 
scribed as  comptroller  of  the  Pipe  in  1618, 
and  on  October  24, 1631,  he  was  raised  to 
the  office  of  a  baron  of  the  court.  (Rymer, 
xix.  347.) 

It  is  manifest,  however,  that  this  office 
was  not  that  of  one  of  thjB  judicial  barons. 
There  was  no  vacancy  among  them  at  the 
time  of  his  nominataon;  and  during  the 
whole  of  his  career  he  neither  took  part  in 
the  business  of  the  court,  nor  is  ever  men- 
tioned in  the  con ferences  of  the  \  udges.  An- 
thony Wood  (iv.  354)  calls  him  'puisne 
baron  of  the  Exchequer,*  the  precise  title 
given  to  Sir  Thomas  Caesar,  with  the  addi- 
tion, '  commonly  called  the  baron  cursitor.' 
(Duydale's  Orig.  140.)  He  died  on  Sep- 
tember 3, 1638,  at  Tottenham,  in  the  church 
of  which  parish  is  a  monument  to  his 
memory. 

He  married  three  wives,  but  had  issue  only 
by  the  first.  She  was  Katherine,  daughter  ' 
of  Dr.  William  Lewin,  dean  of  the  Arches. 
The  second  was  Bridget,  daughter  of  An- 
thony Bowyer,  of  Coventry,  draner,  and 
widow  of —  Moyse,  of  London.  The  third 
was  Mazaretta,  daughter  of  Robert  Harris, 
of  Reading  and  Lmcoln's  Inn,  who  had 
previously  had  two  husbands,  as  he  had 


PARK 

had  two  wives,  viz.,  Richard  Van^^ian  tssA 

Zephaniah  Sayers,  both  of  London.    (OU- 
JUi^  sand  Dyson's  Tottenham,  48 ;  AAmMt 
Berks,  iii.  88;   WotUm' s  Bitrtmet,  vl.  ^) 

TAJSTTTLE,  HuoH,  waa  the  eeoond  am 
of  Hugh,  the  grandson  of  William  Pantol^ 
a  renowned  Norman  knight,  who,  he^dei 
large  possessions  in  Normandy,  is  recorded 
in  JDomesday  Book  as  holding  twenty-nine 
lordships  in  Shropshire,  of  which  WemoK 
was  the  chief.  This  Hugh  held  the  sheiiS^ 
alty  of  that  county  from  2ii  Henry  IL,  1180, 
to  1  Richard  I.,  1180-00 ;  and  in  the  latter 
year  he  travelled  the  counties  of  Salop, 
Gloucester,  and  Stafford  as  one  of  the  jo^ 
tices  itinerant   (Pipe  Jlofl,  91, 95, 168,248.) 

He  must  have  lived  to  a  good  old  age, 
since  it  was  not  till  9  Henry  IIL,  1224-5; 
that  his  son  William,  being  charged  witk 
100/.  relief  as  a  baron  for  the  land  whidi 
his  father  held  of  the  king  m  capite,  was  ex- 
cused, and  his  fine  reduced  to  25/.  (Madoi^ 
i.  318.)  ^  ' 

PABDI8H0WE,  Thovas  de,  had  the  cus- 
tody of  the  Great  Seal  when  Sir  Robert 
Bourchier  the  chancellor  left  London  ea 
February  14, 1341,  under  the  seals  of  Thomtf 
de  Evesham,  the  master  of  the  Rolls,  and 
Thomas  de  Brayton.  It  is  clear  fix)mtk 
terms  of  the  record  that  the  two  latter  only 
were  appointed  to  execute  the  functions  k 
the  office,  which  they  did  till  his  return  co 
March  3.  Pardishowe  is  called  a  clerk  ia 
the  Chancery,  but  there  is  no  other  entrr 
of  his  name. 

PABK,  James  Alan,  was  the  son  of 
James  Park,  Esq.,  a  respectable  surgeon  in 
Edinburgh,  and  was  bom  in  that  dtyos 
Apiil  6,  1763.  WTien  very  young  he  came 
to  England,  and  was  admitted  into  the  so- 
ciety of  the  Middle  Temple,  by  which  be 
was  called  to  the  bar  in  June  1784.  He 
was  fortimate  enough  to  gain  the  friendship 
and  patronage  of  his  noble  countryman 
Lord  Mansfield,  under  whose  encourage- 
ment he  published  in  1787  a  work  on  the 
*  Law  of  Marine  Insurances,'  comprehend- 
ing the  decisions  and  dicta  of  the  chief 
justice,  who  had  been  almost  the  creator  of 
the  system.  This  work  was  found  to  be  so 
useful  to  mercantile  and  legal  men  that  it 
passed  throuffh  many  editions,  with  im- 
nrovements  By  its  author,  and  at  once 
Drought  him  into  professional  notice. 
Joining  the  Northern  Circuit,  he  ww 
successful  in  obtaining  a  considerable 
practice,  which  before  long  incxeased  till 
he  became  one  of  the  leaders  of  that  bar. 
In  Westminster  Hall  also  he  acquired 
much  business,  as  well  from  that  nume- 
rous body  engaged  in  maritime  afiain  and 
insurance  cases,  as  from  other  clients  who 
were  observant  of  the  extreme  interest  be 
took  in  his  causes,  and  the  clearness  and 
earnest  simplicity  of  his  advocacy.  He 
gleaned  much  learning  and  experience  from 


PARK 


PARKE 


497 


his  intimacy  with  Lord  Mansfield,  to  whom, 
after  hifl  lordship's  retirement,  he  was  in 
the  habit  of  taking  an  account  of  the  daily 
proceedings  in  court,  and  profiting  by  the 
observations  made  bv  the  legal  Nestor  upon 
the  different  points  decided. 


PABKSy  Jaxes  (Lord  Wsnslxtdalb). 
His  elevation  to  the  peerage  on  retiring 
from  the  Court  of  Exchequer  gave  rise  to 
the  important  constitutional  question  whe- 
ther the  patent  which  created  him  Baion 
Wensleydale  of  Wensleydale  for  the  '  term 


In  1701,  before  the  death  of  Lord  <  of  his  natural  life'  entitled  him  to  sit  and 
Mansfield,  Mr.  Park  was  appointed  vice-  I  vote  in  parliament  After  a  long  and  able 
chancellor  of  the  duchy  of  Luicaster,  and  discussiony  the  committee  of  privileges  de- 
in  1795  recorder  of  Preston.  In  1799  he  dded  it  in  the  negative,  and  a  new  patent  was 
received  a  silk  gown  as  king^s  counsel,  and  i  accordingly  issued  in  the  usual  form  witii 


in  1802  he  was  elected  recorder  of  Durham. 
On  the  retirement  from  the  circuit  of  Mr. 
Law  (afterwards  Lord  Ellenborough)  when 
he  became  attomev-general,  he  succeeded 
to  the  undisputed  ieiui,  which  he  retained 
for  more  than  a  dozen  years,  dividing  that 
in  London  with  Sir  Vicary  Gibbs  and  Sir 
William  Garrow ;  and  in  1811  he  was  made 
attorney-general  of  Lancaster. 

A  sincere  and  zealous  churchmany  he 
was  by  the  religious  classes  of  the  com- 
munity looked  up  to  with  great  esteem. 
Among  his  intimates  was  WiUiam  Stevens, 
the  modest  and  benevolent  treasurer  of 
Queen  Anne's  bounty,  with  whom  he 
formed  a  committee  in  support  of  the 
Scotch  episcopal  clergy,  and  succeeded  in 
obtaining  the  repeal  of  the  penal  statutes 
then  in  force  against  them.  He  was  one  of 
the  original  members  of  *  Nobody's  Club,* 
so  called  from  the  nofn  de  plume  of  Mr. 
Stevens,  in  whose  honour  it  was  founded, 
and  which,  lasting  till  the  present  day,  has 
numbered  among  its  membiBrs  some  of  the 
most  eminent  men  in  the  Church  and  in 
science,  law,  and  literature.  At  Mr.  Ste- 
vens's death  Mr.  Park  published  a  memoir 
of  him,  which  has  been  lately  reprinted. 
He  was  also  the  author  in  1804  of  'A 
Layman's  Earnest  Exhortation  to  a  Fre- 
quent Reception  of  the  Lord's  Supper.* 

Without  any  pretensions  to  eloquencei 
his  advocacy  was  effective  finom  the  extreme 
anxiety  he  displayed  for  his  client ;  and  he 
ffained  his  verdicts  by  the  apparent  confi- 
dence and  sincerity  with  which  he  im- 
pressed the  jury  with  the  injustice  of 
withholding  them,  as  much  as  by  the 
merits  of  the  causes  themselves. 

After  thirty  years'  successful  practice  at 
the  bar,  he  succeeded  Sir  Alan  Chambers 
as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Fleas  on  Ja- 
nuary 22,  1816,  and  was  knighted.  He 
sat  in  that  court  till  his  death  on  Decem- 
ber 8,  1838,  a  period  of  nearly  twenty- 
three  years,  during  which  he  served  undfer 
four  sovereigns.  With  no  particular  emi- 
nence as  a  lawyer,  he  proved  himself  by  his 
good  sense  and  strict  impartiality^  as  well 
as  by  the  respectability  of  his  character,  a 
most  useful  administrator  of  justice ;  tlie 
onl^  drawback  from  the  general  respect 
which  he  commanded  was  a  certain  irrita- 
bility about  trifles,  which  too  frequently 
excited  the  joculiirity  of  the  bar. 


the  title  ot  Baron  Wensleydale  of  Walton. 
He  was  the  youngest  son  of  Thomas 
Parke,  Esq.,  a  merchant  at  Liverpool,  re- 
siding at  Uighfield,  near  that  town,  by  the 
daughter  of  William  Preston,  Esq.,  ana  was 
bom  there  in  1782.    He  was  educated  at 
the    firee    grammar    school    at    Macclea- 
field,  and  at  Trinity  College,  Cambridge. 
Elected  university  scholar  in  his]  first  temi, 
1799,  and  a  scholar  of  his  college  in  1800, 
he  took  his  degree  of  B.A.  in  1803,  with 
the  honourable  position  of  fifth  wran^r 
and   senior    chancellor's    medallist.     He 
gained  a  fellowship  in  the  following  year, 
and  proceeded  M.A.  in  1806.    It  was  not 
till  seven  years  after  the  latter  date  that  he 
was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  society  of  the 
Inner  Temple  (to  which  he  had  removed 
from  Lincoln's  Inn),  in  Easter  Term  1818, 
having  practised  previously  for  some  years 
as  a  special  pleader,  and  shown  that  pro- 
ficiency in  legal  science  which  led  to  his 
rapid  success  as  an  advocate,  both  on  the 
Northern  Circuit  and  in  Westminster  Hall. 
Within  four  ^ears  he  was  enabled  to  resign 
his  fellowship,  on  his  marriage  in  1817 
with  Cecilia,  daughter  of  Samuel  F.  Barlow, 
Esq.,  of  Middlethorpe  in  Yorkshire. 

Only  seven  years  after  his  call  to  the  bar 
he  was  selected  to  assist  the  crown  officers 
in  conducting  the  memorable  case  against 
Queen  Caroline  in  the  House  of  Lords ;  and 
so  high  was  his  reputation  for  legal  know- 
ledge that,  without  ever  having  had  a  silk 
govni,  and  without  the  suspicion  of  any 
parlimnentary  or  political  interest,  he  was 
chosen  on  Novemoer  28,  1828,  to  supply 
the  place  of  that  excellent  Judge  Sir  Gfeoige 
Holrovd,  and  thus  to  continue  the  acknow- 
ledgea  efficiency  of  the  Court  of  King's 
Bench.    On  that  occasion  he  was,  as  usual, 
knighted.    Here  he  remained  for  nearly  six 
years,  till  on  April  29,  1834,  he  and  Mr. 
Justice  Alderson,  to  strengthen  the  staff  of 
the  Exchequer  bench,  were  removed  into 
that  court    For  the  additional  two-and- 
twenty    years  that  he   remained  on  the 
bench  he  administered  justice  there  and 
on  the  circuits  with  that  weight  and  ex- 
perience, and  with  that  temper  and  con- 
sideration, which  commanded  the  respect 
of  tiie  bar,  and  secured  the  acauiescence  of 
litigants.     He  was  a  zealous  labourer  for 
the  removal  of  all  useless  formalities  in 
legal  proceedings,  and  one  of  the  principal 

s  K 


498 


PARKEB 


amendment  acts   passed  in  the  xeign  of 
William  IV.  was  His  work. 

In  1833  he  was  called  to  the  privy 
council,  and  became  a  most  efficient  mem- 
ber of  its  judicial  committee,  and  in  1835 
he  received  the  dep^ree  of  LL.D.  at  his 
university.  After  twenty-eight  years  of 
judicial  service,  during  the  whole  of  which 
he  never  flagged  in  hu  duties,  his  age  (74) 
warned  him  to  retire.  He  resigned  his 
seat  at  the  end  of  December  1855;  but  the 
government  were  so  conscious  of  his  judicial 
powers,  and  so  desirous  to  secure  his  assist- 
ance in  the  hearing  of  appeals  in  the  House 
of  Lords,  that  he  was  raised  to  a  peerage 
for  life  on  tiie  10th  of  the  following  January 
as  Lord  Wensleydale.  The  subsequent 
change  in  his  patent  took  place  for  the 
reason  before  given,  and  without  any  desire 
on  his  part,  as  he  had  no  male  heir  to  suc- 
ceed to  the  title,  his  only  surviving  child 
being  a  daughter. 

He  survived  till  the  age  of  eighty-five, 
vnth  his  intellects  unimpaired,  giving  his 
valuable  assistance  in  the  last  coiirt  of 
appeal  till  his  death  in  Februarv  1808. 

PASKEB,  James,  held  the  odiice  of  vice- 
chancellor  only  for  t«n  short  months,  but 
during  that  time  he  afforded  such  evidence 
of  intellectual  power,  promising  a  most 
brilliant  judicial  career,  that  his  sudden 
death  was  almost  as  great  a  grief  to  the 
legal  world  as  it  must  necessarilv  have 
been  to  his  family  and  private  friends.  He 
was  only  in  his  forty-ninth  year  when  he 
died,  having  been  bom  in  Glasgow  in  1803. 
He  was  the  son  of  Charles  Steuart  Parker, 
Esq.,  of  Blockaim,  near  that  city,  in  the 
grammar  school  and  college  of  which  he 
received  his  early  instruction.  He  then 
proceeded  to  Trinity  College,  Cambridge, 
where  he  graduated  as  B.A.  in  1825,  gam- 
ing the  seventh  wrangler^s  place,  and  as 
M.  A.  in  1829.  On  Feoruary  6  in  the  same 
year  he  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  society 
of  Lincoln's  Inn,  and,  practising  in  the* 
equity  courts,  his  merits  were  soon  acknow- 
ledged. By  his  indefatigable  industry  and 
clearness  of  intellect  the  difficulties  of  the 
science  were  quickly  mastered,  and  in  ad- 
vocating the  cases  entrusted  to  his  care 
there  was  an  exhibition  of  learning  and 
shrewdness  that  secured  to  him  numerous 
retainers. 

He  was  made  queen's  counsel  in  July 
1844,  and  his  reputation  was  so  high  that 
he  was  named  on  the  Chancery  Commission, 
in  the  investigations  of  which  he  took  a 
very  prominent  part.  At  the  election  in 
1847  ne  stood  for  Leicester  on  the  con- 
servative side,  but  was  defeated  after  a  close 
contest  Notwithstanding  his  avowed  poli- 
tical principles,  his  character  as  a  lawyer 
was  BO  well  established,  and  the  necessity 
of  a  reform  in  Chancery,  of  which  he  was 
a  zealous  advocate,  was  ao  \xxg^t)  that  the 


FXRKER 

whig  ministry  selected  him,  althoagh  their 
opponent,  to  fill  the  office  of  vice-chanoellor 
on  October  20, 1851,  when  he  was  knighted. 

Short  as  was  his  presidency  of  his  court, 
it  was  long  enough  to  prove  him  a  most 
excellent  judge.  Patient  in  hearing,  care- 
ful in  deciding,  courteous  to  all,  his  jod^ 
ments  manifested  his  full  comprehenaion  of 
the  facts,  and  satisfied  the  understandinfr 
by  the  acute  and  saflracious  application  of 
the  law  to  them.  He  survived  the  last 
sittings  before  his  first  long  vacation  odIt 
a  few  days,  dying  of  an  attack  of  aDgim 
pectoris  on  August  13,  1852,  at  Rothkr 
Temple  in  Leicestershire,  where  he  m 
buried. 

He  married  Mary,  daughter  of  Thomas 
Babington,  Esq.,  of  Rothley  Temple,  3LP. 
for  Leicester,  by  whom  he  left  aevenl 
children. 

PABKEB,  Jonx,  in  his  admission  to 
Gray*s  Inn  in  1611,  is  described  of  Wevkmd 
Underwood  in  Buckinghamshire.  He  wu 
called  to  the  bar  on  June  20,  1017,  became 
an  ancient  in  1638,  a  bencher  in  1640,  and 
in  1042  arrived  at  the  post  of  reader. 

In  March  1047  he  was  appointed  a  judge 
of  one  of  the  Welsh  drcmts,  and  in  toe 
next  year  was  sent  by  the  Commons  with 
others  to  try  the  rioters  in  thatcountzy. 
The  parliament  included  him  in  the  sezjeants 
they  made  on  October  30,  1048,  and  on  the 
death  of  the  king  confirmed  him  in  his 
office  of  Welsh  judge.  He  was  sent  on 
the  summer  circuit  of  1053,  dther  as  a 
Serjeant  or  a  judge ;  for  there  is  some  donht 
as  to  the  precise  date  of  his  being  placed 
on  the  bench  of  the  Exchequer ;  Uardxtt 
Reports,  which  record  his  judgments  as  t 
baron,  not  commencing  till  Trinity  Tenn 
1055.  He  kept  his  seat  till  the  Ke^^ration, 
through  all  tne  changes  occasioned  by  the 
accession  of  the  Protector  Richard  mi  the 
return  of  the  Long  Parliament.  In  the 
parliaments  of  1054  and  1056  he  reproaented 
Kochester;  and  when  Cromwell  composed 
an  upper  house,  he  with  the  other  judgp 
was  summoned  as  an  assistant.  (Gciwm, 
ii.  2;«,  ui.  527 ;  Whitehcke,  905-683 ;  Pari 
Hid.  iii.  1430, 1480,  1610.) 

Anthony  Wood  says  that  he  was  one  of 
the  assbtajit  conunittee  mea  in  Northamp- 
tonshire ;  that  he  was  of  the  High  Coozt  of 
Justice  which  tried  Lord  CapdJ,  the  Eail 
of  Holland,  and  the  Duke  of  Hamilton,  in 
1049 ;  that  in  the  next  year  he  publiahed  a 
remarkable  book,  called*  'Tlie  Govenmient 
of  the  People  of  England,  Precedent  and 
Present,'  &c. ;  and  that  on  June  22, 1655, 
he  vtras  sworn  seijeant-at-law,  being  a  meiii* 
her  of  the  Temple,  (iv.  226.)  The  letnad 
author  seems,  however,  to  have  oooibaM 
two  individuala ;  for,  beddes  the  ^«* 
of  the  inn  of  ooiut,  it  ^pean  IP 
the  John  Parker  who^  aoBoitl 
lockoi  was  madaa  leqwiit 


PARKER  PARKER  499 

flame    man  who  by  Hardres*  Reports  is   of  its  represenUtivesin  IZOo,  and  agrain  in 
proTed  to  have  been  a  baron  in  IGoo.  ,  the  two  following  parliaments :  but  though 

At  the  Restoration  ho  of  course  was  re-  he  sat  as  a  member  for  the  five  vears  he 
moved  from  his  place ;  but,  instead  of  being  continued  at  the  bar,  there  is  no  record  of 
subjected  to  any  enquiry  into  his  previous  any  speech  he  delivered  in  the  house,  nor 
conduct,  he  was  summoned  to  take  the  of  any  part  he  took,  except  in  the  proceed- 
degree  of  serjeant-at-law :  Anthony  AVood  '  ings  against  Dr.  Sacheverell.  In  June  1705 
says,  *  by  the  endeavours  of  Lord  Chancellor  '  he  was  not  only  raised  to  the  degree  of  the 
Hyde/  '  The  same  author  describes  him  as  ;  coif,  but  immediately  made  one  of  the 
father  of  Dr.  Samuel  Parker,  made  Bishop  queen*s  Serjeants  and  knighted.  Attached 
of  Oxford  by  James  II.,  and  placed  by  that ,  to  the  whig  party,  he  was  naturally  ap- 
king  as  president  of  Magdalen  College  in  pointed  one  of  the  managers  in  the  unpo- 
oppoaition  to  the  lawful  elevation  of  Dr.  pular  impeachment  of  Dr.  Sacheverell  in 
Hough.     (1  Siderfin^  4.)  1710.  when  his  speeches  were  so  effective, 

PABXSS,  THOiCi.s  TEarl  of  Maccles-  and  his  denunciations  against  the  vain  and 
yield\  belonged  to  a  Dranch  of  a  respect-  factious  doctor  were  so  strong,  that  in  his 
able  family  long  seated  at  Norton  Lees  in  return  to  his  chambers  he  with  diiliculty 
Derbyshire.  Ilis  father,  Thomas  Parker,  escaped  from  the  mob,  which  since  the 
a  younger  son  of  George  Parker,  of  Park  commencement  of  the  trial  had  b(ien  furi- 
Hall  in  Stalfordshire,  hisrh  sheriff  of  that  ously  excited  against  the  prosecution.  Ilis 
county  in  the  reign  of  Charles  I.,  was  an  :  exertions  were  soon  rewarded  and  his  fright 
attorney  practising  in  the  neighbouring  quickly  compensated  by  the  appointment 
town  of  Leek;  and  his  mother  was  Anne,  of  chief  justice  of  the  Queen's  Bench  on 
daughter  and  coheir  of  Robert  Venables,  of  :  March  13. 

Wincham  in  Derbyshire.  He  was  bom  at  ^  Within  a  month  he  was  called  upon  to 
Leek,  and  his  birthdav^  July  23, 16GG,  was  ';  preside  at  the  trial  of  Dammaree,  Willis, 
commemorated  in  a  subsequent  year  by  the  and  Purchase,  who  had  been  engaged  in 
poet  John  Hughes,  to  whom  both  he  and  the  riots  arising  out  of  Sachevereirs  trial, 
Lord  Cowper  had  been  munificent  benefac-  and  were  charged  with  pulling  down  dis- 
tors,  in  the  following  eulogistic  lines : —        |  senting  meeting-houses ;    and,  though  he 

I  summed  up   for  the  conviction,  and  they 
Xot  fair  July,  tho'  Plenty  clothe  his  fields,  i  ^ere  found  guUty  of  high  treason,  he  inter- 

&:^t.^^C^^:.t^':S:;^yX'    ^^  '%  ^^•'P.?-^  ^^r^.^  their  pardon. 
As  that  he  gave  a  Parker  to  our  isle. 


Ilail,  happv  month !  secure  of  lasting  fame  I 
Doubly  diDtin^^uish'd  thro*  the  circlinjj:  year  : — 

laRume*  a  hero  ^ave  thee  first  thy  name,* 
A  patriut's  birth  makes  thee  to  Britain  dear. 


During  tho  eight  years  of  his  presidency  he 
fully  justified  the  wisdom  of  the  choice; 
for  though  immediatelv  following  so  re- 
nowned a  lawyer  as  .Sir  John  Holt,  he 
escaped  any  injurious  comparison,  and  con- 
ducted the'  business  of  his  court  vriih  dis- 
After  recei\ing  the  rudiments  of  his  cdu-  |  crimination  and  learning, 
cation  at  Newport  in  Shropshire,  and  at !  Two  years  after  the  acci'.«sion  of  George  I., 
Derbv,  he  was  sent  to  Tnnitv  College,  '  on  March  10,  1710,  he  was  raised  to  tho 
CamSridge,  on  October  0,  1085,  having  :  peerage  by  the  title  of  Baron  Parker  of 
already  been  admitted  a  student  at  the  -  Macclesfield,  and  at  the  same  time  ho  re- 
Iimer  'Temnle  in  February  1083-4.  It  is  I  ceived  the  grant  of  a  pension  for  life  of 
act  imnos^ible,  though  very  unlikely,  that  j  1200/.  a  year.  This  is  a  sufficient  proof  of 
be  mignt  have  been  articled  to  his  father  \  the  estimation  with  which  he  was  regarded 
It  the  time  he  became  a  member  of  the  '  by  the  king,  whose  favour  was  two  years 
Inner  Temple ;  but  his  subsequent  entry  at ,  after  firmly  established  by  the  opinion 
Cambridge,  and  still  more  his  call  to  the  which  tho  chief  justice  gave,  that  his  ma- 
liar  on  May  21, 1001,  seem  completely  to    jesty  had  the  sole  control  over  the  odu- 


nmtive  the  story  mentioned  by  Lysons 
Werbjfsh,  111),  and  asserted  as  a  fact  by 


cation  and  marriages  of  his  grandcliildren 
(State  TriaUy  xv.  1222) ;  an  opinion  which, 


Lord  Campbell  (iv.  f>03),  that  he  was  placed  i  though  subsequently  confirmed,  insured  the 
on  the  roll  of  the  junior  branch  of  the  pro-  enmity  of  the  Prince  of  Wales.  The  fruits 
feiaon,  or  practised  as  an  attorney  at  Derby  '  of  the*  king's  favour  were  immediate ;  tho 
'at  the  foot  of  the  bridge  next  the  Three  (  effect  of  the  prince's  animosity  was  for 
Crowns.'  He  attended  the  Midland  Cir-  ;  some  time  concealed, 
cuit,  and  probably  acted  as  a  provincial  .  The  Great  Seal  was  presented  to  Lord 
eonnael  in  tne  town  of  Derby,  of  which  he  |  Parker  on  May  12,  1718,  with  the  title  of 
was  Boon  elected  recorder.  The  statement ,  lord  chancellor,  accompanied  by  the  extra- 
tkat  he  was  designated  the  *  silver- tongued  ordinary  present  of  14,000A  from  the  Idnff. 
eoonsel'  is  merely  a  second  edition  of  the    To  hb  son  also  a  yearly  pension  of  120(SL 


titla  given  forty  years  before  to  Heneage 
Unch,  a{terwaza8*£arl  of  Nottingham. 
The  town  of  Derby  returned  him  aa  one 


was  at  the  same  time  granted  till  he  oIh 
tained  the  place  of  teller  of  the  £xchec\<UK^ 
to  which  he  waa  ap^mtAi'iaxVift  %(^Stfanrm% 


500 


PABKER 


year.  Lord  Parker  held  the  Seal  for  nearly 
seven  years,  and  proved  himself  as  able  in 
eqidtv  as  he  had  shown  himself  in  law,  his 
decisions  being  regarded  to  this  day  with 
as  much  respect  as  those  of  any  of  his  pre- 
decessors, thi  November  6, 1721.  he  was 
created  Viscount  Parker  of  Ewelme,  and 
Earl  of  Macclesfield,  with  a  remainder,  fail- 
ing his  issue  male,  to  his  daughter  Eliza- 
beth, the  wife  of  William  Heathcote,  Esi^., 
and  her  issue  male.  This  uncommon  limi- 
tation may  have  been  caused  by  his  son's 
absence  abroad  and  the  uncertainty  of  the 
father  as  to  his  existence.  The  earl  had 
been  already  made  lord  lieutenant  of  the 
counties  of  Warwick  and  Oxford,  in  the 
latter  of  which  he  had  purchased  Sherbum 
Castle,  near  Watlinffton.  In  September 
1724  he  was  chosen  lord  high  steward  of 
the  borough  of  Stafford.  Yet  with  these 
and  other  proofs  of  the  king's  countenance 
and  favour,  with  the  reputation  of  an  able 
dispenser  of  justice,  in  the  full  possession 
of  nis  faculties,  and  without  any  change 
or  any  ^ssension  in  the  ministry,  he  sud- 
denly'resigned  the  Great  Seal  on  January 
4,  1726. 

His  high  position  for  the  last  four  years 
in  which  he  filled  it  had  been  anything  but 
a  bed  of  roses.    In  the  latter  end  of  1720 
Mr.  Dormer,  one  of  the  masters  in  Chan- 
cery, had  absconded  in  consequence  of  the 
failure  of  a  Mr.  Wilson,  his  goldsmith  or 
banker,  in  whose  hands  he  had  deposited  a 
large  amount  of  the  suitors'  cash.    The 
dendency  this  occasioned,  added  to  his  own 
losses  by  speculating  with  the  same  cash 
in  the  South  Sea  bubble,  which  at  that 
time  burst,  amounted  to  nearly  100,000/., 
which  it  was  impossible  for  him  to  meet 
from  his  own  private  means.    Those  means 
were  applied  as  far  as  they  would  go,  and 
various  palliatives  were   adopted  by  the 
chancellor  to  satisfy  the  incoming  claims, 
such  as  by  applying  for  that  purpose  the 
price  ffiven  by  the  successor  for  the  master- 
ship, Dy  obtaining  a  contribution  of  600/. 
from  each  of  the  other  masters  except  one, 
and  by  some  payments  out  of  his  own 
pocket.    But  these  were  not  nearly  suffi- 
cient, and  the  refusal  of  the  masters  to 
make  any  further  contribution,  with  the 
urgency  of  unsatisfied  applicants,  deter- 
mined the  chancellor  to  put  an  end  to  his 
anxiety  by  resigning  the  Seal. 

Then  did  he  experience  the  effect  of  the 
prince's  displeasure.  He  had  not  resigned 
three  weeks  before  petitions  were  presented 
to  the  House  of  Commons  by  nis  royal 
highnesses  friends  from  parties  complaining 
of  non-payment  of  the  moneys  they  were 
entitled  to;  addresses  to  the  king  were 
voted,  commissions  of  enauirv  granted,  and 
reports  made,  which  resulted  in  the  earl's 
impeachment  for  corruption  on  February  12. 
The  charges  were  not  like  those  against 


PABKEB 

Lord  Chancellor  Bacon  for  taking  bribes  of 
the  suitors,  but  the  twenty-one  articles  w»e 
confined  to  his  selling  offices  contraiy  to 
law,  and  for  taking  extortionate  snms  for 
them,  with  the  knowledge  that  the  payment 
was  defrayed  out  of  vie  suitors  money. 
The  trial  lasted  thirteen  days,  from  the  6th 
to  the  27th  of  May,  and  the  report  occupiM 
no  less  than  632  columns  or  the  'State 
Trials '  (vol.  xvi.  767  et  seq.).  The  pro- 
ceedings were  most  tiresome,  and  the  repe- 
titions and  the  quibblings  do  no  credit  eitW 
to  the  managers  for  the  Commons  or  to  the 
accused  earl.  The  Lords  unanimou^  found 
him  ^ilty  and  fined  him  80,000/.  Thissam 
the  king,  though  he  was  obliged  to  strike 
his  name  from  the  privy  council,  intimated 
to  him  that  he  would  pay  out  of  his  privy 
purse  as  fast  as  he  could  spare  the  mope^, 
and  actually  gave  him  1000/.  towards  it  m 
the  first  year,  and  in  the  second  directed 
2000/.  more  to  be  given  to  him ;  but  before 
the  earl  applied  for  it  the  king  died,  andSr 
Robert  Wal^le  evaded  the  payment,  pro- 
bably from  his  fear  of  offendingthe impue- 
able  successor. 

This  prosecution  was  attended  with  im- 
portant results.  Though  many  will  consider 
that  the  earl  was  treated  harshly  and  msde 
to  suffer  for  irregularities  introduced  by  hii 
predecessors, all  must  rejoice  in  the  exporaie 
and  removal  of  them  which  the  investigatioo 
produced.    A  vicious  system  had  previiled 
for  a  long  series  of  years,  not  omy  in  tiie 
Court  of  Chancery,  but  in  the  other  oonxts 
also,  of  disposing  of  the  various  offices  is 
the  gift  ot  the  chiefs  to  any  person  who 
would  offer  what  was  called  <  a  present '  to 
the  bestower.    In  the  Court  or  Chancery 
not  only  the  executive  and  honorary  offieen 
who  were  entitied  to  fees  were  expected  to 
contribute  to  the  purse  of  the  chancellor, 
but  the  system  extended  to  the  masten  in 
Chancery,  who  were  the  chancellor's  jn- 
dicial  assistants,  and  moreover  were  en- 
trusted with  the  care  of  the  moneys,  the 
right  to  which  was  disputed,  or  the  appli- 
cation of  which  was  to  be  determined,  in  the 
various  causes  that  came  within  the  inns- 
diction  of  the  court.    The  practice  had  been 
notoriously  acted  upon  for  many  yean  hr 
the  chancellor's  predecessors,  and,' though 
the  equally  objectionable  custom  of  receiring 
new  yearns  gifts  had  been  abrogated  vj 
those  whom  he    immediately  succeeded, 
Lords  Cowper  and  Harcourt,  yet  even  they 
had  not  hesitated  to  receive  payment  from 
those  masters  whom  they  had  app(nnted. 
Bad  as  the  system  was,  the  blot  would  not 
have  been  removed  but  for  the  acddent  of 
Mr.  Dormer's  insolvency ;  and  even  with ftit 
discovery  Lord  Macderaeld  wbuld  pnUUj 
have  escaped  censure  had  he  oanf 
self  to  the  former  practice,  whufc 
in  some  sort  reoognised  bytUlr'' 
inasmuch  as  at  the  xeTolimoB  • 


PARKEB 

LibitiDg  the  sale  of  the  office  of  master  of 
Chancery,  which  had  been  proposed  to  be 
inserted  in  a  bill  then  before  the  house,  had 
been  negatived  by  the  Lords.  Either  his 
acquittal  or  his  condemnation  would  have 
equally  resulted  in  the  abolition  of  that 
practice,  and  in  a  more  safe  investment  of 
the  suitors*  money.  But,  unfortunately  for 
the  accused  earl,  the  investigation  proved 
that  he  had  not  been  content  with  the  ac- 
customed honorarium,  but  had  increased  the 
pric9  so  enormously  that  it  became  next  to 
impossible  for  the  appointees  to  refund 
themselves,  or  even  to  pay  the  amount, 
without  either  extorting  unnecessary  fees  by 
delaying  causes  before  them,  or  using  the 
monev  deposited  with  them  to  defray  the 
sum  demanded.  That  he  employed  an  agent 
to  bargain  for  him  and  to  higgle  about  the 
price  there  is  no  doubt,  and  that  he  was 
aware  of  the  improper  use  that  was  made 
of  the  suitors*  money,  and  took  means  to 
conceal  the  losses  that  occasionally  occurred, 
there  is  too  much  evidence.  Though  there- 
fore his  friends  might  assert  that  he  was 
made  to  suifer  for  a  system  of  which  he  was 
not  the  author,  and  which  had  been  know- 
ingly practised  by  his  predecessors  with 
impunitv,  it  is  impossible  to  acquit  him  en- 
tirely of  the  charge  of  carrying  that  system 
to  an  exorbitant  extent,  and  of  corruptly 
recognising,  if  not  encouraffing,  practices 
dangerous  to  the  public  credit,  and  destruc- 
tive of  that  confidence  which  should  always 
exist  in  the  judicature  of  the  country.  The 
contradictions  sometimes  found  in  human 
nature  are  extraordinary,  for  while  the  dis- 
closures of  the  trial  tend  to  exhibit  an  ava- 
ricious disposition  in  the  earl,  the  evidence 
be  produced,  '^ith  questionable  delicacy, 
satisfactorily  proves  tnat  he  was  at  the  same  ^ 
time  extremely  liberal,  dispensing  with  an 
almost  extravagant  hand  large  sums  in  the  ' 
promotion  of  learning  and  in  aid  and  en-  ■ 
couragement  of  poor  scholars  and  distressed 
clergjmen.  That  the  price  paid  by  the 
masters  for  their  places  was  considered  a 
legitimate  part  of  the  profit  of  the  chan- 
cellor, received  a  curious  confirmation  in  the 
grant  to  Lord  Macclesfield's  immediate 
successor,  Ijord  King,  of  a  considerable  ad- 
dition to  his  salary,  as  a  compensation  for 
the  loss  occasioned  by  the  annihilation  of 
the  practice  consequent  upon  this  investi- 
gation. 

Lord  Macclesfield  lived  seven  vears  after- 
wards, but  mixed  no  more  in  pu'blic  affairs, 
lie  spent  his  time  between  Sherbum  Castle, 
his  seat  in  Oxfordshire,  and  Iiondon,  where 
at  the  time  of  his  death  he  was  building  a 
house  in  St.  James*s  Square,  afterwards  in- 
habited by  his  son.  He  died  on  April  28, 
1 782,  and  was  buried  at  Sherbum. 

His  wife,  Janet,  daughter  and  coheir  of 
Charles  Carrier,  of  Wirksworth  in  Derbv- 
.  shire,  Esq.,  faroMght  him  two  children  ovly, 


PARKER 


501 


a  son  and  a  daughter.  The  wm,  who  suc- 
ceeded to  the  earldom,  was  renowned  as  a 
philosopher,  and  had  a  principal  share  in 
preparing  the  act  of  parliament  for  the 
alteration  of  the  style.  The  |f  resent  earl  is 
the  sixth  who  has  Dome  the  title. 

PARKER,  Thomas,  was  a  near  relation 
of  his  namesake,  Lord  Chancellor  Macclee* 
field,  George  Parker,  of  Park  Hall  m  Staf- 
fordshire, being  the  grandfather  of  the 
chancellor,  and  the  great-grandfSeither  of  the 
judge,  whose  father,  George,  sooceeded  to 
the  estate  of  Park  HalL 

Thomas  Parker  was  bom  about  1095,  and 
received  his  education  at  the  grammar 
school  of  Lichfield,  from  whence  he  was 
removed  to  the  ofiice  of  Mr.  Salkeld,  a  so- 
licitor in  Brook  Street,  Holbom,  where 
three  other  eminent  lawyers  and  judges 
were  at  nearly  the  same  time  initiated  into 
the  mysteries  of  the  science.  These  wpre 
Lord  Jocelyn,  lord  chancellor  of  Ireland : 
Sir  John  Strange,  master  of  the  Rolls ;  and 
Lord  Hardwicke,  lord  chancellor  of  Eng- 
land. With  the  latter  he  contracted  a 
lasting  intimacy,  and  when  he  was  called  to 
the  bar  at  the  Inner  Temple  in  June  1724 
Lord  Hardwicke  was  attomey-^neral.  This 
was  less  than  a  vear  before  his  noble  rela- 
tive's disgrace,  oi  whose  patronage  though 
he  was  thus  deprived,  he  found  an  ample 
compensation  in  the  friendship  of  Lord 
Hardwicke,  who  never  forgot  what  he  owed 
to  the  early  encouragement  of  the  persecuted 
peer,  in  gratitude  to  whom  he  took  every 
opportunity  of  promoting  Parker^s  advance- 
ment. Thus  in  June  1780,  when  Parker 
had  been  a  barrister  only  twelve  years,  he 
was  raised  to  the  dignity  of  the  coif,  and 
made  king's  serjeant  at  the  same  time ;  and 
in  two  years  aner,  on  Jidy  7,  1738,  he  was 
raised  to  the  bench  as  a  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer. From  this  court  he  was  removed 
in  April  1740  to  the  Common  Pleas,  where 
he  remained  till  November  29,  1742,  when, 
having  been  previously  knighted^  he  was 
advanced  to  the  head  of  the  Court  of  £x- 
che<|uer  as  lord  chief  baron.  AU  these  pro- 
motions he  owed  to  Lord  Hardwicke,  who 
in  a  letter  to  the  Duke  of  Somerset  said 
that '  Parker  was  in  every  way  deserving, 
and  has  gained  a  very  hifffa  character  for 
ability  and  integri^  smoe  his  advancement 
to  the  bench.'  (l£arr%»^9  Lord  Hardwicke, 
iL26.) 

Lord  Hardwicke,  even  when  out  of  power, 
did  not  neglect  him,  but  endeavoured  on  the 
death  of  €ir  John  Willes  tojprocure  for  him 
the  chief  justiceship  of  the  (Common  Pleas, 
and  to  the  last  showed  his  reg^ard  by  naming 
him  as  a  trustee  under  his  wilL  (TMdL  iiu 
200,394.) 

Sir  Thomas  presided  in  the  Exchequer 
for  thirty  years,  when,  having  airived  at  the 
age  of  seventy-seven,  he  resigned  in  the 
summer  vacation  1772,  being  gratL6Alm\^K 


502 


PAHNING 


a  pension  of  2400/.,  and  being  sworn  a 
privy  councillor,  a  post  not  then  usually 

S'ven  to  the  chief  barons  while  in  office, 
e  lived  for  twelve  years  after  his  retire- 
ment, during  which  he  published  a  volume 
of  Reports  of  Revenue  Cases  in  the  Ex- 
chequer from  1743  to  1767,  which  display 
considerable  acuteness.  A  judgment  may 
also  be  formed  of  the  manner  in  which  he 
had  executed  his  judicial  functions  by  the 
remark  of  Lord  Mansiield,  who,  on  the 
frequent  absence  of  his  successor  Sir  Sidnev 
Stafford  Smythe  from  infirmity,  observed,, 
'The  new  chief  baron  should  resign  in 
favour  of  his  predecessor.'  {Lord  Campbell, 
Ch.  Jugticeiff  li.  671.) 

He  died  on  December  29,  1784,  and  was 
buried  in  the  family  vault  at  Park  Hall. 
He  was  twice  married — first  to  Anne, 
daughter  of  James  Whitehall,  of  Pipe- 
Ridware  in  Staffordshire ;  and  secondly  to 
Martha,  daughter  of  Edward  Strong,  of 
Greenwich,  by  each  of  whom  he  left  issue. 
The  estate  of  Park  Hall  is  still  in  possession 
of  his  descendants. 

PABHIHO,  RoBEBTj  was  possessed  of 
considerable  propertv  m  Cumberland,  and 
was  returned  to  parliament  in  the  last  year 
of  the  reign  of  Edward  H.,  as  one  of  the 
representatives  of  that  county.  He  took 
the  degree  of  a  seijeant-at-law  in  8  Edward 
III.  (Cokcj  4th  Inst,  79),  and  is  mentioned 
as  a  king's  serjeant  in  the  eighth  year. 
From  this  time  till  he  was  cafled  to  the 
bench  he  frequently  acted  as  a  judge  of 


assize. 


On  May  23, 1340,  he  became  a  justice  of 
the  Common  Pleas,  but  only  remained  in 
that  court  for  two  months,  being  raised  on 
July  24  to  the  office  of  chief  justice  of  the 
King's  Bench.  His  presidency  there,  how- 
over,  did  not  contmue  longer  than  the 
16th  of  the  following  December,  when  he 
changed  the  office  of  chief  justice  for  that 
of  treasurer.  Being  distinguished,  as  Coke 
says,  for  his  profoimd  and  excellent  know- 
ledge of  the  laws,  his  elevation  to  the  bench 
can  be  well  understood;  but  the  cause  of 
his  early  removal  from  a  sphere  in  which 
he  was  so  fitted  to  shine  is  not  so  readily 
apparent.  It  arose,  probably,  from  the 
kmg  having  as  hi^h  an  opinion  of  his  integ- 
rityjas  of  his  legal  att^nments. 

He  held  his  new  position  for  little  more 
than  ten  months ;  for  on  October  27, 1341, 
the  Great  Seal  was  placed  in  his  hands. 
He  continued  chancellor  till  his  death, 
and  it  b  remarkable  that,  though  there  is 
no  imputation  against  him  for  neglecting 
his  duties,  he  was  still  in  the  habit  of 
attending  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  to 
hear  arguments  there,  and  sometimes  to 
take  part  in  them.  Instances  of  this  occur 
in  Hilaiy,  17  Edward  IIL,  and  in  the  two 
following  terms. 

He  died  on  Angost  26,  1348,  leaving  by 


PASTON 

his  wife,  Isabella,  a  son  named  Adam,  who 
succeeded  to  eight  manors  and  other  property 
in  the  counties  of  Cumberland  ■nd  Nofth- 
umberland.  (Abb,  Bat,  Orig.  ii  202 ;  Cd, 
Inquis,  p.  m.  ii.  110.) 

PA88ELEWE,  SiMOX^  of  Norman  origin, 
was  probably  brother  of  Robert,  deputy 
treasurer  to  Henry  UI.  He  was  a  justioft 
of  the  Jews  in  1237,  and  in  62  Henry  IQ. 
his  name  appears  as  a  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer. (Madox,  ii.  319,  820,  727.)  Li 
1258  he  is  mentioned  as  applying  to  thfr 
abbey  of  St  Albans  for  a  loan  to  the  king. 
(Neiccome^s  St.  Albans,  171.) 

PA88ELE,  or  PA88ELEWE,  EDMinn)  de, 
as  several  members  of  his  family  did  before 
him,  held  office  in  the  Exchequer.  He  was 
probably  the  son  of  Robert  de  Passelewe, 
who  was  knight  of  the  shire  for  Sussex  in 
24  and  28  Heniy  IIL,  as  he  himself  had 
considerable  estates  in  that  coun^,  part  of 
which  he  devoted  to  pious  uses.  In  16  Ed- 
ward I.  he  was  appomted  one  of  the  com- 
missioners to  enquire  as  to  the  damage  done 
by  the  overflowing  of  the  sea  in  the  Isle  of 
'Aanet  (Lewis's  Thanet,  77)  ;  and  in  3  Ed- 
ward II.  he  was  specially  employed  by  the 
king  and  the  council  to  attend  to  the  long's 
pleas,  and  is  designated  by  Dugdale  a  ter- 
leant.  From  that  till  the  sixteenth  year 
he  was  frequently  engaged  as  a  jiutice  of 
assize,  or  otherwise,  and  as  such  was  ooor 
manded  to  bring  his  proceedings  into  the  Ex- 
chequer to  bo  estreated,  and  received  the  cus- 
tomary summons  to  attend  the  ]^liaments. 

On  September  20,  1323,  17  fedwaid  E, 
he  was  constituted  a  baron  of  the  Exche- 
quer, the  duties  of  which  he  continued  to 
perform  till  the  end  of  the  reign,  fie  died 
m  1  Edward  III.,  leaving  a  widow  and  tiro 
sons.  (Abb.  Hot.  Orig.  i.  132,  207;  JM. 
Writs,  il  12G1;  Abb.  Placit.  325.) 

P  A8T0H,  William,  was  a  descendant  from 
^Wolstan,  a  knight  who  came  from  France 
with  Henry  I.,  and  receiving  a  grant  of 
lands  at  Paston  in  Norfolk,  adopted  the 
name  of  that  place.  His  parents  were  Cle- 
ment Paston,  and  Beatrice,  the  daughter  of 
John  de  Somerton. 

He  was  bom  in  1378,  and,  being  brouzht 
up  to  the  law,  was  in  1413  m^e  stewaidof 
all  the  courts  and  leets  belonging  to  Ri- 
chard Courtney,  Bishop  of  NorwicL  (BlomB' 
fields s  Norfolk,  vi.  47^)  He  was  called  to 
the  degree  of  serjeant  in  Hilary,  8  Henry  V., 
1421;  and  soon  after  was  selected  as  one  of 
the  King's  Serjeants.  He  was  raised  to  the 
bench  as  a  justice  of  the  Common  Fleas  oo 
October  16, 1429, 8  Henry  VL,  and  retained 
his  seat  during  the  remainder  of  hia  life. 
(AOs  Privy  CmmcU,  It.  4,  5:  DmkU* 
Orig.  46.) 

Although  his  judicial  chai»^—  — t  i> 
high  aa  to  aoq[uiie  tot  him  thft '  lit 

Good  Judge,  it  did  not  pren  ^ 

tion  being  brought  agaiiMt  ^ 


PASTON 

liament  of  1434.  This  was  contained  in  a 
petition  from  one  William  Bailing,  in  which 
he  charged  the  judge  that  he  '  taketh  divers 
fees  and  rewaras  of  divers  persons  within 
the  shiies  of  Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  and  is 
withhold  with  every  matter  in  tiie  said 
counties ;' and  then  he  names  nine  cases, 
two  being  towns,  one  an  abbot^  four  priors, 
and  two  individuals,  with  sums  varying 
from  1«.  to  40s.,  except  the  last,  which  is 
evidentlj  the  origin  of  the  complaint,  and 
is  thus  stated : — 

'And  of  Katherine  Shelton  X  marks, 
against  the  king  for  to  be  of  her  counsel  for 
to  destroy  the  right  of  the  king  and  of  his 
ward,  that  is  for  to  say,  Ralph,  son  and  heir 
of  John  Shelton/  (Paston  IjeUers  [Knight's 
ed/L  IfUrod.  zxiv.) 

The  petition  w&s  rejected,  and  is  endorsed 
*  FalsaBilla; '  but  it  exposes  practices  which, 
even  if  some  of  them  were  old  annuities 
gmnted  while  he  was  an  advocate  for  past 
or  future  services,  and  not  withdrawn  when 
.  he  Toee  to  the  bench,  might  well  make  his 
impartiality  suspected  when  these  parties 
were  engaged  before  him. 

He  was  too  ill  to  ride  the  Home  Circuit  in 
January  1444,  as  was  then  the  practice; 
and  it  la  curious  to  find,  from  a  letter  ad- 
dressed to  him,  that  no  other  conveyance 
was  then  thought  of  except  that  by  water ; 
and  that  so  his  colleague,  Chief  Justice 
Hody,  arranged  for  them  to  go.  (Ibid,  5.) 
On  the  14tli  of  the  following  August  he 
died,  and  was  buried  in  Norwich  Cathedral, 
to  which  he  had  been  a  benefactor.  {Index 
Mmuut,  6.) 

He  married  Agnes,  daughter  of  Sir  Ed- 
mund Berrye,  of  Harlingbury  Hall,  Herts, 
who  after  her  husband  s  death  was  pro- 
ceeded against  by  one  John  Haute^  to  re- 
cover the  manor  of  Oxnead ;  and  it  affords 
%  strong  proof  of  the  respect  paid  to  the 
memonr  of  the  judge  that  Hauteyn  was 
obliged  to  petition  the  chancellor  to  assign 
certain  persons  to  be  of  counsel  for  him  in 
the  process,  because  no  men  of  court  would 
act  in  his  behalf.     {Paston  Letters,  8.) 

From  his  eldest  son,  John,  descended  Sir 
William  Paston,  distinguished  as  an  anti- 
qpaiTy  who  was  made  a  baronet  of  Oxnead, 
Norrolky  in  1641 ;  and  whose  son.  Sir 
Boberty  was  created  Baron  Paston  of  Pas- 
ton, and  Viscount  Yarmouth,  by  Charles 
IL,  to  which  an  earldom  of  Yarmouth  was 
added  in  1679 ;  but  all  these  titles  became 
extinct  in  1782  on  the  death  of  his  son 
William,  the  second  earl.  (Morant^s  Essex, 
n.  816 ;  Genealogy  of  the  Paston  Famify,  by 
F.  Wonhm,  Esq,) 

The  collection  of  letters  written  by  or  to 
Hie  members  of  this  family  during  the 
leipui  of  Henry  VL,  Edward  IV.,  Richard 
lEL^imd  Henry  VII.,  published  originally 
br  oir  John  Fenn,  and  reprinted  by  Charles 
juug^t  in  1840  under  the  name  of  the 


PATESHULL 


503 


'  Paston  Letters,'  contains  a  most  interest- 
ing record  of  the  domestic  manners  and 
haoits  of  the  fifteenth  century. 

PATS8HULL,  SncoN  de,  is  first  men- 
tioned when  he  appears  on  the  judicial 
bench  in  6  Richard  I.,  1103^  from  which 
time  till  the  end  of  John's  reign  his  name 
is  frequently  recorded  on  fines,  and  as  per- 
forming the  various  duties  of  a  justicier, 
besides  acting  as  a  justice  of  the  Jews. 
(Madox,  L  235,  iL  315.)  His  position 
during  the  principal  ^art  of  the  latter  reign 
was  evidently  very  high,  and  from  the  iict 
that  many  of  the  mandates  in  causes  be- 
fore the  court,  from  7  John,  are  addressed 
'  Rex  Sim.  de  Pateshull  et  sociis  suis,  jus- 
ticiis  suis,'  an  inference  may  perhaps  be 
drawn  that  he  was  at  the  head  of  that 
'.  division  of  the  Curia  Regis  in  which  '  com- 
mon pleas '  were  tried.  In  John  he  and 
James  de  Potema  appear  to  have  been  fined 
in  one  hundred  marKS  each  for  panting  a 
term  in  a  cause  before  them  without  the 
king's  licence,  but  they  were  afterwards 
excused.    (Rot,  Claus,  i.  61,  &c.,  113, 114.) 

Numerous  entries  show  his  continued 
attendance  on  King  John,  from  whom  he 
received  many  marks  of  favour.  {Eot. 
ChaH.  52,  131»  184.)  He  held  the  sheriff- 
alties of  Northampton  from  6  Richard  I. 
to  5  John,  and  of  Essex  and  Hertford  in  G 
Richard  I. 

In  the  wars  between  King  John  and  the 
barons  he  was  more  than  suspected  of  a 
defection  from  his  sovereign ;  out  in  May 
1215  the  king  granted  him  a  safe-conduct, 
with  an  intimation  expressed  in  it  that '  if 
it  is  so  as  the  abbot  of  Wobum  tells  us  on 
your  part,  we  will  relax  all  the  anger  and 
indignation  we  had  against  you.*  {Rot. 
Pat,  94.)  He  succeeded  in  clearing  nim- 
self  with  the  king,  and  his  lands,  which 
had  been  seized,  were  restored  to  him  in 
December.     {Rot,  Claus,  i.  200,  244.) 

The  time  of  his  death  is  uncertain ;  but 
as  the  rolls  give  only  one  other  instance,  in 
the  following  March,  of  his  performance 
of  judicial  duties  {Ibid,  270),  and  as  his 
son  Hugh's  subsequent  connection  with 
the  barons'  party  is  shown  by  the  restora- 
tion of  his  lands  to  him  in  2  Henry  IH.,  it 
is  more  than  probable  that  Simon  died 
before  that  date. 

Dugdale,  however,  in  his  '  Chronica 
Series,'  inserts  him  as  chief  justiciary  in  17 
Henry  UI.,  from  an  apparent  misappre- 
hension of  a  parenthetical  sentence  in  a 
passage  in  Matthew  Paris,  speaking  of  the 
next-mentioned  Hugh  de  Pateshull,  who, 
he  says,  was  son  of  Simon  the  justiciary, 
'  qui  quandoque  habenas  moderabatur  totius 
regni.'  Whether  such  an  obiter  dictum  is 
a  sufficient  authority  for  describing  him  at 
all  as  chief  justiciary  or  not,  it  clearly 
does  not  pretend  to  make  him  so  at  that 
time  or  in  any  part  of  that  reign. 


504 


FATESHULL 


PATS8HULL,  Hugh  de  (Bishop  of 
I^icHFiELD  AND  Coyentby).  Although 
Dogdale  introduces  him  88  chief  justiciary 
in  18  Heniy  111.^  1234,  when  Stephen  de 
Segrave  was  diM^raced,  the  authority  of  the 

Saasage  in  Mattnew  Paris  which  he  quotes 
oes  not  appear  to  authorise  any  such 
statement  That  passage  goes  no  further 
than  to  show  that  he  was  then  nominated 
treasurer  in  the  place  of  Peter  de  Hivallis, 
an  appointment  which  is  proved  to  have 
been  made  by  a  patent  of  the  same  date. 
(Maehxy  i.  36.) 

He  was  the  son  of  the  last-mentioned 
Simon  de  PateshuU,  and  in  his  early  life,  pro- 
bably just  after  his  father's  death,  he  jomed 
the  popular  cry  against  King  John,  and  lost 
bis  lands  accordinglv,  which  were,  how- 
ever, restored  after  the  accession  of  Henry 
HLf  when  he  returned  to  his  allegiance. 
(Bat,  Claus,  i.  340.)  He  obtained,  no 
doubt  from  his  father's  connection  with 
the  court,  a  place  in  the  Exchequer,  and 
united,  as  was  then  common,  the  clericid 
profession  with  the  performance  of  his  offi- 
cial duties.  In  the  former  department  he 
became  a  canon  of  St.  Paul's  {Angl.  Sac,  i. 
439),  and  in  the  latter  he  was  gradually 
advanced  to  that  position  in  which  he  had 
the  custody  of  the  seal  of  the  Exchequer, 
and  the  receipt  of  the  revenue  accounted 
for  by  the  sheriffs,  a  post  which,  if  not  at 
that  time,  was  shortly  afterwards  distin- 
guished by  the  title  of  chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer. 

The  date  of  the  patent  appointing  him 
treasurer  is  June  1,  1234,  and  there  are 
entries  to  show  that  he  still  continued  to 
perform  the  duties  in  22  Henrjr  III.  {Mado,T, 
li.  35,  256,  317)  ;  and  there  is  no  notice  of 
any  successor  being  appointed  till  24  Henry 
III.,  1240,  on  July  1  in  which  year  he 
was  consecrated  Bishop  of  Lichfield  and 
Coventry.  His  short  presidency  over  this 
diocese  was  terminated  bv  his  death,  while 
yet  comparatively  a  young  man,  on  De- 
cember 7, 1241.  \GodtDin,  317 ;  JBarofiage, 
ii.  143.) 

PATESHITLL,  Martin  de,  is  stated  by 
one  authority  to  be  a  native  of  Northamp- 
tonshire (Ftiller,  ii.  106),  and  bv  another  of 
Staffordshire  (Gent.  Mag,  Aug."  1813),  and 
there  is  a  village  of  his  name  in  both  these 
counties. 

During  the  reign  of  John  he  probably 
held  some  office  in  the  court,  with  the  title 
of  '  clerk '  added  to  his  name  {Rot,  Chart, 
180),  and  in  17  John  he  had  letters  of  safe- 
conduct  to  come  to  the  king  (Rot,  Pat. 
142),  then  in  the  midst  of  his  troubles. 

Very  soon  aiter  the  accession  of  Henry 

III.  he  was  raised  to  the  bench,  for  his 

name  appears  in  1217,  not  onlv  at  West- 

minster,  when  a  fine  was  levied  there,  but 

»ho  as  a  justice  itineTAiit  m  Yock  and 

Aiorthomberland,  and  in  otSiei  co>m\i«&. 


PATTBBON 

From  this  time  until  the  end  of  his  life 
he  was  actively  engaged  in  judicial  duties, 
scarcely  a  year  occurring  in  which  he  wu 
not  sent  on  various  itinera.  In  1224  he 
was  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  at  Don- 
stable  whom  Faukes  de  Breaute  endeavound 
to  capture ;  but  he  was  fortunate  enough  to 
escape.  (12.  de  Weiidover,  iv.  94.)  From 
the  next  year,  when  he  stands  the  first  of 
those  who  were  appointed,  he  is  in  eveij 
subsequent  commission  mentioned  in  tlie 
same  prominent  position.  Even  if  the  divi- 
sion of  the  courts  had  then  taken  place, 
which  is  very  doubtful,  there  is  no  other 
evidence  that  he  was  at  the  head  of  either 
branch. 

The  Fourth  Report  of  the  Public  Records 
{App,  ii.  161)  ^ves  an  amusing  testimooy 
to  his  activity  m  perl'omiing  his  legal  fonc- 
tions.  In  a  letter  to  the  authorities,  s 
brother  justicier  appointed  to  go  the  York 
Circuit  with  him  prays  to  be  excused  from 
the  duty,  *•  for,'  says  he,  *  tbe  said  Martin  is 
strong,  and  in  his  labour  so  sedulous  and 
practised  that  all  his  fellows,  espedsll? 
W.  de  Ralegh  and  the  writer*  (whose 
name  does  not  appear), '  are  overpowered 
by  the  labour  or  I^ateshull,  who  worb 
every  dav  from  sunrise  until  night'  The 
writer  therefore  prays  to  be  eased  of  his 
office,  and  allowed  to  go  quietly  to  his 
church  in  the  county  of  i  ork,  to  which  he 
had  been  lately  presented. 

Martin  de  PateshuU  was  appointed  arch- 
deacon of  Norfolk  in  1226,  and  two  yean 
after  he  was  raised  to  the  deanery  of  St 
Paul's,  London,  of  which  hehadprevioualr 
been  a  canon,  but  did  not  long  enjov  his 
dignitv,  as  he  died  on  November  14, 1^. 
{Le  AW,  182,  219.) 

Fuller  quotes  (ii.  160)  from  Florilepis 
this  character  of  him :  *  Vir  miras  prudentic, 
et  legum  regni  peritissimus.' 

PATE8HULL,  Walter  ds,  resided  in 
Bedfordshire,  and  the  only  notice  thst 
occurs  of  him  in  a  judicial  character  is  in 
3  Henry  HE.,  when  he  was  one  of  the 
iustices  itinerant  for  that  and  the  neigh- 
bouring counties.  On  the  disgrace  of  Faues 
de  Breaute  he  was  appointed  sheriff  of 
Bedfordshire  and  Buckinghamshire,  and 
under  the  direction  of  him  and  Henrv  de 
Braybroc,  the  captured  jud^,  the  castle  of 
Bedford  was  demolished.  He  retained  the 
sheriffalty  for  four  years,  and  died  in 
August  1232.  (Rot.  Clatts,  L  581,  632; 
Excerpt,  e  Rat,  Fin,  i.  225.) 

PATTESOK,  Jons,  was  the  son  of  the 
Rev.  Henry  Patteson,  of  Drinkstcoie  in 
Suffolk,  by  Sophia,  the  daughter  of  Bichaid 
Ayton  Lee,  Esq.,  a  banker  m  London.  He 
was  bom  on  February  1 1, 1700,  at  N«wki^ 
of  which  dty  hia  unck,  John  Pattato^S^* 
was  the  representative  in  pailiiiMVt  w 
some  years. 
\    ^£^\U2ai(H^il  Eton,  he 


fli* 


PATTESON 

CDondatioD^  and  succeeded  to  King's  College, 
OambridgOy  in  1800,  as  a  scholar,  where  in 
1812  he  became  a  fellow,  having  in  the 
meantime  been  the  first  to  win  the  Davies 
University  Scholarship. 

^  Entering  the  Middle  Temj)le,  he  placed 
himself  successively  under  the  instructions  of 
two  among  the  most  eminent  special  pleaders 
of  the  day,  Mr.  Godfrey  Sykes  and  Mr. 
{afterwards  Justice)  Littledale,  and,  having 
gained  by  their  guidance  sufficient  know- 
ledge of  the  then  abstruse  science,  com- 
menced the  practice  of  it  on  his  own  ac- 
count. Here  great  success  attended  him, 
and  soon  his  reputation  was  so  well  esta- 
blished that  manv  pupils  resorted  to  his 
chambers  to  sha^  m  the  benefit  of  his 
teaching. 

When  in  1821  he  was  called  to  the  bar 
and  joined  the  Northern  Circuit,  his  name 
as  an  accurate  and  subtle  pleader  soon 
secured  him  a  prominent  place  among  his 
compeers;  and  Mr.  Littledale,  who  then 
acted  as  counsel  for  the  Treasury,  showed 
bis  confidence  in  him  by  securing  his  assis- 
tance in  the  business  of  the  crown.  At  the 
dose  of  one  of  his  arguments, '  Kennell  v. 
The  Bishop  of  Lincoln,'  Mr.  Justice  Bavley 
is  said  to  nave  thrown  down  to  him  from 
the  bench  a  note  with  these  words :  *  Dear  P. 
Lord  Tenterden^  C.J.  An  admirable  argu- 
ment ;  shows  him  fit  to  be  an  early  judge.' 
•  The  implied  prophecy  was  speedily  ac- 
complisbea.  When  three  new  judges  were 
to  be  appointed,  Lord  Chancellor  Lyndhurst 
selected  Mr.  Patteson  as  the  most  eligible 
person  to  take  the  additional  place  in  the 
King's  Bench.  He  received  his  promotion 
on  November  12,  1830,  without  a  murmur 
among  his  colleagues,  tiiough  no  other  in- 
stance had  ever  occurred  of  one  who  after 
only  nine  vears'  practice  at  the  bar  had  been 
raised  to  the  bench ;  so  unreservedly  were 
hia  merits  acknowledged.  He  of  course  then 
received  the  honour  of  knighthood. 

The  choice  proved  a  most  successful  one. 
For  rather  more  than  one-and-twenty  years, 
under  three  chiefs  (Lord  Tenterden,  Lord 
Denman,  and  Lord  Campbell^ ,  he  contributed 
greatly,  by  his  high  judicial  &culty,  to  the 
efficiency  of  the  court,  as  was  frequently 
and  publicly  acknowledged.  No  one  was 
more  soundly  versed  in  the  principles  of  the 
common  law,  or  more  firm  in  his  enimci- 
«ti0D  of  them;  no  one  was  more  lucid  in 
Ids  reasoning,  or  less  liable  to  be  misled  by 
the  sophistries  of  counsel ;  and,  what  is  of 
the  greatest  importance,  no  one  was  more 
courteous  and  kind  to  all  applicants,  whether 
in  court  or  in  chambers.  As  a  criminal 
jndffe  he  was  inflexibly  just,  and,  where  he 
could  be.  most  merciful;  and  in  every 
branch  or  his  duties  he  established  a  cha- 
racter inspirinff  so  much  respect  and  con- 
fidence that  tnere  have  been  few  judges 
mhoae  retixement  was  more  regretted. 


PATTESON 


505 


But  he  was  visited  with  an  infirmity, 
that  of  deafness,  which,  though  at  first 
moderated  by  the  use  of  ingemous  instru- 
ments, at  last  increased  to  such  an  extent 
that  he  felt  that  he  could  not  adequately 
fulfil  the  duties  which  devolved  upon  him, 
and,  most  unwillingly,  he  tendered  his 
resignation.  The  scene  on  his  last  appear- 
ance in  court,  February  9,  1852,  was  a 
most  affecting  one ;  and  no  better  evidence 
can  be  produced  of  the  bar's  appreciation  of 
him  than  is  afforded  by  the  following  pas- 
sage in  the  address  of  the  present  chief 
justice  of  that  court,  Sir  Alexander  Cock- 
bum,  then  attorney-general : — 

'As  we  are  now  about  to  lose  you,  it 
may  not  be  entirely  unbecoming  in  me  to 
offer,  nor  wholly  unwelcome  to  you  to 
receive,  the  assurance  of  the  imiversal  sense 
of  the  whole  profession  that  the  high  and 
sacred  duties  of  the  judicial  office  were 
never  more  honestly  or  ably  discharged 
than  bv  you  during  your  whole  judicial 
life.  Though  we  lose  you,  your  memory 
will  ^et  remain  to  us,  assuming  its  proper 
position  amonff  those  revered  names  which 
dignify  this  pmce  and  this  hall,  and  will 
be  cherished  by  us  not  more  for  that  vast 
and  varied  learning  bv  which  all  have 
profited  and  which  all  {lave  admired,  than 
tor  that  untiring  love  of  justice  and  truth, 
and  that  hatred  of  oppression  and  wrong, 
that  unflinching  integrity  of  purpose,  that 
simplicity  and  singleness  of  heart,  and  that 
benevolent  kindness  of  nature,  which  leave 
us  in  doubt  whether  we  should  more  revere 
the  judge  or  love  the  man.  You  will  cany 
into  your  retirement  the  respect  and  vener- 
ation, and  the  enduring  attachment,  of 
every  member  of  the  profession.  "VVe  re- 
joice to  hope  that,  though  the  sense  of  one 
infirmity,  and  the  apprehension  lest  that 
should  interfere  with  the  perfect  discharge 
of  your  duty,  have  made  you  withdraw 
firom  your  office  in  the  vigour  of  ;^our 
powers,  you  will  long  remain  m  unimpaired 
nealth,  and  long  enjoy  all  the  pleasures  of 
life.' 

He  was  immediately  sworn  of  the  privy 
council,  and  for  five  years  assisted  in  the 
adjudication  of  the  dimcult  cases  that  come 
before  its  judicial  committee.  His  failing 
health  then  compelled  him  to  desist  from 
all  mental  labour,  and  for  the  short  re- 
mainder of  his  life  he  devoted  himself  to 
the  enjoyments  of  domestic  society  and  to 
the  friend Iv  assistance  of  his  neighbours. 
He  expired  on  June  28, 1861,  at  Foniton 
Court,  near  Honiton,  an  estate  he  had  pur- 
chased at  a  short  distance  from  the  residence 
of  his  brother-in-law  and  colleague  Sir 
John  Taylor  Coleridge,  with  whom  ne  kept 
up  the  most  affectionate  intimacy,  and  who 
has  feelingly  recorded  his  worth  on  the 
brass  his  admirers  put  up  to  his  memory  in 
Eton  College  cbapeV. 


506 


PAULET 


PAUNTON 


Hewastwiceinarned — first  to  Elizabeth, ;  title  that  of  Marquis  of  Winchester  wts 


daughter  of  George  Lee,  Esq.,  of  Dickie- 
borough,  Norfolk ;  and  secondly  to  Frances 
Duke,  sister  of  Mr.  Justice  Coleridge,  whom 
he  survived.  One  of  his  two  sons  is  the 
missionary  bishop  to  the  western  isles  of 
the  South  Pacific  Ocean,  and  the  other  a 
revising  barrister  on  the  Northern  Circuit. 

PAULET,  William  (Makquis  of  Win- 
chester), was  the  son  of  Sir  John  Paulet, 
an  eminent  soldier,  created  a  knight  of  the 
Bath  at  the  man*iage  of  Prince  Arthur  in 
1501,  and  of  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Sir 
William  Paulet,  of  Hinton  St.  George, 
lie  was  bom  about  1476,  if  it  be  true  that 
he  lived  to  his  ninety-seventh  year. 

Though  he  appears  to  have  been  sheriff 
of  Hampshire  in  1518,  the  history  of  his 


added  in  October  of  the  following  year,  and 
in  little  more  than  a  month  he  presided  as 
lord  steward  at  the  trial  of  the  late  Pro- 
tector Somerset.  He  was  one  of  the  twenty- 
four  subscribers  to  the  document  prepared 
by  the  Duke  of  Northumberland,  under- 
taking to  support  the  succession  of  the 
kingdom  on  Ladv  Jane  Grey ;  but  on  the 
death  of  King  lldward^  though^  acting  as 
lord  treasurer,  he  presented  the  crown  to 
that  imfortunate  lady,  he  had  the  wit  verr 
soon  to  see  his  dangerous  position,  and 
contrived  to  be  one  of  those  lords  who  met 
at  Baynard's  Castle,  and  caused  Queen  Maiy 
to  be  proclaimed.  This  secured  to  him  a 
continuance  in  his  office  of  treasurer  for  the 
whole  of  that  reign,  during  which  he  is 


early  life  is  limited  to  the  fact  that  he  was  I  said  to  have  been  active  in  the  persecutions 
a  learned  and  accomplished  man,  and  that  I  which  disgraced  it.  His  patent,  however, 
he  received  the  *  honour  of  knighthood  \  was  renewed  when  Queen  Elizabeth  sac- 
before  he  was  made  comptroller  of  the  ,  ceeded.  He  lived  for  nearly  thirteen  years 
household  by  Henry  \nil.,  in  1532,  when,  I  after  that  event,  and  died  on  March  10,1672, 
according  to  the  above  account,  ho  must :  and  was  buried  at  Basing  in  Hampshire, 
have  been  fifty-seven  years  of  age.  Five  '  It  is  not  supposed  that  a  man  so  old  as 
years  afterwards  he  became  treasurer,  and  he  was  coula  interfere  much  in  politics 
on  March  9,  1539,  was  advanced  to  the    in  the  last  two  reigns;  but  it  is  apparent 


baronage  by  the  title  of  Lord  St.  John  of 
Basing.  On  the  establishment  of  the  new 
Court  of  Wards,  in  32  Henry  VIII.,  he  was 
the  first  master  appointed,  and  in  the 
thirty-iifth  year  he  was  installed  a  knight 
of  the  Garter.  He  next  became  great 
master  of  the  king's  household,  and  the 
last  service  he  performed  to  Henry  VIII. 
was  in  accompanying  him  on  the  expedi- 
tion to  France,  when  he  was  present  at  the 
taking  of  Boulogne.  Of  that  king's  will 
he  was  the  third  named  of  the  sixteen 
executors,  and  under  its  provisions  one  of 
the  privy  council  of  his  infant  successor. 

Of  this  council  he  was  appointed  presi- 
dent wlien  Somerset  became  protector,  and 
within  a  few  weeks  after  the  accession  of 
Edward  VI.  the  Great  Seal  was  placed  in 
his  hands  on  ^larch  6, 1547,  with  the  title 
of  lord  keeper.  It  is  evident  that  this  was 
not  meant  to  be  a  permanent  appointment, 
from  the  time  during  which  he  was  to  hold 
it  being  limited  in  the  first  instance  to 
foiui;een  days,  and  on  two  subsequent 
occasions  to  defined  periods.  The  protector, 
however,  was  so  uncertain  as  to  tne  person 
with  whom  he  should  ultimately  entrust  it 
that  Lord  St.  John  retained  the  possession 
for  more  than  seven  months,  when  Richard 
Lord  Ilich  was  constituted  lord  chancellor 
on  October  23. 

As  soon  as  the  power  of  the  protector 
seemed  to  be  slipping  away  from  his  grasp. 
Lord  St.  John  is  found  on  the  side  of  his 
opponents  and  assisting  in  his  downfall. 
The  reward  of  thiB  suppleness  was  the 
earldom  of  Wiltshire  ana  the  office  of  lord 

treasurer,  both  of  -which  "weie  mxitAd  in  I  his  son  by  Isabella  hia  in^W 
the  beginning  of  1550.    To  xSi^  ioTKi«\%^\.%xi\.  Va.  «l^  %i^guiiat  tli 


that  he  must  have  possessed  a  wonderfoUr 
accommodatins  spirit  to  have  remained  un- 
scathed in  sucn  perilous  times  imder  four 
sovereigns,  professing  alternately  different 
systems  of  religion.  His  own  solution  of 
the  difficulty  seems  to  be  the  right  one. 
TVTien  he  was  asked  how  he  had  attained 
so  gi'eat  an  age,  he  pleasantly  answered,— 

Late  supping  I  forbear, 

Wine  and  women  I  forswear  ; 

My  neck  and  feet  I  keep  from  cold  ; 

No  mar\'el  then  that  1  am  old. 

/  am  a  tcUloWj  not  an  oak ; 

1  chide,  but  never  hurt  with  stroke. 

He  married  two  wives.  The  first  was 
Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Sir  William  Capel: 
the  second,  Winifred,  daughter  of  Sir  Jolrn 
Bruges,  and  widow  of  Sir  William  Sack- 
\'ille,  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer.  His 
titles  descended  in  regular  succession  till 
the  sixth  marquis  in  1689  was  created 
Duke  of  Bolton.  The  sixth  duke  dying 
without  male  issue  in  1794,  the  dukedom 
became  extinct,  but  the  marquisate  de- 
volved on  the  descendant  of  a  younger  son 
of  the  fourth  marquis,  whose  grandson 
now  enjoys  the  title.  (^Baronage,  i.  876; 
Collinses  Peerage^  ii.  367 ;  Hayward;  Bapw ." 
Lingard^  &c.) 

PAXJirrOK,  Jambs  de,  was  settled  in 
Lincolnshire,  his  father,  William,  beine 
sheriff  there  in  50  and  ol  Henry  IIL,  and 
he  himself  in  the  four  following  years.  He 
was  constituted  a  justice  of  the  Kng^ 
Bench  in  1270^  and  died  almoik  im- 
mediately after  hia  appointment  i  i»  Ii 
1  Edward  L,  Philip  de  PAtm^  ^ 

^     -  ^  "    ^-       '-■  « 

I 


PAUPER 

James  moDey,  to  pav  his  debts  to  the 
crown.  (Mado.r,  173, 194  j  Abb.  Placit,  109, 
283,  312.) 

PAXJPEB,  EooER,  was  the  son  of  Roger, 
Bishop  of  Salisbury-,  the  great  minister  of 
Henry  I.,  and  of  Matilda  of  Ramsbury, 
whom  some  authors  call  his  wife,  and  some 
his  concubine.  The  charitable  presumption 
is,  that  he  had  been  legally  united  to  her, 
and  that  he  had  refused  to  obey  the  canons 
which  were  then  attempted  to  be  enforced, 
enjoining  married  priests  to  put  away  their 
wives. 

There  are  three  documents  proving  that 
liOger  Pauper  was  chancellor  in  the  first 
year  of  Stephen's  reign — one  dated  in  1135 
{Monast.  ii.  482);  another  granted  at  the 
jfeneral  council  held  at  Westminster  in  the 
following  Easter  (Madox^  i.  13);  and  a 
third,  b^mg  the  Charter  of  Liberties,  dated 
near  the  same  time  at  Oxford  (App,  to  He^ 
portSj  liec.  Commis.) ;  to  all  oi  which  the 
attestation  of  his  father,  the  bishop,  is  also 
attached. 

In  July  1139  he  was  still  chancellor, 
when  he  and  his  father  were  seized  by 
Stephen  at  Oxford.  The  manner  in  which 
he  was  carried  in  fetters  before  the  castle 
of  Devizes,  and  threatened  with  instant 
death  unless  it  was  surrendered  to  the  king, 
i;^  more  fully  related  in  the  subsequent  life 
of  Bishop  Roger. 

Although  the  bishop  was  released  when 
the  castle  was  taken,  the  king  kept  the 
chancellor  in  confinement,  and  for  a  long 
time  refused  to  give  him  his  liberty  unless 
he  would  join  the  court  party,  an  offer 
which  he  invariably  rejected.  At  last, 
however,  he  procured  his  freedom,  on  con- 
dition that  he  retired  from  the  kingdom. 
Ilis  exile  continued  during  the  remainder 
of  his  life,  and  history  is  silent  as  to  its 
close.  (Mado.Cf  i.  14  ;  Godicin,  341 ;  Wai^ 
dover^  ii.  220. ) 

PAXJPEB,  IIerbert  (Bishop  of  Salis- 
ucRT),  enjoyed  the  archdeaconry  of  Can- 
terburj'  in  ll75,  and  in  1186  and  the 
following  years  was  one  of  the  custodes 
of  the  see  of  Salisbury  during  its  vacancy 
( Madow,  i.  31 1, 634),  which  lasted  tiU  1188. 
To  this  bishopric  he  was  afterwards  elected 
in  May  1 104,  5  Richard  I.  From  that  time 
he  acted  regularly  as  a  justicier  in  the  Curia 
Regis,  his  name  appearing  to  several  fines 
from  the  sixth  to  the  nmth  year  of  the 
reira  inclusive.  {Hunter's Preface,)  He  died 
on  Alav  0, 1217,  and  was  buried  at  Wilton. 
(Godmn,  342;  Le  Neve,  11,  257.) 

PEC,  Richard  de,  was  among  the  jus- 
tices itinerant  selected  by  the  king  when  the 
council  of  Windsor,  in  1179,  26  Henry  H., 
divided  the  kingdom  into  four  circuits. 
{Madox,  i.  137.)  In  27  Henry  IL  he  was 
sent  with  the  constable  of  Chester  to  Ire- 
land, to  take  away  the  government  from 
Hugh  de  Lacy,  who  had  offended  the  king 


PEMBERTON 


5or 


by  marry  in  e  a  daughter  of  Roderick,  King 
of  Connau^ht     {Lord  Lyttelton,  iii.  361.) 

In  3  Richard  I.  he  had  the  custody  of  tne 
castle  of  Bolsover  (Madox,  ii.  220)  ;  and  in 
1195  he  appears  a^n  as  a  justice  itinerant, 
fixing  the  tallage  m  Gloucestershire. 

He  married  Matilda,  the  widow  of  the 
before-mentioned  Robert  Grimbald.  (Ibidl 
i.  704.) 

PEKBEBTOK,  Francis.  Chauncy,  the 
historian  of  Hertfordshire,  is  the  only  author 
who  speaks  of  his  contemporary  Sir  Francis 
Pemberton  with  lumiixea  conmiendation. 
His  other  biographers,  with  whatever  party 
they  are  connected,  almost  invariably  qua- 
lify the  encomiums  they  are  compelled  to 
utter  with  some  expressions  of  depreda^ 
tion.  One  says  that  he  was  a  great  lawyer, 
but  that  he  had  so  towering  an  opinion  of 
his  own  sense  and  wisdom  that  he  mad& 
more  law  than  he  declared.  Another,  while 
acknowledging  that  he  was  an  excellent 
judge,  asserts  that  his  passion  for  prefer- 
ment led  him  sometimes  to  do  wrong.  The 
various  incidents  of  his  career  are  so  tinted 
by  the  different  prejudices  of  the  writers, 
whether  whig  or  tory,  that,  not  receiving 
the  entire  approbation  of  either  party,  the 
natural  inference  to  an  unprejudiced  mind 
is,  that  he  acted  independentl^r  of  both. 
That  he  was  *  damned  with  faint  praise ' 
receives  its  explanation  in  Burnet's  admis- 
sion that '  he  was  not  wholly  for  the  court.' 

The  family  of  Pemberton  came  originally 
from  a  town  of  that  name  in  Lancashire ; 
but  a  branch  of  it  settled  at  St.  Albans  in- 
Herts,  and  gave  many  sherifis  to  that  county. 
Ralph  Pemberton,  who  was  twice  mayor 
of  tne  borough  in  the  reign  of  Charles'  L, 
was  the  father  of  the  judge,  who  was  bonr. 
there  in  1625,  and,  after  receiving  the 
rudiments  of  his  education  in  one  of  its 
private  seminaries,  was  removed  in  August 
1640  to  Emmanuel  College,  Cambridge, 
under  the  tuition  of  the  learned  Dr.  Whicn* 
cote,  whose  niece  he  afterwards  married. 
He  remained  at  the  university  till  Februair 
1644,  having  taken  the  degree  of  B.  A.,  ancf^ 
entering  the  Inner  Temple,  was  called  to 
the  bar  in  November  1654.  Chauncy  omits 
any  mention  of  his  youthful  follies,  probably 
considering  that  he  redeemed  them  by  hia 
future  life;  but  both  Roger  North  and 
Burnet,  the  courtier  and  the  whig,  agree 
in  describing  his  beginning  as  very  de- 
bauched, and  leading  him  mto  such  extra- 
vagance that  he  soon  wasted  his  patrimony^ 
and  involved  himself  in  such  debt  that  he 
lay  many  years  in  gaol.  While  there  he- 
is  represented  by  both  to  have  made  up  for 
lost  time,  following  his  studies  so  closely 
that  according  to  one  he  came  out  a 
sharper  at  the  law,  and  according  to  the 
other  he  became  one  of  the  ablest  men  or 
his  profession.  He  no  doubt  had  plenty 
of  exerdae  for  legal  subtleties  in  the 


500 


PARKER 


year.  Lord  Parker  held  the  Seal  for  nearly 
seven  years,  and  proved  himself  as  ahle  in 
equity  as  he  had  shown  himself  in  law,  his 
decisions  being  regarded  to  this  day  with 
as  much  respect  as  those  of  any  of  his  pre- 
decessors. On  November  5, 1721,  he  was 
created  Viscount  Parker  of  Ewelme,  and 
Earl  of  Macclesfield,  with  a  remainder,  fail- 
ing his  issue  male,  to  his  daughter  Eliza- 
beth, the  wife  of  William  Heathcote,  Esc[m 
and  her  issue  male.  This  uncommon  limi- 
tation may  have  been  caused  by  his  son's 
abfiience  abroad  and  the  uncertainty  of  the 
father  as  to  his  existence.  The  earl  had 
been  already  made  lord  lieutenant  of  the 
counties  of  Warwick  and  Oxford,  in  the 
latter  of  which  he  had  purchased  Sherbum 
Castle,  near  Watlin^ton.  In  September 
1724  he  was  chosen  lord  high  steward  of 
the  borough  of  Stafford.  Yet  with  these 
and  other  proofs  of  the  king's  countenance 
and  favour,  v^ith  the  reputation  of  an  able 
dispenser  of  justice,  in  the  full  possession 
of  his  faculties,  and  without  any  change 
or  any  dissension  in  the  ministry,  he  sud- 
denly resigned  the  Great  Seal  on  January 
4, 1726. 

His  high  position  for  the  last  four  years 
in  which  he  filled  it  had  been  anything  but 
a  bed  of  roses.    In  the  latter  end  of  1720 
Mr.  Dormer,  one  of  the  masters  in  Chan- 
cery, had  absconded  in  consequence  of  the 
failure  of  a  Mr.  Wilson,  his  goldsmith  or 
banker,  in  whose  hands  he  had  deposited  a 
large  amount  of  the  suitors'  cash.    The 
deficiency  this  occasioned,  added  to  his  own 
losses  by  speculating  with  the  same  cash 
in  the  South  Sea  bubble,  which  at  that 
time  burst,  amounted  to  nearly  100,000/., 
which  it  was  impossible  for  him  to  meet 
from  his  own  private  means.    Those  means 
were  applied  as  far  &s  they  would  go,  and 
various  palliatives  were   adopted  by  the 
chancellor  to  satisfy  the  incoming  claims, 
such  as  by  applying  for  that  purpose  the 
price  given  by  the  successor  for  the  master- 
ship, by  obtaining  a  contribution  of  500/. 
from  each  of  the  other  masters  except  one, 
and  by  some  payments  out  of  his  own 
pocket.     But  these  were  not  nearly  sufil- 
cient,   and  the  refusal  of  the  masters  to 
make  any  further  contribution,  with  the 
urgency  of  unsatisfied  applicants,  deter- 
mined the  chancellor  to  put  an  end  to  his 
anxiety  by  resigning  the  Seal. 

Then  did  he  experience  the  efiect  of  the 
prince's  displeasure.  He  had  not  resigned 
three  weeks  before  petitions  were  presented 
to  the  House  of  Commons  by  nis  royal 
highnesses  friends  from  parties  complaining 
of  non-payment  of  the  moneys  they  were 
entitled  to;  addresses  to  the  king  were 
voted,  commissions  of  enauiry  granted,  and 
reports  made,  which  resulted  in  the  earl's 
impeachment  for  corruption  on  February  12. 
The  charges  were  not  like  those  against 


PARKER 

Lord  Chancellor  Bacon  for  taking  biibei  of 
the  suitors,  but  the  twenty-one  articlei  were 
confined  to  his  selling  ofiices  contraij  to 
law,  and  for  taking  extortionate  sums  for 
them,  with  the  knowledge  that  the  payment 
was  defrayed  out  of  the  suitors^  money. 
The  tri^  lasted  thirteen  days,  from  the  Gtii 
to  the  27th  of  May,  and  the  report  occupies 
no  less  than  032"  columns  or  the  'Stite 
Trials '  (vol.  xvi.  767  et  seq.).  The  pro- 
ceedings were  most  tiresome,  and  the  repe- 
titions and  the  quibblings  do  no  credit  dtaer 
to  the  managers  for  the  Commons  or  to  tb 
accused  earl.  The  Lords  unanimously  fonsd 
him  guilty  and  fined  him  S0,000/.  TliissDm 
the  king,  though  he  was  obliged  to  stzflte 
his  name  from  the  privy  council,  intimitod 
to  him  that  he  would  pay  out  of  his  priTy 
purse  as  fast  as  he  coiud  spare  the  mooeT, 
and  actually  gave  him  1000/.  towards  it  b 
the  first  year,  and  in  the  second  directed 
2000/.  more  to  be  given  to  him ;  but  before 
the  earl  applied  for  it  the  king  died,  and  Sir 
Robert  'WaliK)^  evaded  the  payment,  pro- 
bably from  lus  fear  of  offendingthe impb^ 
able  successor. 

This  prosecution  was  attended  with  im- 
portant results.  Though  many  will  conadff 
that  the  earl  was  treated  harshly  and  made 
to  suffer  for  irregularities  introdfucedhyliii 
predecessors, all  must  rejoice  in  the  exponn 
and  removal  of  them  which  the  investigtiifla 
produced.    A  vicious  system  had  previilBd 
for  a  long  series  of  years,  not  only  m  ^ 
Court  of  Chancery,  but  in  the  other  coniti 
also,  of  disposing  of  the  various  offioei  iB 
the  gift  01  the  chiefs  to  any  person  wk 
would  offer  what  was  called  '  a  present '  to 
the  bestower.    In  the  Court  of  Chancery 
not  only  the  executive  and  honorary  offieor 
who  were  entitled  to  fees  were  expected  to 
contribute  to  the  purse  of  the  chsDcelkit 
but  the  system  extended  to  the  masten  D 
Chancery,  who  were  the  chancellor^a  jt> 
dicial  assistants,  and  moreover  were  es- 
trusted  with  the  care  of  the  money>|tha 
right  to  which  was  disputed,  or  the  appfi* 
cation  of  which  was  to  be  determined,  m  dM 
various  causes  that  came  within  the  inxit* 
diction  of  the  court.    The  practice  had  bea 
notoriously  acted  upon  for  many  years  \j 
the  chancellor's  predecessors,  and,  thoqgi 
the  equally  objectionable  custom  of  reoeiiiQI 
new  year's  gifts  had  been  abrogated  l7 
those  whom  he   immediately  su'ooeededf 
Lords  Cowper  and  Harcourt,  yet  even  they 
had  not  hesitated  to  receive  payment  fitn 
those  masters  whom  they  had  appointedi 
Bad  as  the  system  was,  the  blot  would  not 
have  been  removed  but  for  the  acddent' 
Mr.  Dormer's  insolvency;  and  even  wiAt* 
discovery  Lord  Maodeaneld  would  prahi 
have  escaped  censure  had  he  cooftni  F 
self  to  the  former  practice,  wliidk  Ml 
in  some  sort  reoognisad  by  theli^riM 
inasmuch  as  at  the  reTolndon  VMWl 


-3 


■1 


i 


PARKER 

liibidng  the  sale  of  the  office  of  master  of 
Chanceiy^  which  had  been  proposed  to  be 
inserted  in  a  bill  then  before  the  house,  had 
been  negatiyed  by  the  Lords.  Either  his 
acquittal  or  his  condemnation  would  have 
equally  resulted  in  the  abolition  of  that 
practice,  and  in  a  more  safe  iuTestment  of 
the  suitors'  money.  But,  unfortunately  for 
the  accused  earl,  the  investigation  proved 
that  he  had  not  been  content  with  the  ac- 
customed honorarium,  but  had  increased  the 
price  so  enormously  that  it  became  next  to 
impossible  for  the  appointees  to  refund 
themselves,  or  even  to  pay  the  amount, 
without  either  extorting  unnecessary  fees  by 
delaying  causes  before  them,  or  using  the 
money  deposited  with  them  to  defray  the 
sum  demanded.  That  he  employed  an  agent 
to  bargain  for  him  and  to  higgle  about  the 
price  there  is  no  doubt,  and  that  he  was 
aware  of  the  improper  use  that  was  made 
of  the  suitors*  money,  and  took  means  to 
conceal  the  losses  that  occasionally  occurred, 
there  is  too  much  evidence.  Though  there- 
fore his  friends  might  assert  that  he  was 
made  to  suffer  for  a  sjrstem  of  which  he  was 
not  the  author,  and  which  had  been  know- 
ingly practised  by  bis  predecessors  with 
impunity,  it  is  impossible  to  acquit  him  en- 
tirely of  the  charge  of  carr3ring  that  system 
to  an  exorbitant  extent,  and  of  corruptly 
recognising,  if  not  encouraffing,  practices 
dangerous  to  the  public  credit,  and  destruc- 
tive of  that  confidence  which  should  always 
exist  in  the  judicature  of  the  country.  The 
contradictions  sometimes  found  in  human 
nature  are  extraordinary,  for  while  the  dis- 
closures of  the  trial  tend  to  exhibit  an  ava- 
ricious disposition  in  the  earl,  the  evidence 
he  produced,  with  questionable  delicacy, 
satisfactorily  proves  that  he  was  at  the  same 
time  extremely  liberal,  dispensing  with  an 
almost  extravagant  hand  large  sums  in  the 
promotion  of  learning  and  in  aid  and  en- 
couragement of  poor  scholars  and  distressed 
clergymen.  That  the  price  paid  by  the 
masters  for  their  places  was  considered  a 
legitimate  part  of  the  profit  of  the  chan- 
cellor, received  a  curious  confirmation  in  the 
grsnt  to  Lord  Macclesfield's  immediate 
successor.  Lord  King,  of  a  considerable  ad- 
dition to  his  salary,  as  a  compensation  for 
the  loss  occasioned  by  the  annihilation  of 
the  practice  consequent  upon  this  investi- 
gation. 

Lord  Macclesfield  lived  seven  years  after- 
wards, but  mixed  no  more  in  puolic  affairs. 
lie  spent  his  time  between  Sherbum  Castle, 
his  seat  in  Oxfordshire,  and  Jx>ndon,  where 
at  the  time  of  his  death  he  was  building  a 
house  in  St.  James's  Square,  afterwards  in- 
habited by  his  son.  lie  died  on  April  2d, 
1782,  and' was  buried  at  Sherbum. 

Ilis  wife,  Janet,  daughter  and  coheir  of 
Charles  Carrier,  of  Wirksworth  in  Derbv- 
.  shire,  Esq.,  brought  him  two  children  only, 


PARKBB 


501 


a  son  and  a  daughter.  The  son,  who  tuo- 
ceeded  to  the  earldom,  was  renowned  as  a 
philoeopher,  and  had  a  principal  share  in 
preparing  the  act  of  parliament  for  the 
alteration  of  the  style.  The  i^resent  earl  U 
the  sixth  who  has  borne  the  title. 

PABXEB,  Thomas,  was  a  near  relation 
of  his  namesake,  Lord  Chancellor  Maodes* 
field,  George  Parker,  of  Park  Hall  in  Staf- 
fordshire, being  the  grandfather  of  the 
chancellor,  and  the  great-grandfather  of  the 
judge,  whose  father,  (leorge,  sooceeded  to 
the  estate  of  Park  HalL 

Thomas  Parker  was  bom  about  1695,  and 
received  his  education  at  the  grammar 
school  of  Lichfield,  firom  whence  he  was 
removed  to  the  office  of  Mr.  Salkeld,  a  so- 
licitor in  Brook  Street,  Holbom,  where 
three  other  eminent  lawyers  and  judges 
were  at  nearly  the  same  time  initiated  into 
the  mysteries  of  the  science.  These  wpre 
Lord  Jocelyn,  lord  chancellor  of  Ireland : 
Sir  John  Strange,  master  of  the  Rolls;  and 
Lord  Hardwicke,  lord  chancellor  of  Eng- 
land. With  the  latter  he  contracted  a 
lasting  intimacy,  and  when  he  was  called  to 
the  bar  at  the  Inner  Temple  in  June  1724 
Lord  Hardwicke  was  attomey-^neral.  This 
was  less  than  a  year  before  his  noble  rela- 
tive's disgrace,  of  whose  patronage  though 
he  was  thus  deprived,  he  found  an  ample 
compensation  in  the  friendship  of  Lord 
Hardwicke,  who  never  forgot  what  he  owed 
to  the  early  encouragement  of  the  persecuted 
peer,  in  ^atitude  to  whom  he  took  every 
opportunity  of  promoting  Parker's  advance- 
ment. Thus  in  June  1780,  when  Parker 
had  been  a  barrister  only  twelve  years,  he 
was  raised  to  the  dignity  of  the  coif,  and 
made  king's  Serjeant  at  the  same  time ;  and 
in  two  years  aner,  on  July  7, 1738,  he  was 
raised  to  the  bench  as  a  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer. From  this  court  he  was  removed 
in  April  1740  to  the  Common  Pleas,  where 
he  remained  till  November  29. 1742,  when, 
having  been  previously  knignted,  he  was 
advanced  to  the  head  of  the  Court  of  Ex- 
che<}uer  as  lord  chief  baron.  All  these  pro- 
motions he  owed  to  Lord  Hardwicke,  who 
in  a  letter  to  the  Duke  of  Somerset  said 
that '  Parker  was  in  every  way  deserving, 
and  has  gained  a  very  hi«rh  character  tor 
ability  and  integrity  smce  his  advancement 
to  the  bench.'  (itarMs  Lard  Hardwicke^ 
ii.  26.) 

Lord  Hardwicke,  even  when  ont  of  power, 
did  not  neglect  him,  but  endeavoured  on  the 
death  of  Sir  John  WiUes  to  procure  for  him 
the  chief  justiceship  of  the  Common  Pleas, 
and  to  the  last  showed  his  regpard  by  naming 
him  as  a  trustee  under  his  wilL  (Ibid,  iii. 
209,  394.) 

Sir  Thomas  presided  in  the  Exchequer 
for  thirty  years,  when,  having  arrived  at  the 
age  of  seventv-eeven,  he  resigned  in  the 
summer  vacation  1772,  being  gratLfial^\2^ 


510 


PENROS 


the  crown,  had  the  conduct  of  the  indict- 
ment of  Christopher  Layer  for  high  treason 
in  conspiring  against  the  king  in  1722, 
-very  ably  and  efficiently  nerforming  his 
duty  on  that  important  trial.  On  October 
10,  1726,  he  was  appointed  chief  baron  of 
the  Exchequer.  {Lord  Raymond^  1309, 
1410;  State  Trials,  xvi.  140,  1330.)  He 
presided  in  that  court  for  four  years  and  a 
half,  and  during  that  time  he  exhibited 
that  patience  and  firmness,  as  well  as  legal 
knowledge  and  discrimination,  by  whicb  a 
good  judge  is  di^^tinguished.  He  fell  a 
victim  to  the  cruel  and  disgusting  manner 
in  which  prisoners  were  treated  in  that 
age.  Travelling  the  Western  Circuit,  some 
culprits  were  brought  before  him  from 
Ilchester  for  trial  at  Taunton,  the  stench 
from  whom  was  so  bad  that  an  infection 
was  spread  which  caused  the  death  of  some 
hundreds  of  persons.  Among  them  was 
the  lord  chief  oaron,  who  died  at  Blandford 
on  April  14,  1730.  {StaU  Trials,  xvii. 
219-260;  Gent.  Mag.  xx.  236.) 

He  was  considered  when  at  the  bar  a 
florid  speaker  and  bold  advocate,  though 
^rhaps  at  times  too  vehement.  Steele's 
quibble  on  his  name — *  As  Pen  is  the  Welsh 
term  for  head,  guelt  is  the  Dutch  for  money, 
which  vdth  the  English  syllable  ly,  taken 
together,  expresses  one  who  turns  hui  head 
to  lye  for  money ' — must  be  wholly  disre- 
garded, as  it  was  prompted  by  anger  at 
having  the  licence  of  his  tneatre  taken  away. 
As  a  judfire  he  held  a  high  reputation  for 
his  leammg  and  his  equal  distribution  of 
justice ;  ana  in  his  private  character  he  was 
esteemed  for  his  probity  and  cheerfulness. 
His  charity  was  not  confined  to  his  life,  for 
by  his  will  he  left  a  considerable  sum  for 
the  discharge  of  prisoners  confined  for  debt. 
(Nohys  CromweU,  i.  176  j  Cont.  of  Granger, 
iil  194) 

PEKBOS,  John,  was  of  a  Cornish  family. 
He  was  raised  to  the  office  of  a  judge  of 
the  King's  Bench  in  Ireland  on  February 
27, 1385,  8  Richard  H.  {Cal  Rot.  Pat.  211.) 
From  this  position  he  was  removed  to  the 
English  bench  on  January  16.  1391,  in  the 
fourteenth  year ;  but  to  which  of  the  two 
courts  seems  xmcertain.  Although  Dugdale 
places  him  in  the  Common  Pleas,  the  words 
in  the  patent  seem  rather  to  express  the 
King's  Bench  {Ibid.  221) ;  and  no  fines  ap- 
pear, from  Dugdale's  account,  to  have  been 
levied  before  him.  In  the  following  year 
he  was  made  justice  of  South  Wales;  and 
the  last  time  we  find  him  mentioned  is  as  a 
trier  of  petitions  in  the  parliament  of  17 
Richard  II.     {Ibid.  223 ;  Rot.  Pari.  310.) 

PEKZAKCE,  Lord.    See  J.  P.  Wilde. 

PEPTS,  Richard,  was  the  second  son  of 
John  Pepys,  of  Cottenham  in  Cambridge- 
shire, and  the  nephew  of  Talbot  Pepys,  who 
was  a  reader  at  tne  Middle  Temple  in  1623. 
His  mother  was  E^za\)et\i,  ^\x^\i\/^i  o^  SoVol 


PEPYS 

Bendish,  of  Steeple  Bumnstetd  in  Esmx. 
He  studied  at  the  Middle  Temple,  and, 
arriving  at  the  post  of  reader  in  1640,  wu 
elected  treasurer  of  the  society  in  1613. 
In  JanuaiY  1064  he  was  called  seijeant, 
immediately  after  which  he  was  named  od 
the  commission  for  the  spring  circuit  througli 
the  midland  counties ;  and  on  A^y  30,  16m, 
he  was  made  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer. 
{Dugdalfs  Orig.  220-222;  WhUdocke,m) 
Within  a  vear  he  was  removed  to  tiie 
chief  justiceship  of  the  Upper  Bench  is 
Ireland;  and  on  June  14,  1666,  he  was 
placed  in  that  character  as  chief  com- 
missioner of  the  Great  Seal  of  that  countzr, 
in  which  he  continued  till  August  20, 165& 
At  the  time  of  his  death,  in  Januaiy  1658, 
he  was  the  sole  judge  of  his  court;  audit 
is  much  to  his  credit  that  in  times  like 
those  in  which  he  flourished  no  touch  of 
calumny  sullies  his  name.  (Smuth's  Lax 
Off.  Ireland,  31,  90.) 

The  grandson  of  Richard,  the  judge^s 
eldest  son,  was  the  father  of  two  baronetft— 
Sir  Lucas  Pepys,  physician  to  George  UL, 
created  in  1784;  and  Sir  William  Wdkr 
Pepys,*  a  master  in  Chancery,  created  in 
1801.  The  latter  title  devolved  in  1845 
on  the  next-noticed  Charles  Christopher 
Pepys. 

Notwithstanding  all  these  honours  attach- 
ing to  the  family,  the  name  of  Pepvs  iriD 
be  longer  remembered  through  the  utenzy 
reputation  of  Samuel  Pepys,  the  descendint 
ot  a  younger  branch,  who  was  secretaij  of 
the  Admiralty  in  the  reigns  of  Charles  H. 
and  .Fames  II. 

PEPTS,  Charles  Christopher  (Eail 

OF  Cottenham),  was  directly  desosoded 

from  the  above-noticed    Richard   Pepj*, 

being  the  second  son  of  Sir  William  "WeUer 

Pepys,  who  held  the  office  of  master  in 

I  Chancery  from  1775  till  1807,  and  obtained 

his  baronetcy  in  1801  by  his  wifSe,  Eliia- 

beth,  eldest  daughter  of  the  Right  HoDoa^ 

;  able  William  Dowdeswell,  chancellor  of  the 

'  Exchequer  in  1765.    He  was  nephew  alw 

to  Sir  Lucas  Pepys,  Bart.,  physician  to 

George  lU.     Both  the  baronetcies  centred 

in  him  by  the  decease  of  his  brother  in  1845, 

i  and  his  cousin  in  1840,  and  are  now  merged 

i  in  the  earldom  he  afterwards  attained.  Hie 

younger  brother  Henr\'  held  the  bL>hopric 

of  Worcester  from  1841  to  1861. 

He  was  bom  on  April  29,  1781,  and  wis 
educated  at  Harrow,  from  whence  he  pro- 
ceeded to  Trinity  College,  Cambridge,  wnere 
he  took  his  degree  of  Bachelor  of  Laws  in 
1803.  Having  previously  entered  himseh 
as  a  member  of  Lincoln**s  Inn,  he  availed 
himself  of  the  instructions  of  the  two  fljoat 
eminent  men  in  common  law  and  ¥ffBBS% 
Mr.  Tidd  and  Sir  Samuel  RomiUj^fiDfa 
was  called  to  the  bar  in  XovMiiba  Di 
He  attached  himself  to  the  C  '  "^ 
^ycftty^  but,  though  eitocaiied  a  ^ 


PEPYS 

nan,  his  progress  was  not  rapid.  He  did  not 
ibtain  a  silk  gown  till  1826 ;  but  afterwards 
le  had  no  reason  to  complain. 

Soon  after  the  accession  of  William  IV. 
le  was  appointed,  in  November  1830,  soli- 
itor-general  to  the  aueen;  and  in  July 
L8S1  he  entered  parliament,  iirst  as  the 
representative  of  Earl  Fitzwilliam's  borough 
)!  Malton,  and  afterwards  of  Hiffham  Fer- 
rers. In  the  senate  he  supported  the  whig 
partjy  to  which  he  was  always  attached; 
ind  was  raised  by  that  party  in  February 
1834  to  the  post  of  solicitor-general  to  the 
king,  on  which  occasion  he  was  knic^hted. 

He  had  filled  that  office  for  little  more 
than  six  months  when  the  mastership  of 
the  Rolls  became  vacant,  to  which  post, 
pusingoverthe  Attorney-General  Campoell, 
oir  Christopher  was  appointed  on  Septem- 
ber 29, 1834.  In  the  mterval  between  that 
month  and  April  1835  there  had  been  two 
changes  of  ministry;  and  on  the  second 
change,  when  the  liberal  party  resumed 
power,  the  Great  Seal  was  put  into  commis- 
sion, at  the  head  of  which  the  new  master  of 
the  Rolls  was  placed.  At  the  end  of  nine 
months,  on  January  16, 1836,  the  Seal  was 
delivered  to  Sir  Christopher  alone  as  lord 
chancellor,  and  four  days  afterwards  he  was 
created  Baron  Cottenham. 

For  nearly  the  six  following  jears  he 
performed  the  functions  of  his  high  office 
m  a  most  satisfactory  manner ;  but  on  Sejp- 
tember  3,  1841,  on  the  restoration  of  the 
sonservative  parir,  he  retired,  and  remained 
out  of  office  while  that  ministry  retained 
power,  but  assisted  in  hearing  appeals  to 
the  House  of  Lords  and  the  privy  council. 
When  the  conservatives  were  in  their  turn 
obliged  to  quit  the  government  he  resumed 
his  seat  on  the  woolsack,  on  July  4,  1846, 
being  the  only  whig  chancellor,  except 
Lord  Cranworth,  who  during  the  present 
century  has  been  restored  to  his  place. 

Towards  the  end  of  four  years  Lord  Cot- 
tenham's  health  began  to  succumb  under 
the  labours  of  his  position,  and  his  suffer- 
ings at  last  interfered  much  with  his  duties. 
In  the  prospect  of  his  retirement,  her 
majesty,  or  rather  perhaps  the  party  to 
which  he  was  attached,  showed  the  value 
placed  on  his  services  by  raising  him  two 
steps  in  the  peerage.  He  was  on  June  1, 
1860,  createa  Viscount  Crowhurst  and 
Earl  of  Cottenham ;  and  on  the  19th  of  the 
same  month,  under  the  pressure  of  severe 
illness,  he  resigned  the  Seal,  having  held  it 
as  chancellor  nearly  ten  years.  With  the 
hope  of  restoring  his  health,  he  travelled  on 
the  continent,  but,  as  in  the  case  of  Lord 
Langdale,  his  relaxation  came  too  late. 
Witnin  nine  months  he  died  at  Pietra  Sauta 
in  tiie  dnchy  of  Lucca  on  April  19, 1851. 

Lord  Cottenham,  though  he  attained  no 

Seat  eminence  as    an    advocate,  proved 
maelf  a  most  excellent  judge,    in  the 


PERCY 


511 


former  capacity  he  was  a  sound  and  prac- 
tical adviser,  and  an  accurate  and  logical 
reasoner^  but  without  that  ready  eloquence 
which  IS  often  the  principal  attraction. 
But  these  very  qualities  renaered  his  deci- 
sions in  the  latter  character  of  the  greater 
value,  enabling  him  at  once  to  see  the  real 
merits  of  the  point  in  dispute,  and  to  dis- 
card from  his  consideration  useless  techni- 
calities and  irrelevant  arguments.  As  a 
senator,  both  in  and  out  of  office,  he  sup- 
ported and  sometimes  originated  several 
amendments  of  the  law,  and  in  his  own 
court  he  introduced  some  regulations  for 
the  simplification  and  more  satisfactory 
conduct  of  its  proceedings.  It  speaks 
highly  in  his  favour  that  his  judicial  merits 
were  not  praised  by  his  own  friends  only, 
but  fully  acknowledged  by  the  opposite 
part^  also.  He  was  peculiarly  cold  and  sedate 
m  his  manner,  and  extremefy  tenacious  of  his 
opinions,  and  though  he  was  a  staunch  ad- 
herent to  the  whig  party,  he  was  not  consi- 
dered of  any  use  to  it  as  a  politician. 

In  182L  Lord  Cottenham  married  Caro- 
line, daughter  of  William  Wingfield,  Esq., 
the  master  in  Chancery,  by  Lady  Charlotte 
Maria,  daughter  of  the  first  Earl  of  Digby. 
By  her  he  had  twelve  children. 

PEECEHAT,  or  PEBC7,  Henry  de,  may 
have  been  a  younger  branch  of  the  noble 
house  of  Percy,  but  was  probably  the  son  of 
W^illiam  and  IsabellaTercehay,  the  posses- 
sors of  Lewesham  and  other  manors  in  York- 
shire and  Lincolnshire.  From  39  Edward 
HI.  he  received  a  fee  as  one  of  the  king's 
Serjeants,  after  which  he  was  occasionally 
employed  as  a  justice  of  assize.  He  was 
raised  to  the  nench  at  Westminster  on 
October  6,  1376,  being  then  constituted  a 
baron  of  the  Exchequer,  in  which  office  he 
remained  during  the  rest  of  that  and  the 
first  five  months  of  the  following  reign. 
He  was  then,  on  November  26,  1.377,  re- 
moved to  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  in 
which  fines  are  recorded  as  levied  belore 
him  till  Midsummer  1380,  4  Richard  IL 
(Duffdale^s  Orig,  45.) 

PEBCY,  Robert  de,  was  one  of  the  jus- 
ticiers  before  whom  fines  were  taken  in  10 
John.  (^Hunter's  Preface.)  They  were 
acknowledged  in  the  country,  and  he  is 
mentioned  in  that  character  in  no  previous 
or  subsequent  year. 

He  was  the  third  son  of  Josceline  of 
Lovaine  (son  of  Godfrey  Duke  of  Brabant, 
and  brother  of  Adelicia,  the  second  wife  of 
Heniy  I.),  who  assumed  the  name  of  Percy 
for  himself  and  his  descendants  on  his  mar- 
riage with  Agnes,  one  of  the  daughters 
and  coheirs  of  Lord  William  de  Percy, 
the  third  baron,  on  whose  death  the  male 
branch  became  extinct. 

He  accompanied  the  king  to  Ireland  in 
1210,  and  in  the  following  year  had  various 
allowances  for  the  expenses  of  the  S^%i:d&\i. 


512 


PERCY 


ambassadors  and  their  knights,  and  for 
conductinpr  them  to  Dover.  (Rot,  de  Pr<p- 
stito,  180-*^30.)  In  14  John  the  sheriflfelty 
of  Yorkshire  was  committed  to  hinii  but 
he  subsequently  appears  to  have  joined 
with  the  oarons,  as  his  lands  were  g^ven 
to  Brian  de  Insula;  but  they  were  restored 
on  his  submission  soon  after  the  accession 
of  Henrv  HI.  (Hot.  Claus.  L  246,  324, 
873.)  fn  the  tenth  year  of  that  reign  he  is 
mentioned  as  one  of  the  justices  assigned 
to  hold  a  special  assize  of  last  presentation 
to  a  church  in  Yorkshire.  {Ibid,  ii.  138.) 
He  is  said  to  have  assumed  the  name  of 
Sutton,  which  was  borne  by  his  posterity. 
{Baronage^  i.  271 ;  ColUns's  Peerage,  ii.  232'.) 

PEBCT,  William  de,  was  also  named  in 
Mr.  Hunter's  list  of  justiciers  before  whom 
fines  were  acknowledged  in  8  John,  1206, 
but  none  of  the  fines  m  which  he  is  so  in- 
troduced have  yet  been  published. 

He  seems  to  have  been  nephew  of  the 
above-mentioned  Robert  de  Percy,  and  the 
son  of  Ilenry  de  Percy,  Robert's  elder 
brother,  by  Isabel,  daughter  of  Adam  de 
Brus,  lord  of  Skelton. 

He  was  employed  by  King  John,  a  man- 
date being  recorded  for  a  secure  ship  for 
him  to  pass  over  in  the  king's  service  into 
Poictou  with  horses  and  arms.  (BoL  de 
Fin,  647.)  Under  Ilenry  III.  he  received 
various  grants  of  land,  and  obtained  a 
weekly  market  for  his  manor  of  Spoffbrth 
in  Yorkshire,  and  in  26  Henry  HI.  he  paid 
one  hundred  marks  to  be  exempted  irom 
attendance  on  the  king  in  Gascony. 

He  died  in  1246,  and  was  buried  in  the 
abbey  of  Sallay.  Ills  first  wife  was  Joan, 
one  of  the  daughters  of  the  before-noticed 
"William  Briwer.  His  second  wife  was 
Ellen,  daughter  of  Ingelram  de  Balliol. 
By  both  he  had  issue. 

The  thirteenth  baron  was  in  1377  created 
Earl  of  Northumberland,  a  title  which  still 
exists,  notwithstanding  various  forfeitures, 
in  the  present  Duke  of  Northumberland, 
who  is  ^e  lineal  descendant,  sometimes 
through  female  heirs,  of  this  William  de 
Percy.  The  dukedom  was  added  by  George 
III.  on  October  18,  1760.  {Baronage,  i. 
271 ;  CoUins,  ii.  233.) 

PEBCT,  Peter  de,  was  probably  a 
branch  of  the  same  noble  tamilv*  and 
was  certainly  a  native  of  the  \orth. 
From  the  numerous  entries  in  the  Rotu- 
lus  de  Unibus  {Excerpt,  ii.  263-^)  of 
payments  made  for  assizes  before  him,  it  is 
apparent  that  he  was  a  regular  justicier. 
They  extend  from  41  to  47  Henry  III., 
1257-1263.  After  that  date  there  is  no 
further  mention  of  him  until  1267,  when 
his  son  Robert  does  homage  for  the  lands 
his  father  held  in  capite.     {Ihid,  466.) 

PEBBOTy  George,  was  the  son  of  the 
Rev.  Thomas  Perrot,  rector  of  Welbury 
and  Martin-cum-Gregory  in  York,  and  a 


FEBYAM 

prebendary  of  Ripen,  by  Anastaaia,  danghter 
of  George  Plaxton,  Esq.,  of  Beriiick.  He 
was  born  in  1710,  and  was  initiated  in  the 
study  of  the  law  at  the  Lmer  Texople,  ob- 
taining his  ^rade  of  barrister  in  17o2,  tod 
of  bencher  m  May  1757.  Two  yean  after 
he  was  made  a  king's  counael,  and  in  1700 
he  opened  the  indictment  against  Lord 
Ferrers  when  he  was  tried  for  murder 
by  the  House  of  Lords.  In  January  176S 
he  obtained  a  seat  on  the  bench  as  a  barn 
of  the  Exchequer,  but  was  never  knighted. 
His  power  of^  discrimination  may  be  esti- 
wated  by  his  summing  up  on  a  trial  tt 
Exeter  as  to  the  right  to  a  certain  stream  of 
water,  which  he  concluded  thus:  'Gentle- 
men, there  are  fifteen  witnesses  who  sweir 
that  the  watercourse  used  to  flow  in  a  ditch 
on  the  north  side  of  the  hedge.  On  tlie 
other  hand,  gentlemen,  there  are  nine  wit- 
nesses who  swear  that  the  watercourse  used 
to  flow  on  the  south  side  of  the  hedge. 
Now,  gentlemen,  if  you  subtract  nine  frmn 
fifteen,  there  remain  six  witnesses  whoOr 
uncontradicted ;  and  I  recommend  yon  to 
give  your  verdict  accordingly  for  the  ptitr 
who  called  those  six  witnesses.' 

His  judicial  life  extended  to  twelve 
years,  and  was  terminated  by  a  fit  of 
the  palsy,  with  which  he  was  seized  it 
Maidstone  during  the  Lent  assizes  in  1775, 
which  induced  him  to  resign  in  the  follow- 
ing May,  receiving  a  grant  of  1200/.  a  veer 
as  a  retiring  pension.  He  was  buriei  at 
Laleham. 

He  married  Marv,  the  daughter  of 
William  Bower,  of  Bridlington  m  York- 
shire, and  the  widow  of  Peter  Whittoo, 
who  in  1728  was  lord  mayor  of  York,  Iwt 
left  no  issue.     {StaU  Trials,  xix.  804.) 

PEBBTN,  Richard,  the  son  of  Benjamb 
Perryn,  Esq.,  of  Flint,  commenced  his  etodT 
of  the  law  at  Lincoln's  Inn,  but  was  calka 
to  the  bar  in  July  1747  by  the  society  of 
the  Inner  Temple,  to  which  he  had  trms- 
ferred  himself,  and  became  a  bencher  is 
April  1771.  Choosing  the  Court  of  Chan- 
cery for  his  legal  arena,  he  soon  acquired 
such  a  reputation  there  as  to  be  employed 
in  almost  every  cause.  After  a  long  ap- 
prenticeship, he  obtained  a  silk  gown  in 
1771,  and  received  the  appointment  of 
\ice-chamberlain  of  Chester.  It  is  inn- 
nuated  by  a  contemporary  that  he  owed 
his  success  more  to  cnance  than  to  merit, 
and  that  his  professional  colleagues  had  no 
very  high  opinion  of  his  legal  acquirements 
On  April  6,  1770,  he  was  promoted  to  a 
barony  in  the  Court  of  Exchequer,  and 
knighted.  After  a  respectable  career  of 
three-and-twenty  years  as  a  judge,  he  le* 
signed  in  the  summer  vacation  ca  1790. 
(8  Term  Heparti,  421 ;  Striehtrm  m  liV- 
yers,  176.)    He  died  in  180a 

PKBYAM,  WlLLIAX,  was  te  dM  ^ 
the  two  sons  of  John 


PETER 

citizen  and  twice  major  of  Exeter ;  and  of 
Market,  one  of  the  daughters  and  coheirs 
of  Kobert  Hone,  Esq.,  of  Ottery  St.  Mary. 
The  other  son,  John,  was  an  alderman  of 
Exeter  and  a  knight,  and  was  a  consider- 
able benefactor  to  Exeter  College,  Oxford 
{Chalmers'  Oxford,  08),  where  William, 
who  was  bom  at  Exeter  in  1534,  is  said  to 
have  been  educated.  His  arms  are  placed 
in  one  of  the  windows  of  Middle  Temple 
Hall.  Keceiving  the  Serjeant's  coif  in  Mi- 
chaelmas Term  1579^  he  was  constituted  a 
judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  February 
18, 1561,  23  EUz.     {DugdMa  Orig.  225.^ 

For  the  twelve  years  during  which  ne 
retained  his  seat  the  reputation  he  enjoyed 
may  be  estimated  as  well  by  his  being 
named  as  one  of  the  commissioners  to  hear 
causes  in  Chancery  on  the  death  of  Sir 
Christopher  Hatton,  as  by  the  number  of 
commissions  into  which  his  name  was  in- 
troduced for  the  trial  of  state  offenders. 
Among  these  were  Mary  Queen  of  Scots, 
the  Earls  of  Arundel  and  Essex,  Sir  John 
Perrot,  and  others  of  less  note.  (App,  4 
HejHn-t  Pith.  Kec,  272-290 ;  State  Trtak,  L 
1107,  1251,  1315,  1333.)  In  Januair  1693 
he  was  promoted  to  the  office  of  chief  baron 
of  the  Exchequer,  and  was  knighted.  He 
continued  to  preside  in  that  court  during 
the  ten  remaining  years  of  Elizabeth's 
reign,  and  for  eighteen  months  under  King 
James  I.     {Dutjdale'a  Orig,  48.) 

After  a  judicial  life  of  nearly  twenty-four 
years^  he  died  on  October  9, 1004,  at  his 
mansion  at  Little  Fulford,  near  Crediton, 
in  the  church  of  which  he  was  buried  under 
a  stately  monument 

He  married  three  wives.  The  first  was 
Margery,  daughter  of  John  Holcot,  of 
Berkshire,  Esq. ;  the  second  was  Anne,  the 
daughter  of  Jolm  Parker,  of  North  Molton, 
Devon,  Esq. ;  and  the  third  was  Elizabeth, 
one  of  Sir  5^'icholas  Bacon  the  lord  keeper's 
daughters,  to  whom  he  was  also  the  Uiird 
husband,  she  having  been  previouslymar- 
ried  to  Sir  Kobert  d'Oyly  and  Sir  Henry 
NevilL  He  left  four  daughters.  {Princes 
Worthies ;  Diary  of  Walter  Yonge,  8.) 

FETEB,  as  abbot  of  Tewkesbury  (elected 
in  1210),  is  added  to  the  list  of  justices 
itinerant  for  the  county  of  Gloucester  in 
9  Henry  111.,  1225.  His  name  does  not 
again  appear  in  ajudicial  character,  and  he 
died  in  1232.  (Bot,  Claus.  i.  271,  ii.  70 ; 
Hot.  Pat.  184  ;  Mitred  Abbeys,  L  I860 

PETIT,  JoHir,  was  a  member  of  Gray's 
Inn,  and  filled  the  post  of  reader  there  in 
1518,  and  again  in  1520.  He  was  in  the 
commission  of  the  peace  for  Kent  &om 
1514.  He  became  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer 
in  Michaelmas  1527,  but  Dugdale  is  some- 
what confused  in  respect  to  wnetherhe  was 
second  or  third  baron.  {DugdMs  Orig, 
292;  Cal  State  Papers  [1509-14],  728.) 
FEYEBELL,  Hugh,  is  named  on  a  fine  of 


PHELIPPS 


513 


0  Richard  I.,  1194^  as  one  of  the  j  asticiers  be- 
fore whom  it  was  levied  at  Westminster,  and 
in  8  Richard  I.  was  at  the  head  of  the  j  ustioes 
itinannt  who  fixed  the  tallage  in  the  coun- 
ties of  Euex  and  Hertford.  Odadox,i.70L) 
That  he  held  a  distinct  ofilcial  appoint- 
ment in  the  Exchequer  appears  firom  seve- 
ral entries  on  the  rolls,    (tbid,  iL  274-^.^ 

He  was  probably  a  scion  of  the  noole 
house  of  Peyerell,  whicli  commenced  in  the 
person  of  Ranulph  Peverell,  who  married 
a  concubine  of  William  the  Conqueror, 
and  was  perhaps  that  Hugh  Peverell  who 
in  John's  reign  was  seatM  at  Sanford  in 
Devonshire ;  or  the  Hugh  Peverell,  of  Er- 
mington  in  the  same  county,  whose  lands 
were  forfeited  for  his  adherence  to  tiie 
barons,  but  afterwards  restored  on  his  sub- 
mission to  King  Henry  HI.  (Rot,  Claus,  i. 
200,  283, 307) ;  or  more  probeubly  the  father 
of  one  of  them. 

FHSLIPFS,  or  PHILLIPS,  Edward,  was 
descended  from  an  ancient  Welsh  fEunily, 
which  migrated  into  the  county  of  Somerset 
where  they  long  resided  at  Harrington,  a 
few  miles  firom  Montacute.  He  v^as  the 
fourth  son  of  Thomas  Phelipps,  Esq.,  of 
that  nlace,  by  Elizabeth,  the  daughter  of — 
Smitii,  Esq.,  whose  second  son  was  father  of 
Sir  Thomas  Phelipps,  ndsed  to  a  baronetcy 
in  1020,  which  became  extinct  in  1090. 

It  is  not  improbable  that  Edward  studied 
at  Broadgate's  Hall  (now  Pembroke  Col- 
lege), Oxford,  as  Wood  notices  one  of  his 
name  taking  the  degree  of  B.A.  in  1579, 
and  of  M.A.  in  1582.  He  kept  his  legal 
terms  at  the  Middle  Temple,  and  attained 
to  the  rank  of  reader  in  autumn  1590. 
(Dugdale's  Orig.  218.^  He  was  called  Ser- 
jeant at  the  end  ox  the  reign  of  Queen 
Elizabeth,  but  did  not  assume  the  degree, 
on  accoimt  of  her  death  intervening,  till 
the  beginning  of  King  James's.  He  waa 
appointed  king's  seijeant  on  the  18th  of 
May  following,  and  was  knighted.  In  No- 
vember he  assisted  in  the  trial  of  Sir 
Walter  Raleigh,  but  took  no  part  in  the 
brutal  manner  vrith  which  Sir  Edward 
Coke  conducted  the  prosecution.  In  July 
1004  he  was  made  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas  in  the  county  palatine  of  Lancaster. 
(Cal.  State  Papers  [1003-10],  13a) 

In  January  1000  he  opened  the  indict- 
ment against  Out  Fawkes  and  the  other 
conspirators  in  the  Gunpowder  Plot,  and 
his  speech  on  the  occasion  is  a  curious  spe- 
cimen of  oratory.    (State  Trials,  ii.  104.) 

In  the  first  parliament  of  King  James, 
which  met  on  March  19, 1004^  he  was  re- 
turned for  his  native  county,  and  elected 
speaker.  His  address  to  the  king  is  in  his 
usual  ponderous  style,  and  he  apparently 
vied  with  his  majestv  which  should  most 
&tigue  the  audience  oy  the  length  of  their 
orations.  The  reporter,  however,  was  out 
of  patience  and  leaves  his  harangue  un- 

LL 


614 


PHELIPPS 


finished.  On  the  close  of  the  session  in 
July  his  speech  is  full  of  the  most  fulsome 
absurdities,  beginning  with  solemn  pom- 
posity, 'History,  most  high  and  nughty 
sovereign,  is  truly  approved  to  be  the  trea- 
sure of  times  past ;  the  light  of  truth ;  the 
memory  of  life ;  the  guide  and  image  of 
man's  present  estate ;  pattern  of  things  to 
come,  and  the  true  work-mistress  of  ex- 
perience, the  mother  of  knowledge/  &c. 
(Pari  Hid.  i.  969,  1046.)  This  parlia- 
ment continued  till  February  1611,  during 
which  period  there  were  four  more  ses- 
nons,  in  all  of  which  Sir  Edward  acted  as 
speaker^  having  in  the  interim  been  re- 
warded for  his  flattery  by  the  reversion  of 
the  ofBce  of  master  of  the  Rolls,  granted  to 
him  on  December  2,  1608,  to  which  he 
succeeded  on  the  death  of  Lord  Bruce  of 
Kinloss,  on  January  14, 1611.  He  was  also 
made  chancellor  to  Henry  Prince  of  Wales. 

Of  Sir  Edward's  proceedings  in  Chancery 
little  more  is  known  than  appears  inci- 
dentally in  the  report  of  Wraynnam's  case, 
against  whom  proceedings  were  instituted 
for  slandering  Lord  Bacon.  A  cause  in 
which  Wraynham  was  concerned  had  been 
referred  to  the  master  of  the  Rolls,  who 
had  made  a  report  adverse  to  his  interests, 
on  which  Lord  Chancellor  Bacon  had  after- 
wards founded  his  decree,  and  Wraynham 
had  thereupon  conveyed  the  slander  in  a 
petition  to  the  king.  On  the  hearing  of 
the  charge,  the  character  of  Sir  Edward 
Phelipps  (then  dead)  is  given  by  three 
eminent  lawyers  his  contemporaries.  Yel- 
verton,  the  attorney-general,  calls  him  *  a 
man  of  great  xmderstanding,  great  pains, 
great  experience,  preat  dexterity,  and  great 
mtegrity.'  Sir  Edward  Coke  says,  ^  As  for 
this  master  of  the  Rolls,  never  man  in  Eng- 
land was  more  excellent  in  Chancery  than 
that  man ;  and  for  aught  I  heard  (that  had 
reason  to  hear  something  of  him)  I  never 
heard  him  taxed  vrith  corruption,  being  a 
man  of  excellent  dexterity,  diligent,  early 
in  the  morning,  ready  to  do  justice.'  Chief 
Justice  Montagu,  however,  lets  us  into  a 
little  bit  of  his  real  character  as  a  judge, 
for,  after  declaring  that  *  whoever  knew  that 
man  knows  him  to  be  a  true  reporter  and 
a  judicious  collector  of  proofs  as  ever  was,' 
he  adds,  *  I  will  not  dissemble  what  others 
thought  a  fault  in  him,  to  be  over  swift  in 
judging,  but  this  was  the  error  of  his  greater 
experience  and  riper  judgment  than  others 
had.'     {StaU  Trials,  ii.  1062, 1073,  1079.) 

He  had  left  the  scene  long  before  this 
trial  took  place,  having  died  on  September 
11,  1614.  He  built  the  large  and  noble 
mansion  still  standing  at  Montacute.  He 
married  first  Margaret,  daughter  of  — 
Newdigate,  Esq..;  and  secondly  Elizabeth, 
daughter  of  Thomas  Pigott,  Esq.,  of  Bucks. 
His  representatives  still  enjoy  the  paternal 
estate. 


PICHEFORD 

PHESAKT,  Peter,  was  of  a  family  estar 
blished  at  Tottenham  in  Middlesex,  and 
the  son  of  Peter  Phesant,  of  Bletchworth 
in  the  county  of  Lincoln,  an  eminent  lawyer 
and  reader  of   Gray's  Inn  in  1582,  and 
Queen  Elizabeth's    attorney   'in  partibu 
borealibus.'    A  student  at  QraVa  Inn,  he 
became  a  barrister  in  1608,  and*was  diosen 
reader  in  1624.     In  May    1640    he  wis 
honoured  with  the  degree  of  the  coif,  and 
having  been  one  of  the  common  pleadeit 
of  the  citv  of  London,  was  elected  recorder 
on  May  ^,  1643,  but  resigned  the  oj£ce  oq 
the  SOth  of  the  same  month,  on  the  plea  of 
ill-health,  but  probably  in  order  to  make 
room  for  John  (ilynne,  the  favourite  of  the 
parliament     Under  the  same  plea  he  had 
m  the  previous  vear  excused  himself  from 
appearing  in  defence  of  Sir  Edward  Her- 
bert, the  attorney-general,  on  his  impeach- 
ment.    (Pari.  Higt.  ii.  1126,  1127.) 

In  February  1643  the  parliament  pro- 
posed him  to  the  king  as  one  of  the  judges 
of  the  Common  Pleas  {Clarendon y  iii.  407), 
and,  on  their  assumption  of  the  government, 
voted  him  into  that  place  on  September  30, 
1645.  On  the  king's  death,  in  Janoarj 
1649,  he  consented  to  act  in  his  judidil 
capacitv  under  *  the  keepers  of  the  liberties 
of  England ; '  but  in  the  following  June  he 
was  allowed  to  stay  at  home  from  the  as- 
cuit,  *  being  sickly '  (  Whitdocke^  174,  378, 
409) ;  and  dying  three  months  after,  ofl 
October  1,  1649,  at  Upwood  in  Hunting- 
donshire, he  was  buned  in  the  church 
there.  The  inscription  on  his  monum^t 
describes  him  as  having  been  twice  the 
only  j  udge  of  his  court.  Bv  his  wife,  Miry. 
of  the  family  of  Bruges,  of  Gloucestershire, 
he  had  several  children.    {Hatfieidg  HunU) 

PHILIP  is  mentioned  as  the  successor  d 
Roger  Pauper,  who  was  removed  from  the 
office  of  chancellor  in  1139  ;  and  a  charter 
to  the  monastery  of  St  Frideswide  (Christ- 
church^,  Oxford,  one  of  the  -witnesses  to 
which  is  *  P.  the  chancellor,'  seems  to  cor- 
roborate this  account,  as  it  must  have  been 
dated  before  1148,  and  perhaps  before 
1144.     (Mofuut.  ii.  146 ;  Pm^>ot,\ 

The  author  of  the  '  Lives  of  the  Chan- 
cellors '  (1708)  is  evidentlv  mistaken  in 
saying  that  he  held  it  till  Becket  was 
appointed,  in  the  next  reign,  as  Robert  de 
Gant  was  certainly  chanc^or  during  part 
of  the  interval. 

PICHEFOBD,  Geoffrey  de,  the  son  of 
Ralph  de  Picheford,  was  constable  of  the 
castle  and  forest  of  Windsor  in  1  Edward 
I.  (Abh.  Rot.  Orig.  i.  21),  and  was  a  justice 
itinerant  of  the  forests  from  the  sixth  to  the 
eighteenth  year.  He  was  afterwards  Queen 
Eleanor's  bailiff  at  Langley.  (Rot,  Pari 
i.  4,  59,  ii.  81.)  The  last  time  any  recoid 
of  his  name  appears  is  as  constoble  of 
Windsor  Castle,  m  26  Edward  L  (Madas, 
ii.  224.)  ^ 


PIGOTT 

PI(K)TT,  GiLLERY,  is  one  of  the  preaent 
Karons  of  the  Exchequer.  His  fEuuily  is 
traced  from  a  kaight  who  accompanied 
William  the  Conqueror  on  his  invasion  of 
England,  and  its  members  have  held  pos- 
sessions in  various  counties  ever  since.  He 
is  the  fourth  son  of  Pajnton  Pigott,  ^^^*  ^^ 
Archer  Lodge  in  Hampshire,  and  of  Ban- 
bury in  Oxfordshire  (who  assumed  in  1836 
the  additional  names  of  Stainsby  Conani;, 
find  of  Maria  Lucy^  daughter  of  Richard 
Drosse  Oough,  Esq.,  of  Loudem  in  the 
latter  county.  He  was  bom  at  Oxford  in 
1813,  his  Christian  name  being  given  him 
from  his  great-ffrandmother,  the  daughter 
of  Colonel  Gillery;  and  he  received  his 
education  at  a  private  school  at  Putney. 

A  member  ot  the  Middle  Temple,  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  by  that  society  in  May 
1839 ;  and  joining  the  Oxford  Circuit,  and 
attending  the  sessions  of  that  and  the  neigh- 
bouring county  of  Gloucester,  he  gained  a 
considerable  practice.  In  a  few  vears  he 
was  elected  recorder  of  Hereford.  feLis  next 
promotion  was  to  the  degree  of  the  coif  in 
1856,  to  which  was  added  in  the  following 
year  a  patent  of  precedence.  In  October 
1800  he  was  elected  representative  for 
Heading,  and,  professing  liberal  opinions,  he 
supported  LordPalmerston's  admmistration. 
But  his  senatorial  career  was  soon  inter- 
rupted by  his  elevation  to  the  bench  of  the 
Exchequer  on  October  8,  1863,  when  he 
receivea  the  honour  of  knighthood. 

He  married  Frances,  only  daughter  of 
Thomas  Duke,  Esq.,  of  Ashday  Hall,  near 
Halifax. 

PIKEKOT,  Robert,  is  the  last  named  of 
the  eisrhteen  justices  itinerant  to  whose 
judicial  superintendence  the  six  divisions 
into  which  the  kingdom  was  apportioned  in 
22  Henry  II.,  1170,  was  suWitted,  the 
northern  counties  bein^  allotted  to  him  and 
two  others.     (MadoXf  i.  128.) 

PILBOBOXJOH,  John,  was  admitted  a 
member  of  Lincoln's  Inn  in  1515,  and  be- 
came reader  there  in  1535,  and  again  in 
1543.  He  was  appointed  a  baron  of  the 
Exchequer  on  November  28,  1545,  37 
Henry  VIII. ;  and  within  a  week  after  the 
death  of  that  monarch,  being  still  a  governor 
of  Lincoln's  Inn,  he  delivered  '  an  ornate 
oration  *  to  two  new-made  Serjeants  of  that 
society.  His  death  occurred  m  the  follow- 
ing year.  (Dugdale'$  Orig,  119,  251,  252.) 
lie  married  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  John 
Roper,  attorney-general  to  Henry  VIII., 
and  Jane,  daugnter  of  Lord  Chief  Justice 
Fineux ;  and  was  thus  the  brother-in-law 
to  Chief  Justice  Sir  Edward  Montagu,  who 
married  Eleanor,  another  daughter.  (Co/- 
lins  Petn-age,  vii.  80.) 
PIKCEBKA,  Alexander.  See  Botelbr. 
PIKKEKI,  Gilbert  de,  or  PmCiUJIi, 
was  a  baron  whose  property  lay  in  N  orthamp- 
tonshire  and  Berkshire.    Having  succeeded 


PLANTAGENET 


515 


his  father  Ralph,  he  held  the  sheriffalty  of 
Berkshire  in  4  Henry  II.  and  two  following 
years. 

Hi%  appearance  in  this  catalogue  arises 
solely  from  his  being  one  of  the  twelve 
named  by  Dugdale  as  justices  itinerant  in 
1170,  but  whose  real  office  was  to  enquire 
into  the  abuses  of  the  sheriffs^  and  had 
nothing  to  do  with  the  ordinary  legal  pro- 
ceedings. 

He  died  about  the  end  of  that  kinff^s 
reign,  leaving  a  son  named  Henry,  -mo 
succeeded  to  his  possessions.  The  ninth 
baron^  Henry  de  Pinkney,  was  summoned 
to  parliament  by  Edward  L,  as  Dominus 
de  Wedou,  but  the  barony  became  extinct 
on  his  death  vrithout  issue.  (Baronagef  L 
550 ;  Pipe  ItoUs,  123 ;  Nicolas.) 

PIPASD,  Gilbert,  in  14  Henry  11.,  and 
for  the  three  following  years,  held  the 
sheriffalty  of  Gloucestershire,  succeeding 
William 'Pipard,  probably  his  father,  who 
had  been  sheriff  for  the  four  previous  years. 
At  the  distribution  of  England,  in  1176^ 
among  the  eighteen  justices  itinerant  ap- 
pointed by  the  council  of  Northampton,  he 
was  the  last  of  the  three  to  whom  the 
counties  of  Wilts,  Dorset,  Somerset,  Devon, 
and  Cornwall  were  appropriated.  In  the 
subsequent  arrangement  also,  made  by  the 
council  of  Windsor  in  1179,  when  England 
was  divided  into  four  parts,  he  was  se- 
lected to  administer  justice  in  one  of  them. 
{Madox,  i.  128-137.) 

Three  other  counties,  in  addition  to  that 
of  Gloucester,  were  entrusted  to  his  super- 
intendence as  sheriff  (^Ibid,  205) ;  ana  in 
1180  he  was  employed  m  Normandy,  being 
the  custos  of  the  castle  of  Exmes  and  for- 
mer of  the  Vicomt^,  in  which  year  he 
accounts  for  the  issues  of  the  forests  of 
Moulin-la-Marche  and  Bonmoulins.  {Hai, 
Scacc,  Nonn,  i.  50,  103, 104.) 

FLAHTAChSVET,  Geoffrey  (Archbi- 
shop OF  Yore),  was  the  younger  of  the 
two  sons  of  Henry  II.  by  Fair  Kosamond, 
one  of  the  daughters  of  Walter  de  Clifford, 
a  baron  of  Herefordshire.  The  date  of  his 
birth,  like  the  whole  of  his  mother's  his- 
tory, is  involved  in  some  doubt.  If,  when 
he  was  elected  Bishop  of  Lincoln  in  1173, 
he  had,  as  is  said  by  Giraldus  Cambrensis, 
scarcely  completed  his  fourth  lustre,  he 
must  have  been  bom  about  1153.  This 
might  have  been  the  case  had  he  been  the 
elder  son,  as  his  father  was  in  England  in 
this  year.  But  as  the  other  son,  William 
Longsword,  afterwards  Earl  of  Salisbury, 
was  his  senior,  the  period  of  Geoffreys 
birth  must  have  been  later,  unless  Heniys 
connection  vrith  Fair  Rosamond  had  com- 
menced in  his  first  visit  to  England  in  1149, 
when  he  was  only  sixteen  years  of  age, 
which  was  not  a  very  likelv  occurrence. 
The  date  of  1158  or  1159,  'which  other 
writers  give  of  his  birth,  seems  more  pro- 


516 


PLANTAOENET 


bable^  especially  as  on  his  seal,  attached.  | 
after  his  election  as  bishop,  to  a  grant  of 
certain  churches  to  the  pnory  of  Burling- 
ton in  Lincolnshire,  an  impression  from 
which  is  published  in  the  'Archseologia' 
(vol.  xxi.  p.  31),  he  is  represented  as  a  boy, 
which  he  would  scarcely  have  permitted 
had  he  attained  his  twentieth  year. 

Notwithstanding  his  youth  and  the  irre- 
gularity of  his  birth,  Henr\'  easily  obtained 
tiie  confirmation  of  the  £lnglish  bishops, 
and  contrived  also  to  procure  a  dispensa- 
tion from  the  pope  from  those  impediments. 
Although,  previously  to  his  election  to  the 
bishopric,  he  had  held  an  archdeaconry  in 
the  same  cathedral,  he  was  not  of  course 
admitted  into  priest*s  orders;  so  that  he 
could  not  yet  be  consecrated  nor  enter  on 
his  pastoral  duties.  It  is  stated  that  his 
father  sent  him  to  Tours  to  prepare  him- 
self in  the  schools  there  for  undertaking  his 
episcopal  charge. 

This  was  probably  at  a  somewhat  later 

feriod,  because  he  took  an  active  part  in 
174  in  aiding  his  father,  when  his  sons 
raised  the  stamdard  of   rebellion  against 
him.    With  this  view  he  had  applied  to, 
and  obtained  from,  the  gentry  and  people  of 
his  diocese,  a  considerable  sum  of  money  as 
a  free  contribution ;  but  on  being  appnsed 
that  it  was  deemed  an  exaction,  ne  at  once 
returned  the  whole.    By  this  popular  act 
he  found  himself  at  the  head  of  a  large  body 
of  volunteers,  with  whom,  throwing  off  his 
ecclesiastical  character,  he  surprised  and 
levelled  to  the  ground  the  castle  of  Ki- 
nardsferry,  a  strong  fortress  in  the  Isle  of 
Axholme,  belonging  to  Roger  de  Mowbray. 
He  then,  at  the  request  of  Ranulph  de 
Glanville,  the  sheriff  of  Yorkshire,  raised 
another  fine  army,  and,  marching  into  that 
county,  took  and  demolished  the  castle  of 
Malepart,  or  Malesart,  which  Roger  de 
Moworay  had  built,  about  twenty  miles 
from  York.     On  joining  his  father  shortly 
afterwards  at  Huntingdon,  the  king  wel- 
comed him  with  affection,   and  declared 
that  his  other  children  were  bastards,  and 
he  alone  had  shown  himself  his  true  and 
le[ntimate  son. 

The  tendency  of  his  inclinations  being 
thus  exhibited  towards  a  military  rather 
than  a  clerical  career,  it  is  not  surprising, 
when  the  pope,  in  1181,  insisted  that  he 
should  either  take  priest's  orders,  and  be 
consecrated,  or  renounce  the  see  of  Lin- 
coln, the  profits  of  which  he  had  received 
without  performing  its  duties,  that  he 
should  voluntarily  resi^  his  bishopric. 
In  his  letter  of  resi^ation  he  calls  him- 
self chancellor,  to  which  office  the  king  had 
previously  appointed  him.  This  office  he 
continued  to  hold  during  the  remainder  of 
his  father's  reim  {Dugdale's  Monatt,  v. 
588,  vi.  938),  and  be  iB  aaid  to  baye  acted 
in  it,  notwitiiBtanding  bia  youlik,  m^  «il- 


PLANTAGENET 

traordinaryequity  and  discretion.  TheafSec- 
tion  of  his  fisither  for  him  may  be  eeen  as  weU 
in  the  charters  as  in  his  will,  in  all  of  which 
he  is  called  '  my  son  and  chancellor/ 

In  1187  his  native  talents  as  a  military 
commander  were  again  called  into  ezerdae 
by  the  king^s  placing  him  at  the  head  of 
one  of  the  divisions  of  the  &nny  he  had 
raised  in  Normandy;  and  his  imectioiiate 
adherence  to  his  father  in  all  his  troubles 
was  strongly  evidenced  in  the  last  war  in 
which  the  king  was  engaged.    Philip  Au- 
gustus of  France  had  attacked  Mans,tiie 
capital  of  Mfdne,  into  which  Henry,  with 
Geoffrey,  had  thrown  himself.    On  tfie  towzi 
taking  fire,  Geofi&ey  in  vain  aided  the  at- 
tempts to  extinguish  the  flames;  but  was 
obliged  to  fly  with  the  king,  and  taking 
refuge  in  the  castle  of  Fresnelles,  he  offered 
to  remain  without,  aa  a  guard  against  the 
expected  attacks  of  the  pursuers,    flenrr, 
however,  not  willing  that^  exhausted  wiu 
the  fatigues  he  had  undeij^ne,  he  shooM 
expose  himself  further,  insisted  on  his  en- 
tenng  the  castle  and  sharing  his  own  bed. 
He  distinguished  himself  greatly  during  tlie 
short  remainder  of  the  war ;  and  when  the 
peace  was  concluded  on  June  28, 1189,  and 
the  ingratitude  of  Prince  John,  which  vu 
then  exposed,  had  so  severely  stung  his  h- 
ther's  heart  as  to  produce  the  fever  firoD 
which  he  never  recovered,  he  continued  widi 
him  in  the  last  trying  moments,  and  soothed 
him  vdth  that  anection  and  respect  which 
hisother  sons  had  never  shown  him.  AmoDg 
the  last  wishes  expressed  by  the  knig  w» 
his  desire  that  Geoffirey  should  resume  his 
clerical  character,  and  obtain  eithtf  the 
bishopric  of  Winchester  or  the  archbishop- 
ric or  York,  and,  giying  him  two  rings  of 
great  value  as  a  mark  of  his  love,  he  died 
at  Chinon  on  July  6. 

The  roll  of  the  first  year  of  Kichiid'* 
reign  mentions  Geof&ey  as  chancellor;  but, 
as  part  of  the  accounts  in  that  roll  DBMS' 
saruy  refer  to  the  last  year  of  Henry's  life, 
it  affords  no  proof  that  he  continued  in  the 
office  after  his  father's  decease.  Biehsid 
was  at  that  time  abroad,  and  there  is  en- 
dence  that  both  before  and  immediatelyafter 
his  coronation  William  de  Longchampwas 
acting  as  his  chancellor. 

Kinff  Richard^  however,  treated  Geoffiey 
with  the  kindness  he  deserved,  and  in  com- 
pliance vdth  Henry's  wish  nominated  him 
to  the  vacant  archbishopric  of  York,  even 
before  his  arrival  in  England,  requiring, 
howeyer,  from  him  at  the  same  time  a  eon- 
tribution  of  three  thousand  marks  towixds 
the  expenses  of  the  crusade. 

Taking  up  his  residence  at  the  fdxtj^ 

St.  Martm  at  Doyer,  theaheriff  of  Um  ttam^t 

by  order  of  the  chaxioenorJVllliMa#»L«f 

chainp.  now  Bishop  of  Elj,  *»  «*■  v 

.  chara  nad  entmsted  the  gofi  rf1fc>' 

\>a&!^g^nnIl  ^ra^  his  tibumt  B^T 


PLATT 

Land,  kept  him  in  siege  for  several  days, 
snd  then  obtaining  entrance,  on  September 
19, 1101,  had  him  violently  dragged  from 
the  altar  itself,  and  on  his  refusal  to  return 
to  Handera,  carried  Inm  to  the  castle  prison, 
and  detained  him  in  custody  there  for  eight 
days.  On  the  Bishop  of  London's  inter- 
ference and  marks  of  public  indignation 
^peanng,  the  chancellor  thought  proper  to 
oraer  his  liberation.  The  precise  cause  of 
this  outrage  is  uncertain;  but  it  possibly 
aroee  £rom  a  dispute  which  seems  to  have 
occurred  between  the  king  and  the  arch- 
bishop as  to  the  appointment  of  certain  offi- 
cers of  his  church.  Be  this  as  it  may,  the 
king  was  soon  after  compelled,  for  this  and 
other  causes,  to  consent  to  the  removal  of 
the  chancellor. 
Geo£&ey's  reception  by  the  clergy  and 

ale  aflir  his  imprieonment  wasa  tBumph 
in  London  and  York ;  and  for  some 
years  he  appears  to  have  quietly  employed 
himself  in  the  affairs  of  his  province,  and 
to  have  refr^ed  from  interfering  in  laontics. 

Soon  after  the  death  of  Bichard,  Geoffrey 
fell  under  the  displeasure  of  King  John,  the 
principal  cause  of  which  was  his  refusal  to 
permit  the  carucage,  which  had  been  gene- 
rally granted  to  the  long  throughout  the 
rest  of  England,  to  be  coUected  in  his  pro- 
Tince.  The  immediate  effect  of  this  was 
the  seizure  of  all  his  manors  and  other  pos- 
sessions; and  though  the  archbishop  did 
not  hesitate  to  punish  James  de  Potema, 
^e  sheriff,  and  all  others  engaged  in  it, 
with  those  who  had  excited  the  km^s  anger 
against  him,  he  succeeded  in  effectmg  a  re- 
conciliation with  the  monarch  which  lasted 
for  several  years.  In  1207,  however,  he 
redsted  the  payment  of  the  thirteenth  pennj 
which  the  king  had  imposed,  and  found  it 
necessary  to  retire  privately  from  England, 
in  order  to  avoid  the  royal  resentment.  In 
this  exile  he  continued  nearly  seven  years, 
and  at  last  died  at  Gromont  m  Normandy, 
on  December  18,  1213. 

The  affectionate  duty  which  he  showed 
to  his  father,  King  Henry,  must  incline  us 
to  a  favourable  interpretetion  of  his  conduct 
in  the  two  succeeding  reigns,  and  induce  us 
to  attribute  his  misfortunes  to  the  irrita- 
bility of  Bichard  and  the  overbearing  tyranny 
of  John,  each  of  whom  his  independence  of 
character  and  his  strict  sense  of  justice  would, 
though  in  a  different  manner,  excite.  His 
military  inclinations  do  not  appear  to  have 
prevented  him  from  bein^  a  ^ood  bishop ; 
nor  do  some  minor  dissensions  between  him 
and  the  canons  of  his  cathedral  at  all  do- 
tract  from  the  character  he  must  ever  hold 
in  history  as  a  valiant  soldier,  an  able  com- 
mander, a  wise  cotmsellor,  and  an  excellent 
aon.  (Godwin^  286,  676 ;  Rich,  Dims,  16, 
34 ;  Madai',  i.  36,  87,  ii.  139 ;  Wendover : 
Zord  ZyttdUm.) 

PLATT,  Thomas   Joshua,  the   son  of 


PLESSETIS 


517 


Thomas  Piatt,  Esq.,  an  eminent  solicitor  in 
London,  who  lived  to  be  the  father  of  the 
profession  with  undiminished  respect  till 
the  a^  of  eightv-two,  and  held  tne  office 
of  pnndpal  clerK  to  three  chief  justices. 
Lords  Mansfield,  Kenyon,  and  Ellen  borough, 
during  a  period  of  thirty  vears,  was  bom 
about  17ub,  and  was  sent  first  to  Harrow, 
and  then  to  Trinity  College,  Cambridge, 
where  he  took  his  degrees  of  B.A.  in  1810, 
with  honours,  and  of  M.A.  in  1814.  He 
had  in  the  meantime  been  admitted  to  the 
Inner  Temple,  and  in  1816  was  called  to 
the  bar.  Joining  the  Home  Circuit,  he 
graduallv  was  entrusted  with  briefs,  and  by 
his  ready  address  and  confident  bearing 
eventually  acquired  a  considerable  practice. 
In  January  lo36  he  received  a  silk  gown, 
and  became  in  the  end  a  favourite  leader  of 
his  circuit.  Before  a  common  jury  he  was 
a  formidable  adversary  to  his  opponent,  but 
before  a  special  juiy  he  was  not  so  success- 
ful In  January  1§46  he  was  raised  to  the 
bench  of  the  Exchequer,  and  sat  there  more 
than  eleven  years,  when,  in  consequence  of 
the  failure  oi  his  health,  he  retired  in  No- 
vember 1866. 

As  an  advocate  he  was  remarkable  for  the 
energy  of  his  manner  and  the  simplicity  of 
his  language ;  and  as  a  judge,  though  not 
deeply  read,  his  good  sense  1^  him  to  sound 
conclusions,  whue  his  blunt  courtesy  and 
amiable  disposition  made  him  a  favourite 
with  the  bar.  He  died  on  February  10, 1862. 

PLESSETIS,  John  de  (Earl 'of  War- 
wick), stands  second  among  the  six  justices 
assigned  in  35  Hennr  HI.,  1261,  to  hold  the 
pleas  of  the  city  of  London,  which  were 
usually  tried  before  the  justices  itinerant, 
the  others  being  regular  justiciers.  This  is 
the  only  time  in  which  he  appears  in  a  ju- 
dicial position,  and  he  held  it  then  no  doubt 
in  his  character  of  constable  of  the  Tower, 
where  the  sittings  were  to  take  place. 

He  was  Earl  of  Warwick  for  life  only,  in 
right  of  Maigery,  his  second  wife,  the  sister 
and  heir  of  Thomas  de  Newburgh,  the  last 
earl.  His  marriage  with  her  was  obtained 
for  him  by  the  king,  in  addition  to  numerous 
other  favours  by  which  he  had  been  raised 
from  a  comparatively  low  origin  to  a  high 
position  in  the  court. 

He  was  a  Norman  by  birth,  and  is  first 
named  in  1227,  as  the  last  of  four  whom 
the  kin^  often  describes  as  his  knights  (22o^. 
Clatis.  ii.  202),  and  who  are  always  intro- 
duced together,  receiving  various  payments 
for  their  services.  They  were  all  evidently 
servants  in  the  king^s  household,  and  each 
partook  of  the  king^  generosity.  Hugo  de 
rlessetis,  another  of  the  four,  was  probably 
the  father  of  John. 

John  advanced  rapidly  in  the  king's  ffood 
graces,  and  for  his  services  in  the  Welsh 
wars  received  ample  rewards.  He  was 
appointed  governor  of  "Devii^^,  ^«x\^m  ?J^ 


518 


PLESTE 


Chippenham  Forest,  and  sheriff  of  Oxford ; 
had  grants  of  the  wardships  of  various 
minors,  with  the  custody  of  their  lands 
(Excerpt,  e  Hot  Fin.  I  319-409) ;  and,  to 
raise  his  fortune  to  the  highest  point,  the 
king  took  such  measures  that  Mara^ry,  the 
sister  and  heir  of  the  Earl  of  Warwick, 
whose  first  hushand,  John  Mareschall,  had 
lately  died,  did  not  venture  to  refuse  him  as 
her  second.  He  married  her  accordingly  in 
1243,  but  did  not  assume  the  title  of  Earl 
of  Warwick  until  he  had  obtained  the  con- 
sent of  AVilliam  Malduit,  the  presmnptive 
heir  to  the  earldom  in  the  event  ot  the 
countess's  death,  that  he  should  enjoy  it  for 
his  life  if  he  survived  her. 

He  had  been  appointed  constable  of  the 
Tower  of  London  m  28  Henry  III.,  and  the 
remainder  of  his  life  is  chiefly  remarkable 
for  the  liberal  proofs  he  received  of  the 
king's  favour,  and  for  his  steady  adherence 
to  his  royal  master.  After  attending  the 
king  into  Gascony,  and  the  conclusion  of  the 
truce  there,  he  was,  in  38  Henry  IH.,  trea- 
cherously seized  by  the  people  of  Pontes  in 
Poictou,  notwithstanding  a  safe-conduct 
from  the  King  of  France,  and  cast  into 
^risouj  whence  he  was  not  released  till  the 
loUowmg  year.  In  his  last  years  he  saw 
the  commencement  of  the  troubles  between 
the  king  and  the  barons,  during  which  he 
was  entrusted  with  the  sheriffalty  of  War- 
wick and  Leicester.  He  died  in  the  midst 
of  them,  on  February  26, 1263.  (Baronage, 
i.  772.) 

PLEBTE,  KoBEBT  DE,  is  not  mentioned 
in  any  of  the  published  records,  but,  ac- 
cording to  Duprdale's  •Chronica  Series,' wasa 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  in  1362, 36  Edward 
HL  There  was  a  William  de  Pleste,  who, 
in  the  same  year,  is  called  *  attomatus  regis.' 

PLESnrOTOlf,  Robert  de,  evidently 
mixed  much  in  the  politics  of  his  day.  Hfs 
name  is  that  of  a  township  in  the  parish  of 
Blackburn  iA  Lancashire,  which  was  pro- 
bably his  native  place.  In  50  Edward  iH., 
1376,  he  was  appointed  one  of  the  custodes 
of  certain  property  in  the  town  of  Lancaster, 
and  of  several  manors  in  the  neighbourhood. 
{Ahh.  Rot.  Orifj.  ii.  341.)  At  this  time  he 
held  an  oiRce  m  the  Court  of  Exchequer, 
to  the  head  of  which  he  was  advanced  four 
years  afterwards,  being  constituted  chief 
baron  on  December  6, 1380,  4  Richard  H. 

Dugdale  removes  Plesyngton  from  his 
seat  on  the  bench  on  June  27,  1383  j  but 
William  de  Karleol,  whom  the  learned 
author  names  as  his  successor,  was  appointed 
chief  baron,  not  of  tie  English,  but  the 
Irish  Exchequer;  and  the  Liberate  Rolls 
show  that  Robert  de  Plesyngton  continued 
in  office  without  interruption  till  the  tenth 
year  of  the  reign. 

His  actual  retirement  took  place  on  No- 
vember 6, 1386, 10  Richard  U.  This  day 
was  during  the  sittiDg  of  the  parliament 


PLUMEE 

which  impeached  the  chancellor  Iffichaelde 
la  Pole,  Earl  of  Suffolk,  and  which  passed 
the  ordinance  constituting  commisBioners 
for  regulating  the  government.  This  ordi- 
nance, however,  was  not  dated  till  a  fort- 
night after  Plesynp^n's  remoyal,  which 
therefore,  there  is  little  doubt,  was  the  act 
of  the  king  himself.  It  not  improbably 
arose  from  a  desire  to  thwart  and  counterKt 
his  uncle,  Thomas  Duke  of  Gloucester,  to 
whose  part^  Plesyngton  was  strongly  at- 
tached. The  reasons  for  his  removal  no- 
where expressly  appear ;  but  if  they  are  to 
be  found  m  the  articles  against  him  which 
are  referred  to  in  Appendix  II.  to  the  Ninth 
Report  of  the  Deputy  Keeper  of  the  Pabh'c 
Records,  1848  (p.  244)*  they  are  of  the 
most  frivolous  character. 

It  is  not  likely  that  any  proceedings  w^ 
taken  upon  these  articles,  because,  on  the 
passing  of  the  ordinance,  the  influence  of 
Plesynffton's  friend,  the  Duke  of  Gloucester, 
would  De  paramount;  but  they  were  per- 
haps considered  sufficient  to  prevent  his 
reinstatement  in  the  court  at  the  time.  In 
the  parliament  of  the  following  year  ^ 
find  Plesyngton  acting  as  the  spokesman  of 
the  duke  and  the  four  other  loros  appellant, 
when  they  exhibited  their  charges  against 
the  Archbishop  of  York,  the  Duike  of 
Ireland,  the  Earl  of  Suffolk,  Sir  Robert 
Tresiliaai,  and  Nicholas  Brambre,  the  con- 
viction of  whom  was  quickly  followed  hy 
that  of  the  judges  who  had  answered  the 
unconstitutional  questions  propounded  to 
them,  among  whom  was  Sir  John  CaiT,the 
new  chief  boron.  But,  even  upon  the 
attainder  of  the  latter,  Plesyngton  was  not 
replaced  on  the  bench  of  the  Exchequer, 
nor  is  any  explanation  to  be  found  why  he 
was  then  passed  over. 

He  died  in  17  Richard  H.,  139M,  but 
the  king  was  so  inveterate  agsonst  all  those 
who  were  connected  with  the  Duke  of 
Gloucester's  proceedings  that,  when  he 
resumed  his  authority  in  the  twenty-first 
year  of  his  reign,  he  was  not  content  with 
punishing  the  survivors,  but  he  caused  tho$e 
who  were  dead,  and  among  them  Robert 
de  Plesyngton,  to  be  impeached  for  their 
share  in  the  supposed  treasons.  The  par- 
liament, being  then  under  his  control,  of 
course  confirmed  his  law,  and  the  chief 
baron's  proper^  was  declared  forfeited  to 
the  crown.  These  unjust  sentences,  how- 
ever, were  all  overturned  in  the  first  par- 
liament of  Henry  IV.,  and  the  posseeaoDS 
of  Robert  de  Plesyngton  in  Rutland  and 
Yorkshire  seemed  to  have  descended  to  the 
son  of  the  same  name,  whom  he  had  by  Ids 
wife  Agnes.  (i2oe.  Por^  iii  384, 426;  (W. 
Inquis,  p.  m.  iii.  176,  805.) 

PLVXSB,  Thomas,  deaceaded  l^aat  n: 
old  and  respectable  x  orikahirfi  *"  t* 

the  second  son  of  Thomas  F 
ling  HaU  in  that  eoniity.    B  -i 


PLUMEB 

October  10, 1753,  and  at  eight  years  of  age 
he  was  eent  to  Eton,  where  he  eained  that 
character  for  classical  ability  and  suavity  of 
disposition  which  afterwards  distinguished 
him  at  University  College,  Oxford.  While 
William  Scott  (afterwards  Lord  Stowell) 
was  regarded  as  the  best  tutor  in  the  uni- 
yersity,  Plumer  was  considered  one  of  the 
best  scholars.  He  was  elected  Vinerian 
Scholar  in  1777,  and,  taking  his  degree  of 
B.A.  in  1778,  became  fellow  of  his  college 
in  the  next  year,  and  proceeded  M.A.  m 
1783. 

He  had  become  a  member  of  Lincoln's 
Inn  so  early  as  April  1769,  but  was  not 
called  to  the  bar  till  February  1778.  Be- 
fore that  event  took  place  he  had  the 
advantage  of  attending  Sir  James  Eyre  on 
his  circuits,  and  frequently  assisting  the 
jodge,  whose  eyes  were  weak,  in  taking 
down  the  evidence  on  the  trials  at  which 
he  presided.  This  employment  was  of 
great  benefit  to  him  in  his  future  practice, 
which  was  principally  in  the  Court  of  Ex- 
chequer. In  1781  he  was  made  a  commis- 
sioner of  bankrupts,  and  attended  the 
Oxford  and  also  the  Welsh  Circuits,  at  the 
end  of  the  latter  of  which  he  joined  in  the 
revelry  of  the  Horseshoe  Club,  instituted  by 
the  members  for  their  relaxation  and  indul- 
gence in  all  sorts  of  fun  and  nonsense. 
{Notes  and  Queries,  2nd  S.  xii.  87, 214.)  He 
soon  acquired  practice,  and  stood  so  high 
in  estimation  that  he  was  employed  in  the 
defence  of  Sir  Thomas  Humbold  at  the  bar 
of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  there  ex- 
hibited such  powers  that  he  was  selected  in 
1787  as  one  of  the  three  counsel  to  defend 
Warren  Hastings,  his  coadjutors  being  Mr. 
I^aw  and  Mr.  Dallas,  each  of  whom,  as  well 
as  he,  eventually  filled  high  offices  in  the 
law.  In  1793  he  was  made  a  kinfi^'s  coun- 
sely  in  which  character  he  was  onen  em- 
ployed in  the  public  trials  that  took  place 
daring  the  next  ten  or  twelve  years.  He 
successfully  defended  John  Heeves  when 
absurdly  prosecuted  in  1797  for  a  libel. 
In  the  next  year  he  defended  Arthur 
O'Connor  and  others  on  a  charge  of  high 
treason,  one  only  of  the  defendants,  James 
CCoigley,  being  found  guilty.  In  1802  he 
was  engaged  in  the  prosecution  of  Governor 
Wall  for  a  murder  committed  twenty  years 
before,  in  the  next  year  in  the  prosecution 
of  Colonel  Despard  for  high  treason,  both 
of  whom  were  condemned  and  executed. 
He  was  leading  counsel  in  the  defence  of 
Lord  Viscount  Melville  in  1806,  on  his 
impeachment  by  the  House  of  Commons, 
and  contended  with  so  much  success  against 
the  case  of  the  managers  as  to  procure  an 
acquittal  for  his  noble  client  on  all  the  ten 
charges  in  the  articles.  Just  before  this 
trial,  on  March  25, 1805,  he  was  appointed 
a  judge  on  the  North  Wales  Circmt.  He 
had  a  great  reputation  as  a  tithe  lawyer, 


PLUMER 


519 


and  had  much  employment  before  election 
committees.  Of  the  suppressed  volume 
called  'The  Book,'  arismg  out  of  the 
<  Delicate  Investigation '  into  the  conduct 
of  Caroline,  Princess  of  Wales,  in  1806,  he 
was  supposed  to  be,  if  not  the  author,  at 
least  the  corrector,  joining  with  Lord  Eldon 
and  Mr.  Perceval  as  her  royal  highness's 
friends. 

In  April  of  tiie  next  year,  on  the  defeat 
of  the  whig  ministry,  Mr.  Plumer  was  ap- 
pointed solicitor-general,  and  was  knighted. 
He  then  entered  parliament  for  Lord 
Kadnor*s  borough  of  Downton,  which  he 
continued  to  represent  till  he  was  raised  to 
the  bench.  He  remained  solicitor-general 
for  five  years.  Sir  Vicary  Gibbs  being  the 
attorney-general;  but  he  does  not  appear 
to  have  taken  part  in  any  of  the  numerous 
prosecutions  instituted  by  the  latter,  except 
in  the  case  of  the  'Independent  Whig,' 
when  he  spoke  for  two  hours  in  the  House  of 
Lords  in  support  of  the  sentence  pronounced 
affainst  the  libellers.  On  Sir  Vicary's 
elevation  to  the  bench  Sir  Thomas  Plumer 
succeeded  him  on  June  27,  1812,  but  filled 
the  post  for  less  than  a  year,  being  ap- 
pointed on  April  10,  1813*,  the  first  vice- 
chancellor  under  the  statute  53  Geo.  HI. 
c.  24.  After  presiding  in  the  new  court 
for  nearly  ^ve  years,  he  received  another 
and  a  last  promotion  as  master  of  the  Rolls 
on  January  6,  1818.  He  filled  this  station 
till  his  death,  which  occurred  six  years 
after,  on  March  24,  1824,  when  he  was 
buried  in  the  Rolls  Chapel. 

Though  a  deep-read  lawyer,  and  exhibit- 
ing great  powers  and  abihty  in  his  plead- 
ings, his  style  wias  so  heavy  and  his 
speeches  of  such  length  and  elaboration 
that  he  fatigued  his  nearers  without  in- 
teresting them.  His  estimation  as  a  jud^e 
may  be  seen  by  the  manner  in  which  Sir 
Samuel  RomiUy,  a  sufficient  authority,  re- 
cords in  his  Inarj  Sir  Thomas's  appoint- 
ment to  the  mastership  of  the  RoUs. 
While  acknowled^ng  his  great  anxiety  to 
do  the  duties  of  his  ofiice  to  the  satisfaction 
of  every  one,  and  most  beneficially  to  the 
suitors.  Sir  Samuel  pronounces  him  to  be 
wholly  incapable  of  discharging  those 
duties,  and  accounts  for  the  fact  that  Sir 
William  Grant,  his  predecessor  at  the  Rolls, 
notwithstanding  his  great  dispatch,  left  an 
airear  of  more  than  500  causes,  by  stating  that 
causes  were  set  down  at  the  Rolls  for  a  two- 
fold object— that  Sir  William  Grant  might 
hear  them,  and  that  SirThomas  Plumer  might 
not  hear  them.  His  j udgments  were  as  pro- 
lix as  his  speeches  used  to  be ;  and  in  allu- 
sion to  them  and  to  the  delays  attributed  to 
Lord  Eldon  this  epigram  was  perpetrated : 

To  cause  delay  in  Lincoln's  Inn 

Two  difiTrent  methods  tend : 
His  lordship's  judgments  ne'er  begin, 

His  honour's  never  end. 


520 


FOEB 


Though  unpopular  in  his  court,  his  man- 
ners were  most  obliging,  and  his  disposition 
most  kind.  His  judgments  too  were  so 
exceedingly  learned  and  forcible,  and  in 
general  correct,  that  he  left  a  reputation 
of  being  an  urbane  and  erudite,  though  a 
tedious,  judge. 

By  his  marriage  with  Marianne,  the 
eldest  daughter  of  John  Turton,  Esq.,  of 
Sagnal  Hell  in  Staffordshire,  he  left  seve- 
ral  children.  (Gent,  Mag.  xdv.  610; 
State  TriaUf  zxvi  xxvii.  zziz.  ttt.  ; 
Jtofntlk/'s  Diary,) 

POXR,  Walter  le,  was  in  some  way 
engaged  in  the  service  of  Eong  John.  In 
February  1216  he  was  sent  with  three 
others  into  Worcester  to  explain  the  king*s 
affairs,  and  in  the  following  August  was 
employed  to  make  an  extent  on  the  manor 
of  Budiford  in  Warwickshire,  and  on  that 
of  Sukeleff  in  Worcestershire,  for  the  use 
of  Llewellyn.  The  county  of  Devon  was 
committed  to  his  charge  as  sheriff  in  C 
Henry  III.,  1222 ;  and  m  1220  he  was  one 
of  those  appointed  to  collect  the  quinzime 
in  Worcestershire.  In  the  same  year  he 
was  nominated  a  justice  itinerant  into  Glou- 
cestershire, and  in  1227  into  the  counties 
of  Oxford,  Hereford,  Stafford,  and  Salop. 
(Rot.  Pat.  128  ;  Hot.  Clous,  i.  206,  499,  u. 
140, 161,  206.) 

POIOTIEBS,  Philip  op  (Bishop  of  Dur- 
ham), was  a  confidential  servant  of  Richard 
I.,  and  was  employed  by  him  as  his  clerk  or 
chaplain  in  the  expedition  to  Palestine. 
After  the  truce  with  Saladin  was  made,  he 
was  one  of  the  few  whom  the  king  selected 
as  his  companions  on  his  return.  Soon 
after  Richard's  redemption  he  was  re- 
warded with  the  bishopric  of  Durham,  in 
January  1190.  He  received  priesfs  orders 
in  the  following  June,  but  was  not  conse- 
crated till  May  12,  1197,  when  that  cere- 
mony was  performed  by  Pope  Celestine  at 
Rome,  whither  he  had  been  sent  with 
William  de  Longchamp,  Bishop  of  Ely 
(who  died  during  the  journey),  in  order  to 
procure  the  pontiff's  interference  in  remov- 
ing the  interdict  which  Walter  de  Con- 
stantiis,  the  Archbishop  of  Rouen,  had  laid 
on  Normandy.  His  representations  suc- 
ceeded in  inducing  the  pope  to  promote  an 
apeement  between  the  king  and  the  arch- 
bishop, and  in  restoring  the  afflicted  duchy 
to  the  rites  of  the  Church. 

On  his  return  to  England  he  took  his 

Elace  as  a  justider  in  the  Curia  Regis, 
aving  probably  been  educated  to  the  le^ 
profession,  and  filled  some  office  in  the 
court  before  he  was  selected  as  clerk  to  the 
king.  His  name  does  not  app^cur  to  fines 
levied  at  Westminster  after  10  Richard  I. 

He  undertook  a  pilgrimage  to  Compos- 
tella  in  1200,  and  on  his  return  home  the 
next  vear  he  is  stated  to  have  been  one  of 
the  chief  advisers  of  that  monarch  in  dis- 


FOLE 

regarding   the   pope's   anathemas,  which 
seems  UUle  to  accord  with  the  above  act  of 
devotion,  or  with  his  having  been  fined  t 
thousand  pounds  the  year  b^ore  his  detth 
for  havmg  the  king's  goodwill     (Madoj^  i 
408.)    The  statement,  however,  whemer 
true  or  false,  drew  the  papal  thunder  on  Ids 
ovm  head,  and  the  sentence  of  excommu- 
nication was  pronounced  against  him.    Ai 
this  was  not  removed  before  his  death,  ia 
1208,   his  body  was   buried   outside  the 
church,  without  the   performance  of  ibt 
funeral  rites  {Godwin,  738;    R.  de  Wm- 
doveTy  iii.   06-237);    an   indignity  idiich 
would  not  be  very  distressing  to  the  moski^ 
whom  he  had  violently  persecuted.    (6bp- 
tees^  Dturhanij  i.  xxvii.) 
j     POL£,  William  de  la,  was  one  of  tiie 
!  two  sons  of  William  de  la  Pole,  a  rick 
merchant  in  the  newly  rising  port  of  £jb^ 
ston-unon-HulL    Both  of  them  rendered 
valuable  pecuniary  assistance    to  Edwvi 
U.  and  Edward  III.,  and  were  rewarded 
accordingly. 

William  was  bom  at  Ravenser,  m  tbe 
neighbourhood  of  Kingston-upon-Hall,  to 
'  which  he  ultimately  removed.  In  1  Edwnd 
I  III.  he  had  a  grant  of  4000iL,  out  of  the 
;  first  issues  of  the  customs  of  that  port,  is 
;  pa3rment  of  an  advance  he  had  made  to 
meet  the  royal  necessities,  and  in  1833  be 
sumptuously  entertained  the  king  when  he 
visited  Kingston  on  his  way  to  Scotland. 
On  this  occasion  he  is  said  to  have  reottTed 
the  honour  of  knighthood,  and  to  have  pro- 
cured the  title  of  mayor  for  the  princnul 
officer  of  the  town,  being  himself  the  mst 
who  bore  it    The  next  year  he  was  one  of 
those  employed  in  a  mission  to  Flanden, 
and  was  several  times  engaged  in  similar 
duties  during  the  six  following  veara.   In 
0  Edward  lU.  he  was  constituted  costos  of 
the  exchanges  of  England,  and  receiver  of 
the  old  and  new  customs  of  Hull  and  Bos- 
ton.   The  immediate  consideration  of  the 
last  appointment  was  his  undertaking  to 
pay  the  expenses  of  the  king*s  household  at 
the  rate  of  10^  a  day.     He  was  the  seneial 
agent  for  the  crown  with  the  tradmg  in- 
terest, and  was  commonly  denominate  the 
king*s  merchant.     In  the  twelfth  year  Ed- 
ward III.  gave  him  a  roval  acknowledg- 
ment for  10,000/.  advanced,  and  for  IJSm. 
for  which  he  had  become  bound ;  and  in 
consideration  of  moneys  paid  by  him  in  aid 
of  the  royal  expenses,  and  for  the  defence 
of  the  kingdom,  the  king  granted  him  va- 
rious manors  in  Nottinghaxnshire  and  Yoik- 
shire,  and  afterwards   invested  him  irith 
the  order  of  knight  banneret,  adding  othv 
rents  for  the  support  of  the  honour,  toge- 
ther with  a  reveimonary   asaignmeBt  flf 
1000  marks  of  rent  in  France,  wim  iSm 
king  recovered  his  rights  thoEiL    ^  ^^^ 
this,  houses  in  Lombnd  StiM%. 
which  had  belaiig<ed  to  the  T    ' 


POLE 


POLE 


521 


dorum/  were  appended  to  the  royal  dona-  I  104) ;  and  in  little  more  than  a  year  he 


tion.     (N.  Foedera,  ii.  862-908, 1066, 1086 ; 
AM).  Hot,  Orig.il  11-142.) 

He  was  constituted  second  baron  of  the 
Exchequer  on  September  2Qy  1339,  and  in 
the  parliaments  held  in  the  following  Oc- 
tober and  April  he  was  present  as  one  of 
the  judges  (Rot.  Pari  ii.  103, 112)  ;  but  he 
was  removed;  or  retired,  from  his  seat  on 
the  bench  on  Jime  21. 

When  Edward  III.  returned  from  Tour- 
nay,  in  November  1340,  grievously  dis- 
appointed by  the  ill-success  of  his  ministers 
in  the  collection  of  funds,  William  de  la 
Pole  was  among  the  sufferers  from  his  in- 
difmatiou.  {Barnes,  212.)  He  was  im- 
prisoned, and  all  his  estates  were  taken 
into  the  king's  hands.  The  particular 
charge  against  him  arose  from  a  commission 
which  he  had  received  as  to  the  purchase 
And  sale  of  wools  for  the  king's  use.  {N, 
Fwdera^  ii.  988.)  A  judgment  was  given 
against  him  in  the  Exchequer,  but  the 
"wliole  process  was  annulled  m  the  parlia- 
ment of  July  1344.     {Rot.  Pari.  ii.  164.) 

He  lived  for  more  than  twenty  years 
afterwards,  highly  in  the  king's  favour. 
The  remainder  of  his  life  is  principally 
illustrated  by  his  founding  and  liberally 
endowing  an  hospital  at  Kingston-upon- 
Hull,  which  in  the  last  year  of  his  liie  he 
obtained  a  licence  to  convert  into  a  religious 
house  of  nuns,  of  the  order  of  St.  Clare. 
(Abh.  Hot.  Orig.  ii.  286.)  He  died  on 
April  21,  136G.  {Cal.  Inquis.  p.  m.  ii. 
274.)  By  his  wife,  Catherine,  daughter  of 
8ir  John  Norwich,  he  had  several  sons, 
one  of  whom  was  the  next-mentioned 
Michael  Earl  of  Suffolk.  {Baronage,  ii. 
182 ;  Mimngt.  iv.  20 ;  BurgovCs  Greshanif 
i.  56 ;  Allen's  Yorkshire^  iii.  12.) 

POLE,  Michael  de  la  (Earl  op  Sup- 
folk),  long  before  the  death  of  his  father, 
the  aoove  William  de  la  Pole,  devoted  him- 
self to  arms,  and  was  engaged  in  the  French 
wars ;  in  l.'»56  in  the  retinue  of  Henry 
Duke  of  Lancaster,  and  in  1369  accompany- 
ing Edward  the  Black  Prince.  {N.  Fcedera^ 
iii.  443.)  His  military  character  was 
sufficiently  established  in  60  Edward  lU. 
to  warrant  his  appointment  as  admiral  of 
the  king's  fleet  in  the  northern  seas,  a 
commission  which  was  renewed  in  1  Hich- 
ard  II.  (Ibid.  1065 ;  Rymer,  vii.  172.)  In 
the  foUowdng  year  his  talents  in  diplomacy 


was  raised  to  the  highest  office  in  the 
state,  being  constituted  chancellor  of  Eng- 
land on  March  13, 1383. 

In  January  1384  he  received  a  payment 
of  933/.  64.  Gd,  for  his  expenses  in  going  to 
the  court  of  Rome,  to  the  King  of  the 
Romans  and  Bohemia,  to  treat  for  the 
marriage   of  King  Richard  with  Queen 
Anne,  and  for  the  money  paid  for  her  re- 
lease {Devours  Isiue  JRoU,  224),  she  having 
been  taken  prisoner  on  her  wav  to  England. 
Though  he  presided  in  the  Chancery 
three  years  and  a  half,  he  soon  had  reason 
to  regret  that  he  had  aimed  at  so  high  an 
elevation.     He  had  been  in  office  little 
more  than  a  year  when  he  was  impeached 
by  one  John  Cavendish,  a  fishmonger,  for 
taking  a  bribe  to  favour  him  in  a  cause  in 
which  he  was  engaged.    It  turned  out, 
however,  and  indeed  was  acknowledged  by 
Cavendish,  that  the  chancellor,  as  soon  as 
he  heard  of  the  delivery  of  some  fish,  and 
of  the  bargain  that  luid  been  made  by 
Ottere,  his  clerk,  insisted  on  paying  the 
full  price  for  the  former,  and  on  the  oblippa- 
tion    being    destroved.     Notwithstanding 
this    fact,    Cavendish   had   been   foolish 
enough  to  persist,  and  the  consequence  was 
that,  a  commission  being  appointed  to  try 
Cavendish    for  defamation,  ne   was   con* 
demned  to  nay  1000  marks  as  damages  to 
the  chancellor,   and  such  further  fine  to 
the  king  as  should  be  imposed   on  him. 
{Rot.  Pari.  iii.  168-170.) 

Although  de  la  Pole  escaped  on  this 
occasion,  he  was  not  so  fortunate  two  years 
afterwards.  In  the  meantime  the  king's 
weakness  and  extravagance  had  excited 
great  discontent  among  all  classes,  and  a 
general  cry  was  raised  against  the  favourites 
who  surrounded  him,  to  whose  mismanage- 
ment and  waste  the  distress  of  the  people 
was,  probably  with  some  justice,  attriouted. 
The  honours  and  more  substantial  favours 
which  were  extravagantly  distributed  did 
not  tend  to  allay  the  public  discontent 
De  la  Pole  was  created  Earl  of  Suffolk  on 
August  6,  1386,  and  for  the  support  of 
this  title  he  had  a  munificent  grant  of  the 
lands  of  the  last  earl,  whose  family  had 
become  extinct.     (^Rot.  Pari,  iiL  206.) 

The  jealousy  with  which  these  favours 
were  regarded  is  evidenced  by  the  bold  re- 
tort given  to  the  new-made  earl  by  Thomas 
were  tried  in   two  missions,  one  to  the    Arundel,  Bishop  of  Ely,  as  related  in  the 


court  of  Rome,  and  the  other  to  treat  for  a 
marriage  between  his  royal  master  and 
Catherine,  the  daughter  of  Bamabo,  *  Lord 
of  Millaine,'  which  came  to  no  successful 
issue. 

Having  by  this  time  completely  in- 
gratiated himself  with  the  young  king,  he 
was  appointed  in  the  parliament  of  Novem- 
ber 1381,  6  Richard  II.,  one  of  the  counsel 
to  regulate  the  household  {Rot.  Pari  iiL 


bishop's  life. 

The  unpopularity  of  the  earl  increased  so 
rapidly  that,  though  he  opened  the  next 
paj*liament  on  October  1,  1386,  as  chan- 
cellor, the  king,  under  a  threat  of  deposition 
in  case  he  reuised,  was  compelled  by  the 
complaints  of  both  houses  to  remove  him 
from  the  office  on  the  3rd  of  that  month  ; 
and  Bishop  Arundel  was  appointed  his 
successor. 


522 


POLE 


The  Commons  immediate!}'  exhibited 
seven  articles  of  impeachment  against  him, 
which  certainly  were  of  no  ^eat  weight  or 
importance.  Notwithstandmg  an  awe  de- 
fence by  himself  and  his  brother-in-law, 
Kichard  le  Scrope,  who  referred  to  his 
thirty  years'  goocl  services  as  a  knight,  the 
earl  was  convicted  on  most  of  the  charges, 
and  condemned  to  make  restitution  of  all 
the  purchases  and  grants  acquired,  except 
the  title  of  earl  and  the  20/.  a  year  out  of 
the  county.  lie  was  thereupon  ordered  to 
be  committed  to  prison,  there  to  remain  at 
the  king^s  will  until  he  had  paid  such  fine 
and  ransom  as  should  be  imposed  on  him. 
{Ibid.  21G-220.)  At  the  close  of  these 
proceedings  the  king  was  compelled,  be- 
fore he  could  obtain  a  subsidy,  to  agree  to 
a  statute  appointing  eleven  commissioners 
as  a  permanent  council  for  the  regulation 
and  correction  of  all  state  matters,  with  a 
complete  power  over  the  royal  revenue. 

Although  the  king,  on  hearing  the 
charges  against  de  la  l^ole,  is  said  to  have 
exclaimed^ '  Alas  I  alas  I  Michael,  see  what 
thou  hast  done ! '  it  may  be  well  doubted 
that  he  felt  any  real  indignation,  for  as 
soon  as  the  parliament  was  dissolved  he 
not  only  released  the  earl  from  the  castle 
of  Windsor,  where  he  had  been  confined, 
but  gave  a  willing  ear  to  his  dangerous 
counsel  at  once  to  break  the  bonds  which 
the  parliament  had  thus  imposed.  To 
effect  this  object,  the  judges  were  sum- 
moned to  Nottingham  in  the  following 
August,  and  in  a  measure  compelled  to 
give  answers  to  certain  questions  pro- 
pounded to  them,  whereby  they  declared 
that  the  late  statute  was  illegal  and  void, 
and  that  all  those  who  procured  it  were 
traitors,  and,  further,  that  the  judgment 
against  the  Earl  of  Suffolk  was  erroneous. 

The  plans  of  de  la  Pole  and  the  other 
royal  favourites  were,  however,  so  badly 
laid  that  they  soon  came  to  the  knowledge 
of  the  memoers  of  the  council,  who  took 
the  promptest  steps  to  counteract  them, 
forcing  the  king  to  call  a  parliament  in 
February  1J388,  and  there  appealing  the 
Archbishop  of  York,  the  Duke  of  Ireland, 
do  la  Pole,  Tresilian  the  chief  justice,  and 
Nicholas  Brambre,  an  alderman  of  London, 
of  high  treason.  The  articles  were  thirty- 
nine  in  number,  which,  besides  compre- 
hending ever}'  act  they  had  committed  in 
their  previous  career,  mainly  pressed  their 
last  attempt  to  overturn  the  statute  of  the 
preceding  parliament  The  archbishop, 
the  duke,  the  earl,  and  the  chief  justice, 
failing  to  appear,  were  found  guilty,  by 
defaiut,  of  fourteen  of  the  charges  which 
were  declared  to  be  high  treason,  and  were 
condemned  to  the  punishment  of  traitors. 
(Ibid,  229-237.) 

De  la  Pole,  wisely  eacaping  before  the 
meeting  of  the  parliajnent,  avoided  the 


POLLAED 

fate  of  TresUian  and  Brambre.  On  going 
to  Calais,  he  is  said  to  have  been  r^oaed 
admission  by  his  brother  Edmund,  who 
was  then  captain  of  the  castle  there ;  and, 
proceeding  to  Paris,  he  did  not  long  8ii> 
vive  his  disgrace,  but  died  on  September  5 
in  the  following  year,  1389. 

By  his  wife,  Catherine,  the  daughter  and 
heir  of  Sir  John  Wingfield,  he  left  four 
sons.  Michael,  the  eldest,  was  restored  to 
his  father's  lands  and  honours,  and  his 
descendants  were  successively  created 
Marquis  of  Suffolk,  Earl  of  "Pembroke, 
Duke  of  Suffolk,  and  Earl  of  Lincoln ;  bnt 
all  these  honours  became  extinct  in  151S 
by  death  or  attainder.  {Baronage,  iL  181 ; 
Nicolas  8  Synapsis.) 

POL£,  Ralph,  appears  to  have  bebn^ 
to  a  family  the  vanous  branches  of  wmcb 
have  been  honoured  with  three  baronetdo, 
all  of  which  are  extinct,  except  that  of 
Shute  in  Devonshire.  It  seems  probable 
that  he  was  the  brother  of  Thomas,  the 
direct  ancestor  of  the  baronet  of  Poole  in 
Cheshire,  whose  title  became  extinct  i& 
1821 ;  and  that  he  was  one  of  the  sons  of 
Thomas  Pole  or  Poole,  of  Barretspoole  i& 
Cheshire  (descended  from  Gwenwinwvn  de 
la  Pole,  lord  of  Powis),  by  Eliiabeth, 
daughter  of  Sir  William  Stanley,  of  Hoo- 
ton  in  the  same  county.  {WoiU(m9  B«- 
rotiet,  ii.  124,  iv.  635.)  *  He  was  called  to 
the  degree  of  a  sexjeant  in  Michaelmu,  21 
Henry  VI.,  1442 ;  and  on  July  3, 1452,  be 
was  constituted  a  judge  of  the  Eiog^s 
Bench,  and  certainly  continued  to  perfonn 
the  duties  of  that  office  till  Michaehnas 
1459,  after  which  his  name  does  not  ocear. 
He  was  one  of  the  commissioners  for  De^ 
byshire  in  the  thirty-third  year,  to  nise 
money  for  the  defence  of  Calais  (Adi 
Privy  Council,  vi.  243^,  and  acted  as  ^i 
judge  of  assize  in  Yorkshire  in  1457. 
{Newcomers  St.  Albans,  361.) 

Another  account  makes  him  the  son  of 
Sir  Peter  de  la  Pole,  of  Newborough  in 
Staffordshire,  and  of  Kadbome  in  Derby- 
shire, and  states  that  he  married  Joan, 
daughter  of  Thomas  Grosvenor,  that 
several  of  his  descendants  served  as  sheiifii 
of  the  county  of  Derby,  and  that  his  renie- 
sentative  still  enjoys  the  family  seat  called 
Radbome  HalL  {Topog.  ani  GeneaL  i. 
176 ;  Burke's  Landed  Getdry,  1050.) 

FOLLABD,  Lewis,  was  the  son  of  Robert 
Pollard,  whose  father,  John  Pollard,  of 
Way,  settled  on  him  lands  at  Roborow, 
near  Great  Torrington.  He  was  bom 
about  1465,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  by 
the  society  of  the  Middle  Temple,  wheie 
he  was  reader  in  1602.  He  received  the 
decree  of  the  coif  in  November  of  te 
following  year,  and  was  mads .  «■■  ^ 
the  king's  Serjeants  on  Juhr  %  1"^  Vt 
patent  being  renewad  on  ta*  *^  A 
Henry  VHl     In  tiie  utf  irt 


POLLEXFEN 

leigiii  on  May  29,  1514,  he  was  raised  to 
the  bench  of  the  Common  Pleas.  Prince, 
who  wrote  about  150  years  after  him,  says 
that '  the  fragrant  odour'  of  his  faithfulness 
and  reputation  ^  perfumes  his  memory  unto 
this  day.' 

If  he  died,  as  Prince  states,  in  1540^  he 
must  have  retired  from  the  bench  many 
years  previously,  for  the  last  fine  acknow- 
ledged before  him  was  in  Michaelmas 
1525,  and  he  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Re- 
ports even  so  late  as  that  date. 

By  his  wife,  Asnes,  daughter  of  Thomas 
Hext,  Esq.,  of  Kinsston,  near  Totnes,  he 
had  no  less  than  eleven  sons  and  eleven 
daughters,  all  of  whom  with  his  wife  and 
himself  were  represented  in  a  window  of 
the  church  of  Aing*s  N3rmpton,  in  which 
parish  he  had  purchased  an  estate  and 
erected  a  stately  mansion.  One  of  the 
descendants  of  his  eldest  son,  Hugh,  was 
created  a  baronet  in  1627,  but  the  title  be- 
came extinct  in  1693.  (Bugdak^i  Orig,  47, 
113,  215.) 

POLLEXPEK,  Henry,  derives  his  descent 
from  one  of  the  branches  of  an  ancient 
BeTonfihire  family.  He  was  the  eldest  son 
of  Andrew  Pollexfen,  of  Shorforde  in  that 
county,  and  was  bom  about  1632.  In  1658 
he  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  Inner 
Temple,  and  arrived  at  the  dignity  of 
bencher  in  1674.  Long  before  that  date  he 
had  made  himself  prominent  in  the  courts, 
and  soon  acquired  a  lead  in  the  state  prose- 
cutions, principally  for  the  defence.  In 
1679  he  advised  Lord  Derby  to  plead  his 
pardon,  and  was  assigned  as  counsel  for 
ixnd  Arundel,  one  of  the  five  Popish  lords, 
who  however  was  never  brought  to  trial. 
He  defended  Sir  Patience  Witfd,  William 
Lord  Bussell,  William  Sacheverell,  and 
others,  and  delivered  an  able  argument  in 
support  of  the  charters  of  the  city  of  Lon- 
don. All  these  occurred  in  the  reign  of 
Charies  11.,  and  show  that  his  reputed 
tendencies  were  in  opposition  to  the  coui*t. 
Roger  North  says  he  '  was  deep  in  all  the 
decorate  designs  against  the  crown,'  and 
waa  '  a  thoroughstitch  enemy  to  the  crown 
and  monarchy.'  It  therefore  excited  con- 
siderable surprise  that  Chief  Justice  Jef- 
freys should  select  him  to  conduct  the 
prosecutions  in  the  bloody  western  assize 
against  the  victims  of  Monmouth's  rebel- 
lion. From  the  reports  of  the  trials  he 
does  not  appear  to  nave  done  more  than 
his  uBual  duty  of  stating  the  case  for  the 
prosecution.  jBefore  the  end  of  James's 
reign  he  resumed  his  original  position,  and 
on  the  trial  of  the  seven  bisnops  in  June 
1688  he  was  offered  a  retainer  on  their 
behal£  which  he  refused  to  accept,  unless 
Mr.  Somers  were  associated  with  him. 
TliiB  being  reluctantly  conceded,  as  the 
bishops  thought  Somers  too  young  and 
inezpevieneed,  Pollexfen  exerted  himself 


POLLOCK 


52a 


zealously  for  his  reverend  clients,  and 
Somers  justified  the  recommendation  of  his 
discriminating  patron  by  the  effective  as- 
sistance he  afforded.  {State  Trials,  vii.-xii. ; 
North's  Lives,  214.) 

Pollexfen's  strong  opinion  on  Kinff 
James's  desertion  of  the  government,  and 
in  favour  of  the  establishment  of  the  Prince 
of  Orange,  were  so  well  known  that  he  was 
one  of  tne  lawyers  summoned  by  the  Peers 
to  advise  them  on  the  emergency,  and  waa 
returned  for  the  city  of  Exeter  to  the  Con- 
vention Parliament.  In  February  1689  he 
received  the  appointment  of  attorney- 
general  and  the  nonour  of  knighthood,  and 
when  the  nomination  of  judges  took  place 
he  was  made  chief  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas  on  May  4.  In  the  following  month 
he  was  callea  before  the  House  of  Lords 
for  tumiug  the  Duke  of  Grafton  out  of  the 
treasury  omce  of  the  Common  Pleas,  which 
his  grace  held  by  a  grant  from  the  crown. 
After  enjoying  his  promotion  for  little 
more  than  two  years,  he  died  at  his  house 
in  Lincoln's  Inn  Fields,  from  the  bursting 
of  a  blood-vessel,  on  June  15,  1601,  and 
was  buried  in  the  chancel  of.  Woodbury 
Church  in  Devonshire.  {Clarendon's  Cor- 
resp,  and  Diary,  ii.  227,  231;  Luttrell,  i. 
490-545,  u.  247 ;  Fnnces  Worthies,  327.) 

Roger  North  adds  to  the  opinion  already 
given  that  when  Pollexfen  was  raised  to 
the  bench  '  he  proved  the  veriest  butcher  of 
a  judge  that  hath  been  known ;'  but  there 
does  not  appear  any  ground  for  so  harsh  a 
dictum.  Burnet  (li.  209),  more  inclined 
to  look  favourably  upon  him,  gives  him  but 
a  qualified  character  in  describing  him  as 
'  an  honest  and  learned,  but  perplexed  law- 
yer ; '  but  his  colleague  Judge  Kokeby  in 
recording  his  death  describes  it  as  '  a  great 
and  publike  loss,  he  being  a  very  learned, 
upright,  and  usefuU  man.'  His  Reports, 
commencing  in  1670,  which  were  not  pub- 
lished till  after  his  death,  are  not  held  in 
any  great  repute. 

POLLOCK,  Frederick,  was  the  third  son 
of  Mr.  David  Pollock,  of  Piccadilly,  the- 
highly  respected  saddler  to  Kinp  George  IH., 
and  of  Sarah,  daughter  of  Richard  Parsons, 
Esq.,  comptroller  of  a  department  in  the 
C  ustoms.  The  family  was  originally  settled 
in  the  north,  and  his  father  was  an  eye- 
witness of  the  Pretender  Charles  Edward 
and  his  army  triumphantly  crossing  the 
Tweed  in  November  1745;  within  a  few 
months  to  retrace  their  steps  and  to  be  de- 
feated and  almost  annihilated  at  Culloden. 
Good  fortime  attended  him  both  in  his 
business  and  his  family,  three  of  his  five  sons 
greatly  distinguishing  themselves  in  their 
respective  professions — the  eldest,  Sir  David,, 
becoming  chief  justice  of  Bombay ;  the  third. 
Sir  Frederick,  the  subject  of  the  present 
i^etch  j  and  the  fifth.  Sir  George,  who  ob- 
tained imperishable  fame  in  the  Indian  army,. 


4524 


POLLOCK 


by  his  exploits  in  Afghanistan,  and  in  nu- 
merous otner  well-fought  fields  in  that  part 
of  the  world. 

Frederick  Pollock  was  bom  on  September 
28,  1783.    Li  his  early  years  he  lost  much 
time  at  three  metropoUtan  and  suburban 
.schools,  in  which  he  told  his  father  that  he 
learned  nothing.   On  beinff  taken  away  from 
the  last  he  remained  at  nome  for  sixteen 
months,  employing  them  in  very  miscel- 
laneous reading,  pnncipaUy  devoted  to  Eng- 
lish literature,  chemiRtrv,  physiology,  and 
other  sdeotific  subjects.  He  was  then  placed 
imder  Dr.  Roberts  at  St  Paul's  School.    A 
story  is  related  on  good  authority  that  young 
Pollock,  fancying  that  he  was  wasting  his 
lime  there,  as  he  intended  to  go  to  the  bar, 
intimated  to  the  head-master  that  he  should 
not  stay;  and  that  the  doctor,  who  was  de- 
sirous of  keeping  so  promising  a  lad,  there- 
upon became  so  cross  and  disagreeable  that 
one  day  the  youth  wrote  him  a  note,  saying 
he  should  not  return.    The  doctor,  imorant 
of  the  cordial  terms  on  which  the  father  and 
son  lived  together,  sent  the  note  to  the  fiather, 
who  called  on  him  to  express  his  regret  at 
his  son's  determination,  adding  that  he  had 
advised  him  not  to  send  the  note.     Upon 
which  the  doctor  broke  out,  ^  Ah  I  sir,  you*ll 
live  to  see  that  boy  hanged,^   The  doctor,  on 
meeting  Mrs.  Pollock  some  years  after  his 
pupil  had  obtained  university  honours  and 
professional  success,  congratulated  heron  her 
49on's  good  fortune,  adding, quite  unconscious 
of  the  humorous  contrast,  'Ah!  madam, 
I  alwavs  said  he*d  fill  an  e^va^ situation.' 

At  tLe  end  of  a  year  and  a  half  he  accord- 
ingly left  St  Paul's,  and  entered  Trini^  Col- 
lege, Cambridge,  in  October  1802.  There, 
although  prevented  bv  a  serious  accident, 
which  coniined  him  to)iis  bed,  from  attend- 
ing any  lectures  during  the  whole  of  his 
third  term,  he  went  up  for  the  college  ex- 
amination, and  to  his  surprise  was  placed  in 
the  first  class.  Before  he  knew  of  his  ho- 
nourable position  he  had  come  up  to  town, 
with  the  mtention  of  not  revisiting  Cam- 
bridge, considerately  thinking  that  his  father 
could  not  afford  the  expense.  But  with  the 
announcement  of  his  success,  his  tutor,  the 
Rev.  George  Frederick  Tavel,  expressed  a 
atrong  hope  that  he  would  return,  and  con- 
tinue a  career  so  auspiciously  begun.  His 
parents  being  equally  anxious,  the  young 
man  returned,  fully  resolved  in  his  own 
mind  to  be  senior  wrangler,  but  also  with  a 
-determination  to  relieve  his  father  from  part 
of  the  expenses  by  taking  pupils.  On  ap- 
plying for  permission  to  do  so  his  tutor  gene- 
rously, and  with  true  college  patriotism,  said 
that  the  college  could  not  anbrd  to  let  him 
waste  his  time  in  teaching  others,  and  that 
he  should  never  send  another  bill  to  his 
father,  but  that  whatever  he  wanted  should 
be  supplied,  and  he  should  not  be  expected 
to  refund  till  after  he  had  taken  his  degree. 


POLLOCK 

Mr.  Tavel  felt  himself  more  amply  repaid 
for  his  munificence  by  his  punil'a  giatitode, 
and  subsequent  success,  thin  by  the  ultimate 
discharge  of  the  pecuniary  debt.  From  that 
time  Pollock  was  noted  as  a  regular  readiii£ 
man,  alternating  his  college  studies  witn 
reading  and  reciting  the  best  specimens  d 
ancient  and  modem  oratory,  and  with  lay- 
ing in  an  unusual  stock  of  general  literatnie. 
The  effect  of  such  studious  habits  was  sore 
to  be  tested  at  the  trial  for  his  degree.  After 
the  examination,  which  took  place  in  Ja- 
nuary 1806,  a  laughable  incident  ooconei 
He  of  course  went  to  the  senate-house,  with 
a  crowd  of  others,  to  see  how  he  was  placed. 
Another's  name  appeared  to  be  at  the  top, 
bracketed  alone  with  a  line  above  and  below. 
Then  looking  for  his  own,  he  got  down  tot 
name  he  felt  certain  could  not  be  above  his; 
and  having  gone  carefully  up  the  list,  he 
found  his  name  above  the  one  he  had  sns- 
posed  to  be  at  the  top,  but  pierced  by  the 
nail  on  which  the  paper  hung,  and  that  he 
had  attained  the  honour  to  which  he  had 
aspired.  Li  the  next  vear  he  had  an  eooil 
triumph  in  classics  by  being  elected  a  fellow 
of  Trinity;  and  his  connection  with  the 
universitv  was  kept  up  long  after  his  ml^ 
riage  had  deprived  him  of  hb  fellowship  hy 
receiving  theappointment  of  its  comnuaauy. 
Having  been  previously  admitted  a  sto- 
dent  at  the  Middle  Temple  in  1S02,  he  was 
on  November  27,  1807,  called  to  the  bir, 
where  the  reputation  he  brought  from  the 
university  was  one  of  the  great  elements  of 
his  future  success.  He  joined  the  Northem 
Circuit,  but  did  not  attend  any  sessions,  u 
his  knowledge  of  bookkeeping  and  of  com- 
mercial business  in  general  was  found  so 
useful  in  cases  of  bankruptcy  that  it  intro- 
duced him  at  once  to  considerable  empb^- 
ment  before  the  seventy  lists  of  oomnus- 
sioners  at  that  time  existing.  Many  of  the 
questions  arising  there  requiring  further  in- 
vestigation led  consequently  to  his  engage- 
ment in  the  actions  that  resulted  in  West- 
minster Hall,  so  that  he  almost  immediatelj 
obtained  full  practice  at  Nisi  Prius.  On  hu 
circuit  he  was  ultimately  equallv  fortunate. 
Among  the  eminent  advocates  wbo  attended 
it  he  soon  acquired  a  prominent  station,  and 
at  last  had  the  imdisputed  lead.  His  busi- 
ness there  was  greatly  increased  before  he 
had  been  three  years  at  the  bar  by  his  very 
able  and  judicious  management  on  the  pazt 
of  Captam  (afterwards  Admiral)  Blake,  in 
the  famous  trial  of  Colonel  Arthur  before  a 
court-martial  for  his  implication  in  a  rebel- 
lion a^nst  the  captain  while  governor  of 
New  bouth  Wales.  His  success  on  thai 
occasion  attracted  to  his  chambers  many  in- 
fluential clients.  A  remarkfU>le  evidepoa  of 
the  rapid  effect  arising  out  of  an  ooniMniri 
success  happened  to  him.  Ota  xhm  tiUrf* 
cause  at  the  Guildhall  aessioD 
Term  in  1827,  in  which  Mr. 


POLLOCK 

bis  junior  opened  the  pleadings^  it  was  his 
for^me  to  gain  a  triumphant  verdict  against 
Sir  Jamee  Scarlett,  who  led  on  the  other 
nde.  At  the  ensuing  spring  assizes  at  Lan- 
caster, where  he  had  previously  never  had 
above  four  briefs,  he  found  no  less  than 
sixty-one  delivered  to  him.  Mr.  Pollock 
received  his  patent  as  king's  counsel  some 
weeks  after. 

In  the  forensic  conflicts  in  which  he  was 
subsequently  en^^aged  he  had  the  usual 
ahemations  of  victory  and  defeat    Li  May 
1831  be  became  member  for  Huntingdon, 
and    in   the  autumn  of  18d4,  when  Sir 
Bobert  Peel  became  prime  minister,  he  was 
at  once  promoted  to  the  office  of  attorney- 
genend,  without  having,  as  is  usually  the 
case,  filled  any  minor  post    His  appoint- 
ment, which  was  made  on  December  17, 
and  was  accompanied  with  the  customary 
honour  of   kniehthood,  lasted    only    four 
montiba,  Lord  Melbourne's  administration 
being  restored  to  power,  and  retaining  it  for 
more  than  the  five  succeeding  years.    On 
the  resumption  of  the  government  by  Sir 
Bobert  Peel  in  1841,  Sir  Frederick  was  re- 
placed in  his  former  office  on  September  6 ; 
ami  in  April  1844  he  was  raised  to  the  dis- 
tinguished position  he  lately  held,  of  lord 
chief  baron  of  the  Exchec^uer,  and  was  im- 
mediately called  to  the  pnvy  council. 

He  continued  to  represent  Huntingdon 
till  bis  elevation  to  the  bench.  In  the 
House  of  Commons,  by  his  general  deport- 
ment and  unafiected  eloquence,  and  par- 
ticmlarly  by  the  temperate  manner  in  which 
be  baa  on  each  occasion  performed  the 
duties  of  his  responsible  office  of  attorney- 
general,  he  occupied  that  most  enviable 
poaiti<Hi  of  being  popular  with  both  sides 
of  the  house,  the  evidence  of  which  was  ! 
spedallv  shown  in  the  cordial  congratu- 
Ifttiona  he  received  from  opponents  as  well 
as  Mends  oo  the  brilliant  victories  at  that 
time  gained  by  his  gallant  brother,  General 
8ir  George  Pollock,  m  the  Indian  campai^. 

Of  the  chief  baron's  legal  and  judicial 
merits  these  pages  profess  not  to  speak. 
Bnt  at  the  end  of  two-and-twenty  years 
from  his  appointment,  and  of  near  eighty- 
three  from  his  birth,  it  may  be  allowed  to 
record  that  he  was  to  be  found  in  his  place 
exercising  all  the  functions  of  his  arduous 
office  as  efficiently  as  when  he  was  at  first 
appointed ;  frequently  called  upon  to  pre- 
aae  in  most  important  cases,  and  never 
flinctiW  from  undertaking  them ;  temper- 
ing his  judgments  so  as  not  unnecessarily 
to  hurt  the  feelings  of  those  against  whom 
be  vras  obliged  to  decide ;  and  ever  acting 
towards  his  brethren  on  the  bench,  and  the 
counsel  at  the  bar  of  his  court,  so  as  to  be 
a  general  fiavourite.  On  July  13, 1866,  he 
reored  horn  his  position,  having  sat  on  the 
bendi  at  a  more  advanced  age  than  any 
eommon  law  judge  before  him ;  LordMans- 


PONTE  AUDOMARE 


525 


field,  though  a  little  older  when  he  actually 
resigned,  having  refrained  from  attending- 
the  court  for  two  years  before,  when  he  was 
only  eighty-one  years  old.  To  the  last  Sir 
Fredenek  never  excused  himself  from  hia 
daily  duties,  but  enjoyed  the  conflict  of 
mind  which  arose  in  an  important  argu- 
ment and  the  exercise  of  his  faculties 
called  forth  in  addressing  a  jury.  His 
merits  were  recognised  b^  the  immediate 
ffrant  of  a  baronetcy.  Having  sufiered  little 
nrom  attacks  of  illness,  and  retaining  much 
of  his  former  activity,  he  may  be  truly 
said  to  enjoy  a  ffreen  old  age. 

He  has  been  long  a  fellow  of  the  Royal 
Society,  and  among  other  essays  contributed 
to  that  body  he  read  in  1843,  while  he  was 
attomey-ffeneral,  a  paper  '  On  a  Method  of 
Proving  the  Three  Leading  Properties  of  the 
Ellipse  and  H^rbole,'  and  he  still  has  de- 
light in  pursuing  his  mathematical  studies. 

Sir  Frederick  has  been  twice  married. 
His  first  wife  was  the  third  daughter  of  H. 
Kivers,  Esq.,  of  Spring  G^ardens.  His  second 
wife  was  a  daughter  of  Captain  Richard 
Langslow,  of  Hatton  near  Hounslow,  where 
Sir  Frederick  now  resides.  He  had  chil- 
dren by  each  of  them,  no  less  than  twenty- 
five  in  all,  of  whom  twenty  survive,  ten  by 
the  first  union,  and  ten  by* the  second.  H!e 
can  boast  of  a  more  numerous  issue  than  is 
usually  the  lot  of  humanity.  Besides  his 
twenty  children,  he  counts  fifty-four  srand- 
children,  and  seven  ^eat-grandchildren ; 
and  he  has  had  the  gratification  of  seeing  his 
eldest  son's  eldest  son  the  first  man  of  his 
year  at  his  own  alma  mater. 

POHTE,  Richard  de,  is  inserted  by  Mr. 
Hunter  amon^  the  numerous  justiciers 
before  whom  lines  were  taken  in  10  John 
(Abb,  Flacit.  83);  but  none  of  the  fines 
hitherto  published  appear  to  have  been 
acknowleaged  before  mm,  nor  do  any  of  the 
contemporary  rolls  notice  such  a  person. 

POHTE  AUDOMABE,  Henby  de,  was  a 
Norman,  and  in  1296  was  custos  of  the 
escheats  of  the  bailiwick  of  the  Evredn, 
and  in  1298  baiUff  of  Gaux.  (Rot,  Scacc. 
Norm,  Obsm^vationSj  i.  clxix.,  li.  cxxxiii.) 
He  held  one  knight's  fee  in  Perinton,  of  the 
honor  of  Gloucester,  from  the  scutage  of 
which  he  was  excused  in  7  John,  and  had 
a  grant  in  16  John  of  sixty  shilHngs,  the 
customs  of  the  salt  upon  his  land  there. 
(Hot,  Claus,  i,  49,  206.) 

His  regular  employment  as  a  justicierfor 
eight  years  is  evidenced  by  his  name  ap- 
pearing on  fines  acknowledged  both  at 
Westminster  and  in  the  country  from  9  to 
16  John  inclusive.  (Hot,  de  Fin,  484, 521.) 
It  would  seem  that  he  soon  afterwards  got 
into  disgrace,  as  his  property  fell  into  the 
king's  hands,  which  is  proved  bv  an  entry* 
on  the  Close  Roll  of  2  Henry  tU.,  1218, 
whereby  it  is  ordered  to  be  restored  to  him. 
(Hoi,  Clam,  i.  839.) 


.526 


POORE 


POPHAM 


He  was  entirely  reinstated  in  the  royal  was  tlurty-Aeven  years  old ;  and  he  became 
favour  and  entrusted  in  the  same  year  with  |  treasurer  twelve  years  afterwards.  (D19- 
the  custody  of  the  lands  of  William  Earl    dMs    Orig.    217,  221.)     In  the   interval 


of  Devon,  and  of  Lucas  Iltz-John;  and 
there  is  a  record  in  the  next  year  of  certain 


between  these  two  dates  he  had  obtained, 
as  member  for  Bristol,  a  seat  in  parliament. 


wool  bein^  seized  in  Northampton  market  where  in  1571,  when  the  subsidy  was  under 
by  him  and  Ralph  de  Norwich,  subseauently  ■  discussion,  he  joined  with  Mr.  Bell  (the 
oneofthejusticiers.  (jRa^.C/<it».L  343-602.)  future  chief  baron)  in  calling  for  the  ocn^ 
POOSE,  Richard  (Bishop  of  Chichss-  rection  of  some  abuses,  and  pointed  out  the 
TEB,  Salisbury,  andDuRHAH),  appears  once    evil  of  allowing  the  treasurerB  of  the  crown 


only  in  the  character  of  a  justice  itinerant, 
being,  as  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  at  the  head 
of  those  who  in  3  Henry  111.,  1218,  were 
appointed  for  Wiltshire,  Hampshire,  Berk- 
shire, and  Oxfordshire. 

He  was  bom  at  Tarent  in  Dorsetshire, 
and  was  made  dean  of  Salisbury  in  1197, 
8  Richard  L,  from  which  he  was  raised  to 
the  bishopric  of  Chichester  on  January  7, 
1215,  IC  John.  His  translation  to  Salisbury 
occurred  about  June  1217,  1  Henry  HI. ; 
and  during  the  time  that  he  held  that  see 


to  retain  in  their  hands  '  great  masses  of 
money,'  of  which,  becoming  bankmpt,  they 
only  repaid  an  instalment.  In  the  next 
year  he  was  one  of  the  committee  appdnted 
to  confer  with  the  Lords  on  the  suDJect  of 
the  Queen  of  Scots.  {Pari,  Hitt.  L  735, 779.) 
He  was  called  to  the  degree  of  the  ooif 
on  January  28,  1578 ;  and  in  the  foUoving 
year  he  was  offered  the  place  of  8olicito^ 
general.  This  ofEce  being  inferior  in  luk 
to  that  of  a  serjeant-at-law,  he  obtained  1 
patent  exonerating  him    from  the  latter 


he  undertook  the  removal  of  the  cathedral  !  degree,  and  was  thereupon  appointed  soli- 
church  from  Old  Sarum,  commencing  the  I  citor-general  on  June  20, 1579.  (Dwdalit 
present  magnificent  building  in  1210.    The  |  Ortp.  127.)    While  holding  that  office  be 


Close  Rolls  contain  many  royal  grants  of 
timber  and  other  materials  to  aid  this  erec- 
tion, to  the  progress  of  which  he  devoted 
the  next  nine  years.  Its  completion,  how- 
ever, which  occupied  thirty  years,  he  left 
to  his  successors,  as  he  was  advanced  to  the 


was  elected  speaker  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons in  January  1581 ;  and  some  idea  mij 
be  formed  of  his  wit,  and  also  of  the  light- 
ness of  the  parliamentary  labours  dimiig 
that  session,  oy  his  reply  to  Queen  Eliitr 
beth,  when,  on  his  attending  her  on  some 


see  of  Durham  in  May  1228.  There  he  occasion,  she  said,  ^  Well,  Mr.  Speaker,  what 
presided  for  nine  years,  and  died  on  April !  hath  passed  in  the  Lower  House?'  bean- 
16,  1237,  with  the  character  of  a  man  of  I  swered^  '  If  it  please  your  majesty,  seven 
extraordinary  sanctity  and  profound  science.  >  weeks.'    His  last  and  indeed  pnndpal  dotj 


He  founded  a  hospital  for  the  poor  at  Salis- 
biuT,  and  greatly  endowed  a  convent  at  the 
place  of  his  birth,  in  the  latter  of  which 
his  heart  was  deposited,  his  body  being  in- 
terred in  Salisbury  Cathedral,  or,  according 
to  Surtees  (i.  xx^di.),  conveyed  to  Durham. 
(Godwin,  343,  504,  740;  Ikfonast.  v.  619.) 

POPHAM,  John,  was  descended  from  a 
family  settled-  at  Popham,  a  hamlet  in 
JIampshire,  earlv  in  the  twelfth  century. 
The  estate  of  rfuntworth  in  Somersetshire 
was  acquired  in  marriage  in  the  reign  of 
Edward  I.  j  and  there  John,  the  future  chief 
justice,  was  bom  about  the  year  1531,  being 
the  second  son  of  Alexander  (or,  as  some 
say,  Edward)  Popham,  of  that  place,  by  his 
wife  Jane,  the  daughter  of  Sir  Eaward  Strad- 
ling,  of  St.  Donates  Castle.  Glamorganshire. 

He  received  his  education  at  Balliol  Col- 
lege, Oxford,  whence  he  removed  to  the 
Middle  Temple  to  pursue  the  study  of  the 
law.  Instead  of  doing  this,  tradition  charges 
him  with  entering  into  wild  courses,  and 
even  with  being  wont  to  take  a  purse  with 
his  profligate  companions.  However  this 
may  be,  he  must  have  soon  reformed,  and, 
as  Fuller  says  (iL  284), '  applied  himself  to 
a  more  profitable  fencing ;  for  he  does  not 
seem  to  nave  been  delayed  in  obtaining  the 
usual  honours  of  his  society.  His  nomina- 
tion as  reader  took  place  in  1568,  when  he 


in  this  capacity  was  the  maldng  the  car 
tomary  speech  to  the  queen  on  presentiBg 
the  subsidy  voted  at  the  end  of  the  sesaon. 
This  was  on  March  18,  after  which  that 
parliament  never  again  met.  (Pari  SUL  L 
311, 828.) 

On  June  1, 1581,  he  became  attoreej- 
general,  and  held  that  office  for  eleven 
years,  during  which  he  took  part  in  all 
those  criminal  trials,  the  perusal  of  which, 
even  where  the  guilt  of  the  prisonezs  is 
most  api^arent,  cannot  but  excite  feelings  d 
indignation  at  the  gross  injustice  of  tiie 
proceedings.  His  conduct  m  them,  how- 
ever, is  not  chargeable  with  any  nnnecee- 
sary  harshness ;  and  even  in  the  opemsg  of 
the  unwarrantable  charge  against  oecretirv 
Davison  he  performed  the  difficolt  dntr 
without  any  words  of  aggravation.  (SUdf 
Triais,  i.  1051-1321.) 

His  elevation  to  ihe  office  of  lord  chief 
justice  of  the  King*8  Bench  took  place  on 
June  2,  1692,  when  he  was  immediatelT 
knighted.  He  presided  in  that  court  for  the 
fifteen  remaining  years  of  his  life— eleToa 
under  Queen  Elizabeth,  and  four  under 
King  James. 

He  accompanied  Lord  Keeper  Bprton 
in  February  1600  to  the  Eidi  oT^Ah^ 
house,  as  already  related;  and  " 

Ferdinando  Goiges  offiaied  to  ~ 


POPHAM 

£rom  lus  forced  detention  there,  he  refused 
to  depart  without  his  companions  in  con- 
finement, saying  that  'as  they  came  to- 
gether, 80  wouM  they  go  together,  or  die 
together.'  This  fact  is  not  mentioned  at 
the  earl's  trial,  either  in  the  chief  justice's 
evidence  or  in  Gorges*  examination ;  but  it 
is  related  by  himself  on  the  subsequent 
trial  of  Sir  Ohristopher  Blunt  and  others 
implicated  in  this  insurrection,  at  whicb 
was  exhibited  the  unbecoming  spectacle  of 
prisoners  tried,  and  sentence  pronounced, 
Dj  a  judge  who  had  himself  been  a  sufferer. 
(iwi  L 1340, 1344,  1428.) 

One  of  bis  earliest  duties  after  the  acces- 
sion of  James  was  to  preside  at  the  trial  of 
&i  Walter  Raleigh— stained  not  only  by  a 
eoQTiction  founded  on  weak  and  unsatisfac- 
tory evidence,  but  also  by  that  disgusting 
conduct  towards  the  prisoner  of  Sir  Edward 
Coike,  which  will  ever  disgrace  his  name, 
and  for  which  the  chief  justice  felt  himself 
called  upon  to  apologise,  saying  to  Sir 
Walter,  'Mr.  Attorney  speaketh  out  of  the 
seal  of  his  duty  for  the  service  of  the  king, 
and  you  for  your  life ;  be  valiant  on  both 
sides.'  {Ibid.  iL  10.)  He  would  have  done 
better  to  have  silenced  the  brutal  tongue. 

The  last  state  trials  which  he  presided 
over  were  those  against  the  conspirators  in 
the  Gunpowder  Plot,  finishing  with  that 
of  Garnet  the  Jesuit,  on  March  28,  1606. 
f  JMJL  iL  159,  217.)  He  was  then  seventy- 
nve  vears  old ;  but  he  sat  on  the  bench  K)r 
another  year,  pronouncing  a  judgment  in 
the  Court  of  Wards  as  late  as  Easter 
Term  1607.  On  Jime  10,  in  the  following 
term,  he  died,  and  was  buried  under  a 
magnificent  tomb  in  the  church  of  Welling- 
ton in  Somersetshire,  where  he  had  long 
Tedded  in  a  stately  house  he  had  erected, 
and  to  which  he  left  a  testimony  of  his 
charity  and  goodwill  by  the  foundation  of 
a  hospital  for  the  maintenance  of  twelve 
poor  and  aged  people. 

S^  John  died  m  possession  of  several 
Taluable  estates,  one  of  which  was  that  of 
Littleoott  in  Wiltshire.  In  connection  with 
this  a  dark  and  improbable  stor^  is  related 
of  its  having  come  into  the  chief  justice's 
hands  as  the  price  of  his  corruptly  allowing 
one  DarelL  the  former  proprietor,  to  escape 
on  his  trial  for  an  atrocious  murder.  There 
is  no  doubt  of  the  existence  of  such  a  tradi- 
tion ;  it  is  told  by  Aubrey,  who  was  cer- 
tainly no  admirer  of  the  judge^  and  it  is 
related  bv  Sir  Walter  Scott  in  illustration 
of  a  ballad  in  Hokeby.  Sir  Walter  does 
not  give  the  judge's  name,  but  that  appears 
in  fml  in  other  accounts  both  in  prose  and 
verse  detailing  the  horrid  particulars.  It 
would  be  curious  to  trace  the  circumstances 
to  which  such  a  tradition  owes  its  origin, 
especially  in  a  case  where  every  other  in- 
4daent  in  the  career  of  the  party  implicated 
aeems  to  render  its  occurrence  impossible, 


POPHAM 


527 


and  where  contemporaries  so  eminent  as 
Lord  Ellesmere,  Sir  Edward  Coke,  and  Sir 
George  Croke  give  voluntary  testimony  to 
the  purity  of  his  character. 

Lord  Ellesmere,  in  the  year  after  Pop- 
ham's  death,  says  of  him,  *  And  here  I  may 
not  omit  the  worthy  memory  of  the  late 
grave  and  reverend  judge  Sir  John  Popham, 
chief  justice  of  the  Aing's  Bench,  deceased, 
a  man  of  great  wisdom,  and  of  singular 
learning  and  judgment  in  the  law.'    {Ibid, 
ii.  669.)     CoKe,  not  long  afterwards,  in  re- 
porting Sir  Drew  Drury  s  case  (6  Beports, 
/5),  savs,  'And  this  was  the  last  case  that 
Sir  John  Popham,  the  venerable  and  ho- 
nourable chief  justice  of  England,  &c.,  re- 
solved, who  was  a  most  reverend  judge,  of 
a  ready  apprehension,  profound  judgment, 
most  excellent  understanding,  and  admir- 
able experience  and  knowledge  of  all  busi- 
ness which  concerned  the  commonwealth ; 
accompanied  with   a  rare  memory,  with 
perpetual  industry  and  labour  for  the  main- 
tenance of  the  tranquillity  and  public  good 
of  the  realm,  and  in  all  things  with  great 
constancy,  intepity,  and   patience;'    and 
Croke,  in  noticmg  his  death,  calls  him  *  a 
person  of   great   learning  and  integrity.' 
These  are  qualities  which  oppose  the  idea 
of  the  possessor  of  them    oeing  possibly 
guilty  01  such  a  dereliction  of  principle  an^ 
duty  as    that  with  which   the    tradition 
charges  him.    If  the  petition  which  Sir 
Francis  Bacon,  in  his  argument  against 
Hollis  and  others  for  traducmg  public  jus- 
tice^ states  was  presented  to  Queen  Elizabeth 
against  Chief  Justice  Popham,  and  which 
after  investigation  by  four  privy  councillors 
was  dismissed  as  slanderous  (State  Trials, 
ii.  1029),  could  be  found,  it  mi^ht  possibly 
turn  out  that  this  story  was  tne  slander ; 
and  the  chief  justice's  subsequent  enjoy- 
ment of  his  high  office  would  l^  a  sufficient 
proof  of  its  utter  falsehood. 

An  able  defender  has  at  last  been  found. 
Mr.  Long,  in  a  recent  article  in  the  *  Wilt- 
shire Archseological  Magazine,'  has  not  only 
refuted  the  story  as  it  regards  the  chief 
justice,  but  raises  reasonable  doubt  whether 
the  charge  against  Darell  himself  is  not 
altogether  a  myth.  Aubrey's  account, 
which  is  the  first  printed  authority  for  the 
tradition,  was  written  about  eightv  years 
after  the  judge's  death ;  while  Camden,  the 
judge's  contemporarv,  speaks  of  him  as  a 
man  of  *  distinguished  virtue, '  and,  in 
writing  of  Littlecott,  says  nothing  of  the 
astounding  crime  of  Darell,  its  late  pro- 
prietor. Neither  Symonds  nor  Evelyn, 
when  mentioning  the  place,  make  any  allu- 
sion to  this  mysterious  tradition.  Mr.  Long 
confutes  Aubrey's  loose  statement  by  prov- 
ing that  Darell  was  never  a  knight  and  was 
never  married,  as  asserted,  and  that  he  died 
before  Popham  was  advanced  to  the  bench ; 
so  that  he  could  not  have  been  the  judge 


528 


PORT 


who  pronounced  the  Rupposed  sentence. 
No  record  haa  been  found  of  the  trial,  though 
eveiy  search  has  been  made  in  the  proper 
repositories.  But  a  deposition  has  been 
found  amonff  some  of  Darell*s  papers  in  the 
Rolls  Chapdy  made  before  his  relation  and 
correspondent  Anthony  Bridges  by  the  mid- 
wife concerned  in  the  deed,  whose  story  has 
evidently  no  reference  to  Darell  or  to  Little- 
cott  Hall,  and  was  apparently  taken  in  1678, 
eleven  years  before  I)arell'8  death,  and  one 
year  before  Popham  was  even  solicitor- 
general. 

He  is  reputed  to  have  been  a  severe 
judge,  and,  according  to  Fuller  (Worthies 
li.  284),  to  have  recommended  King  James 
to  be  more  sparing  in  his  pardons  to  the 
malefactors  who  then  infested  the  highways. 
This  author  adds, '  In  a  word,  the  deserved 
death  of  some  scores  preserved  the  lives 
and  livelyhoods  of  more  thousands,  tra- 
vellers owing  their  safetv  to  this  judge's 
severity  many  vears  after  his  death.'  David 
Uoyd,  in  his  *  State  Worthies '  (700),  gives 
him  credit  for  having  ^  first  set  up  the  dis- 
covery of  New  England  to  maintain  and 
employ  those  that  could  not  live  honestly 
in  the  Old ;  being  of  opinion  that  banish- 
ment thither  would  be  as  well  a  more  law- 
ful as  a  more  effectual  remedy  a^nst  these 
extravagancies.'  And  Aubrey  (li.  495)  says 
that  '  he  stockt  and  planted  Vimnia  out  of 
all  the  gaoles  of  England.'  Neither  of  these 
accounts  is  quite  correct,  the  truth  being 
that,  having  associated  himself  with  Sir 
Ferdinando  Gorges  (the  knight  who  released 
him  from  the  Earl  of  Essex's  house)  in  a 
speculation  for  the  establishment  of  a  colony 
in  North  America,  and  a  patent  having 
been  granted  to  them  and  several  others, 
their  expedition  sailed  on  December  19, 
1000  (Bancroft's  America,  i.  123),  about  six 
months  before  the  chief  justice's  death ;  so 
that  whatever  might  have  been  his  inten- 
tions as  to  transpoilation,  he  did  not  live  to 
see  them  carried  into  effect. 

After  his  death  some  Reports  collected 
by  him  were  published  with  his  name ;  but 
the  book  is  considered  as  of  no  authority. 

The  chief  justice  married  Amy,  daughter 
of  Robert  Gaines,  of  Glamorgan,  Esq.,  and 
by  her,  besides  several  daughters,  left  a 
son.  Sir  Francis,  whose  descendants  are 
still  in  possession  of  the  Littlecott  estate. 

POST,  Henbt  de,  was  the  son  and  heir 
of  a  great  Norman  baron  named  Hugh  de 
Port,  who  held  fifty-five  lordships  under 
William  the  Conqueror  at  the  general 
survey,  the  principal  of  which  was  the 
barony  of  Baamg  in  Hampshire. 

By  the  roll  of  81  Henry  I.  he  appears 
to  have  been  one  of  the  justices  itinerant 
acting  in  Kent,  in  which  county  part  of  his 
property  was  situated. 

He  founded  the  priory  of  West  Shirbum 
in  Hampshire,  ana   endowed  it  with  his 


POET 

manor  of  Shirbum.  He  also  ga;?e  the  HAm 
of  his  manor  of  Hagelev,  in  Hawley,  near 
Dartford,  Kent,  to  the  church  of  RodMster. 

His  wife's  name  waa  Hadewise,  and  hj 
her  he  left  two  sons,  John  and  Wilham, 
the  former  of  whom  SQCceeded  to  ]ii» 
barony.  John  had  a  son  Adam,  genenll? 
supposed  to  be  the  under-mentio^d  justf- 
ciary.  (Dugdal^s  Baron.  L  463 ;  Momd, 
i.  170,  vL  1013 ;  Haated.) 

POST,  Adam  ds,  is  stated  byDagdile 
(Baronage J  i.  403)  to  be  the  grandson  of  the 
above  Henry  de  Port^  and  the  son  of  John 
de  Port,  and  that  he  fled  out  of  the  king- 
dom and  was  outlawed  in  1172,  18  Hemy 
II.,  having  become  implicated  in  the  tiea> 
sonable   machinations   carried  on  anuMt 
the   king  by  his   eldest  son  and  Qosui 
Eleanor.    (Lord  LytteiUnCs  Hemy  IL  iL 
104.)     But  from  the  reoordi  and  odier 
documents  of  the   period,  the   detail  of 
which  would  be  unintereetinff,  it  is  mini* 
fest  that  there  were  two  individuals  mnMd 
Adam  de  Port,  both  probably  descended 
from  the  same  great-grandfather,  and  tiitn- 
fore  second  cousins,  and   that  while  one 
Adam  was  a  frigitive,  the  other  was  in 
continued  attendance  on  the  king,  and  m 
the  justice  itinerant  now  to  be  noticed. 

He  was  the  son  of  Rodger  de  Port  bf 
SybiUa  de  Albinero,  and  uie  grandson  i 
another  Adam,  the  brother  of  the  above- 
noticed  Henry.  The  Charter  Rolls  of  Eiig 
John  contain  numerous  instances  of  bii 
acting  as  a  witness  among  the  magnate!  of 
the  land  frx>m  the  first  to  the  fourteenth 
year.     (Hot.  Chart,  23-189.) 

In  9  John  he  had  the  custody  of  the 

Eriory  of  Shirebum,  then    in  the  kingfi 
ands  on  account   of  the  interdict  (mL 
Qaus.  i.  108)  :  and  in  10  John  he  was  o&t 
of  the  justiciers  before  whom  fines  won 
acknowledged  at  Carlisle ;  but  he  is  not 
otherwise  mentioned  in  a  judicial  character. 
On  June  25,  1213, 15  John,  the  custody  of 
the  castle  of  Southampton  was  conunitted 
to  him ;  but  before  the  25th  of  the  follow- 
ing month  he  died.    (Hot,  de  ObMt,  477.) 
He  married  Mabil,  the  daughter  of  Begi* 
nald  de  Aurevalle,  whose  wife,  Muriel,  wu 
the  daughter  of  Roger   de   St  John,  to 
whom  Mabil  ultimately  became  heir,  aod 
their  son  William  assumed  the  name  of  St 
John.    The  title  of  St.  John  of  Baaing,  by 
which  his  descendants  were  summoned  to 
parliament,  eventually  devolved,  sometiiBtf 
through  female  representativeey  onWilliua 
Paulet^    Marquis   of    Winchester,  whidi 
title  still  survives.     (Nicolas^s  S^moBm,) 

POST,  JoHH,  was  a  nataye  of  Cheitflr^ 
where  his  aneestora  were  mexchanti  for 
several  generations.  Hia  father  was  Han^ 
Port,  a  mercer  in  that  city,  who 
mayor  in  1486;  and  his  mother 
daughter  of  Robert  BiroWi  of 
who  had  also  attuned  tiie 


PORTESEYE 


POTERXA 


529 


Panning  his   legal   studies  at  the  Inner  i  c^  that  name  in  the  same  county,  to  which 


Temple,  he  reached  the  post  of  reader  in 
1507,  and  again  in  1516,  becoming  treasurer 
in  the  latter  year,  and  governor  in  1520. 
(Ihiffdale's  Orif/.  103,  170.)  In  1604  he 
was  one  of  the  commissioners  for  raising 
the  subsidy  in  Derbyshire,  and  was  attorney 
for  the  earldom  of  Chester.  On  May  81, 
1509,  he  was  constituted  solicitor-general, 
the  duties  of  which  office  he  performed  till 
Trinity  Term  1621,  when  he  was  raised  to 
the  degree  of  the  coif.  (Hot,  Pari.  vi.  639 ; 
Cal.  State  Papers  [1547-80],  182.) 

Though  Dugdale  does  not  date  his  eleva- 
tion to   the   bench   till   January  1533,  it 


he  added  his  own ;  and  it  still  remains  with 
the  double  designation  in  the  family.  Hia 
father  was  John,  also  a  member  of  the 
Middle  Temple^  where  thd  judge  himself 
became  reader  in  1632  and  1640.  (Duff' 
daif^s  Orig,  176,  216,  2ia)  He  was  called 
to  the  degree  of  the  coif  in  the  following 
Trinity  Term,  and  was  nominated  one  of  the 
king's  serieants  on  November  23.  In  Ja- 
nuary 1641  he  was  sent  to  Plymouth  on  a 
commission  to  examine  into  an  unlawful 
;  assembly  of  its  inhabitants  '  uppon  a  Por- 
tugalles ship.'  {Ads  Privy  Council^  vii.  1 16.) 
His  elevation  as  a  judee  of  the  King's 


certainly  took  place  several  years  before.    Bench  took  place  on  May  16,  1646,  and  on 
He  ia  called  a  ludffe  of  the  Kinsf's  Bench    the  death  of  Kinir  Henry  in  the  followinflr 


judge  01  tne  i^mg 
and  a  knight  in  the  will  of  Lawrence  Dutton 
of  Dutton,  proved  on  January  22,  1627-8 
{Lane,  (md  Cheshire  Wills  [Chesham  Soc]  ), 
and  he  was  summoned  to  parliament  in  that 
character  in  November  1529.  He  was 
a^ain  summoned  in  April  1536  {RymeTf 
xiv.  304,  565),  and  vras  one  of  the  com- 
missioners on  the  trials  of  Sir  Thomas 
More  and  Bishop  Fisher  in  1535.  His 
death  occurred  before  November  1541, 

lie  married  twice.  One  of  his  wives  was 
Marprers-,  daughter  of  Sir  Edward  Trafford, 
of  Trafford  in  Lancashire ;  and  the  other 
was  Joan,  widow  of  John  Pole  of  Radbum, 
and  dau^'hter  of  John  Fitz  Herbert,  remem- 
brancer of  the  Exchequer,  bv  whom   he 


King  Henry  in  the  following 
year  he  was  continued  in  his  seat,  which  he 
retained  during  the  whole  of  Edward's 
reign,  and  for  the  first  two  years  of  Mary's, 
when  he  was  raised  to  the  nead  of  his  court 
on  June  11,  1556.  His  name  frequently 
appears  in  the  commissions  for  the  trial  of 
state  prisoners,  among  whom  was  Sir  Ni- 
chohis  Throckmorton  {State  Trials,  i.  884) ; 
but  he  presided  over  his  court  for  little 
more  than  a  vear  and  a  half,  his  death  oc- 
curring on  Februar}'  5, 1657.  He  was  buried 
at  St.  Cunstan's-in-the- West,  and  his  epitaph 
is  ffiven  in  Maitland's  '  London  '  (p.  1095). 
Whatever  religion  he  professed  during  the 
reign  of  Edward,  he  clearly  belonged  to  the 
Roman  Catholic  body  in  the  last  years  of 


acquired   the   manor  of  Etwafl  in  Derby-  '  his  life,  and  was  considered  so  earnest  in 
shire.     {NichoUs's  Leicestershire y  853.)  '  ^^^  '-^^ ^ *  "-  ^--  ^ "-'" 

FOBTESEYE,  Adam  de,  is  mentioned 
among  the  justices  itinerant  for  the  county 
of  Hants  in  0  Henry  III.,  1225,  and  there 
is  no  further  reference  to  his  name  except 
that  in  the  next  year  he  assessed  the  quin- 
zime  for  that  county.  {Rot.  Clous,  ii.  76, 147.) 

POBTDIOTOK,  John,  was  of  a  Yorkshire 
family  whicli  was  still  nourishing  at  the  end 
of  the  seventeenth  century.  Though  we 
have  not  the  date  of  his  call  to  the  degree 
of  the  coif,  we  find  him  appointed  one  of  the 
king's  w-rjeants  on  April  17, 1440, 18  Henry 
yi.,  and  in  the  next  year  he  acted  as  a 
justice  of  assize  in  Yorkshire.  (Kal.  Exch. 
lii.  28.*J.)  Three  years  afterwards  he  was 
made  a  judge  of  the  Court  of  Common 


that  faith  as  to  be  sent  to  Sir  James  Hales, 
his  brother  judge,  then  in  the  Fleet,  to 
perauade  him  to  recant.  (  Wotton's  Baronet. 
1.  221.) 

Sir  William *s  pandson  was  honoured 
with  a  baronetcy  m  1612,  which  failed  in 
1695.  The  barony  of  Portman  of  Orchard- 
Portman  was  granted  on  January  27, 1837, 
to  Edward  Berkeley  Portman,  the  present 
lord,  a  descendant  of  the  eldest  daughter  of 
the  first  baronet,  whose  estates  devolved 
upon  him.     (Hutchins's  Dorsetsh.  i.  87.) 

POTEBHA,  James  de,  acted  as  a  justicier 
from  9  Richard  I.,  1197,  through  the  whole 
of  the  reign  of  John.  {Abb.  Placit.  83.) 
His  name  also  appears  on  various  itinera 
within  the  same  time ;  and  on  one  occasion 


Pleas.  {Cat.  Pot.  Pat.  285.)  How  long  he  incurred  a  fine  of  one  hundred  marks  for 
after  Easter  1454,  when  the  last  fine  was  '  ^ranting  leave  to  settle  a  cause  without  the 
acknowledged  before  him  { Dugdale' s  Orig.  '  king's  licence,  which  was,  however,  after- 
40),  he  remained  in  the  court  we  have  no  wards  remitted.  He  was  continued  in  his 
account,  nor  of  the  date  of  his  death;  but  Judicial  position  under  Henry  III.,  in  the 
he  was  one  of  tlie  executors  of  Ralph  Lord  j  third  year  of  whose  reign  he  was  one  of  the 


Cromwell,  treasurer  of  England,  who  died 
in  Jannar>-  1455.     (Tcxtam.  Vetwt.  276.) 

POBTICAH,  William,  belonged  to  a 
family  which  flourished  in  the  county  of 
Somerset  from  a  period  earlier  than  the 
reign  of  Edward  I.  His  grandfather,  Wil- 
liani,  was  a  reader  at  the  Middle  Temple, 
and  by  marriage  with  Christian,  the  daugh- 


justices  itinerant  into  Wiltshire,  &c. 

In  1200,  2  John,  he  was  under-sheriff  of 
York  to  Geoffrey  Fitz-Peter,  and  was  the 
principal  instrument  in  despoilinc^  the  arch- 
oishop^s  lands  and  g(X)ds  when  ne  refused 
to  pay  the  comage  imposed  by  the  kinp. 
For  his  severity  in  the  performance  of  this 
duty  he  was  introducea  by  name  into  the 


ter  of  William  Orchard,  acquired  the  estate    sentence  of  excommunication  fulminated  by 


MM 


530 


POWELL 


the  irritated  prelate.  (R,  de  Wendover,  iii.  [ 
154,  n.)  In  5  John  the  county  of  Wilts  i 
was  committed  to  his  charge,  and  in  the 
next  year  the  manor  of  Wellojj  in  Hamp- 
shire was  given  to  him  for  his  support. 
This  manor,  in  17  John,  the  sheriff  was 
ordered  to  deliver  up  to  Itoger  Elys,  *  si 
Jacobus  de  Potema  non  sit  ad  servicium 
nostrum,'  showing  that  in  that  troublesome 
period  his  fidelity  was  suspected.  It  would 
appear  that  he  soon  cleared  himself,  for  the 
property  was  subsequently  in  his  possession. 
He  died  in  5  or  6  Henry 'HI.  (Ilot,  Ciaus, 
i.  8, 114,  232,  476,  487.) 

POWELL,  Thoicas.  There  are  three  con- 
temporaneous judges  of  the  name  of  Powell, 
the  Christian  name  of  one  being  Thomas, 
and  of  two  being  John ;  of  whom  two  sat 
on  the  bench  in  the  reign  of  James  II.,  two 
in  that  of  William  III.,  and  for  a  short 
time  in  the  same  court,  and  one  of  them  in 
the  reign  of  Queen  Anne.  It  is  difficult 
always  to  distin^ish  them,  and  it  is  there- 
fore not  surprising  that  writers  have  fre- 
quently appropriated  to  one  the  character 
and  the  anecdotes  and  even  the  lineage 
which  belong  to  another  of  his  namesakes. 
Thomas,  the  subject  of  this  memoir,  is  not 
so  liable  to  this  misapprehension  as  the  two 
Johns.  He  was  of  Weish  extraction,  tracing 
his  lineage  to  the  princes  of  North  Wales. 
His  father  was  John  Powell,  of  Llechwedd 
Dyrys  in  the  county  of  Cardigan ;  and  his 
mother  was  Aime,  daughter  of  Thomas 
Pryce,  of  Glanfread.  On  his  admission  to 
Gray's  Inn  in  1055  he  is  described  as  of 
Staple  Inn,  where  probably  he  was  initiated 
in  legal  studies.  He  was  called  to  the  bar  in 
1660,  and  after  nearlv  four-and-twentv  vears* 
practice  he  was  sworn  a  serjeant  in  1684. 

Three  years  after,  on  April  22,  1687,  he 
was  appointed  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer, 
and  was  knighted :  and  on  July  6  in  the 
next  year  he  was  removed  to  the  King's 
Bench  in  the  place  of  Sir  John  Powell, 
turned  out  for  the  bold  expression  of  his 
opinion  in  the  case  of  the  seven  bishops. 
lie  had  little  opportunity  of  showing  his 
legal  ability,  for  nis  judicial  career  termi- 
nated a  few  months  afterwards  with  the 
flight  of  the  king.  He  survived  his  removal 
from  the  bench  for  sixteen  years,  and  died 
in  January  1705.  He  married  Elizabeth, 
daughter  and  heir  of  Dand  Lloyd  of  Aber- 
brwynen,  by  whom  he  left  a  son,  whose 
descendant  still  occupies  the  family  seat  at 
Nanteos  in  Cardiganshire.  (Bramdon.  275, 
311 ;  Lidtrcll,  514.) 

POWELL,  John,  was  the  senior  of  the 
two  John  Powells  who  were  contemporary 
judges,  and  was,  like  Sir  Thomas  Powell, 
descended  from  a  very  ancient  Welsh 
family.  He  was  the  son  of  John  Powell, 
of  Kenward  in  Carmarthenshire,  and  was 
bom  about  1638.  The  inscription  on  his 
monument  states  that  he  received  his  first 


POWELL 

instructions  from  Jeremy  Taylor,  the  re- 
nowned Bishop  of  Down,  and  subflequently 
at  the  university  of  Oxford,  bat  Aiithony 
Wood  does  not  name  him  as  taking  any 
degree.    His  legal  education  commenced  in 
1650,  at  Gray's  Inn,  where  he  was  called 
to  the  bar  seven  years  after,  and  became  an 
ancient  in  1676.  "  We  have  no  detail  of  his 
professional  experience  till  his  nominatioD 
as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  ^vil 
26,  1686,  when  he  was  knighted.    In  the 
next  Trinity  Term  he  waa  called  u^  to 
give  his  opinion  with  the  rest  of  the  jndp 
at  Serjeants'  Lm  as  to  the  king's  dispensing 
power  in  Sir  Edward  Hale*8  case,  when  he 
required  time  for  consideration ;  and,  ac- 
cording to  his  own  statement,  the  judgment 
was  pronounced  without  his  having  had  n 
opportunity  to  g^ve  his  decision.  The  diief 
justice  e\*identJy  considered  that  Powdl 
coincided  with  the  majority,  and  thefeforo 
he  at  that  time  escapied  the  dismiasicn  to 
which  some  of  his  fellows  were  suljected. 
He  was  removed  to  the  King's  Bench  « 
April  16,  1687,  and  in   the  same  mootk 
Thomas  Powell  vras  made  a  baron  of  tlu 
Exchequer,  so  that  there  were  then  two 
judges  of  the  name.     During  the  whole 
time  he  sat  on  the  bench  in  Jameses  rai^ 
he  was  always  associated   on  the  diGoit 
with  Sir  Robert  Wright,  a  junction  whid 
was  probably  dictated  by  the  neceasitT  d 
supplying  Wright's    denciency  with  Sr 
John's  profound  knowledge  of  law.  {Brtm' 
firm,  225,  278;  StaU  Trials,  xL  1198;  M. 
Hid,  V.  8.33.) 

Sir  Robert  Wright,  a  few  days  after 
Powell's  appointment  to  the  King's  Bcndi, 
I  was  restored  to  that  court  as  its  chiet 
and  Powell  was  therefore  an  unfortunite 
and  unwilling  participator  in  the  outraseoat 
sentence  on  the  Earl  of  Devonshire,  finin? 
him  in  the  sum  of  30,000/.,  and  committio; 
him  to  prison  till  it  was  paid.  It  must  be 
acknowledged  that  when  called  upon  br 
the  House  of  Lords  after  the  revolution  to 
account  for  this  breach  of  privilege  he  made 
a  very  lame  excuse.  The  Liords  overlooked 
the  offence,  and  contented  themselves  with 
voting  the  committal  to  be  a  breach  of 

Privilege,  and  the  fine  to  be  excessive.  On 
une  29,  1688,  came  on  the  trial  of  the 
seven  bishops,  and  the  remarks  made  hjr 
Sir  John  Powell  during  its  progress  aum- 
ciently  indicated  his  opinion  of  the  prose- 
cution, and  must  have  prepared  his  c<^ 
leagues  for  the  exposition  of  the  law  which 
he  pronounced  wnen  his  turn  came.  He 
declared  that  he  could  not  see  anything  of 
sedition  or  any  other  crime  fixed  upon  the 
reverend  fathers,  for  they  had  with  kminr 
lity  and  decency  submitted  to  the  kiaf  ao^ 
to  insist  on  their  reading  hit  iiiuM|^ 
declaration,  becMue  they  oononii  tti^fiK 
was  against  the  law  of  the  IfliA-  Ift  ~  ' 
foond^  (m  the  diapwiwng  poi 


POWELL 

l>oldly  saidy  if  '  once  allowed  of,  there  will 
need  no  purliament*  The  consequence  of 
this  honest  demonstration,  and  of  Justice 
Holloway's  concurrence  in  it,  was  the 
fauhops'  acquittal,  and  the  dismissal  of  both 
these  judges,  which  took  place  on  July  7, 
Sir  Thomas  Powell  being  substituted  for 
Sir  John  in  the  King's  Bench.  {State  Trials, 
xL  1360,  xii.  426 ;  Pari  Hist.  v.  311.^ 

On  King  William's  government  being 
^eetablished.  Sir  John  Powell  was  immedi- 
ately restored  to  his  original  seat  in  the 
Common  Pleas,  a  place  which  he  preferred 
to  the  more  prominent  one  of  keeper  of  the 
^Oreat  Seal,  which,  according  to  his  epitaph, 
was  offered  to  him.  He  was  sworn  in  on 
.March  11,  1C89,  and  for  the  next  seven 
years  he  administered  justice  in  that  court 
inth  undiminished  reputation.  He  died  of 
the  stone  at  Exeter  on  September  7,  1696, 
and  being  removed  to  his  mansion  at  Broad- 
way, near  Laughame,  in  Carmarthenshire, 
he  was  buried  m  the  church  of  that  parish, 
where  a  tablet  was  erected  to  his  memory. 
His  son  Thomas  was  created  a  baronet  a 
short  time  afterwards,  but  the  dignity 
became  extinct  in  1721.  (Luttrdl,  i.  504, 
609 ;  Gent.  Mag.  July  1839,  p.  22.) 

POWELL,  John,  Junior.  As  he  and  the 
last-mentioned  judge  sat  at  the  same  time 
in  the  same  court,  it  almost  unavoidably 
foUowed  that  frequent  mistakes  occurred  as 
to  their  identity.  Several  biographers,  as 
-Chalmers,  Noble,  Britton,  and  others,  have 
ran  in  this  error,  confounding  the  two,  and 
mixing  up  the  history  of  the  Carmarthen- 
shire judge  with  that  of  the  native  of  Glou- 
cester, wfiose  career  is  now  to  be  related. 

His  family  was  originally  resident  in 
Herefordshire,  but  migrated  to  Gloucester, 
where  his  father  held  various  municipal 
^onoiirs,  and  was  mayor  in  1663.  The  juoge 
-was  born  there  in  1645,  and  became  in 
1664  a  member  of  the  Inner  Temple,  being 
called  to  the  bar  in  1671.  In  16/4  he  was 
elected  town  clerk  of  his  native  city,  and 
chosen  representative  of  it  to  the  sole  par- 
liament or  James  H.  in  16S5.  In  September 
of  that  year  he  was  turned  out  of  his  office, 
but  was  restored  in  1687,  having  first  been 
obliged  to  make  an  application  to  the  Court 
of  King's  Bench,  {hudge's  Gloucester,  89 ; 
2  Shower,  490.) 

At  the  revolution  he  was  included  in 
ihe  first  batch  of  Serjeants;  and  in  May 
1691,  the  king  having  ordered  that  the 
Ticant  seat  in  the  Common  Pleas  should 
be  filled  by  Mr.  Powell,  the  Serjeant 
named  his  officers  and  bespoke  his  robes ; 
but  by  the  interference  of  Sir  John  Trevor 
and  others  in  behalf  of  Sir  William  Poul- 
teney,  the  intended  pitomotion  was  delayed 
tQl  the  king's  return  from  Holland,  when, 
TieTor'B  plot  being  counteracted,  Powell 
-was,  on  October  27,  appointed  a  baron  of 
cthe  Ibushequer  instead.   He  was  thereupon 


POWLE 


531 


knighted,  and  remained  in  that  court  till 
October  29, 1695,  when  he  was  transferred 
to  the  Common  Pleas,  where  he  sat  till  the 
death  of  the  king.  Three  months  after  the 
accession  of  Queen  Anne  he  made  another 
chan^,  and  on  June  24,  1702,  took  his 
seat  m  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench,  which 
he  graced  with  universal  esteem  and  respect 
till  the  last  year  of  her  reign.  He  died  at 
Gloucester,  unmarried,  on  June  14,  1713, 
and  was  buried  in  the  cathedral,  where  a 
monument,  with  an  efBgy  of  him  in  his 
robes,  records  his  judicial  excellencies. 
(LuttreU,  ii.  220, 229;  Lord  Raymond,  769 ; 
Rtidder's  Gloucester,  119.) 

During  the  two-and-twenty  years  he  sat 
in  one  court  or  the  other  his  conduct  on 
the  bench  was  without  reproach ;  and  in  the 
last  eleven  he  ably  seconded  the  efficient 
rule  of  Chief  Justice  Holt  Distinguished 
as  a  profound  lawyer,  he  was  equally  re- 
spected in  his  private  life.  Dean  Smft 
represents  him  in  his  letter  to  Stella  of 
July  5,  1711,  as  the  merriest  old  gentleman 
he  ever  saw,  sneaking  pleasant  things  and 
chuckling  till  he  cried  again.  When  Jane 
Wenham  was  tried  for  witchcraft  before 
him,  and  charged  with  being  able  to  fly,  he 
asked  her  whether  she  coiud  fly,  and  on 
her  answering  in  the  affirmative  he  said, 
*WeIl,  then,  you  may;  there  is  no  law 
against  flying.  The  poor  woman  was  saved 
from  the  effects  of  her  own  faith,  and  re- 
ceived the  queen's  pardon.  (Foshrooke's 
Glottcester.) 

FOWEB,  Walter,  who  was  one  of  the 
commissioners  of  array  for  the  counties  of 
Bedford  and  Buckingham  in  20  Edward  IH., 
held  the  manor  of  Brereby  and  other  pro- 
perty in  Yorkshire,  part  of  which  he  gave 
to  the  prior  of  the  convent  of  Monk  Bretton. 
He  was  a  clerk  or  master  in  Chancery  from 
26  to  47  Edward  III.,  1351-1373 ;  and  in 
that  character  was  at  the  head  of  four  in 
whose  custody  the  Great  Seal  was  left  on 
March  18,  1371,  during  the  temporary  ab- 
sence of  the  chancellor,  Sir  Robert  de  Thorpe. 

He  is  noticed  as  holding  the  office  of 
attorney-general  to  John  of  Gaunt,  Duke  of 
Lancaster,  in  1336.  (JV.  Foedera,  iii.  78, 
483;  Abb.  Rot.  Orig.  ii.  220;  Cal.  Inquis. 
p.  m.  ii.  172 ;  Rot.  Pari  ii.  225-317.) 

FOWL£,  Henry,  was  rather  a  politician 
than  a  lawyer.  His  oratory  was  oftener 
heard  in  the  chapel  of  St.  Stephen's  than  in 
the  courts  of  Westminster,  and  he  owed 
his  promotion  to  the  office  of  master  of  the 
KolLs  more  to  his  beinf  a  whig  leader  than 
to  his  prominence  at  the  bar.  He  was  born 
about  1629,  and  was  the  younger  son  of 
Henry  Powle,  of  Shottisbrooie  in  Berkshire, 
sheriff  of  that  county  in  1632,  by  Catherine, 
daughter  of  Matthew  Herbert,  of  Monmouth. 

From  his  being  returned  for  Cirencester 
to  the  Convention  Parliament  of  1660,  it 
may  be  presumed  that  he  was  known  to  be 

xx2 


532 


POWLE 


averse  from  a  monarchical  groverDment,  with  ] 
a  view  to  the  resumption  of  which  that 
parliament  was  summoned.     In  it  he  seems 
to  have   preserved  a  modest  silence,  and 
not  to  have  spoken  in  the  next  till  it  had 
sat  for  nine  sessions,  occupying  nearly  twelve 
years.     His  first  appearance,  as  reported, 
was  in  February  16/3,  when  in  a  clear  and 
convincing  speech  he  exposed  the  tricks 
played  by  Lord  Chancellor  Shaftesbury  in 
issuing  writs  for  the  election  of  members 
without  the  speaker^s  warrant,  and  procured 
a  vote  declanng  all  the  returns  unaer  them 
void.    He  next  by  his  strenuous  opposition 
succeeded  in  obtaining  the  cancelment  of 
the  king*s  declaration  of  indulgence  to  dis- 
senters;  and  from  that  time  he  took  the 
lead  in  getting  the  Test  Act  through  the 
house,  and  in  all  the  other  important  pro- 
ceedings of  the  session.     In  the  remaining 
seven  sessions  he  continued  to  be  one  of  the 
most  active  heads  of  the  countr}*^  party  in 
opposition  to  the  court.     That  parliament^ 
having  lasted  eighteen  years^  was  brought 
to  a  close  in  January  lO/O ;  and  to  the  next, 
summoned  in  the  following  March,  he  was 
returned  by  his  old  constituency.    He  dis- 
tinguished himself  in  it  by  the  bold  stand 
he  made  against  the  king's  rejection  of  the 
speaker  (Seymour),  thereby  confirming  to 
tne  Commons  for  the  future  their  right  to 
uncontrolled  election;  and  also  by  his  severe 
recapitulation  of  the  crimes  imputed  to  the 
Earl  of  Danby,  thus  securing  the  passing  of 
the  act  of  attainder  which  obliged  the  earl 
to  surrender  himself.     In  this  session  also 
some  enquiries  were  made  into  the  money 
distributed  by  ministers  among  the  mem- 
bers who  supported  them  for  secret  service. 
It  is  more  than  probable  that  neitlier  party 
were  free  from  contamination ;  for  accord- 
ing to  a  late  discovery  several  of  the  leading 
members  of  the  opposition,  and  among  them 
I'owle  himself  is  named,  disorraced  them- 
selves bv  accepting  large  gratuities  from  the 
King  of  France. 

Before  the  dissolution  of  this  short  par- 
liament he  was  t^ken  into  the  ministn-  as 
one  of  the  thirty  privy  councillors,  part 
whig  and  part  tory,  to  whom  by  Sir  W. 
Temple's  advice  the  king  confided  the 
ffovemment.  As  might  be  expected  from 
its  heterogeneous  materials,  the  structure 
fell  to  pieces  in  the  following  October ;  and 
Powle  once  more  returned  to  the  ranks  of 
opposition.  There  he  joined  with  Shaftes- 
bury in  his  endeavours  Uy  exclude  the  Duke 
of  York  from  the  throne,  and  procured  a 
strong  declaration  aprainst  the  illegal  and 
arbitrary  discharge  of  the  grand  jury  to  avoid 
their  presentment  against  the  duke  for  recu- 
sancy. For  this  an  impeachment  was  voted 
against  Chief  Justice  Scroggs,  who  only 
avoided  the  consequence  bv  a  lucky  disso- 
lution of  the  parliament  and  a  timely  sacri- 
fice of  his  place.  Strongly  preju^ced  against 


POWYS 

the  Roman  Catholics^  Powle  gaTe  lus  fall 
belief  to  the  existence  of  the  Popish  Plot: 
and  as  a  manager  for  conducting  the  trial 
of  Lord  Stafibrd  he  summed  up  the  eTidenoe 
against  him  with  peculiar  severity.  In  the 
Oxford  parliament  of  March  Iwl,  wfaidi 
lasted  only  a  week,  Powle  took  very  little 
part ;  and'  to  the  single  parliament  called 
by  James  II.  he  was  not  returned. 

When  that  king  fled  to  France,  and  the 
old  parliamentarv  members  were  6um- 
moned,  Mr.  Powle  was  selected  as  their 
chairman,  and  presented  the  address  to  the 
Prince  of  Orange  to  take  upon  him  the 
government  till  the  meeting  of  the  CooTen- 
tion  on  Januarv  22, 1689.  In  that  Gonyeo- 
tion,  the  second  in  which  it  was  his  foitooe 
to  have  a  place,  he  represented  Windfor, 
and  on  its  first  sitting  was  unanimoiulT 
chosen  speaker.  He  had  the  satisfaction  in 
that  character  of  presenting  the  DedaratioD 
of  Rights,  and  of  hearing  the  prince  and 
princess's  acknowledgment  of  them  in  their 
acceptance  of  the  crown.  In  the  new  a^ 
rangement  of  the  judicial  bench  he  received 
the  post  of  master  of  the  RoUs,  and  "wv 
admitted  into  the  privy  council.  With  tiie 
dissolution  in  January  1690  his  senatoriil 
life  terminated. 

He  died  on  November  21, 1692,  and  wi* 
buried  in  Quenington  Church,  where  then 
is  a  marble  with  a  flattering  inscriptioD  to 
his  memory.  He  married,  first,  Elizabeth, 
daughter  of  the  first  Lord  Newport,  of 
High  Ercall :  and,  secondly,  Franwfl, 
daughter  of  Lionel  Cranfield,  first  Eirl 
of  Middlesex,  and  widow  of  Richard  Eiil 
of  Dorset  (Atkt/ns's  Gloucederfh.  822; 
Manning^ n  Speakers,  389 ;  TowMmdt  Cm- 
monSj  i.  33 ;  Pari,  HUt,  iv.  v.) 

Powle  was  a  violent  partisan  in  violent 
times ;  but  he  was  evidently  an  honest  one. 
Though  his  line  of  conduct  cannot  alwarf 
be  approved,  it  is  difficult  to  credit  tht? 
doubtful  imputation  of  his  receiving  gra- 
tuities from  the  French  kin^.    His  speedrai 
bear  the  impress  of  sincerity ;   they  weie 
ready,  effective,  and  often  eloquent,  particu- 
larly some  of  his  addresses  as  speaker.  For 
that  office  his  historical  knowledge  and|Mr- 
liamentary  learning  peculiarlv  qualified  hinu 
How  far  they  aided  him  in  the  distribation 
of  justice  as  master  of  the  Rolls  we  have 
but  little  means  of  knowing;   but  as  no 
complaints  have  come  down  to  us  we  maT 
conclude  that  ho  performed  his  duties  with 
efficiency.    He  was  a  member  of  the  Roval 
Society,  and  an  industriouscollector  of  MSS^ 
principally  those  relating  to  English  hiatoiTf 
a  great  part  of  which  are  now  in  the  Lnu- 
downe  Collection  in  the  British  Muisiim. 

POWTS,  LiTTLBTOV,  was  descendfld  fioB 
the  Princes  of  Pow^  in  the  tmlftk  «i- 
tuiy,  according  to  his  pedigne  ■■  wftw- 
tically  traced  by  TesadoM  mhUi^ 
who  cany  it  down  tiU  Hm  warn  «» 


POWYS 

-ward  n.,  about  wbich  time  the  Welsh 
appendage  was  discarded,  and  the  more 
pronounceable  name  of  Powys  adopted. 
Tb»  ikmilj  subsequently  divided  into  se- 
Tsiral  branches,  one  of  which  settled  in 
iShiopahiie.  Thomas  Powys,  of  Henley  in 
that  county,  reader  of  Lincoln's  Inn  in 
1667,  and  serjeant-at-law  in  1669,  by  his 
£rst  wife  Mary,  daughter  of  Sir  Adam  Lit- 
tleton, Bart,  was  the  father  of  four  sons^ 
the  eldest  of  whom,  who  was  baptized  with 
Ilia  mother's  maiden  name,  and  the  second, 
Thomas,  both  became  judges.  (Collins' t 
JPeerage^  yiii.  577.) 

Littleton  Powys  was  bom  about  1648, 
and  was  instructed  in  the  mysteries  of  law 
at  Lincoln*s  Inn,  where  he  was  called  to 
the  bar  in  May  1671.  At  the  revolution 
he  took  arms  m  favour  of  William  with 
three  servants,  and  read  aloud  that  prince's 
declaration  at  Shrewsbury.  He  was  re- 
warded for  his  zeal  by  being  made  in  May 
1689  second  judge  on  the  Chester  Circuit. 
In  1692  he  was  raised  to  the  degree  of  the 
coif,  and  soon  after  knighted  \  and  on  Oc- 
tober 29,  1695,  he  was  promoted  to  the 
bench  as  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer.  In 
that  court,  and  afterwards  in  the  King's 
Bench,  to  which  he  was  removed  on  Janu- 
ary 29, 1701,  he  sat  during  three  reigns  till 
Octob^  26, 1726,  when,  bemg  then  seventy- 
•eight  years  old,  he  was  allowed  to  retire  on 
a  pension  of  1500/.  (9  Reports  Pub,  Hec., 
J^  iL  252;  Lord  Itayntondy  622,  1420.) 

On  the  accession  of  George  I.  in  1714 
Lord  Cowper  had  represented  to  the  king 
that  as  the  jud^e  ana  his  brother  frequently 
acted  in  opposition  to  their  two  colleagues 
in  the  court,  it  was  expedient  to  remove 
one  of  them,  and  recommended  that  Sir  Lit- 
tleton should  be  retained,  as  a  blameless  man, 
though  '  of  less  abilitys  and  consequence.' 
(Lord  CamjMCs  Chanc.  iv.  349, 364.) 

Be  was  a  good  plodding  judge,  though, 
according  to  Duke  Wharton*s  satire,  he 
could  not '  sum  a  cause  without  a  blunder,' 
and  was  somewhat  too  much  inclined  to 
take  a  political  view  in  the  trials  before 
him.  With  moderate  intellectual  powers, 
he  filled  his  office  with  average  credit,  but 


POWYS 


533 


<?oipmft^<^^"g 
conceive/ 

'Look,  do  you  see.'  He  is  the  reputed 
victim  of  Philip  Yorke's  badinage,  who, 
^dining  with  the  judge,  and  being  pressed 
to  name  the  subject  of  the  work  which  he 
had  jokingly  said  he  was  about  to  publish, 
stated  that  it  was  a  poetical  version  of  Coke 
upon  Lyttelton.  As  nothing  would  satisfy 
Sir  Littleton  but  a  specimen  of  the  compo- 
aition,  Yorke  gravely  recited, — 

He  that  holdeth  his  lands  in  fee 
Need  neither  to  shake  nor  to  shiver, 

I  humbly  conceive;  for  look,  do  you  see, 
They  are  his  and,  his  heirs*  for  ever. 


That  Sir  Littleton  was  ridiculed  by  the 
bar  appears  in  another  metrical  lampoon 
vmtten  by  Philip  Yorke,  called  '  Sir  Little- 
ton Powis's  Charge  in  Rhyme,  1718,'  hu- 
morously quizzing  his  insipid  phraseology. 
(State  TrwU,  xv.  1407-1422  j  Cookmfs 
Lords  Somers  and  Mardvncke,  57,  66; 
Harrises  Lord  Hardvoickey  i.  84.) 

The  judge  lived  nearly  six  vears  after  his 
retirement,  and  died  on  March  16,  1732. 

POWYS,  Thomas,  was  the  brother  of  Sir 
Littleton,  and  only  a  year  his  junior.  He 
filled  a  larger  space  in  the  history  of  his 
time,  though  he  occupied  a  judicial  position 
for  the  brief  period  of  a  year  and  a  quarter. 
After  being  educated  at  Shrewsbury  School, 
he  became  a  student  at  Lincoln's  Inn,  and 
was  called  to  the  bar  in  1673.  Burnet 
calls  him  a  young  aspiring  lawyer ;  and  he 
certainly  outstripped  his  elder  brother  in 
the  race  for  legal  honours,  though  neither 
of  them  had  any  eminence  in  legal 
attainments. 

When  James  11.  found  that  his  law 
officers  declined  to  comply  with  his  arbi- 
trary requirements,  he  selected  Thomas 
Powys  on  April  23, 1686,  to  till  the  post  of 
solicitor-general,  and  thereupon  kmghted 
him.  Onering  no  objection  to  the  issue  of 
warrants  to  avowed  Papists  to  hold  office, 
and  arguing  Sir  Edward  Hale's  case  in 
favour  of  the  power  assumed  by  the  kinf 
to  dispense  with  the  test,  he  was  advanced 
in  December  1687  to  the  attomev-general- 
ship.  In  that  character  he  conducted  the 
case  against  the  seven  bishops  in  June 
1688,  when  the  moderation,  if  not  luke- 
warmness  of  his  advocacy  contrasted 
strongly  with  the  indecent  intemperance  of 
Williams,  the  solicitor-general.  It  may 
readily  be  believed,  as  he  expressed  him- 
self in  a  letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury in  the  following  January,  excusing 
his  acting  in  that  *most  unhappy  perse- 
cution,' that  *  it  was  the  most  imeasy  thing 
to  him  that  ever  in  his  life  he  was  con- 
cerned in.'  (Burnet.  iiL  01,  223;  State 
Trials,  xii.  :280;  Ciarendon^s  Corresp,  ii. 
607.) 

The    abdication    of    James    of    course 
brought  his  official  career  to  a  close ;  and 
during  William's  reign,  though  he  was  a 
fair  lawyer  and  fully  employed,  especially 
in  the  defences  on  state  prosecutions,  he 
remained  on   the  proscribed  list,      from 
1701  till  1713  he  represented  Ludlow ;  and 
at  the  beginning  of  Queen's  Anne's  reign  he 
was  made  at  one  step  serjeant  and  queen's 
Serjeant;  and  before  the  end  of  it,  on  June  8, 
1713,  was  promoted  to  a  seat  in  the  Queen's 
Bench,  where  his  brother  was  then  second 
j  udge.  He  did  not  long  remain  there,  for,  the 
queen  dying  in  August  1714,  King  Geoi]ge 
on  his  coming  to  England  superseded  him 
on  October  14,  at  the  instigation  of  Lord 
Chancellor    Cowper,    who,    though     he 


534 


POYNTON 


allowed  that  he  had  *  better  abilitys'  thnn 
Ills  brother,  objected  to  him  as  zealously 
instni  mental  in  the  measures  that  ruined 
King  James,  and  as  still  devoted  to  the 
pretender.  He  was,  however,  restored  at 
the  same  time  to  his  rank  as  king's 
seijeant.  (Lord  Raymondy  1318.)  He 
survived  his  dismissal  nearly  five  years,  and 
dying  on  April  4,  1719,  was  boned  under 
a  splendid  monument  at  Lilford  in  North- 
amptonshire^ the  manor  of  which  he  had 
purchased. 

Though  stronffly  opposed  in  politics, 
Burnet  had  evidently  a  high  opinion  of 
him ;  and  Prior  gives  a  graceful  summary 
of  his  legal  character  in  his  epitaph. 

He  married  twice.  His  first  wife  was 
Sarah,  daughter  of  Ambrose  Holbech,  of 
MoUington  in  Warwickshire;  his  second 
was  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Sir  Philip 
Medows,  knight ;  by  both  of  whom  he  had 
a  family.  His  sreat-grandson  Thomas 
Powys  was  created  Lord  Lilford  in  1707, 
and  nis  descendants  still  enjoy  the  title. 
(CoUms^s  Peerage,  viL  579.) 

POTKTOH,  Alexavdjsr  de,  is  named  in 
4  and  10  John  as  being  present  at  West- 
minster when  fines  were  levied  before  him ; 
and  he  acted  in  the  country  also  in  those 
years ;  but  his  name  does  not  again  appear 
judicially.     {Hunter's  Preface,) 

In  I  John  he  had  a  charter  confirming 
a  large  grant  of  property  in  Lincolnshire, 
which  had  been  made  to  him  by  Simon  de 
Bret.  This  grant  included  the  town  of 
Wrengel  in  Hoyland,  for  which  he  ob- 
tained a  market  in  7  John.  {Rot.  Chart, 
60,  156.)  In  14  John  he  was  entrusted 
with  the  sherifialty  of  Lincolnshire,  the 
duties  of  which  he  performed  during  the 
two  foUowing  years.  {Rot,  Pat,  97.)  But 
having  then  jomed  in  the  barons'  war,  he 
was  taken  prisoner  in  Kochester  Castle  in 
December  1215,  and  remained  in  confine- 
ment till  the  following  July.  Ilisproperty 
was  restored  to  him  in  2  Henry  III.  {Rot, 
Clam.  i.  241,  250.  308,  374;  Rot,  Pat,  100.) 

POYWICK,  William  de,  visited  the 
counties  of  Huntingdon^  Buckingham,  and 
Northampton  as  justice  itinerant  in  46  and 
47  Henry  HI.,  1262-3.  He  was  of  the 
clerical  as  well  as  the  legal  profession.  In 
50  Henry  HI.  he  seems  to  have  been 
raised  to  the  bench,  for  from  July  1266 
till  August  in  the  following  year  there  are 
entries  of  no  less  than  eleven  writs  of 
assize  to  be  held  before  him.  {Excerpt,  e 
Rot,  Fin,  ii.  440-459.)  After  the  latter 
date  his  name  does  not  appear. 

PSATT,  John.  The  name  of  Pratt  is 
highly  distinguished  in  legal  annals,  having 
been  borne  both  by  a  lord  chief  justice  and 
by  a  lord  chancellor,  father  and  son.  None 
of  the  biographers  of  the  family  state  who 
the  chief  justice's  father  was:  but  they 
ncord  that  his  grandfather,  Bidiaid  Pratt, 


PRATT 

was  ruined  by  the  civil  wan  and  obliged 
to  sell  his  patrimonial  estate  at  Carcwell 
Priory,  near  CoUumpton,  in  Devonshiie, 
which  had  been  long  in  poeseasion  of  his 
ancestors.  The  parents  of  John  Pratt,  how- 
ever, had  sufficient  means  to  aff(»d  him  a 
liberal  education.  He  was  sent  to  Oxford, 
and  eventually  became  a  fellow  of  Wadham 
College.  He  studied  the  law  at  the  Inner 
Temple  from  November  18>  1675,  till  Fe- 
bruary 12, 1681,  when  he  was  called  to  the 
bar.  *  He  obtained  sufficient  prominence  in 
his  profession  to  be  included  in  the  batch 
of  Serjeants  who  were  honoured  with  the 
coif  in  1700,  and  to  be  employed  in  1711 
to  defend  the  prerogative  of  the  crown  in 
granting  an  English  peerage  to  the  Scotch 
Duke  of  Hamilton,  acfainst  which  the  Lords 
decided  by  a  smiQl  majority.  Sp^ker 
Onslow  calls  him  a  man  of  parts,  spirits, 
learning,  and  eloquence,  and  one  of  the  most 
able  advocates  of  that  time.  (Collm^tPur^ 
age,  v.  264;  Burnet,  vi.  80,  n.)  His  mo- 
cess  must  have  been  very  considerable  to 
have  enabled  him  to  purchase  in  1703  the 
manor  and  seat  of  Wilderness  (fonnerir 
called  Stidulfe*s  Place)  in  the  parish  <tt 
Seale  in  Kent.  In  the  parliament  of  No* 
vember  1710  he  was  returned  forMidhuret, 
and  again  in  February  1714,  after  the  first 
session  of  which  the  queen  died.  In  neither 
parliament  did  he  take  any  prominent  pait 
in  the  debates,  nor  is  there  any  appeannce 
of  his  being  specially  connected  with  either 
of  the  political  parties  in  the  state ;  bat  on 
the  accession  of  George  L,  by  the  recom- 
mendation of  Lord  Cowper  ne  was  ap- 
pointed a  judge  of  the  King*s  Bench,  on 
November  22,  1714,  and  knighted.  In 
Hilary  Term  1718  he  gave  a  deciaed  opinion 
in  favour  of  the  crown  respecting  the  edu- 
cation and  marriage  of  the  royal  family; 
and  on  the  resignation  of  the  S^ls  by  Load 
Cowper  in  the  same  year  he  was  appointed 
one  of  the  lords  commissioners,  nolding 
that  office  from  April  18  to  May  12.  Thre©^ 
days  after  he  was  elevated  to  the  post  cf 
lord  chief  justice  of  the  King*s  Hencn. 

He  presided  over  the  court  for  nearly 
seven  years,  and  ably  supported  its  dignity. 
In  the  only  two  reported  criminal  cases^ 
that  came  before  him,  those  of  Reason  and 
Tranter  for  murder,  and  Christopher  Layer 
for  high  treason,  he  acted  with  equal 
patience  and  fairness ;  and  in  the  exercise 
of  his  civil  jurisdiction  his  rulings  are 
looked  upon  with  respect  and  consideration. 
One  of  them,  which  has  however  been  par- 
tially overruled,  formed  a  subject  for  the 
wits  of  Westminster  Hall.  A  woman  irko 
had  a  settlement  in  a  certain  parish  had 
four  children  by  her  husband,  who  WM  a^ 
vagrant  with  no  settlement  Ijio  dhfaf  jv- 
tice  decided  that  the  wife's  settia  W 
suspended  during  the  l»ube>-^  hii 

that  it  was  leyiyed  on  Us  i  ^ 


PRATT 

the  children  were  then  chftrgeable  on  the 
mother's  parish.  This  judgment,  though 
not  Tegularlj  reported,  is  preserved  and 
quoted  in  the  following  catch : — 

A  woman  having  a  settlemei^t 

Married  a  man  with  none : 
The  question  was,  he  being  dead. 

If  that  she  had  were  gone. 

Qaoth  Sir  John  Pratt,  *  Her  settlement 

Sutpoided  did  remain 
Living  the  husband ;  but  he  dead. 

It  doth  rttive  again.' 

Chorus  of  puisne  judges : 

lairing  the  husband ;  but  he  dead. 
It  &th  revive  again. 

Sir  John  died  at  his  house  in  Ormond 
Street  on  February  14, 1725.  He  married 
twice.  His  first  wife  was  Elizabeth, 
dauffhter  of  the  Rev.  Henry  Gregory,  rector 
of  Middleton  Stoney  in  Oxfordshire.  His 
second  wife  was  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  the 
ReT.  Hugh  Wilson,  canon  of  Bangor.  She 
produced  to  him,  besides  four  daughters, 
four  sons,  the  third  of  whom,  Charles,  is 
the  following  chief  justice  of  the  Common 
Fleas  and  lord  chancellor  (Lord  Haymond, 
1319, 1381.) 

PBATT,  Charles  (Eabl  Camden),  was 
the  third  son  of  the  above  Sir  John  Pratt 
by  his  second  wife  Elizabeth,  daughter  of 
the  Bev.  Hugh  Wilson,  canon  of  Bangor. 
He  was  bom  in  1718,  and  was  educated  at 
Eton.  Among  bis  schoolfellows  was  Wil- 
liam Pitt,  afterwards  Earl  of  Chatham, 
with  whom  he  contracted  a  friendly  inti- 
macy, at  first  personal  and  eventually  poli- 
tical^ which  was  never  interrupted  till  aeath 
closed  the  minister's  career.  From  Eton 
Charles  Pratt  proceeded  in  1731  to  the 
uniyermty  of  Cambridge,  honourably  ob- 
taining his  election  to  King's  College.  In- 
tending to  pursue  his  father's  profession,  he 
had  already,  in  June  1728,  been  entered  at 
the  Middle  Temple ;  and  while  waiting  for 
his  call  and  his  degree  he  devoted  himself 
diHgentiy  to  the  study  of  constitutional 
law.  ae  took  his  degree  of  B.A.  in  1735, 
and  that  of  M.A.  in  1740,  having  been 
called  to  the  bar  in  June  1738,  thirteen 
years  after  his  father's  death. 

As  the  son  of  a  chief  justice  he  might 
fidrly  have  expected  early  encouragement ; 
bat  for  some  years  his  merits,  though  highly 
appreciated  by  his  college  assoaates  and 
his  brother  barristers,  failed  to  attract  the 
dispensers  of  business,  and  his  fee-book 
exhibited  almost  a  total  blank.  On  the 
eye  of  riding  one  of  his  western  circuits  he 
wrote  to  a  friend,  'Alas!  my  horse  is 
lamer  than  ever;  no  sooner  cured  of  one 
shoulder  than  the  other  began  to  halt.  My 
hopes  in  horseflesh  ruin  me,  and  keep  me 
so  poor  that  I  have  scarce  money  enough 
to  Dear  me  out  in  a  summer's  ramble ;  yet 
nunble  I  must^  if  I  starve  for  it'    So  <us- 


PRATT 


535 


heartening  were  his  prospects  that  he  at 
last  determined  to  retire  on  his  fellowship 
at  King's,  and,  entering  the  Church,  to  take 
his  turn  for  one  of  the  college  livings. 
This  resolution  he  communicated  to  his  bar 
friend  Sir  Robert  Henley  (afterwards  I^rd 
Northington),  who  strongly  dissuaded  him 
from  pursuing  it,  and  induced  him  at  least 
to  try  another  circuit  Henley  then  con- 
trived to  get  him  retained  as  junior  to 
himself  in  an  important  case,  and,  knowing 
that  his  talents  only  wanted  an  opportuni^ 
to  be  recognised,  feigned  illness  at  the 
hearing  and  left  his  young  friend  to  defend 
the  cause.  This  he  did  in  so  effective  a 
manner  as  to  secure  him  that  full  share 
of  business  which  relieved  him  from  any 
future  anxiety. 

He  now  had  the  opportunity  of  showing 
his  soundness  as  a  lawyer  and  his  eloquence 
as  an  advocate,  both  on  the  circuit  and  in 
Westminster  Hall,  and  the  liberal  princi- 
ples which  he  enforced  in  those  arenas  and 
at  the  bar  of  the  House  of  Commons  soon 
marked  him  as  a  rising  man.  In  the  trial 
in  1752  of  William  Owen  for  publishing  a 
libel  he  was  engaged  for  the  defence,  and 
boldly  insisted  on  the  Jury's  right  to  judge 
both  the  law  and  the  /act,  which  to  the  end 
of  his  life  he  so  strenuously,  and  at  last 
successfully,  maintained.  Owen's  acquittal 
was  one  of  the  earliest  instances  of  a  jury 
adopting  the  same  doctrine.  He  received 
a  suk  gown  in  1755,  and  was  appointed 
attorney-general  to  the  Prince  of  Wales. 

When  his  schoolfellow  Pitt  came  into 

g>wer,  and  the  Great  Seal  was  given  to  Sir 
obert  Henley,  the  attome^r-general,  on 
June  30,  1757,  Pratt  was  immediately 
selected,  vrith  the  consent  of  Lord  Hard- 
wicke,  to  fill  the  vacant  post,  and  thus  to 
be  placed  over  the  head  of  Charles  Yorke, 
the  solicitor-general.  A  seat  in  parliament 
was  found  for  him  as  member  for  Dovniton 
in  Wiltshire.  Here  he  introduced  a  bill  to 
extend  the  provisions  of  the  Habeas  Corpus 
Act  to  persons  under  impressment,  which, 
though  it  was  almost  unanimously  passed 
in  the  House  of  Commons,  was  thrown  out 
b^r  the  Lords,  being  resisted  by  Lords  Hard- 
wicke  and  Mansfield.  Though  the  judges 
were  ordered  to  prepare  another  bill,  it 
does  not  appear  that  they  did  so,  and  the 
remedy  it  sought  to  provide  was  delayed 
till  the  year  1803.  The  recordership  of 
Bath  was  conferred  upon  him  in  1750.  In 
the  parliament  called  after  the  accession  of 
George  HI.  he  was  elected  by  his  former 
constituents,  but  vrithin  less  than  two 
months  he  yacated  his  seat  for  a  more  pro- 
minent position.  While  attorney-general 
he  confined  his  practice  to  the  Court  of 
Chancery,  except  when  engaged  in  state 
prosecutions.  In  them  he  exercised  the 
utmost  moderation  and  fairness,  not  seek- 
ing a  conviction  fox  the  sake  of  a  triumph. 


536 


PRATT 


but  satisfying  all  men's  minds  of  the  delin- 
quency of  the  accused  by  the  force  of  the 
testimony  adduced  against  them. 

The  death  of  Sir  John  WiUes  in  De- 
cember  17C1  created  a  vacancy  in  the  office 
of  chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  which 
was  pressed  upon  Mr.  Pratt,  though  his 
patron  Mr.  Pitt  was  no  longer  in  power. 
With  some  reluctance  he  was  obliged  to 
accept  it,  and  was  accordingly  knighted, 
and  took  his  seat  on  the  first  day  of  Hilary 
Term  1762.  In  the  following  year  com- 
menced the  important  proceedings  con- 
nected with  the  'North  Briton/  and  its 
author,  John  Wilkes.  The  question  of  the 
legality  of  general  warrants,  and  the  actions 
for  damages  brought  by  the  sufferers  under 
them  a^^ainst  those  who  executed  them, 
were  tried  in  the  Common  Pleas,  where 
the  known  principles  of  .the  chief  justice 
led  the  complainmg  parties  to  expect  at 
least  an  unprejudiced  hearing.  His  inde- 
pendent conduct  throughout  these  inves- 
tigations, his  discharge  of  Wilkes  from 
imprisonment,  his  boldness  in  pronouncing 
the  general  warrant  of  the  secretary  of  state 
to  be  wholly  illegal,  with  other  similar 
proceedings  in  reference  to  the  *  Monitor  or 
British  Freeholder,'  raised  him  to  the  very 
height  of  popular  favour.  Numerous  ad- 
dresses of  thanks  were  presented  to  him, 
with  the  freedom  of  the  corporations  of 
Dublin,  Norwich,  Exeter,  and  Bath  in  gold 
boxes.  The  city  of  I^ondon  added  to  a 
similar  honour  the  i-equest  that  he  would 
sit  for  his  picture  to  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds. 
This  portrait  was  hung  up  in  the  Guildhall, 
with  a  Latin  inscription,  written  by  Dr. 
Johnson,  designating  him  tlie  '  zealous  sup- 
porter of  English  liberty  by  law.'  Though 
these  distinctions  would  seem  to  be  a  re- 
flection on  the  general  course  of  justice,  as 
implying  that  in  no  other  court  would  the 
same  opinions  have  been  expressed,  it  should 
bf*  remembered,  for  the  honour  of  the  law, 
that  the  Court  of  King's  Bench  upon  an 
appeal  in  one  of  the  cases  confirmed  the 
ruling  of  Sir  Charles  Pratt. 

A  ludicrous  story  is  told  of  his  being  on 
a  visit  to  Lord  Dacre  in  Essex,  and  accom- 
jianying  a  j^entleman,  notorious  for  his  ab- 
sence of  mind,  in  a  walk,  during  which  they 
came  to  the  parish  stocks.  Having  a  wish 
to  know  the  nature  of  the  punishment,  the 
chief  justice  begged  his  companion  to  open 
them,  so  that  he  might  try.  This  being 
done,  his  friend  sauntered  on  and  totally 
forgot  him.  The  imprisoned  chief  tried  in 
vain  to  release  himself,  and  on  asking  a 
peasant  who  was  passing  by  to  let  him  out, 
WAS  laughed  at  and  told  he  *  wasn't  set 
there  for  nothing.'  He  was  soon  set  at 
liberty  by  the  servants  of  his  host,  and 
after warcis  on  the  trial  of  an  action  for 
false  imprisonment  against  a  magistrate  by 
some  feUow  whom  he  had  set  in  the  stocks, 


PBATT 

on  the  counsel  for  the  defendant  xidicnliiig 
the  charge  and  declaring  it  was  no  pmush- 
ment  at  all,  his  lordship  leaned  over  and 
whispered,  '  Brother,  were  you  ever  in  tiis 
stocks  ? '  The  counsel  indignantly  replied, 
'Never,  my  lord.'  *Then  I  have  teen,' 
said  the  chief  justice,  *  and  I  can  awire 
you  it  is  not  the  trifle  you  represent  it' 
(Law  and  Lavn/erSj  i.  260.) 

When  Lord  Kockin^ham's  administra- 
tion was  formed  in  1735,  one  of  the  first  of 
its  acts  was  to  raise  the  chief  justice  to  the 
peerage,  and  on  July  17  he  was  created 
Lord  Camden.  He  commenced  his  career 
in  the  House  of  Lords  by  exposing  the  in- 
justice of  taxing  the  unrepresenteid  Ame- 
rican colonies  and  by  strenuously  supporting 
the  repeal  of  the  Stamp  Act  The  EuA  d 
Chatham  the  next  year  resumed  power,  and 
gratified  himself  and  the  public  by  giiing 
on  July  30, 1766,  the  Great  Seal  to  his  old 
friend  Lord  Camden,  with  the  title  of  lord 
chancellor^  who  received  at  the  same  time 
the  reversion  of  a  tellership  of  the  Exche- 
quer for  his  son,  with  the  usual  pension  for 
himself  upon  his  retirement  from  the  chan- 
cellorship. He  then  resided  in  Great  0^ 
mond  Street.  Ere  long  his  position  in  the 
cabinet  was  anything  but  satisDactoiy  to 
him,  and  after  the  secession  of  the  Earl  of 
Chatham  he  so  strongly  disapproved  of 
many  of  its  measures,  especially  in  regard  to 
the  American  import  duties  and  the  Mid- 
dlesex election,  that,  publicly  denouncing 
them  as  illegal  and  arbitraiy,  he  was  re- 
moved from  his  office  on  January  17,  1770. 
He  was  justly  blamed  for  continuing  so 
long  in  a  cabinet  whose  counsels  were  op- 
posed to  the  sentiments  he  entertained 

His  bearing  in  the  two  courts  of  Com- 
mon Pleas  and  Chancery  supported  the 
character  he  had  acquired.  To  his  pro- 
found legal  knowledge  and  clearness  of 
reasoning  were  added  an  attractive  benig- 
nity and  a  graceful  eloquence,  which, 
according  to  IVL*.  Butler,  was  ^  of  colloquial 
kind — extremely  simple — difl'use  but  not 
desultorv.  He  introduced  legal  idiom? 
frequently,  and  always  with  a  pleasing  and 
great  eflect  Sometimes,  however,  he  rose 
to  the  sublime  strains  of  eloquence;  but 
the  sublimity  was  altogether  in  the  senti- 
ment ;  the  diction  retained  its  simplicity, 
this  increased  the  effect'  Many  important 
questions  were  ventilated  before  nim  in 
both  courts  and  in  parliament,  and  though 
some  of  his  decisions  excited  considerable 
controversy,  none  of  them  were  o?ep- 
tumed. 

During  the  next  eleven  years  he  stood  in 
the  foremost  rank  of  opposition  to  the 
ministiT  of  Lord  North,  uniting  with  tiM 
Earl  of  Chatham  in  the  iiiismni—i  af 
the  American  war,  and  as  wA  la  H 
question  as  in  all  others 
Alansfield  with 


PRATT 

findignified  acrimony.  He  evidently  felt  a 
<deep  personal  animosity  against  his  learned 
opponent,  who  undouhtedly  quailed  under 
ue  severe  eloauence  of  his  antagonist.  In 
March  1782  Lord  North  was  obliged  to 
retize,  and  under  the  next  two  short  admi- 
nistrations of  Lord  Rockingham  and  Lord 
Shelbume,  Lord  Camden  tilled  the  post  of 
president  of  the  counciL  During  the  Co- 
alition Ministry,  and  the  first  year  after  Mr. 
IHtt's  accession  to  power,  he  remained  out 
of  office,  but  resumed  it  in  December  1784. 
In  May  1786  he  received  the  additional 
titles  of  Viscount  Bayham  and  Earl 
Camden. 

He  continued  to  enjoy  his  office  for  the 
ten  remaining  years  of  his  life,  actively 
aupportinff  the  measures  of  his  leader, 
witoout  deserting  the  principles  on  which 
he  had  founded  ms  fame.  Though  a  zeal- 
ous Pittite,  he  still  continued  essentially  a 
whi^^ — that  party  becoming  every  day  less 
distiDct  from  the  tories,  in  consequence  ol' 
its  more  moderate  members  not  concurring 
in  the  factious  extremes  to  which  the  spirit 
of  party  led  the  others.  His  last  appear- 
ance in  the  House  of  Lords  was  as  the 
atzenuous  assertor  of  the  right  of  juries  to 
decide  on  all  questions  of  libel,  a  principle 
which  he  had  always  advocated,  and  which 
he  lived  to  see  triumphant 

From  the  commencement  to  the  termi- 
nation of  his  public  life  he  was  a  universal 
favourite.  His  independence  of  character 
could  not  fail  to  secure  the  respect  of  his 
political  antagonists,  and  his  amiable  dis- 
position to  engage  the  affection  of  all.  Of 
social  habits,  yet  of  exemplary  life,  he  re- 
tained the  friendship  of  his  youthful  com- 
panions, and  with  true  wisdom  never  fEiiled 
to  provide  a  succe&don  of  intimates  to 
supply  the  place  of  those  who  wei*e  de- 
parted. His  relaxation,  like  that  of  Lord 
Keeper  Guilford,  was  a  devotion  to  music 
and  the  drama ;  and  he  did  not  disdain  to 
vary  his  graver  studies  with  the  light  lite- 
iatiii«  of  the  day.  In  his  early  years  he 
was  the  author  of  a  '  Treatise  of  the  Process 
of  Latitat  in  Wales,'  published  anony- 
moualy,  but  afterwards  acknowledged. 

He  died  on  April  18,  1794,  at  the  age  of 
^^ty,  and  was  ouried  in  Scale  Church  in 


PBE8T0N 


537 


son  succeeded  to  the  earldom,  and,  having 
held  with  distinguished  honour  several  re- 
sponsible employments,  was  created  a  mar- 
qois  on  August  15,  1812.  with  the  second 
title  of  Eail  of  Brecknock  To  relieve  the 
pecuniary  pressure  of  the  country,  he  with 
patdotic  and  magnanimous  self-denial  gave 
«p  to  the  state  the  large  annual  income 
derived  from  his  office  of  teller  of  the 
Exchequer.  He  was  elected  a  knight  of 
the  Garter^  and  his  son,  the  late  marquis. 


was  decorated  worthily  with  the  same 
order.  {CotUnis  Peerage,  v.  266 ;  Lives  by 
WeUby  and  Lord  Campbell:  Harris's  Life 
of  Lord  Hardwicke,) 

PSE8T0H,  Gilbert  de,  was  the  son  of 
Walter  de  Preston,  who  was  in  the  service 
of  Kine  John,  and  on  whose  death  in  1220 
he  paid  100  shillings  for  his  relief  on  hav- 
ing his  father's  lands  in  Northamptonshire. 
(Excerpt,  e  Rot,  Fin.  i.  204.) 

His  name  is  first  mentioned  at  the  bottom 
of  the  list  of  the  four  justices  itinerant  who 
were  assigned  to  take  the  Southern  Circuit 
in  24  Henry  IH.,  1240.  He  was  nroba- 
blj  not  then  one  of  the  justiciers  at  West- 
minster, but  was  added  to  the  commission 
in  the  same  manner  Serjeants  are  at  the 
present  day.  That  he  was  raised  to  the 
bench  before  the  Purification  (February  2), 
26  Henry  III.,  there  is  no  doubt,  as  fines 
were  levied  before  him  from  that  time,  and 
in  £aster  of  the  same  year  his  name  appears 
on  the  pleas  of  the  bench.  (Dugaale's 
Orig,  43.)  Till  the  end  of  this  long  reign 
no  year  occurs  in  which  payments  are  not 
made  for  writs  of  assize  to  oe  taken  before 
him. 

Of  his  precise  position  on  the  bench  these 
entries  afford  no  certain  evidence,  the 
writs  being  principally  addressed  to  him,  as 
they  were  to  other  judges,  alone.  That  he 
was  eventually,  however,  raised  to  the 
highest  place,  *  capitalis  justiciarius,'  of  the 
Court  or  Common  Pleas,  there  can  be  no 
doubt,  and  as  the  transition  from  the  old  to 
the  new  forms  occurred  in  this  reign,  it 
will  be  interesting  to  endeavour  to  trace 
the  successive  steps  of  his  judicial  career. 

In  1242  he  was  at  the  bottom  of  the 
iusticiarii  de  banco.  From  this  time, 
ludginp  from  the  lists  of  justices  itinerant, 
ne  gradually  advanced  to  a  higher  station, 
until  in  1252  he  stood  at  the  head  of  one 
of  the  commissions,  and  retained  the  same 
position,  with  one  or  two  slight  exceptions, 
till  1257.  It  is  not,  however,  to  be  pre- 
sumed from  this  circumstance  that  he  was 
then  at  the  head  of  either  of  the  courts, 
but  simply  that  in  the  division  of  the  cir- 
cuits he  was  the  senior  in  those  he  was 
appointed  to  take.  Accordingly  it  appears 
that  on  October  3, 1258,  he  was  the  second 
of  three,  Roger  de  Thurkelby  being  the 
first,  who  were  assigned  to  hold  the  King's 
Bench  at  Westminster  until  the  king 
should  arrange  more  fidly.  {CaL  Rot.  Pat. 
29.)  In  I2S  there  are  pleas  before  him 
and  John  de  Wyvill  at  Westminster,  and 
in  1267  pleas  '  de  banco '  before  him  and 
John  de  la  Lynde,  which  would  seem  to 
imply  that  he  was  no  longer  in  the  King's 
Bench,  but  that  he  acted  in  the  Common 
Pleas.  In  the  following  year  also  he  waa 
called  'justiciarius  de  banco'  {Madox^  L 
236),  and  was  at  the  head  of  the  justices 
itinerant  in  various  counties.    His  salary 


538 


PRESTON 


in  1255  was  forty  marks  per  annum,  but  in 
12C9  be  bad  a  grant  of  one  hundred  marks 
annually  for  bis  support  *in  oiiicio  justi- 
ciaria)/  Altbougb  tbe  term  ^  capitaus '  is 
not  used,  tbe  amount  of  this  stipend  sbows 
tbat  be  was  tben  cbief  justice,  and  it  maj 
be  concluded  tbat  tbis  was  tbe  date  of  bis 
advance  to  tbat  rank. 

Tbe  actual  title  of  cbief  justice  does  not 
seem  to  bave  been  applied  to  bim  till  tbe 
following  reign,  wben,  on  bis  re-appoint- 
ment by  Edwaid  I.,  be  was  so  called  m  tbe 
liberate  tbat  grants  bim  livery  of  bis  robes, 
and  Dugdale  remarks  tbat  be  is  tbe  first 
wbom  be  bas  observed  to  bave  tbe  title  of 
capitalis  justiciarius  of  tbe  Court  of  Com- 
mon Pleas.  He  continued  to  preside  tbere 
till  bis  deatb,  wbicb  occurred  in  1274. 
(Dugdale  8  Orig,  39,  43 ;  Co/.  Inquis,  p.  m. 
i.  52.) 

PBE8T0H,  HoBERT  DB,  is  erroneously 
introduced  by  Dugdale  as  receiving  tbe  ap- 
pointment of  cbief  justice  of  tbe  Court  of 
Common  Pleas  on  October  5,  1377, 1  Ri- 
chard II.,  but  be  never  held  tbat  office  in 
England. 

He  became  a  judge  of  tbe  Irish  Court  of 
Common  Pleas  on  October  17, 1342, 16  Ed- 
ward III. ;  but  it  would  seem  that  be  was 
afterwards  removed  from  tbe  bench  and 
returned  to  his  practice  at  the  bar,  since 
there  are  records  to  show  tbat  in  1357  be 
acted  as  tbe  king^s  seijeant-at-law  in  that 
country,  and  accompanied  the  lord  justice 
in  Leinster  and  Munster  to  plead  and  de- 
fend tbe  pleas  of  tbe  crown.  On  October 
14,  1358,  however,  be  was  made  chief 
justice  of  tbe  Common  Pleas  in  Ireland, 
and  presided  in  that  court  during  tbe  re- 
mainder of  Edward's  reign,  a  period  of 
nearly  nineteen  years. 

Tbe  patent  quoted  by  Dugdale  is  bis  re- 
appointment, on  tbe  accession  of  Hichard 
II.,  to  tbe  same  seat,  from  which  be  was 
allowed  to  retire  in  the  following  April.  In 
tbe  eleventh  year  of  tbat  reign  bis  services 
were  affain  required,  and  be  was  constituted 
chancellor  of  Ireland,  in  which  office  he 
remained  till  October  26, 1389.  Two  years 
afterwards  be  received  a  patent  as  keeper 
of  tbe  Great  Seal  in  Ireland,  but  was 
eventually  relieved  on  May  29,  1393. 
(Smith's  Law  Officers  of  Ireland,!,  114,123, 
132 ;  N.  Fccdera,  iii.  833 ;  Cal  Rot,  Pat 
196,  210,  222,  226.) 

PBESTOH,  John,  of  a  very  ancient  family 
settled  at  Preston-Ilichard  and  Preston- 
Patrick  in  Westmoreland,  was  tbe  second 
son  of  Sir  John  Preston,  who  represented 
tbe  county  in  36,  39,  and  46  Edward  III. 

He  was  employed  in  18  Richard  II., 
1394,  in  tbe  prosecution  of  one  David  Panell, 
adjudged  to  death  for  the  murder  of  nine 
men  and  one  woman  j  for  his  cost  and 
labour  in  which  the  king  gave  him  21,  6«. 
Sd.    (Devon's  Isme  JRM,  261.)    He  was 


PRICE 

made  recorder  of  London  in  7  Henry  I\'., 
1406,  and   was  present  in   court  in  that 
character,  declaring  tbe  custom  of  the  dtj^ 
in  tbe  thirteenth  year  of  that  reign.    (T. 
B,  16.)    From  tbis  it  may  be  inferred  uiat 
bis  first  practice  was  confined  to  crimimQ 
cases  and  the  city  courts.    He  was  called 
to  the  degree  of  serjeant-at-law  in  1411, 
and  four  years  afterwards,    on   June  16,. 
1415,  3  Henry  V.,  was  raised  to  the  bench 
of  the  Common  Pleas,  up  to  which  time 
be  continued  to  bold  the  recordership.   He 
remained  in  that  court  throughout  the 
reim  of  Henry  V.,  and  up  to  Hilaiy  Term, 
6  Henry  VL,  when,  on  Januair  28, 1428, 
being  broken  down  with  age,  he  was  ex- 
onerated from  his  office  and  permitted  to 
retire.    Tbe  date  of  his  death  is  not  re- 
corded, but  he  left  a  son,  Richard,  whose 
descendants  continued   to  enjoy  the  pro- 
perty, and  became  at  last  possessed  ot  the 
manor  of  Fumess  in  Lancashire,  by  which 
title  one  of  them,  named  John,  was  created 
a  baronet  in  1644 — a  dignity  which  became 
extinct  in  1710. 

PBICE,  RoBEBT,  a  descendant  from  the 
ancient  stock  of  one  of  the  noble  tribes  of 
Wales,  was  the  son  of  Thomas  Price,  of 
Geeler  in  Denbighshire,  and  of  Margaret, 
daughter  of  Thomas  Wynne,  of  Bwlch-y- 
Beyde  in  tbe  same  county.  He  was  bran 
in  the  parish  of  Cerrig-y-Druidion  on  Ja- 
nuary 14,  1653,  and,  a^er  receiving  hi» 
education  at  Wrexham,  and  St.  John's 
College,  Cambridge,  he  entered  Lmcob^s 
Inn  in  1673.  In  1677  he  took  the  grand 
tour,  and  spent  two  years  in  visiting  all 

Cts  of  France  and  Italy.  Among  the 
ks  wbicb  he  took  with  him  was  Coke 
upon  Lyttelton,  which  the  scrutinising 
officers  at  Rome  thought  was  an  heretic^ 
English  Bible,  and  seizing  it  carried  off  its 
possessor  to  the  pope.  Mi.  Ptice  soon  sa- 
tisiie4  bis  holiness  that  the  laws  it  illus- 
trated, though  not  divine,  were  orthodox; 
and  presenting  it  to  the  holy  father,  it  is  to 
be  hoped  tbat  it  still  graces  the  Vatican 
Library.  On  bis  return  he  was  called  to 
the  bar  in  July  1679. 

In  Septembier  he  married  Lucy,  daughter 
of  Robert  Rodd,  Esj[.,  of  Foxley  in  Here- 
fordshire. After  being  the  mother  of  three 
children,  it  seems  that  her  misconduct  di"^ 
solved  tbe  connection.  Under  the  date  of 
November  21,  1600,  Luttrell  (ii.  2:31)  re- 
cords tbat  *  Robert  Price,  £sa.,  got  loCXV. 
damages  in  an  action  against  Mr.  Neal  for 
crim,  con.'  He  did  not  obtain  a  divorce, 
but,  though  she  survived  her  husband,  the 
^  Life '  tbat  was  published  of  him  imme- 
diately after  bis  death  omits  all  subeequttt 
allusion  to  her;  and  the  judge*a will, winch 
speaks  with  affection  of,  and  piovidH  iM^ 
liberality  for,  all  hiaothMBr  codb*^  ^tij 
coldly  mentions  her  in  a  1^^  w 

mourning,'  and  in  a  cbuge  ^ 


PJRICE 

of  an  annuity  of  120^  *  pursuant  to  a  for- 
mer agreement  and  settlement  between  us/ 

He  was  made  attorney-general  of  South 
Wales  in  1682^  and  recorder  of  Radnor  in 
the  following  year.  He  was  complimented 
also  by  beinff  elected  alderman  of  Here- 
ford, about  nve  miles  from  his  seat  at 
Foxley.  On  the  death  of  Charles  II.  King 
James  appointed  him  steward  to  the  queen 
dowager,  and  kind's  counsel  at  Ludlow. 
The  corporation  of  Gloucester  also  elected 
him  town  clerk  in  1687,  in  the  place  of  Mr. 
(afterwards  Justice)  John  Powell ;  but  upon 
the  latter  appealing  to  the  Court  of  King's 
Bench,  Mr.  Price  consented  to  his  restora- 
tion. (2  Shower^  490.)  In  James's  short 
and  only  parliament  he  represented  Weobl;^. 

King  William  removed  him  from  his 
Welsh  attorney-generalship.  Although  of 
coarse  he  was  not  returned  to  the  Con- 
Tcntion  Parliament,  he  was  elected  by  his 
former  constituents  to  that  summoned  in  the 
next  year,  and  also  for  the  two  following  in 
1695  and  1698,  and  that  which  met  in  De- 
cember 1701.  In  1G95  he  distinguished 
himself  by  strenuously  opposing  tne  ex- 
orbitant grant  made  by  the  king  to  the 
Earl  of  Portland  of  extensive  lands  and 
lordships  in  Wales,  and  enforced  his  ob- 
jections with  such  power  and  effect  that 
upon  an  address  of  tne  house  the  king  was 
obliged  to  annul  it.  In  the  next  year  he 
took  an  active  part  in  the  proceedings  in 
Sir  John  Fenwick's  case.  The  only  state 
tilal  in  which  he  was  engaged  as  counsel 
was  that  of  Lord  Mohun  in  the  House  of 
Lords  for  the  dastardly  murder  of  William 
Moontford  the  actor,  which  resulted  in  the 
acquittal  of  his  client ;  and  the  only  pro- 
modon  he  received  was  that  of  a  Welsh 
judgeship  in  1700,  when  the  tones  had  re- 
gained power,  which  appointment  he  held 
to  tbe  end  of  the  reign.  {Pari.  Hist.  v.  979, 
1016, 1041,  1046 ;  iState  Trials,  xii.  1020.) 

On  the  accession  of  Queen  Anne,  IVIr. 
Price  was  constituted  a  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer on  June  14,  1702.  In  this  court 
he  remained  the  whole  of  that  reign  and 
nearly  to  the  end  of  the  next,  when  he  ob- 
tained a  removal  into  the  Common  Pleas 
on  October  10,  1726.  The  excellent  man- 
ner in  which  he  performed  his  judicial 
duties  may  be  estimated  by  the  following 
lines  in  some  eulogistic  verses  written  after 
his  death : — 

When  Price  reviv'd  the  crowding  suitors*  sight, 

The  Han  of  Rufns  was  the  seat  of  Right. 

In  all  her  arts  was  Fallacy  beguiVd, 

The  orphan  ffladden'd,  and  the  i^idow  smil'd  ; 

Sore  to  behold,  in  ev'ry  just  decree, 

The  friend,  the  sire,  the  consort,  shine  in  thee. 

Mild  E<|aity  resumed  her  gentle  reign, 

And  Bnbeiy  was  prodigal  in  vain. 

In  1718  he  and  Mr.  Justice  Eyre  were 
the  only  two  judges  who  gave  an  opinion 
adverse  to  the  king's  claim  of  prerogative 


PRIDEAUX 


539 


with  regard  to  the  education  of  the  royal 
grandchildren,  and  supported  their  view  by 
an  able  argument  delivered  to  his  majesty. 
George  II.  was  of  course  impressed  in  his  • 
favour,  and  on  coming  to  the  crown  con- 
tinued him  in  his  place,  which  he  tilled 
during  the  remainder  of  his  life.  After  a . 
long  judicial  career  of  no  less  than  thirty- 
one  years,  he  died  on  February  2, 1733,  and 
was  buried  in  the  church  of  Yazor  in  the 
county  of  Hereford. 

The  *  Life  *  of  Mr.  Justice  Price,  written . 
by  its  publisher,  the  notorious  Edmund 
Curll,  within  a  year  of  his  death,  is  the 
foundation  of  all  the  biographical  notices 
that  have  since  appeared.  As  it  was  com- 
piled ^  by  the  appointment  of  the  family,' 
it  cannot  fail  to  oe  regarded  as  little  more 
than  an  extended  epitaph,  and  the  eulogies 
of  which  it  is  fiul  would  naturally  be 
received  with  considerable  qualifications. . 
Yet,  making  due  allowance  for  its  party 
exaggerations^  and  for  some  errors  in  facts  - 
and  dates,  which  its  copyists  have  carelessly 
repeated,  from  all  that  can  be  collected  of 
his  career,  the  character  that  it  gives  him  is 
substantially  true.  Though  a  steady  tory 
in  politics,  no  whig  pen  writes  a  word  in 
his  dispraise ;  his  courage  in  opposing  the 
royal  wishes  receives  no  check,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  known  honesty  of  his  prin- 
ciples )  his  desire  and  pains  to  get  at  the 
truth  of  matters  on  which  his  opinion  was 
required  is  evidenced  by  letters  recently 
published  by  the  Camden  Society ;  and  his 
charity  is  manifested  bv  his  erection  and 
endowment  of  an  almshouse  for  six  poor 
people  in  the  parish  of  his  birth,  and  by  the 
care  that  he  took  in  his  wiU  nut  only  for  the 
perpetuation  of  that  institution,  but  for  the 
continuance  also  of  his  other  benefactions. 

As  he  never  received  the  knighthood  by  ' 
which  the  j  udges  were  usually  distinguished, 
it  may  be  presumed  that  he  declined  the 
honour.  Tne  grandson  of  his  son,  Uyedale, 
who  succeeded  to  his  estates,  received  a 
baronetcy  in  1828,  which  became  extinct  in. 
1867. 

PBIDEAUX,  Edmond,  who  belonged  to- 
an  ancient  and  honourable  family,  tracing 
its  lineage  as  far  back  as  the  Norman  Con- 
quest, when  it  was  seated  in  Prideaux- 
castle  in  Cornwall,  was  the  second  son  of 
an  eminent  lawyer  of  the  same  name,  by 
Catherine,  daughter  of  Piers  Edgecombe, 
Esq.,  of  Mount  Edgecombe  in  Devonshire. 
The  father  in  1622  received  from  King 
James  the  dignity  of  a  baronet,  which  sur- 
vives at  the  present  day.  (  WoUon^s  Baro- 
net, i.  517.) 

Edmona  was  bom  at  his  father's  residence 
at  Netherton,  near  Honiton,  and  seems  to  > 
have  received  his  education  in  the  imiversity 
of  Cambridge,  and  to  have  taken  his  master  a 
degree  there,   since,  some  years  after,  in. 
July  1625,  he  was  admitted  ad  eundem  at 


540 


PRIDEAUX 


Oxford.  His  legal  course  is  traced  with 
greater  certainty,  haTing  been  called  to  the 
bar  at  the  Inner  Temple  on  November  23, 
1623.  His  name  does  not  appear  in  the 
Heports  of  Charles's  reign,  his  practice  being 
chiefly  in  Chancery;  but  at  one  time  he  was 
recorder  of  Exeter.  (Fa$U  Oxon,  i.  424, 
ii.  66.)  The  electors  of  Lyme-Regis  in  Dor- 
setshire returned  him  in  1640  as  a  member 
of  the  Long  Parliament,  where  he  took  the 
popular  side,  and  subscribed  in  June  1642 
loo/,  towards  itsdefence.  {Katesand  Qtieries, 
1st  S.  xii.  350.)  He  was  an  active  partisan, 
and  when  the  two  houses  adopted  a  Great 
Seal  of  their  own  he  was  one  of  the  four 
members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  who 
with  two  peers  were  nominated  commis- 
sioners on  November  10,  1643.  He  filled 
the  post  for  nearly  three  years,  the  parlia- 
ment then  changing  the  custody  of  the  Seal 
and  placing  it  in  the  hands  of  the  speakers 
of  tne  two  houses  on  October  30,  1646. 
While  holding  this  office  he  still  kept  his 
place  in  the  House  of  Commons,  and  was 
named  as  one  of  the  commissioners  who 
assembled  at  Uxbridffe  in  January  1645,  to 
negotiate  a  treaty  oi  accommodation  with 
the  king.  On  his  removal  from  the  Great 
Seal  the  Commons  ordered  that,  as  a  mark 
of  honour  and  of  their  acknowledgment  of 
his  services,  he  should  practise  within  the 
bar,  and  have  precedence  next  after  the  soli- 
citor-general. (Journals;  miitelocke,  02, 
125,  226.) 

Prideaux  then  resumed  his  professional 
practice  till  1648,  when  the  parliament,  on 
tilling  up  the  vacancies  on  the  bench,  named 
him  solicitor-general  on  October  12.  When 
he  saw,  however,  what  proceedings  were 
adoj^ted  for  taking  the  king*s  life,  it  is  evi- 
dent that  he  threw  up  the  office;  for  on 
Charles's  trial  in  the  succeeding  .January 
Willitmi  Steele  acted  as  attorney,  and  John 
Cook  as  solicitor-general  (Ibid.  342,  357, 
368) ;  and  also  on  the  subsequent  trials  of 
the  Duke  of  Hamilton  and  others.  (State 
Trials,  iv.  1167,  1209.)  That  he  lost  no 
favour  with  the  parliament  by  his  conduct 
in  avoiding  these  trials  is  apparent  from  his 
receiving  the  appointment  of  attorney-gene- 
ral on  the  0th  of  the  following  April,  and 
from  his  retaining  it  during  the  remainder 
of  his  life,  through  all  the  different  changes 
that  took  place  in  the  government.  Dunng 
the  whole  of  this  time  he  continued  member 
for  Lyme  Regis.  ( Whitelock^y  394 ;  Pari, 
Hist,  iii.  1429,  1480,  1632.)  The  dignity 
of  baronet  was  conferred  upon  him  on  May 
31,  1658,  '  in  respect  of  his  voluntary  offer 
for  the  maintejrmng  of  30  foot-souldiers  in 
his  highnes  army  in  Ireland.'  (5  Report  Pub, 
JRcc,  App,  273.)  He  survived  Cromwell 
about  a  year,  dying  on  August  19,  1659. 

Whitelocke  aescribes  him  as  'a  generous 
person,  and  faithful  to  the  parhament's 
interest.    A  good  Chancery  lawyer.'    This 


PROBYN 

is  not  great  praise;  and  it  eeems  that  he 
was  equally  faithful  to  hia  own  interest 
Besides  his  practice  at  the  bar,  which  was 
worth  about  5000/.  a  year,  he  was  post- 
master for  all  the  inland  letters,  an  office 
which,  at  sixpence  a  letter,  is  said  to  have 
netted  him  15,000/.  a  year.  (Park  Hist,  m. 
1606.)  No  wonder,  therefore,  that  he 
made  a  large  fortime,  and  that  he  was 
enabled  to  purchase  Ford  Abbey  in  the 
parish  of  Thomcombe,  Devon,  and  to  btiild 
on  its  rtdns  a  noble  mansion. 

He  married  two  wives :  the  first  was  a 
daughter  of  —  Collins,  Esq.,  of  Otterj 
St.  Alary  in  Devonshire ;  the  second  was 
the  daughter  of — Every,  Esq.,  of  Cottey 
in  the  county  of  Somerset,  by  whom  he 
left  an  only  son,  also  named  Edmond. 
(  WoUon's  Baronet,  i.  513 ;  Hasied,  xiL  27.) 

PBISOT,  John,  was  a  native  either  of 
Kent  or  Hertfordshire :  in  the  former 
countv  his  familv  possessed  the  manor  of 
Westberies,  in  tLe  parish  of  Rucking,  in 
the  reign  of  Henry  IV.,  where  his  descen- 
dants continued  till  they  sold  it  in  that  of 
Henry  VIII.  (Hdsf^y  viii.  355) ;  and  in 
the  latter  the  judge  held  the  manor  of 
Wallington,  in  which  his  widow,  Margaret, 
resided  after  his  death.  (ChauHctfj  48.) 
Though  we  have  no  account  of  the  court  oif 
his  practice  previous  to  his  beinsr  called  to 
the  depee  of  the  coif  in  21  llenry  VL, 
1443,  it  is  evident  that  he  must  have 
already  acquired  some  reputation  as  a 
lawyer,  as  six  years  afterwards,  on  June 
16,  1449,  he  was  advanced  to  the  office  of 
chief  j ustice  of  the  Common  Pleas.  ' Certen 
ordinances  made  in  the  tyme  of  Sir  John 
P'sott,  chef  justice  of  the  Commen  Place, 
touchyng  the  officers  there,'  are  to  be  found 
in  p.  8  of  the  first  volume  of  the  'Recoverv 
Indexes'  now  in  the  Record  Office,  tfe 
continued  to  preside  in  the  court  till  Ed- 
ward IV.  had  seized  the  throne,  when  he 
was  not  re-appointed.  As  we  do  not  find 
that  he  took  any  decided  part  in  the  con- 
test between  the  royal  rivals,  it  is  not  im- 
probable that,  if  his  death  did  not  occur 
about  that  time,  he  took  the  opportunitr 
of  the  commencement  of  a  new  reign 
voluntarily  to  retire  to  private  life. 

In  one  of  the  letters  of  the  *Paston 
Correspondence'  (i.  29)  he  is  represented  as 
a  partial  judge,  but  this  is  merely  the  re- 
presentation of  a  disappointed  partisan  in  a 
particular  case.  There  is  no  doubt  that  he 
was  a  considerable  and  expert  lawyer;  and 
he  is  said  to  have  given  'great  furtherance' 
to  Judge  Lyttelton  in  the  compositi(Hi  of 
his  *  Tenures.*     (Dwpdale's  Orig.  68.) 

PBOBTK,  Edmx]^d,  whose  ancestoFBmn 
long  known  and  esteemed  among  the  gitil 
of  the  county  of  Glouoeater,  wm  ibs  Mi  « 
William  Probyn,  of  Newland  r  ^ 

of  Dean,  and  of  EliEAbeth  ^ 

Edmund  Bond,  of  Walfiord  in  ^ 


PUCKERING 

He  was  bom  about  1678,  and  went  throof^h 
the  legal  curriculum  at  the  Middle  Templei 
where  he  took  the  degree  of  barrister  in 
1702. 

After  spending  nearly  twenty  years  in 
the  usual  forensic  drudgerjr  of  the  profes- 
sion^  he  occupied  the  position  of  a  Welsh 
judge  in  1721.  Called  Serjeant  in  1724,  he 
was  employed  in  January  of  the  next  year 
by  the  Earl  of  Macclesfield  to  conduct  the 
defence  against  his  impeachment;  but,  not- 
withstanding  the  pains  he  took  and  the 
lucid  argument  he  delivered,  he  failed  to 
satisfy  the  peers  of  his  client's  innocence. 
(8taU  TruJs,  xvi.  1080.)  The  abilit;^  he 
showed  on  that  occasion  no  doubt  pomted 
him  out  for  promotioui  and  accordingly,  on 
November  4,  1726,  he  was  constituted  a 
judge  of  the  King's  Bench,  and  knighted. 
He  displayed  so  much  learning  and  judg- 
ment in  the  exercise  of  this  oface  for  four- 
teen years  that  he  was  selected  on  Novem- 
ber ^,  1740,  to  succeed  Sir  John  Comyns 
as  lord  chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  a 
dignity  which  he  held  less  than  eighteen 
mmiths,  his  death  occurring  on  May  17, 
1742.  He  was  buried  in  Newland  Church. 
He  married  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Mr. 
Justice  Blencowe,  but  left  no  issue. 

PUCXXBIHG,  John,  was  the  second  son 
of  William  Puckering,  of  Flamborough  in 
the  county  of  York.  He  was  bom  about 
1544,  and,  entering  at  Lincoln's  Inn,  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  on  January  15, 1567.  He 
became  one  of  the  governors  in  1575,  and 
was  elected  reader  in  1577,  at  the  age  of 
thirty-three,  a  proof  that  he  had  made 
himself  remarkable  for  his  learning  at  a 
very  early  period.  He  was  raised  to  the 
degree  of  tne  coif  in  1580,  and  was  made 
queen's  Serjeant  in  1586,  when  he  con- 
ducted the  trial  of  Abington  and  others  for 
high  treason,  and  also  took  part  in  the 
proceedings  against  Secretary  Davbon  in 
March  1587.  (StaU  Trials,  i.  1143, 1233.) 
In  the  parliament  of  1585,  Puckering, 
having  been  returned  for  Bedford,  was 
elected  speaker.  During  the  session  he  had 
to  reprimand  Dr.  Wiluam  Parry  (shortly 
afterwards  executed  for  high  treason)  for 
the  intemperate  speech  he  uttered  on  the 
passing  of  the  bill  against  Jesuits,  and  at 
the  end  of  it  to  address  the  queen  on  pre- 
senting the  subsidy  granted — <luties  which 
he  penormed  with  so  much  discretion  and 
propriety  that  he  was  re-elected  speaker  of 
the  new  parliament  opened  on  October  15, 
1586,  by  which  the  fate  of  the  Scottish 
queen  was  decided. 

In  a  few  davs  after  the  execution  of  the 
unfortunate  Mary  the  speaks  was  again 
caUed  upon  to  clieck  the  rising  demand  for 
greater  nreedom  of  debate.  The  immediate 
questioD  was  quickly  decided  by  the  com- 
mittal of  Mr.  Wentworth  and  four  others 
to  the  Tower  (JP^L  Hist.  i.  822-852) ;  but 


PULESTON 


541 


the  spirit  was  not  subdued.  The  attempt 
to  control  it  was  afterwards  attended  with 
serious  consequences,  and  its  ultimate 
recognition,  though  leading  occasionidly 
to  fiery  discussions,  has  been  happilv  found 
to  be  practically  conducive  to  tne  real 
benefit  of  the  realm. 

In  the  following  parliament,  which  sat 
from  February  4  to  March  29,  1589,  Puck- 
ering was  not  called  to  the  chair,  probably 
because  his  services  were  required  on  the 
state  trials  which  were  then  proceeding. 
In  the  arrai^ment  of  Sir  Richard  Enightley 
and  others  in  the  Star  Chamber  on  Febru- 
ary 13,  he  enlarged  on  the  evil  tendencv  of 
the  different  libels—'  Have  you  any  Work 
for  the  Cooper?'  and  others — with  the 
publication  of  which  they  were  charged. 
On  April  18  he  again  appeared  as  the 
leader  for  the  crown  on  the  trial  of 
Philip  Earl  of  Arundel  for  high  treason, 
conducting  it  without  any  unnecessary 
harshness. 

The  last  trial  of  which  he  had  the  con- 
duct as  queen's  serjeant  was  that  of  Sir 
John  Perrot,  lord-deputy  of  Ireland,  after 
which,  between  the  veraict  and  sentence, 
the  Great  Seal  was  placed  in  his  hands  as 
lord  keeper,  on  May  28,  1592,  the  honour 
of  knighthood  being  conferred  upon  him  at 
the  same  time.  During  the  four  years  that 
he  sat  in  the  Court  of  Chancery  he  pre- 
served a  *  good  repute  for  his  own  carriage, 
but  unhappy  for  that  of  his  servants,  who 
for  disposing  of  his  livings  corruptly  left 
themselves  an  ill  name  in  the  Church,  and 
him  but  a  dubious  one  in  the  state.'  (State 
WoHhies,  609.) 

He  presided  over  only  one  parliament  as 
lord  keeper,  and  in  his  opening  speech, 
after  declaring  the  queen's  will  that  there 
should  be  no  new  statutes  passed,  he  added, 
*So  many  there  be  that,  rather  than  to 
burthen  the  subjects  with  more,  to  their 
grievance,  it  were  fitting  an  abridgment 
were  made  of  those  there  are  already.' 
(Pari.  Hist.  i.  859.)  If  subsequent  legis- 
lators had  acted  on  this  principle,  the  cry 
for  a  digested  code  would  not  now  be  so 
loud,  nor  its  execution  so  difficult. 

He  died  on  April  30,  1596,  and  was 
buried  in  Westminster  Abbey.  By  his 
wife,  Anne,  daughter  of  Nicholas  Chowne, 
Esq.,  of  Kent,  he  left  several  children. 
His  son  and  heir,  Thomas,  was  created  a 
baronet  in  1612,  but  died  without  surviv- 
ing issue  in  1636.  One  of  the  lord  keeper's 
daughters  having  married  Adam  Newton, 
tutor  to  King  James's  son  Prince  Henry, 
also  created  a  baronet,  her  son  Sir  Henry 
became  heir  to  the  Puckering  estates  on 
the  death  of  his  uncle,  and  assumed  the 
name,  but  that  title  also  expired  in  1700. 
(Manning  and  Bray's  Sttrret/,  i.  446;  Hasted, 
i,  423 ;  WoUm's  Baronet,  iv.  270.) 
PXTLESTOH,  John,    of  a   very  ancient 


542 


PUSAR 


family  settled  at  Emral  in  Flintshire  as 
early  as  the  reiffn  of  Edward  L,  was  the  son 
of  Richard  Piueston,  by  AlicOi  daughter  of 
David  Lewis,  of  Bulcot  in  Oxfordshire ;  and 
received  his  legal  education  at  the  Middle 
Temple,  where  he  became  reader  in  1634. 
{Dugdales  Orig.  220.)  In  February  1643 
he  was  recommended  by  the  Commons  as 
a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  in  the  proposi- 
tions they  made  to  the  king.  {Clarendonf 
iii.  407.)  Failing  in  this  application,  they 
-invested  him  with  the  dignity  of  the  coif  in 
October  1648 ;  and  after  the  king  was 
beheaded  he  was  substituted  for  one  of  the 
judges  who  then  refused  to  act,  and  took 
his  place  as  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas 
on  June  1,  1649.  ( WhUelocke,  342,  405.) 
Ifis  conduct  in  the  following  August  at  the 
assizes  at  York,  when  he  and  Baron  Thorpe 
tried  and  condemned  Lieut-Colonel  Mor- 
rice,  the  governor  of  Pomfret  Castle,  for 
«high  treason,  speaks  strongly  against  his  jus- 
tice and  humanitr.   (State  Trtals^  iv.  1249.) 

It  seems  probable,  though  he  did  not  die 
till  September  5,  1659,  that  Cromwell, 
when  he  become  protector  in  1653,  did  not 
renew  his  patent ;  for  then,  by  the  appoint- 
ment of  Sir  Matthew  Hale,  the  court  had 
its  full  complement. 

By  his  marriage  with  Elizabeth,  daughter 
of  Sir  John  Woolrych,  knight,  he  had  a 
son,  the  last  of  whose  male  descendants 
died,  leaving  an  only  daufifhter,  who  carried 
the  estate  of  Emral  to  her  husband,  Richard 
Price,  Esq.  Their  son  took  the  name  of 
Puleston,  and  was  ci-eated  a  baronet  in  1813. 

PUSAB,  or  PTJD8ET,  Hugh  (Bishop  of 
Durham),  is  said  to  have  been  the  son  of  a 
sister  of  King  Stephen,  who  in  a  charter  to 
him  *  De  Mineraria  in  Werdale '  calls  him 
'  nepoti  meo.'  {Surtees  Durham^  i.  cxxvi.) 
In  tnat  reign  he  became  treasurer  of  York, 
archdeacon  of  Winchester,  and  ultimately 
Bishop  of  Durham.  (Le  Neve,  289,  319, 
547.)  To  this  last  dignity  he  was  elected 
on  January  22,  1153,  but  was  refused  con- 
secration by  the  Archbishop  of  York,  as  well 
because  of  his  age,  which  did  not  exceed 
twenty-five  years,  as  on  account  of  the  irre- 
gulariW  of  ms  life,  evidenced  by  his  having 
three  illegitimate  sons  by  as  many  mothers. 
The  pope,  to  whom  he  applied,  listened  to 
the  representations  of  the  archbishop ;  but 
the  death  of  both  put  an  end  to  the  objec- 
tions, and  the  new  bishop  obtained  conse- 
<:ration  from  the  succeeding  pontiff  on  De- 
cember 20,  1153.  His  conduct  in  his  see 
was  correct  and  praiseworthy,  and  his 
memory  v^ill  last  while  the  beautiful  build- 
ing called  the  Galilee,  which  he  added  to 
the  cathedral,  exists.  His  munificence  ex- 
tended throughout  his  diocese  in  many  use- 
ful and  pioiis  works.  He  caused  a  survey 
to  be  made  of  the  possessions  of  the  see, 
which  is  known  as  the  '  Boldon  Book,'  and 
Jiaa  been  published  by  the  Surtees  Society. 


PUSAR 

He  was  present  at  the  council  of  Touxs  m 
1163,  and  at  that  of  Lateran  in  1179. 

In  the  early  part  of  his  career  he  mixed 
little  in  politics ;  but  in  1170  he  aaasted  at 
the  coronation  of  Prince  Henry,  the  bod  of 
Henry  IL,  an  act  which,  at  the  instigation 
of  Becket,  occasioned  his  temporary  suspen- 
sion by  Pope  Alexander  from  his  ejoscopal 
duties.  When  this  young  prince  and  m 
brothers  rebelled  against  tneir  father  m 
1173,  the  bishop  found  himself  suspected 
of  adhering  to  their  party,  and  deemed  it 
prudent  to  deliver  into  the  king's  hands  his 
castles  of  Durham,  Norham,  and  Alverton. 
The  latter  was  totally  destroyed,  but  the 
two  former  were  some  time  uter  restored 
to  the  prelate,  on  the  payment  of  a  fine  of 
two  thousand  marks ;  wlule  the  king,  as  a 
proof  of  his  recovered  favour,  granted  to 
his  son  Henry  the  royal  manor  of  Wickton. 
A  few  years  afterwards  he  got  into  a  new 
disgrace  with  King  Henry  by  a  somewhat 
pert  answer  he  sent  to  him.  Boger,  Aich- 
oishop  of  York,  had  made  a  verlMil  will, 
which  Henrv  declared  to  be  invalid,  and 
demanded  of  Pusar,  who  was  one  of  the  ex- 
ecutors, the  restoration  of  three  hundred 
marks  which  he  had  received  of  the  pro- 
perty. The  bishop  replied  that  he  had  dis- 
tributed them,  as  directed  by  the  deceased, 
among  the  poor,  the  blind,  and  the  lame, 
from  whom  he  could  not  collect  them  again. 
Henry  resented  this  by  depriving  him  of 
his  palace  at  Durham  till  the  money  was 
returned.  The  bishop,  however,  was  em- 
ployed by  the  king  in  1188  in  collecting 
m  Scotland  the  disme  he  bad  imposed  for 
his  purposed  expedition  to  the  Holy  Land. 

When  Richard  succeeded  to  the  throne, 
and,  for  the  purpose  of  raising  funds  to 
carry  on  the  Holy  War,  exposed  offices, 
honours,  and  estates  to  sale,  the  bishop, 
urged  by  ambitious  promptings,  was  in- 
duced to  ^vc  a  large  sum  for  the  enjov- 
ment,  during  the  short  remains  of  his  life, 
of  the  earldom  of  Northumberland.  Even 
the  king,  though  benefiting  by  the  iniatua- 
tion,  could  not  refrain  from  a  sneer,  re- 


markinsr    at     his     investiture 


ioB 


.£,    _     —     _ —     upon 

cleverness  in  thus  being  able  to  make  a 
young  earl  out  of  an  old  bishop.  At  the 
same  time,  and  for  a  further  consideration, 
he  appointed  him,  in  conjunction  with 
William  Earl  of  Albemarle,  chief  justiciaiy 
of  the  kingdom,  associating  with  them 
five  others  as  a  council  for  the  government 
of  the  realm  during  his  absence.  (Madax^ 
i.  21,  34.)  The  Earl  of  Albemarle,  how- 
ever, dyina:  two  months  afterwards,  and 
before  the  King's  departure,  the  chancellor, 
William  de  Longchamp,  Bishop  of  Byi 
was  named  in  hia  stead.  The  govemmenft 
of  England  north  of  the  Trent  wit  en- 
trusted to  the  Bishop  of  DniJMi^^iriiflg 
the  Bishop  of  Ely's  aathcNtify  vw  JPbM 
to  the  iouth  of  that  nmt      ^ 


1 


PUSAE 

natunilly  be  expected,  however,  the  sole 
power  was  soon  iisurpeid  bj  the  latter,  who, 
not  content  with  this,  deprived  his  weak 
coadjutor  of  his  newly-acquired  earldom, 
and  seized  his  person  till  he  gave  hostages 
for  the  deliveiy  of  the  kind's  castles  com- 
mitted to  his  charge.  The  king^s  com- 
mands for  his  reinstatement  were  dis- 
Tegardedy  nor  were  the  castles  restored  to 
him  till  the  fall  of  the  arrogant  chan- 
cellor. Pasar  was  not,  however,  replaced 
in  the  office  of  chief  justiciary,  which 
was  then  given  to  Walter,  Archbishop  of 
Houen. 

He  died  on  March  3, 1195,  having  pre- 
sided over  his  see  above  forty-two  years. 
{OodwtHy  735;    Lord  Luttelton,  iii.  152, 
290-363;   Rie,  Devizes,  8,  11,  39;   R.  de 
Wendaver,  iL  298,  iii.  9-15.) 


QUINCY 


543 


Thoills,  whom  Dugdale  calls 
in  one  place  Pyne^  was  appointed  a  baron 
of  the  Exchequer  on  September  30,  1562 ; 
but  nothing  whatever  is  recorded  of  him, 
except  that  he  died  a  short  time  before  his 
successor,  James  Lord,  received  his  patent, 
on  November  12,  1566. 

PTKCHSBEK,  Thomas,  whose  family  re- 
ceived its  name  from  a  parish  so  called  in 
Lincolnshire,  was  made  chief  baron  of  the 
Excheauer  on  April  24, 1388,  11  Richard 
n.,  ana  his  successor,  John  Cassy,  was  ap- 
pointed on  May  12  of  the  following  year. 
That  this  change  was  occasioned  by  his 
death  appears  probable^  as  part  of  the  Lin- 
colnshire properly  of  Sir  John  de  BeUo 
Monte,  who  died  m  20  Richard  II.,  is  stated 
to  have  come  from  '  the  heirs  of  Thomas  de 
Pynchbek.*    (Co/.  Jnquis.  p.  m.  iii.  199.) 


Q 


QVIVOT,  Sahebus  de  (Earl  of  Win- 
•chsbteb),  was  the  second  son  of  another 
Saherus  de  Quincy,  who  was  possessed  of 
the  lordship  of  Buchby  in  Northampton- 
shire, by  royal  grants  from  Henry  II.  and 
Hidiard  L  His  mother  was  Maud  de  St. 
Liz,  daughter  of  Simon  Earl  of  Huntingdon, 
Bnd  widow  of  Robert  Fitz-Richaia,  of 
Tunbridge.  He  was  early  in  the  confidence 
<of  EjngJohn,  and  was  present  at  Lincoln 
when  William,  Kin?  of  Scotland,  did 
liomage.     (MadoTf  i.  S66,) 

In  5  John,  Robert  Fitz- Walter  and  he, 
'bdng  besieged  in  the  castle  of  Ruil  in 
Normandy,  of  which  they  had  the  command, 
delivered  it  up  without  resistance  to  the 
^Vench  king,  who,  disgusted  at  their  ap- 
parent treachery,  placed  them  in  strict  con- 
iinement.  He,  however,  succeeded  in  satis- 
fpng  King  John,  for  in  the  nextyear,  on  the 
deaui  of  Robert  de  Breteuil,  Earl  of  Lei- 
cester, whose  sister  Margaret  he  had  mar- 
ried, he  had  a  grant,  on  a  fine  of  one 
thousand  marks,  of  all  the  earFs  lands ;  to 
which  was  added  in  7  John,  on  another 
"fine  of  five  thousand  marks,  the  lands  of 
the  honor  of  Grentemesnil.  {Rot,  de  Ltbe- 
rate,  38 ;  Rot.  de  Fm,  268.  320.) 

In  the  charter  of  8  John,  1210,  Saherus 
is  for  the  first  time  called  Earl  of  Win- 
chester^ to  which  dignity  he  had  been  just 
raised.  (Madoxj  i.  51.)  He  was  in  per- 
sonal attendance  on  the  kbg  in  11  ana  12 
J^ohn,  accompanying  him  into  Ireland,  and 


partaking,  according  to  the  record,  of  his 
amusements  at  play.  (Rot.  Misce,  152, 162 ; 
Roi,  de  Pr<B8tito,  183-240.) 

For  the  three  following  years  he  acted  as 
a  iusticier,  fines  being  levied  before  him  in 
lo  and  15  John,  and  his  name  being  men- 
tioned in  Rot  Glaus.  14  John,  as  one  of 
those  ^  tunc  ad  Scaccarium  residentes.' 
{Rot,  Clous,  i.  132;  DugdMs  Orig.  50.) 

Although  he  had  hitherto  continued 
lo^al  to  tne  king,  and  had  been  one  of  the 
witnesses  to  the  resignation  of  the  crown 
to  the  pope  on  May  15,  1212,  and  after- 
wards one  of  the  sureties  for  the  restitution 
to  the  clergy,  he  eventually  joined  the  in- 
surgent barons;  and  being  chosen  of  the 
twenty-five  who  were  appointed  to  secure 
the  fulfilment  of  Magna  Charta,  he  under- 
went in  consequence  the  pope's  excommu- 
nication. He  was  one  of  the  ambassadors 
from  them  sent  to  invite  Louis  of  France 
to  assume  the  throne,  and,  adhering  to  him 
even  after  the  accession  of  Henry  III.,  was 
defeated  and  taken  prisoner  at  the  battle  of 
Lincoln,  on  Ma^  19,  1217. 

On  his  submission,  however,  to  the  king, 
his  lands  were  restored,  and  he  went  the 
next  year  to  the  Holy  Land,  where  he  was 
present  at  the  siege  of  Damietta.  He  died 
in  1220  on  his  journey  to  Jerusalem,  and 
was  succeeded  bv  his  son  Roger,  on  whose 
death,  in  1264,  without  male  issue,  the  title 
became  extinct.  {Baronagey  i.  686 ;  Rogei* 
de  Wendover;  Nic,  TrivetuSy  206.) 


544 


E 


BADECLTVX,  Thomas  de,  a  native  of 
Radcliff  on  Sore  in  the  county  of  Notting- 
ham, "was  summoned  among  the  judges  to 
the  great  council  at  Westminster  in  17 
Edward  II.  He  was  the  last  named  of  six 
justices  itinerant  into  Bedfordshire  in  4 
Edward  III.,  1330,  and  was  sub-sheriff  of 
the  county  of  Nottingham  in  the  same 
year,  as  appears  by  a  complaint  made 
against  him  in  parbament,  tne  result  of 
which  is  not  recorded.  (Issue  HoU,  ii. 
1819 ;  Sot,  Pari.  ii.  411.) 

BADEKEALE,  John  de,  derived  his  name 
from  the  parish  of  Kadenhale,  or  Heden- 
hale,  in  Norfolk,  where,  and  in  Suffolk,  the 
family  possessed  property.  A  Henry  Reden- 
hale  was  in  the  King's  household,  and  was 
paid  20/.  to  provide  small  pike,  and  ten 
marks  to  obtam  lampreys  from  Gloucester 
for  the  coronation  of  Edward  H.  John, 
who  was  perhaps  his  son,  was  employed  in 
judicial  investigations  in  those  counties  in 
the  latter  years  of  that  monarch,  and  his 
name  occurs  in  the  Year  Books  as  an 
advocate  in  3  Edward  III.  In  1329  he  was 
appointed  a  justice  itinerant  into  North- 
amptonshire, and  he  continued  to  act  in 
other  counties  till  7  Edward  HI.  (Issue 
RoU,  120-1 ;  Pari  Writs,  ii.  p.  ii.  1319.) 

BADESWELL,  or  BEDESWELL,  John 
DE,  was  probably  the  complainant  in  a  suit 
in  18  Eaward  L,  wherein  he  recovered  a 
considerable  estate  in  Bedfordshire  from 
Henrj%  the  son  of  Beatrice,  the  widow  of 
Robert  de  Radeswell,  by  proving  that 
Henry  was  bom  eleven  days  luter  the  forty 
weeks  which  is  the  legitimate  time  of 
bearing  by  women,  the  more  especially  as 
it  was  further  shown  that  Beatrice  haa  no 
access  to  her  husband  for  one  month  before 
his  death.     (Ahh,  Piacit.  221,  234.) 

In  18  Edward  II.  he  is  mentioned  as 
*senescallum  regis,'  and  principal  custos 
of  the  lands  and  tenements  of  Queen  Isa- 
bella in  England  and  Wales.  Two  years 
afterwards,  on  September  1,  X826,  he  was 
advanced  to  the  office  of  a  baron  of  the 
Exchequer,  which  he  held  only  for  the  few 
remaining  months  of  that  reign. 

Though  not  re-appointed  by  Edward  III., 
he  was  still  emploved  in  Exchequer  busi- 
ness, being  assigned  towards  the  end  of  the 
first  year  to  supervise  and  appraise  the 
goods  and  chattels  of  Walter  Reginald, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  then  lately  de- 
ceased; and  in  the  record  he  is  called 
'clericus  rens.'  (Abb,  Hot.  Orig,  i.  262, 
iL  11 ;  Pari  Writs,  ii.  1819.) 

BAIKSEOBD,  RiOHARD,  was  bom  in 
1605  at  Staverton,  near  Daventry,  the  resi- 


dence of  his  father,  Robert  Rainefoid,  wha 
was  descended  from  an  old  Lancaahiie 
family.  His  mother  wajs  Mary,  daughter  of 
Thomas  Kirton,  Esq.,  of  Thorpe-Mandevilk 
Admitted  to  Lincoln's  Inn,  ne  was  called 
to  the  bar  on  October  16, 1632,  and  for  this 
society,  as  his  legal  mother,  he  showed  his 
admiration  and  regard  by  presenting  a 
silver  cup  when  he  was  chief  justice.  He 
was  appointed  in  1630  recorder  of  Daventiy, 
and  in  1653  recorder  of  Northampton,  and, 
known  as  a  loyalist,  he  was  elected  member 
for  the  latter  borough  in  the  Convention 
Parliament  that  met  before  Charles's  re 
turn,  and  was  nominated  after  that  event 
as  one  of  the  knights  of  the  Royal  Oak,  had 
that  order  been  instituted  aa  at  first  in- 
tended. He  sat  also  for  the  same  borough 
in  the  parliament  of  1661,  but  took  no 
ostensible  part  in  the  debates. 

On  Octooer  5,  1661,  he  was  called  ser* 
jeant,  and  soon  after  was  knighted,  for  he 
IS  named  with  that  title  in  nb  patent  as 
baron  of  the  Exchequer,  dated  Kovemher 
26,  16a3.  After  siUing  in  that  court  a  J 
little  more  than  five  years,  he  was  removed  1 
into  the  King's  Bench  on  February  6, 1689. 
Baker  (i.  323)  states  that  in  1667,  while  a 
baron,  he  officiated  as  recorder  of  Daventiy ; 
and  Roger  North  (Lives,  130)  relates  a 
curious  story  about  a  witch  brought  to 
Salisbury  to  be  tried  before  him.  'Sir 
James  Long  came  to  his  chamber  and  made 
a  heavy  complaint  of  this  witch,  and  said 
that  if  she  escaped  his  estate  would  not  be 
worth  anything,  for  all  the  people  would 
go  away.  It  happened  that  tne  witch  was 
acquitted,  and  the  knight  continued  ex- 
tremely concerned  ;  therefore  the  jud^,  to 
save  the  poor  gentleman's  estate,  oraered 
the  woman  to  be  kept  in  gaol,  and  that  the 
town  should  allow  her  2s,  6d.  per  week, 
for  which  he  was  very  thankful.  The  veir 
next  assize  he  came  to  the  judge  to  desire 
his  lordship  would  let  her  come  back  to  the 
town.  And  why  ?  They  could  keep  her 
for  Is,  6d,  there,  and  in  the  gaol  she  cost 
them  a  shilling  more.' 

Sir  Richard  was  promoted  to  the  chief 
justiceship  of  his  court  on  April  12, 1676. 
The  only  important  state  question  which  is 
reported  as  discussed  before  him  was  the 
Habeas  Corpus  applied  for  in  June  1677  bj 
the  Earl  of  Shaitesbury,  on  his  imprison- 
ment by  the  House  of  Lords,  when  it  was 
decided  that  the  court  had  no  jurisdietioDi 
and  the  earl  was  zemanded  to  poMBi 
Ventria  (p.  820}  aays  that  Sir  Richaid  m 
removed  horn  nis  office  in  Itiidtr  Turn 
1678.     It  might  be   that   h  A 


RALEIGH 

fncapacitj,  which  ought  to  have  preTented 
hia  promotion  to  so  prominent  a  position^ 
had  then  hecome  more  apparent,  or  that  the 
minister,  Ix)rd  Danbj,  made  them  the 
excuse^  in  order  to  promote  his  favourite, 
Sir  William  Scroggs,  to  the  place ;  but  it  is 
fiff  from  improbable  that  Sir  Richard's 
oiwn  feelings  of  decay  prompted  his  retire- 
ment, for  he  did  not  survive  it  much  above 
eight  months.  His  death  occurred  on 
Febnuuy  17,  1679,  at  Dallington,  where 
there  is  a  monument  over  his  remains,  and 
where  he  left  a  memorial  of  his  charity  in 
an  almshouse  for  two  old  men  and  two  old 
women,  with  a  weekly  allowance  of  two 
ahillingB  each. 

He  was  very  estimable  in  his  private  life, 
and  would  have  had  a  fair,  though  second- 
aiy,  reputation  as  a  lawyer,  had  he  not  been 
80  unfortunate  as  to  succeed  such  an  eminent 
judge  as  Sir  Matthew  Hale,  whom  he  was 
as  much  below  in  point  of  learning  as  he 
was  above  Sir  William  Scronrs  his  suc- 
cessor in  point  of  integrity.  He  married 
Catherine,  daughter  of  the  Rev.  Samuel 
Clarke,  of  Kingsthorpe,  D.D. ;  his  eldest  son 
by  whom,  by  his  marriage  with  Anne, 
daughter  of  Richard  NeviUe  of  Billings- 
bere,  had  a  daughter  from  whom  Lord 
Brayfarooke  is  descended.  (Bridgets  North- 
mnpi.  i.  436 :  Baker's  do.  L  134,  323 ;  Col- 
imrs  Peeragey  viii.  157.) 

BALSIGH,  William  de  (Bishop  op 
Norwich  and  Winchbsteb),  sometimes 
called  de  Radlev,  was  a  native  of  Devon- 
shire. He  was  brought  up  to  the  Church, 
and  in  14  John  was  presented  by  the  king 
to  the  living  of  Bratton  in  the  archdea- 
eouy  of  Barnstaple.  (Hot,  Pat.  93.)  He 
pursued  at  the  same  time  the  stud^r  of  the 
law,  and  it  is  as  difficult  to  distinguish  him 
from  as  to  identify  him  with  persons  bear- 
ing the  same  name,  and  flounshing  at  the 
■one  period.  There  is,  for  instance,  a  Wil- 
liam de  Raleigh,  who,  being  coroner,  was 
raised  in  9  Henry  IIL  to  the  sheriffalty  of 
the  county  of  Devon.  (Hot.  Clous,  ii.  67.) 
There  is  nothing  to  show  distinct^  that  he 
was  die  same  man ;  but  either  office  might 
hare  been  held  by  him,  as  a  clergyman,  or 
•B  officer  of  the  court.  In  the  next  vear 
he  was  one  of  those  appointed  to  collect 
tile  quinzime  in  Lincomshiie,  and  in  the 
feDowing  to  assess  the  tallage  in  Cumber- 
knd  and  Northumberland.  (21^^.146^208.) 
His  nomination  as  a  justicier  at  West^ 
oiiiflter  took  place  soon  after.  Fines  were 
Wied  before  him  in  this  character  from 
1S28  till  1234,  during  which  time  he  also 
Airformed  the  duties  of  a  justice  itinerant 
there  are  instances  likewise  of  parties  pay- 
^  fines  for  writs  to  take  assizes  of  novel 
litBfiT^Mn  before  him  in  1235  {Excetyft,  eSot, 
%•.  286),  beyond  which  date  there  is  no 
vidence  of  his  acting  as  a  judge.  In  1237 
e  was  employed  to  open  the  parliament. 


RAMSEY 


545 


and  by  his  eloquence  to  induce  the  barons  to 

grant  a  subsidy  to  the  king.  (Bapin,  iii.  55.) 
His  clerical  preferment  proceeded  at  the 

same  time:  he  was  appomted  a  canon  of 

St  Paul's  and  of  Licnfield,  and  treasurer 
of  Exeter    Cathedral.    So  high  was  his 
character  both  as   an  ecclesiastic  and  a 
lawyer  that  he  was  soon  after  elected  to 
two  bishoprics — those  of  Lichfield  and  Co- 
ventry, and  of   Norwich — the    latter   of 
which  he  accepted,  and  was  consecrated  on 
September  25,  123iD.    Almost  immediately 
afterwards  the  chapter  of  Winchester,  on 
the  death  of  Peter  de  Rupibus,  selected 
him  as  his  successor,  in  opposition  to  the 
king,  who  wanted  to  force  upon  them  Wil- 
liam of  Valence,  his  wife^  uncle.    The 
chapter  were,  however,  forced  to  proceed 
to  a  new  election;  but  their  next  choice, 
Ralph  de  Neville,  being  equally  obnoxious 
to  tne  sovereign,  it  was  also  made  void,  and 
the  see  remained  vacant  for  three  or  four 
years  longer.    The  monks  then  proceeded 
to  a  third  election,  when,  persisting  in  the 
nomination  of  WUliam  de  Raleigh,  their 
choice  was  confirmed  by  the  pope  on  Sep- 
tember 13, 1243.    Though  the  new  bishop 
was  compelled  to  avoid  the  indignation  of 
the  king  by  retiring  into  France,  he  suc- 
ceeded at  last,  by  the  intercession  of  the 
pope  and  of  Archbishop  Boniface,  in  pro- 
curing the  royal  concurrence.    For  the  in- 
terference of  the  pope  he  is  reported  to 
have  paid  no  less  a  sum  than  six  thousand 
marks,  and  is  foolishly  supposed  to  have 
expected  the  pontiif  to  return  him  a  part 
of  the  bribe.    In  1249  he  retired  to  Tours, 
where  he  died  in  September  of  the  fol- 
lowing year,  and  was  buried  in  the  church 
of  St.  IVIartm  in  that  city.     Some  letters 
addressed  to  him  by  Robert  Grossetete, 
Bishop  of  Lincoln,  are  extant     (Godwin, 
219,  316,  430 ;  Broim's  Faseictd.  316.) 

BALFH  (Archdeacon  of  Colchesteb) 
was  one  of  the  justiciers  in  the  latter  part 
of  the  reign  of  Henry  II.  He  was  present 
when  fines  were  levied  in  the  Curia  Regis 
at  Canterbury  in  the  thirty-third  year,  1187, 
and  at  Oxforii  in  the  thirty-fifth.  (Hunter's 
Preface.)  The  Pi^e  Roll  of  1  Richard  1. 
(11-236)  records  his  pleas  in  various  coun- 
ties.   He  died  in  1190.    (Le  Neve,  195.) 

EALPH  (Abchdeacon  of  Hebefobd)  is 
considered  by  Le  Neve  (118)  to  be  sur- 
named  Foliot,  and  to  have  held  that  dignity 
as  early  as  1163  and  as  late  as  1197.  H!e 
appeata  to  have  been  a  justicier  for  several  of 
the  latter  years,  as  fines  were  acknowledged 
before  him  in  33  Henry  U.,  1188,  and  from 
the  7th  to  the  9th  years  of  Richard  L, 
1195-7.     (Hunter's  Preface.) 

EAM8ET,  Abbot  of.  In  Mr.  Hunter's 
list  of  justiciers  extracted  from  the  fines 
he  introduces  '  Abbas  Sancti  Benedicti  de 
Ramsey  *  in  10  and  15  John.  1208-1213, 
but  in  the  fines  hitherto  published  his  name 


N  V 


546 


BAKDOLFH 


does  not  appear.  When  Robert  de  Re- 
dinges  resigned  the  abbacy  in  1207,  the 
king  issued  a  precept  to  the  monks,  com- 
manding them  to  elect  the  prior  of  Frenton 
in  his  place,  which  they  refused  to  obey. 
He  thereupon  kept  the  abbey  vacant  for 
seven  years.  (  WtUis's  Mitred  AbbeySy  154 ; 
MmasticoHy  ii.  654.)  It  would  seem,  how- 
ever, that  the  prior  of  Frenton,  whose 
name  has  not  been  discovered,  assumed  the 
titie  of  abbot  of  Ramsey,  notwithstanding 
the  monks'  resistance. 

RANDOLPH  was  prior  of  Worcester  at 
the  time  he  was  appointed  abbot  of  Eve- 
sham in  1214, 15  John.  The  only  occa- 
sion on  which  he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant 
was  in  5  Henrv  III.,  1221,  when  he  and 
the  abbot  of  Reading  were  placed  at  the 
head  of  the  commission  for  nine  counties. 
He  died  on  January  16,  1229.  {WiUii^s 
Mitred  Abbeys;  Rot.  Claus,  i.  162,  476.) 

RANDOLPH,  John,  belonged  to  a  family 
settled  in  Hampshire,  and  is  first  mentioned 
in  13  Edward  1.,  1285,  as  one  of  the  exe- 
cutors of  William  de  Braboef,  the  justice 
itinerant.  He  was  connected  with  the  Ex- 
chequer, and  in  26  Edward  I.  was  appointed 
one  of  the  commissioners  to  visit  the  sea- 
ports, and  enquire  into  the  concealment  of 
the  customs  on  wool,  &c.  (Madox,  i.  231, 
784.)  The  only  time  his  name  appears  in 
Dugdale's  'Chronica  Series '  is  as  the  third 
of  five  justices  itinerant  into  Cornwall  in  30 
Edwani  I. ;  but  a  document  contained  in 
the  Rolls  of  Parliament  of  8  Edward  H. 
proves  not  only  that  he  acted  for  four  years 
as  a  justice  of  assize,  as  well  as  a  justice  iti- 
nerant in  the  last  circuit  into  Cornwall,  but 
also  that  his  salary  for  these  services  then 
remained  unp^d.    (Hot,  Pari  i.  332.) 

In  the  first  two  years  of  the  reign  of  Ed- 
ward II.  he  had  been  summoned  to  par- 
liament among  the  j  udges,  and  was  employed 
in  a  variety  of  ways  in  a  judicial  character 
as  late  as  the  thirteenth  year,  when  he  was 
commanded  to  cause  his  proceedings  as  a 
justice  of  assize,  or  otherwise,  to  be  estreated 
into  the  Exchequer.  {Pari  WritSj  i.  799, 
iL  p.  u.  1323.) 

Although  he  is  not  judicially  mentioned 
for  the  next  seven  vears,  there  are  several 
entries  relative  to  him  in  the  interval ;  and 
in  2  Edward  lU.  he  was  named  on  a  com- 
mission to  try  certain  malefactors  of  France 
charged  with  molestinp:  the  merchants  of 
Soutnampton.  In  1329  he  was  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  into  Northamptonshire^ 
but  after  4  Edward  HI.,  when  he  had  the 
custody  of  the  castle  and  manor  of  Por- 
chester  committed  to  him.  he  is  not  again 
noticed.  (Abb,  JRot.  Orig,  i.  284,  ii.  41, 81 : 
N.  Fcsdera,  ii.  751.) 

SAiniLPH,  who  succeeded  to  the  trea- 
Burership  of  the  church  of  Salisbury  in  1192 
(^Le  Neve,  270),  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant 
in  10  Richard  L,  1198,  making  amercements 


RASTALL 

in  Essex  and  Hertfordshire,  and  fixing  the 
tallage  in  Surrey.    (Madoxy  i.  565,  788.) 

EAHTJLPH.  sometimes  ctdled  Anmlphhy 
the  historians,  but  not  in  the  records,  waa 
one  of  the  chaplains  of  Henry  L,  who  raised 
him  to  the  omce  of  his  cSoanoellor.  In 
Thynne's  Catalogue,  from  which  all  the 
sul)8eauent  writers  copy,  the  first  date  at- 
tached to  his  holding  the  S^  is  1116,  but 
from  the  following  evidence  it  will  he  ap- 
parent that  he  was  inpossession  of  it  at  a 
much  earlier  period.  He  attested,  as  chan- 
cellor, a  charter  granted  to  tiie  priory  of  St 
Andrew  at  Northampton  in  8  Hemy  L, 
1107  {Monatt.  v.  191),  and  another  at  Whit- 
suntide 1100,  granting  the  archbishopric  of 
York  to  Thomas,  (ibid.  vi.  1180.)  His 
continuance  in  office  until  1123  is  proved  bj 
his  name  and  title  being  appended  to  sevoi 
other  charters  in  the  '  Monasticon.'  (i.  30B, 
483,  629,  ii.  267,  iii.  86,  vi.  188,  1075.) 

At  Christmas  1123  the  king  held  bis 
court  at  Dunstable.  It  is  raited  that, 
riding  there  with  the  monarch,  the  chan- 
cellor fell  from  his  horse  and  was  carelessly 
(improvide)  ridden  over  by  a  monk  of  St 
Albans,  'cujus  possessiones,'  Roger  de 
Wendover  slyly  adds,  '  male  oocupaveiat' 
In  a  few  days  his  career  was  closedL 

Although  he  did  not  live  long  enough  to 
attain  the  episcopal  honours  usu^y  awarded    j 
to  chancellors,  he  had  made  some  way  in    i 
his  ecclesiastical  preferment,  being  desczibed 
in  one  of  the  above  charters  as  '  Abbaa  de 
Salesbia,'  probably  Selby. 

He  is  described  by  Wendover  (iL  202) 
as  suffering  under  heavy  bodily  infirmity 
during  the  last  twenty  years  of  his  life,  lot 
as  ready  for  all  kinds  of  wickedness ;  and 
Henry  of  Huntingdon  {AngL  Sac,  iL  698), 
in  recording  the  characters  of  those  snat 
men  whose  lives  he  had  witnessed,  whuebe 
bears  the  strongest  testimony  to  his  leanung. 
sagacity,  and  experience,  speaks  in  tenns  of 
severe  censure  of  his  impiety,  oppreeaioD, 
and  avarice. 

RASTALL,  William,  was  the  son  of  Jobn 
Rastall,  who  was  educated  at  Oxford,  and 
established  himself  in  London  as  a  printer, 
an  occupation  which,  in  those  times,  was 
deemed  more  as  a  profession  than  a  trade, 
and  was  'pursued  by  men  of  learning  and 
education.  That  John  Rastall  deserved 
this  character  is  manifest  from  various 
works,  some  connected  with  the  law,  wbidb 
he  wrote  and  which  were  publishea  at  bit 
own  press.  His  marriage  with  Elizabetb, 
the  daughter  of  Sir  Jolm  More  the  jud£<^ 
and  the  sister  of  Sir  Thomas  More  tke 
chancellor,  shows  the  grade  in  which  be 
moved.  He  was  a  most  zealous  Catholi^ 
and  his  known  hatred  of  the  innovatuMw 
Henry  VIIL  was  not  diminUhed  hj  r^ 
neasbg  the  sacrifice  of  his  bioClMMH 
as  one  of  the  victiiiia.  ( WmJts  Jtki 
100.)    He  diad  in  1696, iBKili^tmm 


RAVENSER 

the  elder  of  whom,  William^  afterwards  the 
judge,  was  bom  in  London  in  1508. 

He  was  sent  to  the  university  of  Oxford, 
which  he  left  without  taking  a  degree. 
The  increasing  infirmities  of  his  father 
probably  drew  him  from  his  studies,  and 
induced  him  to  enter  into  the  printing 
business,  for  books  with  his  imprimatur 
appear  from  the  year  1631.  How  long  he 
continued  to  exercise  this  calling,  or  whe- 
ther he  did  so  after  his  becoming  a  student 
of  Lincoln's  Inn,  where  he  was  admitted 
on  September  12,  1532,  is  not  known  ;  but 
it  may  be  presumed  that  he  had  renewed 
his  legal  course  before  the  end  of  the  reign 
of  Henry  VUI.,  inasmuch  as  he  was  aj>- 
pointed  reader  in  1547  {Dugdays  Ortg, 
252),  within  a  few  months  after  Edward 
VI.  came  to  the  crown.  Feeling  that  one 
of  his  religion  was  not  then  safe  in  England, 
he  retired  to  Louvain,  where  he  remained 
during  Edward^s  life,  and  where  he  buried 
his  wife  Winifred,  the  daughter  of  the 
learned  Dr.  John  Clement. 

On  the  lG^storation  of  the  Catholic  wor- 
ship, Eastall  returned  to  England  and 
resumed  his  professional  practice.  In  Oc- 
tober 1555  he  was  raised  to  the  degree  of 
serjeant-at-law,  and  in  three  years  was 
promoted  to  the  judicial  seat,  receiving  his 
patent  as  a  judge  of  the  Queen's  Bench  on 
October  27,  1558,  not  a  month  before 
Queen  Mary's  death.  All  the  judges  were 
re-appointed  the  day  after  Elizabeth*s 
accession,  without  regard  to  their  religious 
persuasion;  and  three  months  after,  Mr. 
Justice  Kastall  was  appointed  one  of  the 
justices  of  assize  in  Durham  during  the 
vacancy  of  that  see.  (CW.  SttUe  Papers 
r  1547-80],  122.)  He  continued  on  the 
Dench  at  Westminster,  at  least  as  late  as 
Michaelmas  1562,  his  name  appearing  in  \ 
that  term  in  Plowden's  Reports;  but  his 
resignation  occurred  shortly  after,  as  the 
date  of  his  successor  Mr.  Justice  Southcote^s 
patent  is  February  10,  1563. 

He  spent  the  remainder  of  his  life  in 
Louvain,  where  he  died  on  August  27, 
1565,  and  was  buried  there  in  the  church 
of  St  Peter. 

He  was  the  author  of  several  works ;  but 
some  confusion  has  arisen  in  distinguishing 
them  from  those  written  by  his  father. 
Among  his  undoubted  compositions,  are 
<  The  Chartuary,*  *  A  Collection  of  Entries 
of  Declarations,  &c.,'  'Les  Termes  de  la 
Ley,*  and  a  *  Collection  of  Statutes  to  4 
&  5  Philip  and  Mary,'  which  is  spoken 
highly  of  by  Sir  Edward  Coke.  ( Watrs 
BAlio.  Brit) 

SAYEKSES,  John  de,  and  the  next- 
mentioned  Richard,  apparently  his  brother, 
were  natives  of  Ravenser,  the  place  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Kingston-upon-HuU 
where  William  de  la  Pole  was  bom.  To  the 
influence  of  this  powerful  merchant  was 


BAWUKSON 


547 


probably  owing  the  advance  of  these  brothers. 
Both  were  ecclesiastics;  and  John  in  48 
Edward  m.  granted  an  endowment  to  a 
chantry  at  '  Hellewe,'  in  connection  with 
the  church  of  Waltham.  {Ahb.  Rot,  Ortg, 
ii.  333.)  He  was  keeper  of  the  Hanaper 
in  1386, 10  Richard  II.,  and  it  was  in  that 
character  that  he  was  appointed  with  the 
master  of  the  Rolls  on  March  26, 1393,  to 
hold  the  Great  Seal  till  April  19,  while 
Thomas  de  Arundel  was  cnancellor.  As 
William  de  Waltham  was  keeper  of  ^^ 
Hanaper  in  the  following  year,  Ravenser 
probably  died  in  the  interval.  (Bymer, 
vii.  548.) 

SAYEH8SE,  RiOHARD  ss,  apparently 
the  elder  brother  of  John,  in  31  Edward 
ni.,  1357,  had  a  grant  of  the  office  of  keeper 
of  the  Hanaper.  In  the  next  vear  he  was 
assigned  to  administer  the  goods  of  the  late 
Queen  Isabella  (Abb,  Rot,  Orig,  ij^,  and 
was  rewarded  for  his  services  in  36  Eldward 
ni.  b;<^  being  appointed  one  of  the  twelve 
clerks  in  the  Chancery  of  the  higher  grade, 
still,  however,  retaining  the  Hanaper  for 
some  years  afterwards.  {CvtUm,  JuUm, 
R  X,  16  fo.  103 ;  N,  Fcedera,  iu.  708,  934.) 

He  continued  a  clerk  of  the  Chancery 
during  the  remainder  of  his  life,  and  was 
endowed  with  the  usual  ecclesiastical  pre- 
ferments, the  last  of  which  was  that  in  42 
Edward  UL  he  was  made  archdeacon  of 
Lincoln.  He  was  rich  enough  to  lend  the 
king  200^.  which  was  repaid  in  44  Edward 
m.  (P<^  Records,  i.  190.)  He  died  at 
the  end  of  Ma^  1386,  9  Richard  U.,  and 
was  buried  in  Lincoln  Cathedrid.  His  will 
is  printed  in  the  '  Proceedings  of  the  Archae- 
ological Institute  at  Lincoln'  (1848),  pp. 
312-17.  He  was  twice  called  upon,  witii 
two  other  clerks,  to  hold  the  Great  Seal 
during  the  temporarv  absence  of  the  chan- 
cellors— firsL  from  May  4  to  June  21, 1377, 
the  day  of  King  Edward's  death ;  and  se- 
cbndly,  from  February  9  to  March  28, 1386, 
0  Richard  II.,  but  two  months  before  his 
own  death. 

SAWLIHSOV,  William,  of  Graythwaite, 
near  Newby  Bridge,  on  the  Lake  of  Win- 
dermere, a  scion  of  a  family  of  great  emi- 
nence and  antiquitv  in  Westmoreland  and 
Lancashire,  descended  from  two  brothers, 
Walter  and  Edward,  who  shared  in  the 
glory  of  the  field  of  ^^rincourt,  was  bom  at 
Gravthwaite  about  l&O,  and  was  the  son 
of  Captain  William  Rawlinson,  who  for  his 
services  in  the  civil  wars  had  a  grant  of 
arms  in  which  three  swords  were  introduced 
to  commemorate  the  gallantry  of  himself 
and  his  l^o  ancestors.  Studying  the  law 
at  Gray*s  Inn,  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in 
1667,  and  attained  the  dignity  of  the  coif 
in  1686.  With  a  fair  practice  and  a  good 
repute  he  was  selected  at  the  Revolution  to 
be  third  commissioner  of  the  Great  Seal,  to 
which  he  waa  appointed  on  Maidi  4, 16iB0<^ 


548 


RAYMOND 


RAYMOND 


in  conjunction  with  Sir  John  Maynard  and  '  probably  by  his  early  death  avoided  the 
Sir  Anthony  Keck.    He  was  at  the  same  '  dismissal  which  was  the  too  common  re- 
time knighted ;  and  when  both  his  col-  '  ward  of  straiffhtforward  independence  and 
leagues  retired  in  June  1690  he  was  re-    an  honest  administration  oi  justice.    Aa 
tained,  being  then  joined  with  Sir  John  '  there  is  no  evidence  of  the  ^  extraordinaiy 
Trevor  and  Sir  George  Hutchins.    Luttrell  \  servility '  which  Lord  Campbell  imputes 
(ii.  128)  records  that  in  November  he  was    to  him,"  nor  any  other  grouna  adduced  for 
heard  in  the  House  of  Lords  against  the    designating  him  as  an  ^  unprincipled  judpB' 
bill  for   the   regulation  of  the  Court  of   except  his  concurrence  with  the  rest  of  m 
Chancery.    He  sat  under  this  commission  I  court  in  the  decision  on  the  quo  wammto 
for  three  years,  when  in  March  1693  the    against  the  City  of  London  (a  case  tuniing 
Seal  was  delivered  to  Sir  John  Somers  as  i  on  manv  difficult  points  of  law),  the  pro- 
sole  keeper.    King  William  wished  on  his    phetic  future,  which  his  lordship's  pKJo- 
removal  to  make  him  chief  baron  of  the  ;  dice  would  ascribe  to  him  if  he  naa  lired 
Exchequer,  but  the  lord  keef)er  objecting  '  may  in  fairness   be  disregarded  and  set 
that  it  was  necessary  the  chief  judge  of  j  aside,  receiving  only  the  noble  author's  re- 
that  court  ^should  be  experienced  in  the  ,  luctant  admission  that  he  was  a  judge  of 
course  of  the  Exchequer  and  knowing  in  | '  extraordinarv   learning ' — a    sumect  an 
the  common  law,' — ^thus  inferring  his  igno-  |  which  every  la^er  is  ready  to  allow  his 
ranee  of  both, — ^his  appointment  was  not 
innsted  on,  and  Sir  William  returned  to 


the  bar,  where  we  find  him  pleading  as  a 
Serjeant  for  the  Duke  of  Devonshire  in 
October  1697.  He  died  on  May  11,  1703, 
and  was  buried  in  Hendon  Church,  Middle- 
sex.    (Lf/son^s  London,  iii.  8.) 

SAYXOHD,  Thomas,  is  described  in  his 
admittance  into  Grav's  Inn  as  the  son 
of  Robert  Raymond  of  Bowers-Gifiard 
in  the  countv  of  Essex,  which  is  near 
Downham,  where  the  judge  possessed  an 
estate  called  Tremnals.  He  was  called  to 
the  bar  on  February  11,  16o0,  and  from 
the  period  of  the  Restoration  he  was  a  dili- 
firent  reporter  during  the  remainder  of  his 
life.  In  1677  he  was  created  a  seijeant, 
and  less  than  two  years  afterwards  was 
raised  to  the  bench  and  knighted,  though, 
as  he  declares,  he  laboured,  and  not  with- 
out reason,  to  prevent  his  promotion.  He 
filled,  in  the  course  of  one  year,  a  seat  in 
each  of  the  three  courts,  receiving  a  patent 
as  baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  May  1, 1679, 
from  which  he  was  removed  to  the  Com- 
mon I'lcas  on  February  7  following,  and  on 
April  29  was  transferred  to  the  Kings 
Bench.  In  the  latter  court  he  sat  for  little 
more  than  three  years,  during  which  he 
assisted  in  the  trials  and  acquittals  of  Mr. 
Cellior  and  the  Earl  of  Castlemaine,  luckily 
coming  into  office  at  the  fag  end  of  the 
pretended  Popish  Plot,  when  the  tide  was 
Deginningtotum,  and  Chief  Justice  Scroggs 
thought  it  his  interest  to  test  the  credi- 
bility of  the  witnesses  whose  evidence  he 
had  before  received  with  imdoubting  faith. 

Though  Roger  North  (136)  relates  of 
Sir  Thomas  that  two  old  women  were  tried 
before  him  at  Exeter  for  witchcraft,  and 
that,  by  his  passive  behaviour,  and  neglect- 
ing to  point  out  to  the  jury  the  irrationality 
of  their  confessions,  he  suffered  them  to  be 
convicted,  and  one  of  them  to  be  hanged, 
by  his  general  conduct  on  the  bench  he 
escaped  the  censure  to  which  too  many  of  employed  as  junior  oomuel  fai  Ai 
his  colleagues  in  this  reign  were  liable,  and   cution  of  Riehud  Hatiwwi^  — '  ~^ 


lordship  to  have  been  a  sufficient  authoiitr. 

He  ified  in  the  fifty-seventh  year  of  lus 
age  on  July  14,  1683,  while  engaged  on 
the  circuit,  and  was  buried  in  the  parish 
church  of  Downham.  By  his  wife,  Amu 
daughter  of  Sir  Edward  Pish,  Bart,  he 
had  one  only  child,  his  more  famous  son, 
the  next-mentioned  Robert  Lord  Raymood. 
The  Reports  both  of  the  father  and  son  vr 
in  great  repute  in  Westminster  HiD. 
(MoranfB  Essex ^  L  206.) 

SATXOVD,  RoBEBT  (LoBB  Ratkokd), 
the  only  son  of  the  above  Sir  Thomas  Bay- 
mond,  was  bom  in  1673,  and  his  fathW 
nine  months  before  his  death  induced  the 
society  of  Gray's  Lm  to  admit  the  bov  on 
November  1, 1682,  when  only  nine  yetis 
old.  No  doubt  the  young  student  was  ex- 
cused attendance  on  the  usual  exercises 
until  he  had  completed  the  rest  of  his  eda- 
cation,  but  the  devotion  which  he  paid  to 
his  father's  wishes  is  shown  by  his  eailT 
adoption  of  the  most  efficient  course  of  ac- 
quiring practical  legal  knowledge.  He 
constantly  attended  the  courts,  and  his 
successors  at  the  bar  benefit  to  the  present 
day  by  the  fruits  of  his  industry.  1^ 
Reports  commence  in  Easter  Term  16H 
when  he  was  but  twenty  years  old,  lod 
more  than  three  years  before  he  was  called 
to  the  bar.  They  finish  in  Trinity  Tenn 
1732,  a  year  before  his  death,  thus  extend- 
ing over  thirty-eight  years,  during  Ae 
reigns  of  four  sovereigns.  They  were  not 
published  till  ten  years  after  bis  death,  hot 
are  so  highly  valued,  and  still  regarded  ts 
such  high  authority,  Uiat  they  have  been 
several  times  reprinted  under  the  editorial 
care  of  eminent  lawyers. 

His  call  to  the  bfu*  did  not  take  place  till 
November  12,  1697,  fifteen  years  after  )m 
admission;  but  he  got  into  immediate  {no- 
tice, he  himself  reporting  a  case  in  inU 
he  was  engaged  in  a  levned  an  '  ^ 
Michaelmas  ie8&    In  1702  w% 


f 


EAYMOND 

impostor  in  pretending  to  be  bewitched  by 
Sarah  Murdock,  whom  he  brought  to  trial 
for  her  life.  After  the  conviction  in  this 
case  indictments  for  witchcraft  almost  en- 
tirely ceased.  In  1704  he  very  ably  and 
strenuously  (and  in  the  event  effectually) 
defended  bavid  Lindsay  on  a  charge  of 
high  treason  in  returning  to  England  from 
France  without  leave,  and  in  1706  he  was  of 
counsel  for  the  prosecution  of  Beau  Field- 
ing for  bigamy,  in  marrying  the  Duchess 
of  Cleveland,  hiis  first  wife  being  alive. 

In  Queen  Anne's  parliaments  of  1710 
and  1714  he  was  returned  for  Bishop^s 
Castle,  having  been  knighted  on  May  13 
in  the  former  year  on  being  made  solicitor- 
general,  an  office  from  which  he  was  re- 
moved on  October  14  in  the  latter  year  by 
the  advice  of  Lord  Cowper  on  the  anival 
of  George  I.  in  England.  In  that  king's 
tirst  parliament  of  1716  Sir  Robert  was 
elected  for  Ludlow,  and  in  the  second  of 
1722  for  Helston.  In  the  former  he  joined 
with  the  tones  in  opposing  the  Septennial 
Bill  in  1716,  which  was  however  passed  by 
a  large  majority.  While  still  a  member 
he  was  again  taken  into  the  king's  service, 
and  appointed  attorney-general  in  May 
1720,  in  which  character  he  conducted  the 
prosecution  a^ain&t  Christopher  Laj'er  for 
high  treason  m  November  1722.  On  Ja- 
nuary 31,  1724,  he  was  appointed  a  judge  of 
the  King's  Bench. 

On  the  removal  of  Lord  Chancellor 
Macclestield,  Sir  liobert  was  appointed  one 
of  the  three  commissioners  of  the  Great 
Seal,  which  they  held  from  January  7  to 
June  4,  1726.  On  March  2  he  succeeded 
Sir  John  Pratt  as,chief  justice  of  the  Kind's 
Bench,  still  continuing  to  act  as  commis- 
sioner till  Lord  King  became  chancellor. 
The  judgments  delivered  by  him  during 
the  eight  years  he  presided  in  the  King's 
Bench  are  most  elaborate,  and  display  a 
great  fund  of  legal  knowledge.  In  the 
state  trials  before  him  he  was  patient,  im- 
partial, careful,  and  discriminating.  In 
one  of  them,  that  against  Curll,  the  book- 
seller, he  established  the  doctrine  that  to 
publish  an  obscene  libel  is  a  temporal 
ottence ;  and  the  delinquent  was  punished 
on  this  confirmation  of  his  conviction. 
George  II.  on  his  accession  continued  him 
in  his  place,  and  rained  him  to  the  peerage 
on  January  15,  17.'31,  by  the  title  of  Lord 
Kay mond  of  Abbots  Langley  in  Hertford- 
shire. In  the  House  of  I^rds  he  distin- 
guished himself  by  opposing  the  bill 
enacting  that  all  proceedings  in  courts  of 
justice  should  be  in  the  EngUsh  language, 
alleging  that  if  the  bill  passed  the  law 
must  likewise  be  translated  into  Welsh^  as 
many  in  Wales  understood  not  English. 
Though  the  alteration  was  unpopular 
araonjr  lawyers  (even  Lord  Ellenborough 
thought  it  tended  to  make  attorneys  illite- 


BEAD 


549 


rate),  it  happily  became  law,  to  the  great 
benefit  and  comfort  of  the  community. 

Lord  Raymond  died  on  March  19.  1733, 
and  was  buried  at  Abbots  Langley,  in 
which  parish  his  country  seat  was  situate, 
and  where  a  handsome  monument  was 
erected  to  his  memonr.  By  his  wife,  Anne, 
daughter  of  Sir  Edward  Northey,  the 
attorney-general,  he  left  an  only  son,  of  his 
own  name,  upon  whose  death  m  1763  the 
title  became  extinct  (Lord  ^Raymond, 
passim ;  State  Trials,  xiv.  642,  989, 1329 ; 
Farl  Hist,  vii.  336,  861  j  Strange,  948  ; 
Collins' 8  Peerage f  ix.  432.) 

BEAD,  or  BEDE,  Robert,  was  of  a  family 
which  originally  came  from  Morpeth  in 
Northumberland.  His  grandfather  John 
was  a  serjeant-at-law  in  the  reign  of 
Henry  IV.,  and  was  settled  at  Norwich; 
and  his  father's  and  mother's  names  were, 
according  to  his  will,  William  and  Joan, 
though  Burke  calls  them  Edward  and 
Izod,  daughter  of  Sir  Humphrey  Stanley. 
Robert  was  their  third  son,  and  was 
educated  at  Buckingham  Hall,  afterwards 
Magdalen  College,  in  Cambridge,  and  be- 
came a  fellow  of  King's  Hall,  on  the  site 
of  which  part  of  Trinity  College  was  built. 
He  was  placed  at  Lincoln's  Inn,  where  he 
became  reader  in  1480,  and  again  in  1486, 
having  in  the  previous  November  received 
his  summons  to  take  on  himself  the  degree 
of  the  coif.  On  Apri  18, 1494,  he  was  ap- 
pointed king's  Serjeant;  and  was  made  a 
judge  of  the  King's  Bench  on  November 
24,  1496,  11  Henry  VH.,  when  he  was 
knighted. 

In  October  1506  he  was  raised  to  the 
chief  justiceship  of  the  Court  of  Com- 
mon !rleas,  for  which  advancement  the 
judge  was  obliged  to  pay  to  the  avaricious 
king  the  sum  of  400  marks,  as  appears  by 
an  account  rendered  by  the  noted  Edmond 
Dudley.  (  Turner's  England,  iv.  168. )  King 
Henry  named  him  as  one  of  the  executors 
of  his  will.     (  Testam.  Vetutt,  36.) 

Henry  VIII.  continued  him  in  his  place, 
which  he  retained  till  his  death  on  January 
8, 1619.  He  was  buried  in  the  chapel  of 
St  Catherine  at  the  Charterhouse,  where 
he  founded  a  chantry  of  8/.  a  year  for 
thirty  years.  (Supp.  of  the  Monasteries, 
08.)  He  also  left  100/.  to  Jesus  College  to 
found  a  fellowship  and  brewery  there,  and 
established  three  public  lectures  at  the 
university  of  Cambridge,  called  '  Bamaby's 
Lectures,'  on  humanity,  logic,  and  philo- 
sophy, which  are  now  consolidated  into 
one  lecture  every  year,  with  the  name  of 
the  foimder.  (Jbyer's  Cambridge,  L  82,  ii. 
69,  269.) 

By  his  marriage  with  Margaret,  one  of 
the  daughters  of  John  Alphew,  of  Bore 
Place  in  Chiddinffstone,  Kent,  he  became 
possessed  of  considerable  property  in  Kent* 
{Hasted,  iii.  133,  219.) 


550 


REEVE 


BEEVE)  Edmund,  was  of  a  Norfolk 
family,  and  is  riffhtly  claimed  by  the 
society  of  Barnard's  Inn  as  having  com- 
menced his  legal  studies  there.  He  com- 
pleted them  at  Gray's  Inn,  where  he 
attained  the  post  of  reader  in  1632.  In 
1629  he  was  named  as  the  first  recorder  of 
Great  Yarmouth.  (Cal,  State  Papers 
[1620-31],  131.)  He  was  called  seijeant 
on  May  30,  1636,  and  was  promoted  to 
the  bench  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  March 
24, 1639.     (Jiymer,  xx.  381.) 

In  the  propositions  made  to  the  king  in 
February  1643  he  was  one  of  the  judges 
whom  the  parliament  requested  to  be  con- 
tinued ;  ana  in  Michaelmas  Term  of  that 
year  he  sat  alone  in  his  court  at  West- 
minster, when  the  king's  proclamation  to 
adjourn  it  to  Oxford  was  delivered  to  .him. 
In  subservience  to  the  parliament,  he 
caused  the  apprehension  of  the  messenger, 
who  was  tned  by  a  council  of  war,  and 
condemned  and  executed  as  a  spy.  (  Claren- 
don, iii.  407,  iv.  342.)  The  Judge  retained 
his  seat  till  his  death,  on  March  27,  1647, 
when  his  remains  were  interred  in  the  church 
of  Estratuna  (Stratton)  in  Norfolk.  Lord 
Clarendon  (iii.  145-9)  speaks  of  him  as  ^  a 
man  of  good  reputation  for  learning,  who 
in  good  times  would  have  been  a  good 
judffe,'  and  represents  him  as  giving  some 
prudent  counsel  to  the  king  on  his  coming 
to  Leicester  during  the  assizes  in  July 
1642. 

Phillips  states  that  Sir  George  Reeve 
of  Thwaite  in  Suffolk  (who  obtained  a 
baronetcy  in  1663,  which  failed  about 
1688)  was  descended  from  him.  (  Grandeur 
of  the  Law  [1684],  87  j  Gent.  Mag. 
Ixxxviii.  396.) 

BESVE,  Thomas,  frequently  miscalled 
Ileeves,  was  the  son  of  Ricnard  Keeve,  Esq., 
of  New  Windsor,  who  erected  four  alms- 
houses in  the  parish.  Admitted  first  a 
member  of  the  Inner  Temple,  he  transferred 
himself  to  the  Middle  Temple,  and  was 
called  to  the  bar  by  the  latter  society  in 
1713.  He  had  sucn  success  that  he  was 
made  king's  counsel  so  early  as  1718,  and 
soon  afterwards  attorney-general  for  the 
duchy  of  Lancaster.  He  became  a  bencher 
of  the  Middle  Temple  in  1 720,  and  reader 
in  1722.  In  the  latter  year  he  was  counsel 
for  the  crown  in  support  of  the  bill  of  at- 
tainder against  Bishop  Atterbury  and  the 
other  parties  implicated  in  the  same  con- 
spiracy ;  and  in  1730  he  most  ably  advocated 
the  cause  of  the  widow  of  Robert  Castell  in 
the  appeal  of  murder  against  Bambridge, 
the  warden  of  the  Fleet  In  April  1733 
he  was  constituted  a  judge  of  the  Common 
Pleas,  and  knighted ;  and  after  sitting  there 
for  nearly  three  years  he  was  advanced  to 
the  head  of  the  court  in  January  1736.  His 
enjoyment  of  this  post  was  limited  to  a 
angle  year,  as  on  Januaxy  18, 1787,  he  died. 


EEGIKALD 

(State   Trials,  xvi.  469,  007,    xviL  398; 
Gent,  Mag,  iii.  215,  vi.  56,  viL  60.) 

Learned  himself,  he  was  an  encoiiragerof 
the  aspirants  to  learning ;  and  that  he  was 
a  favourite  among  the  literary  men  of  the 
day  is  apparent  from  numerous  printed  and 
manuscript  verses  written  in  his  laudation. 
He  resided  at  Eton,  and  at  Qej^s  House, 
Maidenhead;  and  at  his  death  his  personal 
estate  was  estimated  at  22fi76L,  besides  real 
estates  of  considerable  rental,  amon^  which 
was  a  moietf  of  the  playhouse  in  Lmcoh*» 
Inn  Fields,  let  to  Rich  at  100/.  per  annom. 
His  wife  was  Annabella^  sister  of  Richard 
Topham,  Esq.,  of  NewWmdsor,  keeper  of  the 
records  in  the  Tower ;  but  he  left  no  iasoe. 
{£x  mf,  of  John  Payne  Collier,  JEsq,,  F.SJL, 
who  occupied  the  family  residence,  Geft 
House.) 

SEOniALD  (Abbot  of  Waldbn)  is  in- 
troduced among  the  chancellors  of  Stephen's 
reiffn  on  the  sole  authority  of  '  one  anonj- 
mall  brief-written  chronicle,'  in  whioi 
Thynne  and  his  copyist  Philipot  say  that 
they  have  seen  him  so  termed.  How  fu 
this  information  is  correct  may  be  judged 
from  the  fact  that  Walden  did  not  exist  as 
an  abbey  till  the  year  1100,  previously  to 
which  date  it  was  only  a  priory.  Although 
Reginald  was  the  first  abbot  and  the  last 
prior,  he  did  not  attain  even  the  latter  dig- 
nity till  1164,  ten  years  after  Stephen's 
death.  (PhOipoe,  11 ;  Browne  WiUi/s  Mi- 
tred Abbeys.) 

BEOniALD  is  introduced  as  chancellor  to 
Henry  I.  by  Thynne,  on  no  other  foundation 
than  the  foUowmg  words  in  Leland's  *  Itine- 
rary: '  '  Then  came  one  Reginaldus  Cancel- 
lanus,  so  namyd,  by  Uk^M>de,  of  his  ofBce, 
a  man  of  gret  fame,  about  King  Heniy  the 
First'  Upon  such  vague  evidence  as  this 
the  name  has  been  continued  in  subsequent 
lists,  when  there  is  not  a  single  docmnent 
to  support  the  supposition,  and  when  it  is 
notorious  that  queens,  and  barons,  and  In- 
shops,  and  others  had  offices  of  this  title, 
from  which  Reginald  might  have  beennamed. 

Leland  goes  on  to  say  that  '  he  felle  to 
religion,  and  was  prior  to  Montegue,  and 
enlarged  yt  with  buildings  and  possessions.' 
Yet  it  is  curious  that  hia  name  is  not  in 
the  list  of  priors  contained  in  the  Cottonian 
Manuscript  copied  by  Willis  in  his  'Mitred 
Abbeys,'  and  that  in  the  recapitulation  of 
the  grants  to  that  priory  set  forth  in  iti 
various  charters  hia  name  does  not  appear 
as  a  benefactor. 

BEeniALD,  or  RA^YKALD,  WaliB 
(Archbishop  of  Cantkrburt),  ^ihsm 
career  affords  an  eariy  instance  in  Ebdiik 
history  of  the  advance  of  an  individual  inB 
the  lower  ranks  of  life  to  the  hi^eit  aedb* 
siastical  hcmouis,  waa  the  aonoi •  Ubtffit 
Windsor,  and, bong  bred  up  fn*^ 
was  brouffht  under  the  notioe  I 

a  monarch  whose  powen  of  <  i 


I 


REGINALD 

*  vere  seldom  at  fault.  The  king  soon  dia- 
Goyered  merit  in  the  youthful  aspirant, 
whoee  appointment  as  tutor  to  the  young 
prince  is  no  small  evidence  in  favour  of  his 
character  and  abilities.  Judging  both  from 
the  earlier  and  the  more  matured  career  of 
his  puvil,  he  fiuled  (as  might  be  expected 
from  tne  events  of  his  own  life)  to  check 
the  weakneMS  of  the  prince's  judgment^  or  to 
instil  into  him  steaoiness  of  purpose.  He^ 
however^  satisfied  the  father,  nrom  whom  he 
received  the  living  of  Wimbledon  in  1298^ 
and  ingratiated  himself  with  the  son,  on 
whose  accession  he  was  rapidly  advanced. 
He  immediately  obtained  a  canonry  in  St. 
Paul's,  and  was  constituted  treasurer  of  the 
Ezcheiauer  on  August  22,  1307.  To  this 
was  added  the  bishopric  of  Worcester  in 
April  1308 ;  and  on  July  0,  1310.  resign- 
ing the  treasurership.  the  Great  Seal  was 
placed  in  his  hands.  The  terms  used  on  the 
roll  recording  this  event  make  it  doubtful 
whether^he  was  invested  with  the  office  of 
chancellor  or  vrith  that  of  keeper.  The  oath 
he  is  described  as  taking  is,  *  de  officio  Sigilli 
iUiusfideliter  exequendo,' which  would  seem 
to  apply  more  directly  to  the  latter.  In  sub- 
sequent records,  however,  he  is  certainly 
called  chancellor.  (Madox,u.SS,4S.)  Soon 
^er  his  appointment  he  lent  lOOO/.  to  the 
king,  to  the  advance  of  which  has  been  at- 
tributed, without  sufficient  evidence,  his 
attainment  of  the  Seal ;  but,  as  the  loan  was 
made  after  his  elevation,  it  may  more  cha- 
ritably be  ascribed  to  his  desire  to  assist  the 
king  in  the  necessities  which  then  pressed 
upon  him,  the  ordainers  being  in  fact  at  that 
tmie  in  possession  of  the  government  and 
the  royal  purse :  an  order,  indeed,  for  the 
repayment  of  nearly  one-half  of  it  was  made 
so  early  as  May  1, 1311. 

Between  December  19, 1311,  and  October 
6^  1312,  the  Seal  never  appears  to  have  been 
under  his  control ;  but  on  the  latter  day  it 
was  again  placed  in  his  hands,  only,  how- 
erer,  as  custos  or  keeper,  remaining  sealed 
up  under  the  seals  of  the  master  of  the 
JEu>lls  and  two  other  clerks  in  Chancery,  in 
whose  presence  it  would  seem  that  all  vmts 
were  sealed.  In  this  manner  the  office  was 
executed  till  April  5,  1314,  which  is  the 
laat  date  on  which  the  bishop  is  mentioned 
in  connection  with  the  Seal. 

His  removal  from  this  high  office,  which 
no  doubt  took  place  about  that  time,  was 
not  occasioned  by  any  diminution  of  his 
aorereiffn's  favour,  but  rather  by  his  having 
attained  a  higher  elevation.  On  the  decease 
of  Archlnshop  Winchelsey  in  May  1313, 
altlioiighthe  monks  had  elected  Dr.  Cobham, 
tiie  sub-dean  of  Salisburv — a  most  learned 
and  excellent  man — in  his  place,  the  king 
coDtrired  to  get  the  election  annulled  by 
the  pope^  and  lus  favourite,  Walter,  to  1>b 
aalMtitated  for  him.  The  bull  by  which 
thia  was  effected  is  dated  October  1, 1313 ; 


REINGER 


551 


and  he  was  with  great  pomp  enthroned  on 
April  19,  1314.  His  rule  over  the  arch- 
bishopric was  illustrated  hj  the  acquisition 
of  many  important  privileges  from  the 
papal  see. 

During  the  earlier  troubles  vrith  the 
barons  he  remained  fedthful  to  the  king; 
but  on  the  queen's  invasion  of  the  king- 
dom he  basely  deserted  his  patron  and 
master,  adding  strength  to  her  party  by  the 
weight  of  lus  position,  and,  on  the  long's 
deposition,  completing  his  infamy  by  cro  wn- 
ingthe  son  of  his  benefactor. 

This  event,  which  took  place  on  February 
1, 1327,  was  quickly  followed  by  his  own 
death.  The  adulterous  queen  is  said  to 
have  so  pressed  the  consecration  of  James 
de  Berkley,  elected  Bishop  of  Exeter,  that 
the  pusillanimous  archbishop,  more  fearful 
of  the  prevailing  and  present  power  than 
that  of  the  pope  at  a  distance,  did  not  dare 
to  resist  Tne  Koman  pontiff,  enraged  that 
his  confirmation  had  not  been  first  obtained, 
by  his  threats  and  reproaches  against  the 
offending  prelate  created  such  terror  or  such 
remorse  m  his  mind  that,  within  a  few  days 
after  the  announcement  of  the  pope's  anger, 
a  mortal  sickness  fell  upon  him.  His  death 
occurred  at  Mortiake  on  November  10, 1327, 
and  his  remains  were  interred  in  Canterbury 
Cathedral.  (6rO£/ic?tn,103, 402;  I£€uted,jdi- 
379 ;  Angl,  Sac.  i.  18,  69,  632.) 

SEIKOEB,  or  SEHQEB,  John,  was  the 
eldest  son  of  the  under-named  Richard; 
and  when  his  father  was  sheriff  of  London, 
in  0  Henry  UI.,  he  and  his  brother  Matthew 
were  delivered  as  pledges  for  the  peace  of 
that  city.  (Itot,  Clous,  i.  617,  609.)  Madox 
(ii.  319j  introduces  him  as  a  baron  of  the 
Exchequer  in  42  Henry  lU.,  but  nothing 
further  has  been  discovered  concerning  him 
in  that  character.  In  62  Henry  III.  he 
proceeded  against  Stephen  Bukerel  for  tak- 
mg  away  his  goods  and  chattels  from  his 
houses  in  '  Enefeud,  Edelmeton,  Mimmes 
et  Stebeneth,'  in  Middlesex  (Abb,  Flacit 
176),  and  cued  in  the  following  year. 
(Ca/.  Inquis,  p.  m.  i.  32.) 

BEIHOEB,  or  REKOEB,  Richard,  was 
an  alderman  of  London,  serving  the  office 
of  sheriff  in  6,  0,  and  7  Henry  UL,  and 
that  of  mayor  in  the  four  following  years. 
During  part  of  this  time  the  king  committed 
the  chamberlainship  of  the  city  to  him  and 
John  Travers ;  and  m  11  Henry  lU.  he  had 
a  grant  of  the  Queen's  Hithe  (Kipa  Reginse) 
to  hold  at  40/.  a  year.  About  the  same 
time  he  and  Alexander  de  Dorset  had  the 
custody  of  the  Mint  of  London ;  but  in  13 
Henry  HI.  it  was  transferred,  together  vrith 
that  of  Canterbury,  to  him  alone,  for  four 
years,  at  an  annuu  rent  of  seven  hundred 
marks.  It  was  while  he  held  this  office 
that  he  acted  as  a  justicier,  fines  being 
levied  before  him  trom  Hilary  1230  till 
Easter  1231.    There  is  a  record  showing 


552. 


KEnnr 


that  he  was  still  alderman  in  19  Henry  III. 
He  died  soon  afterwards.  (Stow^s  Survey; 
Rot,  Clatis.  i.  517,  &c.,  iL  21,  &c. ;  Madox, 
i.  709-781,  ii.  134.) 

SEIinr,  Joim  D£,  was  the  son  of  a  knight 
of  the  same  name  to  whom*  the  manor  of 
Hemmeston  in  Devonshire  belonged,  and 
who  bore  arms  against  King  John.  His 
mother,  in  6  Henry  III.,  married  Nicholas 
de  Heaulton  without  the  king's  licence :  and 
he  was  placed  imder  the  wardship  of  Warin 
Fitz-Joel.  In  9  Henr^  III.,  1225,  he  was 
appointed  one  of  the  lustices  itinerant  for 
Somersetshire,  in  which  county  also  he  had 
property.  No  other  mention  is  made  of 
him  till  1240,  when  his  executors  were 
allowed  to  have  administration  of  his  pro- 
perty. (Rat,  Clam,  i.  270,  577,  ii.  4,  76; 
Excerpt  e  Rot.  Fin.  i.  88,  89,  460.) 

BETFOBD,  Robert  de,  was  the  son  of 
Kichard,  who  was  the  son  of  Richard  de 
Retford  (Abb.  Ptacit.  284),  so  called  from  a 
town  in  Nottinghamshire.  He  was  first  sum- 
moned to  parliament  among  the  judges  in 
August  12?)5,  28  Edward  L,  and  there  are 
records  of  his  pleas  as  a  justice  itinerant  at 
Norwich  and  at  Dunstable  in  the  next  year. 
(^Ahb.  Rat.  On'*/,  i.  96,  97.)  His  attendance 
in  parliament  in  that  character  is  noted  till 
the  end  of  the  reign  {Pari  Wn'tSy  i.  801)  ; 
and  in  February  1307  he  was  placed  among 
the  justices  of  trailbaston  for  the  home 
counties.     {Rot.  Pari.  i.  218.) 

From  the  commencement  of  the  next 
reign  there  are  regular  writs  summoning 
him  to  parliament  in  the  same  manner, 
which  are  continued  till  June  1318,  11 
Edward  II. ;  and  there  is  evidence  of  his 
exercising  his  functions,  not  only  in  the 
home  district,  but  in  Durham  and  in  Lei- 
cestershire, up  to  the  ninth  vear  of  that  reign. 
(Ibid.VAi);  Pari.  If  n^,  ii?  1331.) 
.  SETFOBD,  WILLL431  DE,  was  probably 
the  son  of  the  above  Robert  de  Ketford. 
The  document  by  which  he  was  appointed 
keeper  of  the  great  wardrobe  is  on  the  Roll 
of  Nottinghamshire,  the  county  to  which 
that  liolH»rt  belonged.  This  is  dated  in  23 
Edward  HI. ;  and  he  is  there  called  *cleri- 
cus.'  He  was  rai.sed  to  the  Exchequer 
bench  as  a  baron  on  November  27,  1354, 
and  is  nientionod  a«  a  justice  of  assize  in 
82  Edward  III.,  in  S»*rieant  Benloe*s  Re- 
ports. The  period  of  his  death  or  retire- 
ment has  not  been  discovered.  (Abb.  Rot. 
Oriff.  ii.  20.5;  ^\  Fcedera,  iii.  114.) 

EEYGATE,  John  de,  in  52  Henry  HI., 
1268,  was  appointed  king's  escheator  north 
of  Trent,  and  during  the  time  he  held  that 
office  he  performed  the  duties  of  a  justicier, 
from  May  1269  to  August  1271,  numerous 
payments  being  made  for  assizes  before  him 
in  the  northern  counties.  He  held  the 
escheatorship  to  the  end  of  that  reign. 
{Rvcerpt,  <?  Rot.  Fin.  ii.  467-585.) 
Under  Hidward  I.  there  is  no  actaal  entry 


REYNOLDS 

showing  that  he  was  a  justider  at  Wwt- 
minster;  but  from  his  frequent  employ- 
ment as  a  justice  itinerant,  and  the  {KMition 
he  gradually  attained  in  the  commiaaoiit, 
it  seems  probable  that  he  o(Hitinaed  to  hdil 
the  office.  In  3  Edward  I.  he  waa  the  third 
of  four  justices  itinerai^t  into  Woioester- 
shire,  and  in  the  next  year  the  head  of  four 
j  ustices  of  astdze.  In  6  Edward  L  his  name 
in  two  commissions  of  itinera  was  preceded 
only  by  that  of  the  Bishop  of  Worcester; 
in  the  following  year  he  headed  the  cizcuit 
into  Dorset,  Somerset,  and  Wilts ;  and  in 
12  Edward  I.  a  writ  was  addressed  to  him 
and  another  to  hold  an  asmze  in  North- 
umberland.     {Abb,  IHacit.  276.) 

BETirOIJ>S,JA>[£s(l).  There  weretwo 
judges  of  the  name  of  James  Reynolds  is 
the  reign  of  George  II.— one  h»d  chief 
baron,  and  the  other  baron  of  the  Exche- 
quer. They  were  not  contemponiiies  is 
Westminster  Hall,  the  former  oei^  dead 
before  his  namesake  ascended  the  Engiiak 
bench,  although  he  had  been  chief  jiutiee 
of  the  Common  Pleas  in  Ireland  for  nesrlj 
thirteen  years  before.     The  chief  baroo's 

Cat-grandfather  (who  was  also  the 
on*s  ancestor)  was  Sir  James  Hey- 
nolds^  of  Castle  Camps  in  Cambridge- 
shire, who  flourished  in  the  reign  of 
Queen  Elizabeth.  His  grandfather  and 
father  were  also  named  James,  both  re- 
siding at  Bumstead  Helions  in  ^sex.  The 
estate  of  the  former,  who  married  Doroth?, 
a  daughter  of  Sir  William  De  Grey,  of 
Merton  in  Norfolk,  was  decimated  during 
the  Rebellion,  on  account  of  his  loyalty  and 
great  zeal  for  King  Charles.  The'  latter  in 
1655,  at  the  age  of  twenty-two,  married 
Judith,  the  eldest  daughter  of  Sir  Wilfiim 
Hervey,  of  Ickworth,  near  Bury  St  Ed- 
munds, ancestor  of  the  Marquis  of  Bristol 
By  this  lady,  who  was  then  forty  years  d 
age,  he  had  three  sons ;  and  soon  after  her 
death,  in  1679,  he  took  for  his  second  wife, 
in  1682,  Bridget,  daughter  of  —  Pariier, 
who  smidved  her  husband  thirty-three 
years,  and  died  in  1723.  Both  the  ladies 
were  buried  at  Castle  Camps. 

By  the  latter  marriage  ne  had  an  only 
son,  James,  the  future  chief  baron,  who 
was  born  on  January  6,  1086,  at  the  house 
of  his  mother's  aunt  Gibbs  in  ClericenwelL 
His  precise  relationship  to  the  other  jadg^ 
is  not  traced  with  certainty,  but  as  by  his 
will  he  bequeathed  a  large  legacy  to  hii 
niece,  bearing  the  family  name  of' Jathth* 
and  as  the  other  judge  (to  whom  the  chief 
baron  had  before  hi$  second  marriage  de- 
yised  his  estates  in  Cambridgediire)  had  a 
sister  named  Judith,  it  would  seem,  if  ika 
were  the  same  Juditii,  that  he  nw  tti 


nephew  of  the  chief  baron,  and  nihifi 
the  son  of  the  chief  baron's  balMMttiK 
Hobert.  ( CoUMs  Forage,  L  IMx  Bmi* 
Suffolk,2S7;  Marmt^sSii^lkm^) 


R£YNQi<DS 

The  chief  haron  wo  initiated  into  the 
mjBteriee  of  the  law  at  LincoLi's  Inn,  where 
he  was  called  to  the  har  in  1712,  and  was 
included  in  the  hatch  of  Serjeants  created 
by  Georffe  L  in  the  first  year  of  his  reign. 
Haviiu^  been  in  1712  elected  recorder  of 
Buy  St  Edmunds,  probably  by  the  influ- 
ence of  the  Hervey  family,  then  ennobled, 
that  borough  returned  him  as  its  repre- 
Mntative  in  1717  and  1722.  In  1718  he 
was  selected  by  the  Prince  of  Wales  to 
ar^ue  in  favour  of  his  rojal  hiffhness's 
dium  to  educate  his  own  children ;  out  the 
judges,  with  only  two  dissentients,  decided 
that  the  care  and  education  of  the  kinff's 
grandchildren  belonfi^  to  his  majesty  by  uie 
royal  prerogative.    {State  Triab,  xvi.  12030 

His  argument  did  not  prevent  George  I. 
from  promoting  him  to  a  judgeship  of  the 
fi[ing  8  Bench  in  March  1725 ;  nor  did  his 
old  client  George  II.  forget  him,  but  in 
A]^  1730  raised  him  to  the  office  of  lord 
chief  baron.  After  presiding  in  the  Ex- 
chequer for  eight  years  he  resigned  in  July 
1788 ;  and  dying  on  February  9,  1739,  he 
was  buried  in  St.  James's  Church,  Bury  St. 
Edmunds,  where  there  is  a  splendid  mo- 
nument to  his  memory. 

That  the  graceful  account  of  his  merits 
as  a  jud^  and  as  a  man  which  his  epitaph 
records  is  not  exaggerated,  may  well  be 
believed  from  the  prayer  (still  in  existence) 
which  be  was  in  the  daily  habit  of  using, 
petitioning  for  Hhat  measure  of  under- 
standing and  discernment,  that  spirit  of 
justice^  and  that  portion  of  courage,  as  may  ' 
both  enable  and  dispose  me  to  judge  and 
determine  those  weighty  affairs  which  may 
this  day  fall  unto  my  consideration,  without 
error  or  perplexity,  without  fear  or  affec- 
tion, without  prejudice  or  passion,  without 
▼anity  or  ostentation,  but  in  a  manner 
agreeable  to  the  obligation  of  the  oath  and 
dignity  of  that  station  to  which  Thou  in 
Thy  good  providence  hast  been  pleased  to 
advance  me.' 

He  was  twice  married.  His  first  wife  was 
Mary,  daughter  of  Thomas  Smith,  Esq.,  of 
Thrandeston  Hall,  Suffolk ;  and  liis  second 
was  Alicia,  daughter  of  —  Rainbird.  He 
left  no  issue  by  either.  On  his  elevation  to 
the  bench  he  resigned  the  recordership  of 
Bury,  but  showed  his  affection  for  that 
borouyh  by  leaving  200^  to  its  corporation. 

SJEr  tr^.  of  Ven.  Archdeacon  Hale,  Rev. 
1  C,  Bade^  Hev,  A,  WratislaWj  and  Mr. 
Herbert  Frere;  Notee  and  Queries,  3rd  S.  i. 
235,  iii.  54.) 

SETKOLDS,  James  (2),  bom  in  1684, 
was,  according  to  the  inscription  on  his 
monument  at  Castle  Camps,  Cambridge- 
ihire,  'the  last  male  descendant  of  Sir 
fames  Reynolds,  knight,  who  flourished  in 
Jiese  parts  in  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth.' 
rhough  it  is  difficult  to  ascertain  the 
nal  connection  by  relationship  between 


EICH 


553 


him  and  Chief  Baron  James  Reynolds,  it 
would  appear,  for  the  reasons  already  given 
in  the  me  of  the  latter,  that  he  was  the 
nephew  of  the  chief  baron,  although  bom 
two  years  before  that  judge.  They  both 
had  nroperty  in  the  manor  of  Castie  Camps, 
which  ues  on  the  borders  of  Essex  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Bumstead-Helions.  The 
baron  is  described  in  the  books  of  Lincoln's 
Inn,  to  which  he  was  admitted  in  Febmary 
1704^  as  the  son  and  heir-apjaarent  of 
Rob^  Reynolds,  of  Bumsteaa  in  Essex. 
This  gentleman  was,  it  seems  probable,  the 
half-brother  of  Chief  Baron  James  Rey- 
nolds, and  a  son  of  James  Reynolds  of 
Bumstead  by  his  first  wife  Judith,  the 
daughter  of  Sir  William  Hervey  of  Ick- 
worth.  Robert  married  Kesiah  Tyrrell, 
j  the  granddaughter  of  Sir  William  Hervey, 
another  of  wnose  daughters,  Kesiah,  mar- 
ried Thomas  lyrrell,  of  Gipping  in  Suffolk. 

The  baron  was  called  to  the  bar  in  May 
1710,  but  nothing  is  recorded  of  him  till  he 
was  sent  to  Ireluid  on  November  3,  1727, 
as  chief  justice  of  the  Conmion  Pleas.  In 
that  court  he  sat  for  thirteen  years,  and  by 
his  professional  talents  and  accomplished 
manners  endeared  himself  to  all  parties. 
On  retiring  from  this  honourable  post  he 
was  appointed  a  baron  of  the  English  Ex- 
chequer, and  took  his  seat  there  in  May 
1740.  He  was  not  kniffhted  till  Mav  23, 
1745,  on  going  up  with  the  judges'  address. 
He  administered  justice  on  tne  English 
bench  for  seven  years,  and  dying  on  May 
20,  1747,  he  was  buried  in  the  church  of 
Castle  Camps ;  and,  as  his  monument  there 
was  erected  by  his  sister  Judith,  it  is  pro- 
bable that  he  never  married.  {Smyth^a 
Law  Off.  oflrekuid,  121,  309;  Gent.  May. 
at  the  dates.) 

BICH,  Richard  (Lord  Rich^,  was  no 
doubt  of  a  very  ancient  family.  One  of  the 
earliest  of  the  name  is  John  de  Rich,  who 
flourished  at  Rich's  Place  in  Hampshire 
in  the  reign  of  Edward  II.  His  great- 
grandson  was  Richard  Rich,  the  father  of 
another  Richard,  mercer  in  London,  who 
was  sheriff  of  that  city  in  1441,  died 
possessed  of  large  estates  in  Middlesex  and 
Hertfordshire,  and  was  the  founder  of 
five  almshouses  at  Broxboume.  His  second 
son,  Thomas,  had  a  son  Richard,  who,  by 
his  wife  Joan  Dingley,  was  the  father  of 
the  chancellor.  (  Wottm*s  Baronet,  iv.  58(5 ; 
Baronage,  ii.  387 ;  Tedani,  Vetust.  299.) 

Richard  Rich  resided  in  his  youth  in  the 
same  parish  in  London  where  Sir  Thomas 
More  owelt,  and,  according  to  the  authority 
of  that  eminent  man,  was  of  no  commend- 
able fame,  very  light  of  tongue  and  a  great 
c[icer— one  with  whom  neither  he  nor  any 
man  else  would  ever  in  any  matter  of 
importance  vouchsafe  to  conmiunicate. 
'  And  so,'  More  adds  {Roper,  82),  *in  your 
house  at  the  Temple,  where  hath  been  your 


554 


BICH 


chief  bringing  up,  were  you  likewise  ac- 
counted/ Assured  of  the  truth  of  More's 
representation,  it  would  be  curious  to  dis- 
cover by  what  means  a  character  of  this 
stamp  pushed  himself  up  so  as  to  become 
a  reader  at  the  Middle  Temple  in  1529. 
{Dttgdale's  Orig.  216.) 

By  what  patronage  he  acquired  the  office 
of  attorney-general  of  Wales  in  1532  is  not 
told.  That  of  solicitor-general  to  the  king 
followed  on  October  10,  1633.  This  he 
held  till  April  13,  1536,  a  period  of  two 
years  and  a  half,  during  which,  by  his 
intrigues,  his  degrading  subserviency,  and 
his  bold-faced  perjury,  though  he  paved 
the  way  to  worldly  honours,  he  at  the  same 
time  secured  to  his  name  the  everlasting 
infamy  that  attaches  to  it.  Cunning  much 
less  than  Rich's  would  soon  discover  that 
his  interest  lay  in  gratifying  the  humours 
of  the  king,  but  it  required  a  hardened 
conscience  to  pursue  the  perfidious  course 
which  he  adopted  to  secure  the  royal 
favour.  The  refusal  of  Sir  Thomas  More 
and  Bishop  Fisber  to  acknowledge  the 
king's  supremacy  had  irritated  the  monarch 
beyond  even  his  usual  ferocity,  and  every 
attempt  had  hitherto  failed  in  oringing  the 
two  contumacious  prisoners  wimin  the 
terms  of  the  recent  statute  which  made  it 
high  treason  to  deny  it.  Either  Rich  was 
•umciently  known  to  be  considered  a  fitting 
instrument  to  make  another  trial,  or  he 
voluntarily  imdertook  the  degrading  office. 
The  manner  in  which  he  acted  towards 
both  these  good  and  pious  men  was  ex- 
posed on  their  trials.  That  of  Bishop 
Fisher  came  on  first,  the  sole  evidence 
against  whom  was  Mr.  Solicitor-General 
Rich.  It  was  there  asserted  by  the  bishop, 
and  not  denied,  that  Rich  came  to  him 
with  a  message  from  the  king  desiring  his 
real  opinion  on  the  disputed  point,  and 
that  on  the  bishop's  reminding  him  of  the 
penalti^  in  the  new  act  in  case  anything 
was  said  contrair  to  that  law.  Rich  assured 
him  on  the  king  s  honour,  and  on  the  word 
of  a  kin^,  that  no  advantage  would  be 
taken  a^nst  him  for  declaring  his  secret 
mind,  which  he  professed  that  the  king  was 
desirous  to  know  for  his  own  guidance  in 
future.  To  this  Rich  added  his  own  faith- 
ful promise  that  he  would  never  utter  the 
bishop's  words  but  to  the  king  alone. 
Compelled  thus,  as  it  were  by  the  king's 
command,  the  bishop  expressed  his  real 
sentiments  on  the  statute )  and  upon  these 
alone,  so  uttered  and  so  perfidiously  be- 
trayed, was  the  aged  bishop  most  unright- 
eously condemned.  Without  charging  the 
witness  with  peijury  (for  there  is  too  much 
reason  to  believe  he  was  the  bearer  of  such 
a  message  from  the  king),  it  is  difficult  to 
determine  where  the  greater  share  of  in- 
£uny  rests— on  the  man  who  would  suffer 
himuBelf  to  be  made  an  instrument  in  so  vile 


BICH 

a  plot,  or  on  the  jud^  who  oonld  permit 
conviction  on  such  evidence. 

On  the  next  trial    Sir   Thomas  More 
directly  charged  him  with  peijonr  in  his 
representation    of  what   passed    oetween 
them.      There  it  appears   that  Rich,  oil 
going  to  the  Tower    to    take  away  Sir 
Thomas's  books,  led  him  under  pretence  of 
friendship  into  an  argument,  in  the  coune 
of  which,  as  Rich  alleged,   Sir  Thomas- 
asserted  that  the  parliament  had  no  more 
power  to  make  the  king  supreme  head  of 
the  Church  than  it  had  to  declare  that  God 
was  not  God.     Who  will  doubt  More's 
asseveration  of  the  falsehood  of  Rich*s  evi- 
dence?   For  who  can  believe  that  More 
would  be  incautious  enough,  especially  to  a 
man  of  Rich's  known  character,  to  betray 
his  sentiments  so  unreservedly  on  such  an 
occasion,  when  he  had  guardedly  concealed 
them  in  all  the  various  attempts  which 
persons  of  high  position  and  ability  had 
previously  made    to  entrap  himP  '£Te& 
Rich's  impudence  must  have  been  dannted 
before  Sir  Thomas's  exposure  of  his  fonner 
life,  and  his  diniified  denial  of  the  evidence 
now  offered.    The  two  witnesses  called  to 
support  Rich's  testimony  failed  to  assist 
him,  for  though  they  acknowledged  that 
they   were    present,  they   declared   tiiat 
they  were  too  busy  in  packing  the  boob  to 
give  ear  to  the  conversation.     (SUde  Tridi^ 
1.  387-400.) 

Rich,  however,  procured  what  he  sought 
for — his  own  advancement  In  the  next 
year  he  obtained  the  valuable  place  of 
chirographer  in  the  Court  of  Commoi 
Pleas,  and  resigned  the  solidtorship  for  the 
more  dignified  and  profitable  office  of 
chancellor  of  the  Court  of  Auffmentations, 
then  newly  established.  He  did  not  neglect 
the  opportunity  thus  obtained  of  securing 
to  himself  an  enormous  share  of  the  plunder 
arising  from  the  dissolution  of  the  monas- 
teries. The  inquisition  of  his  possesaons. 
taken  at  his  death,  proves  the  immense 
extent  of  his  acquisitions.  One  of  the 
earliest  and  richest  was  Leeze  Priozy  and 
manor  in  Essex,  which  he  made  his  capital 
seat,  and  from  which  he  subsequently  took 
his  title.     (MorofU,  ii.  101.) 

At  the  new  parliament  which  met  on 
June  8,  1536,  he  was  chosen  speaker,  and 
made  himself  as  remarkable  for  the  gross- 
ness  of  his  flattery  as  he  bad  previously  done 
for  the  baseness  of  his  actions.  (Dcarl  But. 
i.  529,  534.)  In  his  introductory  speech  he 
compared  the  king  '  for  j  ustice  and  prudence 
to  Solomon,  for  strength  and  fortitude  to 
Samson,  and  for  beauty  and  comelineas  to 
Absalom;'  and  on  another  occasion  he 
likened  him  to  the  sun,  which  •^^^l*^  all 
noxious  vapours  hurtful  to  us,  and  ciMOihid 
those  seeds,  plants^  and  fruito  nMVMHivir 
the  support  of  Human  life :  '  ^ 

obseqmous  flatterer,  *  *^^«  '^^ 


BICE 

lent  prince  takes  away  by  his  prudence  all 
tiioee  enormities  which  may  hereafter  be 
hmrtfol  to  us  and  our  posterity,  and  enacts 
such  laws  as  will  be  a  defence  to  the  good, 
and  a  great  terror  to  ctH  doers.'  He  was 
soon  after  knighted. 

He  was  a  regular  attendant  at  the  coun- 
cil ;  and  at  one  of  the  meetinffs  in  1641  he 
was  charged  by  one  John  Hillary  with  not 
doing  what  pertained  to  his  duty  with  re- 
spect to  a  supposed  concealment  by  the 
abbot  of  Keynsham  of  a  part  of  his  income, 
but  the  unfortimate  informer  ^t  nothing 
for  his  pains  but  imprisonment  m  the  Mar- 
shalsea.  (Acts  Privy  Councilf  vii.  101.) 
He  is  charged  also  with  having  assisted 
Lord  Chancellor  Wriothesley  in  working 
the  rack  on  which  poor  Anne  Askew  was 
stretched ;  but  even  prejudice  must  hesitate 
to  believe  this. 

In  1544  he  resigned  the  chancellorship  of 
the  Court  of  Augmentations;  but  in  the 
expedition  apdnst  Boulogne  in  that  year 
he  accompamed  King  Henrv  as  treasurer  of 
the  army — an  office  which  ne  held  in  Scot- 
land as  well  as  in  France ;  and  he  assisted 
in  negotiating  the  treaty  of  peace  with  the 
Frendi  king.  Under  Henry  s  will  he  had 
a  legacy  of  200/.,  and  was  appointed  one  of 
the  twelve  assistants  to  the  sixteen  privy 
councillors. 

On  February  16, 1547,  about  a  fortnight 
after  the  accession  of  Edward  VI.,  in  con- 
sequence of  an  asserted  promise  by  the  late 
king,  he  was  created  Baron  Rich  of  Leeze 
in  £raex.  On  Lord  Wriothesley's  dismis- 
sal from  the  chancellorship  on  March  6, 
Rich  hoped  to  supply  his  place ;  but  the 
lord  protector  hesitated  for  more  than  half 
a  year  as  to  the  choice  he  should  make, 
leaving  the  Seal  in  the  meantime  in  the 
temporary  keeping  of  Lord  St.  John.  Rich, 
however,  havmg  at  last  managed  to  ac- 
quire the  confidence  of  Somerset,  was  in- 
vested with  the  office  on  October  23. 
Within  two  years  he  turned  against  the 
protector,  and,  joining  the  £arf  of  War- 
wick, headed  the  subscribers  to  the  pro- 
clamation against  him.  The  last  puolic 
duty  he  is  mentioned  as  performing  was  on 
August  28, 1551,  when  ne  went  with  Sir 
Anthony  Wingfi eld  and  Sir  William  Petre 
to  the  Princess  Mary  at  Copped  Hall  in 
Essex,  to  announce  to  her  the  determina- 
tion of  the  coimcil  that  private  mass  should 
not  be  nerformed  in  her  household.  She 
retumea  a  resolute  answer,  declaring  that 
none  of  the  new  service  should  be  used  in 
her  house.     {Arckaohguiy  xviii.  161.) 

Very  shortly  after  this  there  are  two 
entries  in  King  Edward's  journal  which, 
though  subsequently  erased  by  his  own  pen, 
show  the  conmiencement  of  doubt  and  un- 
easLnees  on  the  part  of  Rich.  On  October 
1,  the  king  mentions  that  the  chancellor 
hiad  sent  back  a  letter  for  the  execution  of 


BIOH 


555 


the  commission  against  the  Bishops  of  Chi- 
chester and  Worcester,  because  out  eight 
members  of  the  council  had  signed  it, 
though  ten  v^ere  present;  whereupon  his 
majesty  wrote  a  letter  to  Rich  marvelling 
at  his  refusal,  (CaL  St.  Papers  ri547-«01 
55.)  In  less  than  three  months  Lord  Rich 
resigned  his  office  on  December  21, 1551. 
By  an  entry  in  the  journal  the  king  attri- 
butes his  retirement  to  illness ;  and  there  is 
no  doubt  that  in  the  previous  year  he  had 
been  so  incapadted  by  sickness  that  a  com- 
mission had  been  issued  to  the  master  of 
the  Rolls  and  others  to  hear  causes  for  him. 
(RymeTf  xv.  246.)  Hayward  (Kenneths 
JTm.  ii.  323),  however,  gives  a  different 
version.  He  suggests  that  a  wish  to  keep 
the  ^  Mi  estate '  he  had  got.  and  his  desire 
to  avoid  tiie  troubles  he  foresaw  in  the 
coming  parliament,  made  him  petition  for 
his  discharge  on  account  of  his  infirmities. 
Heylin's  explanation  (i.  251)  of  the  occur- 
rence is  more  curious.  'It  so  happened,' 
he  says,  Hhat  the  lord  chancellor,  com- 
miserating the  condition  of  the  Duke  of 
Somerset,  who  had  been  committed  to  the 
Tower  on  his  second  disgrace  in  October, 
'  though  formerly  he  had  showed  himself 
against  him,  despatched  a  letter  to  him, 
concerning  some  proceedings  of  the  lords 
of  the  coimcil  which  he  thought  fit  for 
him  to  know.  Which  letter,  being  hastily 
superscribed  "  To  the  Duke,"  with  no  other 
tiUe^  he  gave  to  one  of  his  servants,  to  be 
earned  to  him.  By  whom,  for  the  want  of 
a  more  particular  direction,  it  was  delivered 
to  the  hands  of  the  Duke  of  Norfolk.  But, 
the  mistake  being  presently  found,  the  lord 
chancellor,  knowing  into  what  hands  he 
was  like  to  fall,  makes  his  address  unto  the 
king  the  next  morning  betimes,  and  humbly 
prays  that,  in  regard  to  his  great  age,  he 
might  be  discharged  of  the  Seal  and  office 
of  chancellor.' 

Lord  Rich  did  not  wholly  retire  from 
political  life,  nor  could  he  refrain  from 
joining  in  the  closing  plot  of  the  reign. 
He  protested  in  the  parliament  of  1553 
against  a  bill  for  the  regulation  of  the  re- 
venue (Pari,  Hist,  i.  600) ;  and  he  not  only 
witnessed  the  king's  will  and  subscribed  the 
undertaking  to  support  its  provisions,  which 
altered  the  succession  ol  the  crown  and 
settled  it  on  Lady  Jane  Grey,  but  he  also 
gave  such  pronunent  aid  to  the  project  as 
to  induce  the  lords  of  the  council  to  address 
a  letter  of  thanks  to  him  for  his  services. 
(Lingard,  vu.  103, 120.) 

By  a  timely  desertion  of  the  party  he 
escaped  the  immediate  consequences,  and 
he  probably  obtained  favour  with  Queen 
Mary  by  his  profession  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  faith.  In  a  month  after  she  was 
proclaimed  he  was  nominated  as  one  of 
the  coimcil  to  attend  at  a  sermon  preached 
at  St.  Paul's  Cross,  when  a  tumult  was 


556 


RICHABD 


apprehended,  and  was  actaallj  summoned 
among  the  twenty-five  peers  appointed  to 
try  the  Duke  of  Northumberland  for  the 
cnme  in  which  he  himself  had  participated. 
U  Repmi  Pub,  Eec,  App.  ii.  234.)  He 
lormed  part  of  the  commission  for  deciding 
on  the  claims  to  do  service  at  the  queen's 
coronation  (Bi/mer,  xv.  338),  and  his  name 
was  freq^uently  placed  at  the  head  of  the 
commissions  in  nis  county  for  trying  here- 
tics, at  the  cruel  execution  of  some  of  whom 
he  was  directed  to  be  present.  (Archao^ 
loffia,  xviii.  181.) 

During  the  ten  years  that  he  lived  under 
the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth  little  is  told 
of  him,  except  that  in  the  first  year  he 
voted  against  the  new  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  and  that  in  1566  he  was  one  of  the 
committee  of  Lords  appointed  to  confer 
with  the  Commons  on  the  subject  of  the 
queen's  marriage.     (PiarL  Hid,  607,  703.) 

He  survived  nearly  seventeen  years  after 
his  retirement  from  the  chanceU6rship,  and 
employed  himself  in  several  charitable 
works  in  the  neighbourhood  of  his  mansion. 
Dying  about  May  1568,  he  was  buried  in 
Felsted  Church. 

By  his  wife,  Elizabeth,  sister  of  William 
Jenks,  of  London,  grocer,  he  had  a  very 
numerous  family.  He  was  succeeded  in 
the  title  by  his  eldest  son,  Robert,  whose 
son,  also  Robert,  was  created  in  1618  Earl 
of  Warwick.  The  earl's  second  son  was 
advanced  to  the  peerage  in  1622  as  Baron 
Kensington,  to  which  was  added  the  earl- 
dom of  Holland  in  1624,  but  both  titles 
became  extinct  in  1759.  (IVoUons  Bar- 
onet, iv.  586 ;  Nicolas's  Synojms,) 

BICHABD  (Bishop  of  Hebeford)  was 
one  of  Kin^  Henry's  chaplains,  and  is  men- 
tioned by  Ihynne  as  keeper  of  the  Seal 
when  Ranulph  was  chancellor.  In  no 
document,  however,  is  he  so  designated, 
and  Malmesbury,  with  greater  probability, 
calls  him  *Clericu8  de  Siffillo.^  In  1120 
he  was  preferred  to  the  bishopric  of  Here- 
ford, and  dyincp  at  Ledbury  on  August  15, 
1127,  he  was  buried  in  his  own  cathedral. 
{Godmn,  482 ;  Le  Ncve^  108.) 

SICHABD  was  archdeacon  of  Wilts, 
and  although  his  pleas  and  those  of  his 
companions  are  mentioned  on  the  roll  of  1 
Richard  I.  for  the  county  of  Cornwall, 
they  evidently  refer  to  an  iter  in  a  previous 
year,  as  they  are  immediately  followed  on 
the  same  roll  by  two  other  series  of  pleas, 
the  last  of  which  are  entitled  '  nova  placita,' 
and  were  taken  before  other  Justiciers  in 
that  year.  {Pipe  BoU,  112.)  Li  31  Henry 
lU.,  1185,  he  and  two  others  were  the 
custodes  of  the  see  of  Exeter  while  it  was 
in  the  king's  hands  (Madox,  i.  310),  and  it 
was  probably  while  he  had  that  charge  that 
he  acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  in  the  £oce8e. 

His  death  occurred  about  1203,  6  John. 
(ic  Km,  276.) 


BIOHABDSOK 

BICEABDB,  RiCHABD,  son  and  h^  of 
Thomas  lUchards  of  Coed  in  Merioneth- 
shire, and  Catherine,  sister  of  the  Bev. 
William  Parry,  warden  of  Ruihyn,  wis 
bom  at  Dolgelly  on  November  6,  1752, 
and  commenced  his  education  at  Ruthyn 
grammar  school.  Entering  the  society  of 
the  Inner  Temple,  he  was  called  to  the  bar 
in  1780.  By  his  marriage  in  1785  with 
Catherine,  the  daughter  of  Robert  Vaiu[hsn 
Humphreys,  he  became  possessed  of  the 
estate  of  Caerynwch  in  the  same  county,  of 
which  she  was  the  heiress.  Shortly  after 
he  was  appointed  counsel  to  Queen  Aime's 
Bounty,  of  which  William  Stevens  was 
then  treasurer,  and  was  one  of  the  man- 
hers,  and  ultimately  president^  of '  Nobody's 
Club,'  instituted  in  honour  of  that  amiabk 
gentleman.  His  principal  practice  was  in 
the  Court  of  Chancery.  He  formed  an 
early  friendship  with  Lord  Eldon,  and 
when  promotea  often  sat  for  him  as  speaks 
of  the  House  of  Lords.  But  a  long  time 
elapsed  before  that  promotion  arrived,  for, 
though  he  became  successively  king's  coun- 
sel and  solicitor-general  to  toe  queen,  he 
was  above  sixty  years  old  before  hewai 
appointed  chief  "justice  of  Chester,  in  lisj 
1813.  He  went  only  one  circuit  in  that 
character,  being  raised  to  the  bench  as  a 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  in  the  following 
February,  when  he  was  knighted.  From 
this  position  he  was  promotea  tu  the  head 
of  the  court  in  April  1817.  He  presided 
for  the  next  five  years  and  a  half  with  the 
reputation,  though  not  of  a  brilliant  lawyer, 
yet  of  an  exceUent  judge,  learned  in  his 
arguments  and  sound  in  his  decisions.  Few 
men  have  been  more  respected  and  esteenoed 
in  private  life,  so  amiable  and  benevolent 
was  his  disposition ;  yet  so  fearful  was  he 
that  his  temper  might  have  the  appearance 
of  partiality  that  when  in  court  he  wu 
apt  to  assume  an  asperity  of  manner  that 
was  wholly  opposed  to  his  real  character. 

He  died  on  November  11,  1823,  leaving 
a  large  family,  several  of  whom  gained 
consiaerable  eminence  in  their  father's  pro- 
fession. His  eldest  son  became  a  master 
in  Chancery,  and  was  for  manv  years  the 
representative  in  parliament  of  £as  native 
county.  (Gent,  mag,  Jan.  1834 ;  L^t  cf 
Stevens  [1869].) 

SICHABDSOH,  JoHX,  was  the  third  son 
of  Anthony  Richardson,  a  merchant  of 
London,  and  was  bom  in  Copthall  Court, 
Lothbury,  on  March  3,  1771.  He  com- 
menced his  education  at  Harrow,  and 
finished  it  at  University  College,  Oxford, 
where  he  took  his  degree  of  MA.  in  17d5, 
having  been  assisted  in  his  progress  thiongb 
the  university  by  the  benevolent  aid  iad 
steady  patronage  of  Mr.  StevM^  Ai 
worthv  treasurer  of  Qneen  Anna'a  Bbpi^^ 
He  aided  his  patron  m  prociiiUMptt*MfMl 
of  the  penal  statates  agaiiul  tgd 


RIGHABB60N 

leigy  of  Scotland,  and  was  hifflily  in^tra- 
lental  in  forminfir  a  club  to  Mr.  Stevens's 
ononr,  called  '  Nobody's  Club/  from  the 
eeudonym  under  which  that  gentleman's 
arioQS  writings  were  published.  The  dub 
till  exists,  and  has  numbered  among  its 
aembers  men  the  most  famous  in  literature, 
heoloffy,  and  law. 

Having  been  entered  at  Lincoln's  Inn  in 
Tune  1798,  he  practised  as  a  special  pleader 
or  several  years,  and  was  not  called  to  the 
Mff  till  June  1803.  In  the  verjr  next  year 
le  appeared  as  counsel  for  William  Cob- 
tteiXf  who  was  defendant  in  an  action 
nrougfat  by  Mr.  Plunkett,  and  agun  for 
tiim  when  indicted  for  publishing  a  libel 
igainst  the  lord  lieutenant  and  lord  chan- 
seller  pf  Ireland,  which  was  written  by  I 
Mr.  Justice  Johnson  of  that  country.  He 
also  soon  niter  argued  ably,  though  unsuc- 
cessfully, in  support  of  tne  plea  filed  by 
that  ju^^  agamst  the  jurismction  of  the 
Dourt  of  King's  Bench,  and  afterwards  on 
his  trial  in  that  court.  {State  IViab,  xxix. 
1,63,894,428.) 

Joining  the  Western  Circuit,  both  there 
and  in  Westminster  Hall  he  soon  esta- 
blished such  a  character  for  industry  and 
legal  learning  as  secured  to  him  competent 
encouragement.  When  to  this  was  added 
experience  and  observation,  he  obtained  the 
laborious  and  responsible  office  of  adviser 
to  the  attorney  and  solicitor  general,  com- 
monly denominat<»d  their  *  devil,'  So  effi- 
cient did  he  prove  himself  in  this  capacity, 
and  80  universally  acknowledged  were  his 
superior  attainments,  that  in  November 
1818  he  was  selected  with  the  approbation 
of  all  to  supply  the  vacant  seat  in  the 
Court  crif  Common  Pleas,  and  in  June  fol- 
lowing he  was  knighted.  After  filling  this 
poet  with  the  reputation  of  one  of  the 
soundest  lawyers  of  the  time,  he  was  com- 
pelled by  ill  health  to  retire  from  its  la- 
bours in  May  1824.  He  lived  nearly 
seventeen  years  after  his  resignation,  several 
of  which  he  spent  in  Malta,  where  he  com- 
posed a  code  of  laws  for  tiiat  island.  He 
died  on  March  19, 1841. 

That  excellent  judge  Sir  John  Coleridge 
describes  him  in  a  lecture  he  delivered  m 
1869  as  'a  thoroughly  instructed  lawyer, 
an  accomplished  scholar,  and  a  man  of  the 
soundest  judgment — a  tender-hearted.  God- 
fearing man/  (Life  of  Stevens;  Gent,  Mag, 
July  1841.) 

BICEABDBOH,  Thoxas,  the  son  of  Dr. 
Thomas  Richardson,  a  clergyman  of  Mul- 
barton,  Norfolk,  was  bor^  at  Hard  wick 
in  the  same  county  on  July  8, 1669.  Ad- 
mitted a  member  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  he  was 
called  to  the  Imu*  in  1596,  and  was  elected 
recorder,  firat  of  Bury,  and  afterwards  of 
Norwich,  having  been  nreviously  under- 
etewmrd  of  the  dean  ana  chapter  of  that 
cathedral    {BlamefiekTs  Norfolk,  i.  684.) 


RIOHASDSON 


557 


He  was  appointed  reader  of  Lincoln's  Inn 
in  1614,  on  occasion  of  his  being  called  Ser- 
jeant. His  next  advance  was  to  be  chan- 
cellor to  the  queen;  and  soon  after  her 
death,  being  elected  member  for  St  Albans, 
he  was  chosen  speaker  of  James's  thira 
parliament  in  January  1(^1,  which  was 
remarkable  for  the  proceedings  which  re- 
sulted in  the  disgrace  of  LoM  Chancellor 
Bacon,  against  whom  Mr.  SpMiker  Richard- 
son had  to  demand  tiie  judgment  of  the 
Lords.  During  this  parliament  he  received 
the  honour  of  knighthood,  and  after  two 
noisy  sessions  it  was  dissolved  in  December 
following.  (Pari  Hist,  i.  1191-1871.)  He 
was  not  replaced  in  the  speaker's  chair  in 
the  next  parliament ;  but  on  February  20, 
1626,  he  received  the  appointment  of  king's 
Serjeant 

On  the  place  of  lord  chief  justice  of  the 
Common  Pleas  becoming  vacant  at  the  end 
of  that  year,  eleven  months  were  allowed 
to  pass  before  it  was  filled  up.  It  was  then 
given  to  Sir  Thomas  Richardson  on  Novem- 
ber 22, 1626,  not  without  suspicion  that  its 
acquisition    cost   him    17,00(V.     (Yonge^s 
Dutry,  97.)    There  is  a  letter  in  the  State 
Paper  Office  (Co/.  [1626-6]  482}  from  the 
king  directing  him  as  soon  as  ne  has  the 
chief  justiceship  to    admit   one    Edward 
Nicholas  to  a  clerkship  of  the  Treasurv,  an- 
ciently called  the  cleric  of  Hell,  whicn  the 
chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas  had  been 
used  to  appoint.    This  perhaps  was  one  of 
the  conditions   of  his  advance;    but  his 
marriage  in  the  next  month  with  his  second 
wife,  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas 
Beaumont,  of  Staughton  in  Leicestershire, 
and  widow  of  Sir  John  Ashbumham,  sister 
of  the  Duke  of  Buckingham's  mother,  more 
probably  accounts  for  the  elevation.   When, 
two  years  afterwards,  the  duke  was  assassi- 
nated, Sir  Thomas,  on  a  question  put  to 
him  by  the  king,  whether  the  murderer 
might  not  be  put  to  the  rack,  had  the  grati- 
fication to  convey  the  judges'  imanimous 
opinion  that  torture  was  not  known  or 
allowed  by  the  law.   On  two  or  three  other 
occasions  be  showed  himself  moderate  in 
his  sentences  and  independent  in  his  prin- 
ciples {StaU  Trials,  iii.  369-874) ;  but  he 
was  considered  by  the  parliament  to  be  a 
favourer  of  the  Jesuits.     (i^W.   Bid.  ii. 
476.)    After  presiding  for  five  years  in  the 
Common  Pleas,  he  was  removed  on  October 
24,  1681,  to  the  chief  justiceship  of  the 
Kmg's  Bench,  where  he  sat  during  the 
remainder  of  his  life.  He  died  on  February 
4,  1636,  and  was  buried  in  Westminister 
Abbey,  where  his  monument  may  still  be 
seen. 

Although  esteemed  a  good  lawyer,  he 
was  not  respected  on  the  bench.  Evel3ni 
(i.  10)  calls  him  *  that  jeering  judge ; '  and 
no  doubt  he  carried  his  inclination  to  humour 
and  jocularity  too  much  into  court.    The 


558 


BICKHUL 


chief  justice  was  inclined  to  the  Puritans. 
His  sentence  against  Sherfield  for  breaking 
a  painted  glass  window  was  more  lenient 
than  that  of  other  members  of  the  court ; 
and  he  made  an  order,  while  on  the  Somer- 
setshire Circuit,  to  suppress  wakes  and  other 
pastimes  on  Sundays.  For  this  the  bishops, 
who  considered  it  an  intrusion  on  their 
power,  encouraged  Archbishop  Laud  to 
complain:  and  tke  chief  justice  received  a 
repnmand  from  the  council.  (  WhUelocke, 
47.)  Even  then  he  could  not  refrain  from 
joking ;  as  he  passed  out  he  declared  that 

*  the  lawn  sleeves  had  almost  choked  him.' 
To  remove,  perhaps,  all  suspicion  of  his 
principles,  he  was  as  violent  and  absurd  as 
any  or  his  colleagues  in  the  Star  Chamber, 
in  the  unjustifiable  sentence  pronounced 
shortly  after  against  William  JPrynne  for 
writing  his  '  Histrio-mastix.'  (Hushwarth, 
ii.  234,  248.)  And  upon  Pryime*s  being 
brought  before  the  council  on  a  subsequent 
occasion,  and  the  Question  being,  whether 
he  might  go  to  cnurch  and  be  allowed 
books,  the  chief  justice,  not  being  able  to 
restrain  his  joke,  said, '  Let  him  nave  the 
Book  of  Martyrs,  for  the  Puritans  do  account 
him  a  martyr.' 

While  attending  at  the  assizes  at  Salis- 
bury, a  prisoner,  whom  he  had  condemned 
to'death  for  some  felony,  threw  a  brickbat 
at  his  head ;  but,  stooping  at  the  time,  it 
only  knocked  off  his  hat.  On  lus  friends 
congratulating  him  on  his  escape  he  said, 

*  You  see,  now,  if  I  had  been  an  upright 
judge  I  had  been  slaine.'  The  additional 
punishment  upon  this  offender  is  thus  curi- 
ously recorded  by  Chief  Justice  Treby,  in 
the  margin  of  Dyer's  Reports  (p.  188,  b) : — 

'Richardson,  0.  J.  de  C.  B.  at  Assizes  at 
Salisbury  in  Summer  1631,  fuit  assault  per 
Prisoner  la  condemne  pur  Felony;— que 
puis  son  condemnation  ject  un  Brickbat  a  le 
dit'Justice,  que  narrowly  mist.  Et  pur  ceo 
immediately  fuit  Indictment  drawn  pur  Noy 
envcrs  le  Prisoner,  et  son  dexter  manus 
ampute  et  fixe  al  Gibbet,  sur  que  luy  mesme 
immediatement  hange  in  presence  de 
Court.' 

By  his  first  wife,  Ursula,  daughter  of 
John  Southwell,  Esq.,  of  Barham  Hall  in 
Suffolk,  he  had  a  lar^  family.  His  second 
wife.  Lady  Ashbumnam,  brought  him  no 
issue.  She,  in  1628,  Sir  Thomas  being  then 
chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  was 
created  a  baroness  of  Scotland,  by  the  title 
of  Lady  Cramond,  with  remainder  to  his 
children,  which  became  extinct  in  1735. 
{CoUms's  Peerage  J  iv.  253.) 

BICKHILL,  William,  is  described  by  Sir 
Edward  Coke  as  a  native  of  Ireland,  and  by 
Hasted  as  establishing  himself  in  the  county 
of  Kent,  and  beconung  possessed  of  the  j 
manor  of  Ridley  there.  He  is  first  men- 
tioned as  one  of  the  king's  Serjeants  in  1884, 
7  Richard  II.    Five  years  afterwaids,  on 


xUUKJaJUuL 

May  20,  1389,  he  was  constitated  a  judge 
of  tne  Common  Pleas. 

When   the  king's  ancle,  the  Duke  of 
Gloucester,  was  arrested  and  taken  to  Calais 
in  July  1397,  Sir  WUUam   Rickhill  was 
employed  to  take  his  deposition.    He  ststei 
that  he  was  awakened  in  the  middle  of  tiie 
night  of  September  7  at  his  house  at  Esaiiig- 
hun  in  Kent,  by  a  king's  messenger  with 
a  writ  requiring  him  to  go  to  Cahus  with 
the  Earl  of  Nottingham,  the  captain  of  that 
town,  and  there  to  do  as  the  earl  should 
order  him ;  and  he  was  directed  immediatelT 
to  proceed  to  Dover.     On   his  amval  tt 
Calais  another  writ  was  presented  to  him 
commanding  him  to  hear  all  that  the  Duke 
of  Gloucester  had  to  communicate,  and  to 
report  the  same  to  the  king.    Sir  William 
was  wholly  at  a  loss  to   understand  the 
object  of  this  commission,  as  there  had  been 
a  re^rt  of  the  duke's  death  for  some  time 
previously  both    in  England   and  Calais. 
The  earl,  however,  satisfying  him  that  the 
duke  was  still  alive.  Sir  William  had  the 
precaution  to  insist  on  haying  two  witneeae? 
present  during  the  interrogatoiy.    At  hi$ 
first  interview  with  the  royal  prisoner  Sir 
William  requested  that  the  duke  would  pat 
in  writing  wnat  he  had  to  say,  and  keep  one 
copy  for  himself.    To  this  tfie  duke  agieed, 
and  afterwards  gave  to  .Sir  William  nine 
articles  to  be  ti&en  to    the    king,  at  the 
same  time  soliciting  the  jud^  to  retum  the 
next  day  in  case  he  should  wish  to  add  anj- 
thing  to  his  communication.     On  the  fol- 
lowing morning,  being  refused  admittance, 
Rickhill  returned  to  England,  and  made  hifl 
report  to  the  king.     (Itot.  Pari,  iii.  840.) 
The  duke  was  soon  after  privately  murdered, 
and  so  much  of  the  articles  which  he  had 
delivered  to  the  judge  as  were  deoned 
necessary  were  brought  as  his  confessioii 
before  parliament.     That  assembly,  not- 
withstanding his  death,  condemned  him  as 
a  traitor,  and  adjudged  fdl  his  lands,  Sx^ 
to  be  forfeited. 

On  the  accession  of  Henry  TV.,  September 
30, 1399,  Sir  William  received  a  new  patent 
for  his  place ;  but  on  November  18  he  was 
called  upon  by  the  parliament  to  answer 
before  Chief  Justice  Ulopton  for  Us  conduct 
in  obtaining  the  duke's  confession.  He 
gave  the  *  round  unvarnished  tale '  related 
above,  showing  that  he  had  merely  executed 
the  commission  he  had  receiveo,  without 
any  previous  knowledge  of  ite  intent,  and 
strictiy  in  performance  of  his  duty.  The 
Lords  could  do  no  other  than  acquit  bin. 
(Ibid.  342.) 

Resuming  his  seat  on  the  bench,  finea 
continued  to  be  levied  before  him  tiD 
Trinity  Term  1407.  (DuadaU's  Orig.  4A) 
How  soon  after  this  he  died  does  not  i 
but  William  his  eldest  son 
parliament  for  Kent  in  the 
{HoBted^  i  243,  iL  4ea). 


BIDEL 

BIDEL,  Geoffrey,  was  a  baron  in  the 
Teign  of  Henry  L,  or  whom  very  few  par- 
ticulars remain. 

The  authority  on  which  he  is  called  chief 
Justiciary  of  England  is  that  of  Henry  of 
Huntingdon!,  in  his  'Epistle  de   Mundi 
ContemptUy'  one  copy  of  which,  however, 
•omits  his  name.  This  author  gives  the  title 
to  several  parties  who  were  acting  as  jus- 
ticiaries at  the  same  period,  and  mav,  per- 
bansy  have  considered  all  those  wno  sat 
juaidallj  in  the  Aula  Regis  as  entitled  to 
that  designation.    The  assertion  in  this  in- 
stance certainly  requires  some  confirmation, 
especially  as  the  chief  authority  was  un- 
doubtedly exercised  by  Roger,  Bishop  of 
Salisbury,  during  the  greater  part  of  the 


Bn)EWAKE 


559 


Robert  Bloet,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  Ralph 
Bassety  and  others,  in  a  commission  to  hear 
imd  determine  a  case  relating  to  the  privilege 
of  sanctuary  in  the  churcn  of  Rinon.  and 
then  adds  tnat  he  succeeded  Ralpn  Basset 
as  justice  of  England.  This,  however,  is 
not  very  probable,  as  Ralph  Basset  lived 
.several  years  after  the  deatn  of  RideL 

That  event  occurred  in  1119,  when  he 
shared  the  fate  of  Prince  William,  who  was 
drowned  on  his  return  from  Normandy. 
William  of  Malmesbury,  who  relates  the 
disaster,  mentions  among  the  sufferers  '  da- 
piferi,  camerarii,  pincemsd  regis,  ac  multi 
pzoceres  cum  eis,'  and  would  scarcely  hav^ 
emitted  the  name  or  the  title  of  so  im- 
portant a  person!^  as  a  chief  justiciary. 


he  was  one  of  the  ambassadors  to  the  court 
of  France,  with  the  king's  request  that 
Becket,  who  had  withdrawn  there,  might 
not  be  permitted  to  remain.  Both  embassies 
were  unsuccessful.  The  irritated  primate 
included  him  in  the  excommimication  which 
he  pronoimced  in  1169  against  several  of 
the  oishops  and  chief  men  of  the  kingdom ; 
and  in  announdng  the  sentence  to  the 
Bishop  of  Hereford,  he  designated  the 
archdeacon  '  archidiabolum  et  Antichristi 
membrum.'  On  Henry's  remonstrance,  how- 
ever, the  pope's  nimdos  found  it  necessary 
to  absolve  him  before  the  end  of  the  year, 
he  beinff  one  of  those  who  person^y  at- 
tended the  king.  Geoffrey's  favour  at  court 
increased  with  Becket's  oppression,  and, 
accordingly,  in  the  same  year  the  custody 


Dugdale  mentions  him  as  united  with    of  the  see  of  Ely  was  placed  in  his  hands, 


and  so  remained  during  its  vacancy,  which 
lasted  about  four  years.  In  1173  the 
bishopric  itself  was  ^ven  to  him ;  but  he 
was  not  admitted  to  it  until  he  had  made 
his  solemn  protestation,  in  the  chapel  of 
St  Catherine  in  Westminster,  that  he  had 
been  in  no  ways  knowingly  accessory  to  the 
murder  of  the  archbishop. 

In  1179  Bishop  Geoffrey  was  appointed, 
with  the  Bishops  of  Winchester  and  Nor- 
wich, to  fill  the  office  of  chief  justiciary ; 
and  on  the  division  of  the  kingdom  by  the 
council  of  Windsor  into  four  judicial  cir- 
cuits these  prelates  were  respectively  placed 
at  the  head  of  three  of  t^em.  {IhigdMs 
Orig,  20.)    They  were  superseded  the  next 

^ „ year  bv  the  appointment  of  Ranulph  de 

He  married  Geva,  the  daugnter  of  Huffh  j  Glanville  as  sole  justiciary.  Geoffrey  ap- 
de  Abrinds,  Earl  of  Chester,  by  whom  he  |  pears,  however,  to  have  acted  subsequently 
left  <mly  a  daughter,  named  Matilda,  who  i  m  court,  as  he  was  one  of  the  justiciers 
married  Richard  Basset,  the  justiciary,  before  whom  a  fine  was  levied  in  1182. 
Their  eldest  son  assumed  the  name  of  Ridel,    {Hunter's  Preface.) 

and  the  baronv  became  extinct  in  the  third       In  the  roll  of  1  Richard  I.  (07,  &c)  his 
generation.    (Angl,  Sac,  ii.  701 )  Dugdale'a  \  pleas  are  recorded  as  a  justice  itinerant  in 


Baron,  i.  555.) 

BIDSL,  Geopfrey  (Bishop  of  Ely), 
was,  according  to  the  account  of  one  writer 
(^AUenkB   Yorkshirej   vi.   154),    a    younger 
brother  of  the  before-mentioned  Eustace 
Fitz-John,  but  the  authority  is  not  suffi- 
ciently distinct  to  be  entirely  depended  on. 
He  was  one  of  the  chaplains  of  Henry  II., 
and  80  much  in  the  royal  favour  that,  after 
Becket's  elevation  to  the  primacv,  he  was 
aj^ointed  his  successor  as  archdeacon  of 
Cfanterbury,  about  Christmas  1162.     He 
probably  continued  to  be  employed  at  court, 
var  his  name  stands  second  of  the  *  assidentes 
joaticiad  regis '  before  whom,  in  1165,  a 
charter  between  the  abbots  of  St.  Alban's 
and  Westminster  was  executed  in  the  Ex- 
chequer.   (Miuhxy  i.  44.)    He  took  a  pro- 
minent part  in  the  king's  contest  with  the 
archbishop,  and  was  sent  with  John  of 
Oxford,  in  1164,  to  the  pope,  to  obtain  his 
confirmation  of  the  ancient  customs  and 
dignities  of  the  realm ;  and  again,  in  1169, 


no  less  than  five  coimties.  As,  however, 
he  died  on  August  21,  1189,  in  the  interval 
between  the  death  of  King  Henry  and  the 
coronation  of  King  Richard,  this  circuit 
probably  took  place  during  the  last  months 
of  Henry's  reign. 

King  Richard,  finding  that  he  had  died 
intestate,  appropriated  to  the  expenses  of 
the  coronation  the  treasure  he  found  in  his 
coffers. 

The  cognomen  '  superbus,'  which  he  ac- 
quired, is  stated  to  have  been  given  from 
the  arrogance  of  his  disposition  and  bis 
w:ant  of  affability.  The  history  of  Ely  re- 
lates that  his  tomb  was  violated,  and  that 
his  successor,  William  de  Longchamp,  on 
the  day  of  his  enthronisation,  ascended  the 
pulpit,  and,  with  the  other  bishops  present, 
excommunicated  all  those  who  nad  com- 
mitted or  consented  to  the  sacrilege.  {God- 
win, 251  ;  Angl  Sac.  i.  631  ^  Madox,  i.  307 ; 
Lord  LytteUon ;  Hasted.) 

BIBEWAlEtE,  William  de,  only  occurs 


660 


RIGBy 


as  one  of  theJusticeA  itinerant  with  William 
Briwer  and  Simon  Basset,  fixing  the  tallage 
for  the  counties  of  Nottingham  and  Derby 
in  9  Richard  I.,  1197-«  (MadoXy  i.  733)*; 
and  in  1  John  he  is  one  of  the  pledges  for 
the  payment  of  a  fine  to  the  king  in  North- 
amptonshire.    (Hot,  de  OhlatU,  S.) 

BIOBT,  Alexander.  *  That  Colonel 
Rigby  be  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  *  is  the 
curious  entry  of  June  1, 1649,  in  White- 
locke's  *  Memorials*  (405).  It  appears,  how- 
ever, that  he  was  bred  a  lawyer,  and  took 
up  arms  on  behalf  of  the  parhament  at  the 
earliest  stage  of  the  troubles.  He  was  of  a 
TiRncashire  family,  then  and  now  seated  at 
Middleton,  and  was  probably  the  son  of 
another  Alexander  Kigby,  clerk  of  the 
peace  in  Lancashire  in  1611.  (Co/.  8t<ite 
Papers  [1611-18],  100.)  Elected  member 
for  Wigan  in  that  county  in  the  Long  Parli- 
ament of  1640,  he  distinguished  himself  by 
moving,  in  a  violent  speech,  plentifully  in- 
terspersed with  scraps  of  Latin  and  Biblical 
quotations,  that  Lora  Keeper  Finch  should 
be  accused  of  high  treason.  Made  a  colonel 
by  the  parliament,  and  entrusted  with  the 
command  of  the  Lancashire  forces,  his  first 
exploit  was  routing  a  party  of  the  king*8 
near  Thurland  Castle  in  l643,  and  taking 
400  prisoners  and  their  commander-in-chief; 
which,  says  Whitelocke,  *was  the  more 
discoursed  of  because  Rigby  was  a  lawyer.* 
His  next  service  is  in  the  lengthened  siege 
of  I>atham  House,  just  before  the  battle  of 
Marston  Moor;  and  immediately  after  he 
was  appointed  one  of  the  commissioners  for 
executing  martial  law.  In  the  '  Mystery  of 
the  Good  Old  Cause*  he  is  said  to  have 
been  governor  of  Boston. 

When  the  death  of  the  king  rendered  the 
military  assistance  of  Colonel  Rigby  no 
longer  necessary  the  parliament  raised  him 
to  the  bench  as  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer. 
(ParL  Hid.  ii.  611,  692,  iii.  286,  1607; 
^liitehcke,  77,  93,  405.)  He  retained  his 
judicial  dignity  little  more  than  a  year, 
dying  on  August  18,  lf360,  of  an  infection 
taken  at  Croydon  on  the  circuit.  {Peck's 
Desid.  C.  b.  xiv.  23.) 

He  married  twice.  His  first  wife  was 
Margaret,  daughter  of  Sir  Gilbert  Hoghton, 
Bart. ;  his  second  was  Anna,  daughter  of 
John  Gobert,  Esq.,  and  widow  of  Thomas 
Legh,  Esq.  Bv  both  he  had  a  large  family. 
(  Wotfon  •«  Baronet  i.  20,  1 62. ) 

KIPAEII8,  Robert  de  (Rivers),  is  re- 
corded once  as  a  justice  itinerant  in  36 
Henry  HI.,  1262,  into  Berkshire,  Oxford, 
and  i*iforthampton ;  and  as  the  under-noticed 
Walter  lived  in  the  first-named  of  these  ! 
counties,  it  is  not  unlikely  that  Robert  was  * 
his  son,  and  that  both  m  succession  were  . 
placed  in  the  commission  on  account  of  their  ; 
residence  within  it.  i 

KIPAEns,  Walter  de,  is  no  further  no-  \ 
ticed  than  that  he  was  one  of  those  appointed  I 


RIVALLIS 

in  1  Heniy  HI.  to  assess  and  recnve  the 
hidage  of  Berkshire.  (Hot.  Ckuu.  L  80&) 
His  possessions  in  that  county  were  no  daalat 
the  cause  of  his  being  selected  to  set  m  a 
justice  itinerant  in  it  in  3  Henry  UL 

BPTALLIB,  Peter  dr,  who  is  sometxiut 
called  de  Orivallis,  was  a  Poicteyin  by  birth, 
and  Roger  de  Wendover  plainly  describei 
him  as  the  son  of  Peter  de  Kapibus,  Kshop 
of  Winchester.  Other  writers  more  ddi- 
cately  describe  him  as  the  nephew  of  tint 

Powerful  prelate ;  and  of  course  he  is  so 
esignated  in  any  record  where  their  con- 
nection is  alluded  to.     Whatever  was  the 
real  relationship,  he  soon  experienced  the 
benefit  arising  from  such  patronage.    So 
early  as  6  John,  1204,  that  king  presented 
to  him  all  the  churches  which  Gilbert  de 
Beseby,  deceased,  held  in  LincolmOure  of 
his  donation.     (Bat.  Pat,  43.)     He  is  not 
mentioned  during  the  remainder  of  that 
reign ;  but  in  3  Henry  III.,  1218,  he  wm 
<  one  of  the  king's  chamberlains,  and  wu  • 
I  clerk  in  the  wardrobe.     (JRoi,  Claw.  i.  383, 
&c.)    In  1232  he  is  recorded  as  cnstos  of 
the  escheats  and  wards  (JExcerpt.  e  Bat.  A. 
i.  226-262) ;  and  in  the  next  year  his  patron, 
the  Bishop  of  Winchester,  procared  for  him 
the  high  appointment  of  treasurer.  (Madar, 
I  ii.  34^    About  the  same  time  he  signed 
himself  *  Capicerio  Pictaviie.'    (Ibid,  i.  65.) 
;  He  now  so  effectually  ingratiated  himself 
I  with  the  king  that  to  this  high  office  sevenl 
i  others  of  great  responsibility  and  emolument 
i  were  added,  among  whicli  were  those  of 
I  custos  of  tlie  forests,  and  of  most  of  the 
castles  in  England.     But  the  dismisnl  of 
the  old  ministers,  and  the  substitution  of 
Poictevins  for  all  the  former  ofiicers,  nato- 
i  rally  disgusted  the  nobles  and  the  peo|de, 
j  and  led  to  a  reaction,  which  produced  the 
I  disgrace  of  the  bishop,  his  father,  in  April 
I  1234,  and  his  own  expulsion  from  conxt, 
'  with  a  threat  that,  if  ho  did  not  resume  the 
tonsure,  he  should  lose  both  his  eyes.    He 
fled  with  the  bishop  to  Winchester;  Irat, 
being  summoned  before  the  king  to  rendw 
an  accomit  of  his  ministry,  he  appeared  *in 
habitu  clericali  cum  toneura  et  lata  coront.* 
His  answers  were  so  unsatisfactoir  that  he 
was  made  to  give  up  all  his  possessions  ^^ 
was  sent  to  the  Tower,  from  which,  how- 
ever, he  was  shortly  released  by  the  Aich- 
bishop  of  Canterbury,  and  allowed  to  remm 
to  his  sanctuary  at  Winchester.    From  this 
retirement  he  was  suddenly  recalled  in  1236, 
and,  notwithstanding  all  his  former  offences, 
was  restored  to  the  royal  confidence. 

He  resumed  his  original  duties  in  the 
wardrobe,  of  which  he  was  appointed  keeper* 
and  in  1261  he  had  a  quittance  from  sD 
debts  and  accounts  to  be  rendered  to  fte 
king  from  the  time  he  fint  had  the  cortodr 
of  the  wardrobe  till  that  date.  (iULJLSn.) 
It  was  probably  in  this  cfaaraefear  Art  Ai 
Great  Seal  was  committed  tolua  Id  mKJtti^ 


BOBERT  BOCHEOTEB  561 

ti<m  with  TVilliam  do  Kilkenny  in  1240,  priaon,  suffering  in  addition  the  cruel  depri- 
when  John  de  Lexinton  retired  nom  court,  vation  of  his  eyes.  (  Will.  Maltn,  GettOj 
tiie  wardrobe  being  a  usual  place  of  deposit-  456 ;  BaraiMffe,  L  24 ;  Hutchinis  Dorset, 
ing  the  Seal  when  the  chancellorship  was  i  i.  31.) 

Tacant.  There  is  nothing  to  show  that '  SOCSUVS  is  mentioned  in  no  former 
Peter  de  Rivallis  was  concerned  in  the  list  as  a  yice-chancellor  to  Richard  L,  but 
Chancery,  nor  that  he  acted  in  the  office.  there  are  three  royal  charters  in  the '  Mo- 
In  February  1249  he  was  one  of  the  kinff's  '  nasticon'  (v.  372, 456, 625),  given  under  the 
coandl  sent  to  receive  the  tallage  of  the  !  hand  of  '  Magistri  Kocenni,  tunc  agentiB 
dty  of  London,  and  on  July  16,  1255,  he  '  vices  Cancellarii  nostri,'  idl  dated  at  Rupes 
was  constituted  a  baron  of  tne  Exchequer,  |  Andeli,  in  10  Richard  I. — one  on  Novemoer 
retaining  his  place  at  the  wardrobe.  (Madox,  \  11,  1108;  another  on  December  0,  llOS; 


L  712,  li.  17 ;  PeU  Becords,  iii.  30,  40.) 
Matthew  Paris  relates  that  about  Michael- 
mas 1257  he  was  again  appointed  treasurer 


and  the  third  on  February  3, 1100. 

BOCHE,  Thomas,  is  only  known  as  being 
appointed  fourth  baron  of  the  Exchequer 


of  the  chamber  on  the  death  of  Hurtaldus,  I  in  Michaelmas,  3  Henry  VII.,  1487.  He 
but  probably  soon  after  died,  as  the  last  |  probably  retained  his  place  till  1504,  when 
notice  of  his  name  occurs  in  a  royal  grant  i  John  AUeyn  became  fourth  baron.  (^- 
to  him  in  May  1258  of  a  piece  of  land  in  |  chequer  Books.) 


Winchester.  (HoUnsked,  ly.  280 ;  B,  de 
Wmdaver,  iv.  244-313 :  Excerpt,  e  Bot.  Fm, 
iL279.) 


SOCfHESTER,  SoLOMON  de,  or,  as  his 
name  is  usually  abbreviated,  Solomon  de 
Roff,  was  one  of  the  canons  of  St  Paul's. 


BOBEBT  (Earl  of  Moreton  or  MoR-  ';  He  was  first  selected  as  a  justice  itinerant 
TieirXy  and  Earl  of  Cornwall).  A>  !  to  assist  the  regular  judges  in  2  Edward  I., 
lotta,  the  mistress  of  Robert  Duke  of  1274,whenheacted  in  Middlesex,  and  in  the 
Normandy,  and  mother  of  William  the  '  following  year  in  Worcestershire.  In  1270 
Conqueror,  afterwards  married  Herluin  de  '  he  is  called  by  Dugdale  one  of  the  justices 
Contoyille,  the  founder  of  the  abbey  of ,  of  assize,  but  there  was  not  at  that  time 
Cnstein,  and  had  by  him  two  sons,  the  ,  any  distinction  between  the  two  classes ; 
eldeat  of  whom  was  this  Robert,  and  the  j  and  two  years  afterwards  his  name  again 
jonngest  was  Odo,  Bishop  of  Bayeux.  ,  appears  among  the  justices  itinerant,  and  so 
Aobert  received  from  Duke  William  the  !  continues  till  1287,  on  the  last  occasion 
lutmy  of  Bourgh  and  the  earldom  of  More-  being  placed  nt  the  head  of  the  list.  {Thtg^ 
too  or  Mortage  in  Normandy.  dale's  Orig.  21.)    In  this  position  he  is 

When  the  invasion  of  England  was  pro-  named  in  various  documents  among  the 
jected,  Robert  greatly  promoted  the  expe-    Rolls  of  Parliament  as  acting  for  the  two 


ditioD,  and  assisted  in  the  triumph  of  nis 
fatotiier,  bearing  the  banner  of  St.  Michael 
before  him  in  the  battle.    As  a  warrior,  he 


following  years.  (Bot,  Pari.  i.  42, 48,  &c.) 
These  rofls  contain  several  complaints 
against  him  by  parties  in  the  coimtry,  but 


^ronld  not  have  been  overlooked  by  the  |  they  probably  were  the  consequence,  not 


Aenerosity  of  William ;  but,  conddering  even 
Sla  relationship  to  the  Conqueror,  his  share 
in  the  spoil  seems  enormous.  He  not  only 
"Was  cnreated  Earl  of  Cornwall,  but  received 
"VaBt  possessions  in  various  counties,  amount- 
Sup,  it  is  stated,  to  no  less  than  973  manors. 
Although  he  is  described  as  somewhat 
in  intellect,  yet,  with  these  proofs 
the  king*s  affection,  it  is  not  imiikely 
thmt  he  should  have  been  appointed,  in 


the  cause,  of  the  disgrace  which  he  shared 
with  most  of  his  judicial  brethren  in  1280. 
The  corruption  chared  against  him  must 
have  been  of  a  far  deeper  dye  than  those 
complaints  exhibit,  for  he  was  compelled 
to  pay  a  fine  of  no  less  than  4000  marks 
before  he  was  discharged  from  his  im- 
prisonment. 

There  is  no  evidence  of  his  having  been 
allowed  to  resume  his  duties  as  a  judge, 
ijunction  with  Archbishop  lianfranc,  and  I  and  the  only  other  published  record  con- 
Oeofl&ey,  Bishop  of  Coutance,  to  the  office  '  ceming  him  is  a  presentation  mode  to  the 
of  chief  justiciary  during  some  part  of  this   justices  itinerant  in  Kent  of   his  being 
Dugdale  supposes  from  several  i  poisoned  at  his  house  at  Snodland  in  that 
havmg   been   discovered  which    county  by  Master  Wynand,  the  parson  of 
to  bear  tnat  interpretation.  i  the  parish,  on  August  14,    1129.*).     (Abb. 

[t  la  believed  that  he  outlived  the  Con-    PlacU.  200.)    Sir  Edward  Coke,  however, 
r,  and  died  about  1090.  His  remains    in  pronouncing  the  sontenco  against  Sir 
buried  in  the  church  of  Bermondsey,    John  Hollis  and  others,  tried  in  the  Star 
^^rhere  be  had  a  mansion.  \  Chamber  in  1015,  for  traducing  the  public 

Bjrhiawife,Maud,  the  daughter  of  Roger  justice,  refers  to  this  case,  and  states  that 
^e  Montgomery,  Earl  of  Shrewsbury,  he  the  prayer  of  the  monk  (as  he  calls  him)  to 
Xeft  a  son  WiUiam,  who  succeeded  to  both  '  be  delivered  to  the  censure  of  tlie  Church 
ills  earldoms;  but, having  joined  with  Duke  •  was  denied,  *  because  the  same  was  a  wrong 
Slobert  against  King  Henry  I.,  and  been  '  to  the  state  to  poison  a  judj^o.*  (State 
^lefeated  at  Tenchebrai  in  1105,  he  died  in  j  Trials,  ii.  1031.)    But  the  entry  by  no 

00 


562 


EODBOROUQH 


means  supports  Sir  Edward  either  in  his 
fact  or  his  inference.  Solomon  de  Rochester 
is  not  mentioned  in  it  as  a  judg:e,  nor  is 
any  reference  made  to  his  havmg  filled  that 
office;  and  though  it  appears  that  the  king 
refused  at  first  to  deliver  the  delinquent  to 
the  Bishop  of  Rochester,  it  was  because  he 
had  shown  too  great  a  desire  to  procure  his 
liberation  and  to  purge  him  from  the  charge. 
Wynand  was  therefore  handed  over  to  the 
church  of  Canterbury,  the  archbishopric 
being  then  vacant,  1but  eventually  was 
actually  given  up  to  the  Bishop  of  Ro- 
chester. The  result  of  the  investigation 
does  not  appear. 

SODBOSOTJGH,  ^EiLO  DE,  took  his  name 
from  that  town  in  Gloucestershire,  but  was 
apparently  resident  in  Worcestershire  in 
the  early  part  of  the  reign  of  Edward  IT., 
as  in  the  third  vear  he  was  one  of  the 
assessors  and  collectors  in  that  county  of 
the  twenty-fifth  which  was  granted  by  par- 
liament, and  was  also  in  a  local  judicial  com- 
mission therein.  In  the  next  year,  1310,  he 
was  the  last  named  of  the  three  justices  of 
assize  appointed  for  both  these  coimties  and 
three  neighbouring  ones.  In  May  1311  a 
commission  was  issued  into  Gloucestershire 
to  four  justices  to  hear  the  complaints  made 
against  him  in  a  petition  from  the  men  of 
that  county,  charging  him  with  many  acts 
of  oppression,  coiTuption,  and  malversation 
in  the  execution  of  his  office.  The  result  of 
this  enquiry  does  not  appear,  but  it  may  be 
presumed  to  have  been  favourable  to  him, 
masmuch  as  in  the  two  following  years  he 
was  responsibly  employed,  and  in  ine  latter 
was  one  of  three  assigned  to  talliate  the 
cities,  &c.,  in  the  same  five  counties.  He 
died  in  7  Edward  II.  (Pari  JFrits,  ii.  p.  ii. 
1344 ;  Abh.  Hot.  Ong.  i.  205.) 

BODES,  Francis,  was  a  descendant  from 
Gerard  do  Rodes,  of  Homcastle  in  Lin- 
colnshire, a  powerful  baron  in  the  reign  of 
Henry  II.,  whose  family  eventually  settled 
in  Derbyshire.  He  was  the  son  of  John 
Rodes,  Esq.,  of  Staveley  Woodthorpe,  and 
of  Attelina,  daughter  of  Thomas  Hewitt,  of 
"Walles  in  Yorkshire.  Bom  about  1634, 
•he  was  educated  at  St.  John's  College, 
Cambridge,  and  being  admitted  a' member 
of  Gray's  Inn,  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in 
1652,  arriving  at  the  dignity  of  reader  in 
1560,  and  again  in  1576.  In  Hilary  Term 
1578  he  was  advanced  to  the  degree  of  the 
coif,  and  on  August  21,  1582,  was  made 
queen's  Serjeant.  His  elevation  to  the  bench 
as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  is  dated 
June  29, 1685,  and  the  last  fine  which  was 
acknowledged  before  him  was  in  November 
1688.  (Ihigdale's  Orig.  48,  294.)  In  the 
following  year  he  died  at  Staveley  Wood- 
thorpe, leaving  issue  by  both  of  his  mar- 
riages. His  first  wife  was  Elizabeth, 
daughter  of  Brian  Sandford,  Esq.,  of  Thorpe 
Salvine  in  York&hire  \  and  his  second  was 


ROGER 

Mary,  daughter  of  Francis  Chailtoii^  Esq., 
of  Appley  in  Shropshire. 

His  eldest  son,  John,  who  was  knighted 
and  served  as  sheriff  of  Derbyshire,  was  the 
father  of  Francis,  whom  Charles  I.  raised  to 
the  baronetcy  in  1641,  a  title  "which  became 
extinct  in  1743.  (  Wotton's BaronH,  ii. 255. ) 

BOOEB  (Bishop  op  Salisburt)  was 
curate  of  a  small  church  in  the  neighbour- 
hood of  Caen,  and  is  said  to  have  iih 
gratiated  himself  with  Henry  by  the 
celerity  with  which  he  despatched  the  se> 
vice  when  the  prince  and  his  followers 
chanced  to  be  present.  From  that  time  he 
becamed  attached  to  the  fortunes  of  th^ 
prince,  who,  though  the  apparent  motive 
for  the  selection  was  not  very  commend- 
able, had  no  reason  to  rejrret  in  after  years 
the  confidence  he  reposed  in  him. 

Roger  became  an  active  and  zealous 
servant,  and,  by  the  dexterous  manage- 
ment of  whatever  business  he  was  engag^ 
in,  so  endeared  himself  to  Henry  durin? 
his  adversity  that  when  he  mounted  iht 
throne  of  England  he  not  only  enridn^i 
him  with  many  preferments,  but  advanced 
him  to  the  highest  employments. 

In  the  first  or  second  year  of  Henrrs  | 
reign  he  was  appointed  chancellor,  suc- 
ceeding William  GiflTard.  Thynne,  ai^  | 
after  him  Spelman  and  Philipot,  place  him 
in  the  same  office  in  1107,  and  again  ftt 
the  end  of  the  reign.  But,  taking  tb* 
charters  as  the  best  authority,  it  appeflR 
from  them  that  he  did  not  retain  the  Gretf 
Seal  long  after  he  was  appointed  Bishop  d 
Salisbury,  which  was  on  April  13,  110*2. 
In  the  '  Monasticon  *  there  are  six  charter? 
with  his  name  as  chancellor,  four  of  which 
are  before  he  was  bishop,  the  earliest  bein|: 
dated  in  September  1101,  and  two  onlj 
with  the  addition  of  his  episcopal  title. 
(Motiast  i.  164,  521,  ii.  14o,  iv.  16,  17,  v. 
1114.)  In  March  1103  William  Gifcd 
was  again  in  office,  and  from  that  time  to 
the  end  of  the  reign  there  is  a  regular  8Il^ 
cession  of  other  chancellors. 

Whatever  was  the  position  he  held  in  the 
state,  there  is  little  doubt  that  firom  a  veir 
early  period  the  whole  of  the  business  <J 
the  kingdom  was  submitted  to  his  caie,  tk 
treasures  were  in  his  keeping,  and  the 
expenses  under  his  regulation.  That  he 
was  well  versed  in  the  knowledge  of  the 
Exchequer  is  proved  by  the  author  of  the 
ancient  'Dialogus  de  Scaccario,'  Richard 
Fitz-Ni^el,  who,  though  his  grand-nephev, 
yet,  writing  nearly  forty  years  after  hi* 
Heath,  may  be  fairly  trusted  when  descrilh 
in^  his  omcial  character.  He  calls  luff 
^vir  prudens,  consiliis  providus,  sermone 
discretus,  et  ad  maxima  quasque  negotiA 
per  Dei  gratiam  repente  pnecipuus;'  and 
adds,  'Hie  igitur,  succrescenti  in  eum 
principis,  ac  cleri,  populique  fayore.  SaiK- 
buriensis   Epiacopua   factos^    xnazimiB  is 


HOGER 

o'egno  fuDgebatur  honoribus,  et  de  Scaccario 
'plurimum  babuit  scientiam :  adeo  ut  non 
ftit  ambiginim^  sed  ex  ipsis  Rotulis  mani- 
f»'3tum,  plurimum  sub  eo  floruisse.' 

Part  of  his  duty  as  cbancellor  was  to 
attend  to  tbe  business  of  the  revenue,  but 
it  was  peculiai'ly  so  in  the  offices  of 
treasurer  and  chief  justiciary  or  president  of 
the  Exchequer,  in  which  he  was  afterwards 
placed.  It  is  probable  that  he  was  not  in- 
vested with  the  latter  till  the  year  1107, 
because,  having  been  offered  that  charge 
immediately  after  his  appointment  to  the 
prelacy,  he  would  not  consent  to  accept  it, 
deeming  a  judicial  office  incompatible  with 
his  episcopal  functions,  without  the  autho- 
rity of  the  pope  and  the  archbishop.  Al- 
though, therefore,  his  election  to  the 
bishopric  took  place  in  April  1102,  yet, 
being  one  of  those  whose  consecrations 
were  in  abeyance  pending  the  contest  be- 
tween the  king  and  Anselm,  his  scruples 
could  not  be  removed  till  that  dispute  was 
accommodated.  This  did  not  occur  till 
1107,  on  August  11  in  which  year  Mb  con- 
secration took  place. 

From  this  period,   therefore,  we    may 
consider  him  in  full  power,  presiding  over 
the  administration  of  justice,  and  regu- 
lating the  revenue  of  the  realm  and  the 
atlkirs  of  the  state.    The  suppression  of 
those  violations  of  the  law  which  were 
prevalent  in  the  last  reign,  the  improve- 
ment in  the  purity  of  the  coin,  the  punish- 
ment of  the  oppression  of  the  royal  pur- 
vevors,  were  tne  results  of  this  wise  and 
coimiderate    counsels;     and,    though    the 
whole  government  of  the  kingdom  was  en- 
trusted to  him  in  the  frequent  and  long-  | 
continued   absences  of  the  king  in  Nor-  j 
mandy,  no  contemporary  hbtorian  hints  a  j 
doubt  of  his  integrity,  and  no  fact  is  re-  . 
corded  which  can  raise  a  suspicion  that  hie  ^ 
ministry  was  distasteful  to  the  people.  j 

His  conduct  was  equallv  satisfactory  to  | 
his  sovereign,  who  never  withdrew  his  eon- 
iidence  nor  neglected  to  bestow  upon  him  . 
f«ubstantial  marks  of  his  favour.     Among 
others,  his  two  nephews,  Alexander  and  i 
Xi^-el,  were  invested  with  the  bishoprics  of 
Lincobi  (in  1123)  and  Ely  (in  1133) ;  and  ' 
t  >   his  own  care  was  entrusted  the  safe  j 
r-ustody  of  the  king's  brother  Robert,  the 
captive  Duke  of  Xormandy.     When  King  ' 
Henry  was  anxious  to  insure  the  succession 
of  the  kingdom  to  his  daughter  the  em- 
press,  Iloger   not  only   joined  with  the 
other  nobles  in  taking  the  oath  of  fealty  to 
Matilda  on  this  occasion,  but  overcame  the 
scruples  of  some  who  were  unwilling  to  do 
so.     Yet  no  sooner  was  King  Henry  dead 
than,  setting  aside  his  oath,  from  which  he 
pretended  the  subsequent  marriage  of  the 
enapress    with    Geoffrey    Earl  of  Anjou^ 
witnout  the  consent  of   the   peers,   naa  j 
absolved  him^  he  aided  Stephen  in  his  as- 


BOGER 


563 


sumption  of  the  crown.  Stephen,  however, 
entertained  doubts  of  his  fidelity,  whidi  he 
at  first  endeavoured  to  secure  by  numerous 
favours,  continuing  him  in  some  of  his 
offices,  either  as  chief  iusticiary  or  treasurer, 
presenting  him  with  tne  borough  of  Malmes- 
Dury,  and  conferring  on  his  son,  Roger,  the 
office  of  chancellor.  Thynne  and  some 
others  place  the  bishop  himself  as  chan- 
cellor in  the  early  part  of  Stephen's  reign ; 
but  they  evidently  confound  him  with 
his  son  Roger,  as  both  their  names 
appear  on  three  charters  of  the  first  year, 
the  one  bein£^  designated  as  bishop,  ana 
the  other  as  cmanceUor. 

The  king's  jealousy  was  at  last  excited 
by  the  representations  made  to  him  that 
the  magnitude  and  strength  of  the  castles 
built  by  the  bishop  at  Devizes^  Malmesbury, 
and  Shirbum,  and  the  additions  he  had 
made  to  that  of  Salisbury,  were  intended  to 
support  the  cause  of  Matilda,  whenever  he 
should  find  an  opportunity  to  declare  for 
her.     ^li  ether  the  king  really  believed 
these  suggestions,  or  whether,  being  now, 
as  he  imagined,  firmly  seated  on  the  throne, 
he  forgot  the  assistance  he  had  received  in 
his  anxiety  to  obtain  possession  of   the 
bishop's  wealth,  may  well  be  doubted. '  He 
determined,  however,  to  seize  his  castles 
and  his  property  on  the  first  opportunity. 
This  was  soon  contriyed.    In  June  1130 
the  reluctant   bishop  was   compelled   to 
attend  a  council  at  Oxford,  where,  on  a 
pretended  quarrel  between  his  servants  and 
those  of  the  Earl  of  firitteny,  the  king 
required  him,  in  aatisfiwtfwit  for  the  breach 
of  the  peace,  to  give  Vp  liis  castles  as 
pledges  of  his  fealty,  and  thereupon  com- 
mitted him  and  his  son  Roger,  tne  chan- 
cellor, and  his  nephew  Alexander,  Bishop 
of  Lincoln,    to   close    custody  until  this 
should  have  been  done.  His  other  nephew, 
Nigel,  Bishop  of  Ely,  suspecting  to  what 
these  proceedings  tended,  fled,  and  shut 
himself  up  in  his  uncle's  castle  of  Devizes, 
which  he  refused  to  surrender.    The  king 
immediately  marched  thither,  taking  his 
prisoners  with  him.  and,  having  erected  a 
gibbet  in  front  of  tne  walls,  pronounc^id  in 
the  presence  of  Bishop  Roger  sentence  of 
death  upon  his   son,  whicn  he  declared 
should  be  forthwith  executed  unless  the 
gates  were  opened  to  him.    Nigel,  regard- 
less of  the  entreaties  of  his  uncM,  persisted 
notwithstanding  in  his   refusal,  and  the 
king  directed  the  sentence  to  be  executed. 
The  victim  ascended  the  scaffold,  and  the 
rope  was  adjusted,  when  Bishop  Roger, 
horrified  that  his  son  should  be  so  mur- 
dered, threw  himself  at  the  kind's  feet,  and 
bound  himself  by  an  oath,  if  his  son  were 
saved,  to  taste    no   food    till   the  royal 
mandate  was  obeyed.    Nig^el  at  last  unwil- 
lingly submitted,  but  not  till  his  unde  had 
endured  three  days'  fast. 


564 


BOKEBT 


The  king,  on  taking  possession  of  the 
castle,  appropriated  to  his  own  use  a  trea- 
sure of  40,000  marks,  besides  an  immense 
qiiantitj  of  plate  and  jewels  which  he  found 
tnere. 

A  council  was  held  at  Winchester  to 
examine  into  this  extraordinary  affair,  and 
others  of  a  similar  character  affecting  the 
bishops  and  clergy,  at  which  Bishop  Rocrer 
made  his  last  appearance  in  public  bfe. 
The  king  was  represented  at  it  by  certain 
earls,  and  his  claim  was  defended  by  Alberic 
de  Vere,  then  renowned  in  the  law.  No- 
thing, however,  could  be  done  against  the 
power  of  Stephen,  who  retained  the  posses- 
sions he  had  thus  acquired. 

The  unfortunate  bishop,  either  through 
grief  at  his  loss,  or  from  the  effect  of  his 
long  fasting,  was  soon  after  seized  with  a 
quartan  ague,  of  which  he  died  on  December 
4,  1130.  As  his  death  approached,  he 
directed  the  small  remainder  of  his  wealth 
to  be  placed  on  the  altar  of  his  church, 
devotiug  it  to  the  completion  'of  the  build- 
ing ;  but  even  this  he  liad  the  mortification 
of  hearing  was  seized  and  taken  away  by 
the  king's  orders. 

While  in  the  conduct  of  public  business, 
he  is  stated  to  have  invariaoly  devoted  his 
mornings  to  the  performance'  of  his  epis- 
copal duties,  and  he  grudged  no  expense  in 
the  renovation  and  ornament  of  his  cathe- 
dral. He  was  seated  at  Salisbury  more 
than  thirty-two  years;  his  remains  were 
deposited  there,  and  his  memory  was  re- 
pirded  with  such  high  estimation  that  he 
is  usually  named  with  the  addition  of 
*  Magnus.'  (Mado.r,  i.  a%  78,  ii.  381; 
CrW/rtw,  337;  Atiffl,  Sac.  ii.  700:  Wendover^ 
ii.  183,  &c. ;  Malmesfniry,  tJ30,  &c ;  Lord 
LytUlton ;  Lwqard,  &c.) 

BOKEBY,  l^HOKAs.  As  the  knightly 
deeds  of  the  house  of  Rokeby,  illustrious 
Iwtli  in  council  and  in  cnmp]^  have  been 
fully  recorded  in  ancient  annals  and  modem 
Torse,  the  legal  honours  by  which  the 
family  was  distin$ruished  ought  not  to  be 
forgotten.  Sir  Thomas  Rokeby  was  lord 
justice  of  Ireland  in  the  reign  of  Edward 
III. ;  William  Rokeby,  -tVrchbishop  of 
Dublin,  was  lord  chancellor  of  that  king- 
dom under  Henry  VII.  and  VIII.;  iSr. 
John  Rokeby,  a  famous  civilian,  became 
vicar-general  of  the  province  of  York  in 
the  reign  of  the  latter  king:  Ralph  Roke- 
by, by  his  eminence  as  a  lawyer,  received 
the  dignity  of  the  coif  from  Edward  VI. ; 
and  Thomas  Rokeby,  whose  career  is  now 
to  be  traced,  was  elevated  to  the  English 
bench  in  the  reign  of  William  and  Mary. 

The  Rokebys  were  a  very  prolific  race, 
and  the  family  was  multipbed  into  nume- 
rous branches,  most  of  whom  settled  in 
various  parts  of  Yorkshire.  William  lioke- 
by  of  Skiers  was  honoured  in  1661  with  a 
baronetcy^  which  became  extinct  in  1678; 


ROKEBY 

and  his  brother,  Thomas  Rokeby  of  Barnbv, 
after  having  had  eleven  childxen  br  Elia* 
beth,  sister  of  Sir  William  Bury  of  Gmt- 
ham,  was  killed  at  the  battle  of  Dunbtr  in 
1650.  Thomas,  the  future  judge,  was  the 
second  of  his  sons.  Bom  about  1632,  he 
was  educated  at  Catherine  College,  Cam- 
bridge, and  took  his  degree  of  RA.  in 
January  1050,  becoming  a  fellow  of  the 
college  at  the  following  Christmas.  To- 
wards its  new  buildings  in  1674  he  contii- 
buted  20/.,  and  bound  himself  to  pay  hi.  a 
year  during  his  life  towards  the  aischarge 
of  certain  annuities  to  persons  who  had 
advanced  money  for  the  compleUon  of  the 
works.  He  qualified  himself  for  lesal 
honours  at  Gray's  Inn,  was  called  to  Vb» 
bar  in  June  1657,  and  became  an  andent 
in  1676. 

When  not  engaged  in  term  he  took  np 
his  residence  at  York,  and  engroased  mncn 
of  the  practice  of  that  and  the  neighbouxing 
counties,  being  the  chief  adviser  of  the 
Puritans  of  the  north,  of  whose  religioos 
opinions  he  was  a  zealous  and  consutent 
supporter.    He  seems  to  haye  been  in  some 
way  connected  with  the  court  of  Cromirell, 
for  he  himself  relates  (as  Dr.  Henry  Samp- 
son   records  in  his  Diary)   that  he  was 
present  when  the  Duke  of   Creqni  ira» 
received  by  Cromwell  at  the  BananetiD; 
House    as    ambassador    from  the  rieneh 
king,  and  delivered  a  letter  to  him  sope^ 
scribed  <To  his    most  Serene    HighneiB 
Oliver,  Lord  Protector  of  England,  France, 
and  Ireland.'  « Cromwell,  looking  at  the 
address,  turned  upon  his  heel,  and  put  the 
letter   in  his  pocket  without  reaun^  it 
The  indignant  ambassador,  on   enqnuiog 
the  cause  of  this  insult,  found  that  the 
offence  was  that  the  letter  was  not  directed 
'  To  our  dear  Brother,  Oliver,'  on  hearing 
which  the  great  Louis  felt  it  expedient  to 
comply.     {Gent.  Mag.  April  1851,  p.  386l) 

In  the  last  months  of  tne  reign  of  Jamei 
II.  he  took  an  important  part  in  the  giieat 
movement  at  York  in  favour  of  the  ftipce 
of  Orange.  His  known  principles,  his  hi{^ 
character,  and  probably  a  desire  to  cqd- 
ciliate  the  Presbyterian  party,  pointed  him 
out  for  selection  as  one  of  the  first  judges 
at  the  revolution.  He  vas  accordingly 
placed  in  the  Common  Pieaa  on  May  ^ 
1689,  his  Serjeant's  ring  bearing  the  appro- 
priate motto  ^  Veniundo  restituit  rem.  He 
soon  after  received  the  honour  of  knight- 
hood. After  sitting  for  six  years  and  a 
half  in  the  Common  Pleas,  he  was  remored 
on  October  29, 1605,  to  the  King's  Bench, . 
where  he  remained  till  his  death,  on  No- 
vember 26, 1699.  He  waa  btiried  at  Saadalr 
near  Doncaster,  where  a  aumptuoua  nat^ 
ment  was  erected  to  his  memoiy  it  A** 
chapel  of  Aichfa&^op  Rokeby.      ^  ^ 

His  ezoellenoe  as  a  man,  ok  iJJ^fMy 
I  Christian^  ind  hk  iipiightawi  ii Hji^F 


BOKELE 

aie  exemplified  bj  his  Biaiy  and  the  corre- 
spondence which  has  come  down  to  us. 
He  married  Ursula,  daughter  of  James 
Danby,  of  New  Building  (formerly  Kirby 
Knowle  Castle),  near  Thir^,  who  Vought 
him  no  issue.  {Memoir  of  J\tdge  JtokStyy 
^  60,  wi  SurUes  Soc.  Public,  for  1860; 
ZutireU,  i.  629,  ill.  643,  iv.  687.) 

BOSXLS,  RoBSBT  BE,  was  of  a  family 
which,  according  to  Hasted,  originally  came 
from  Rochelle  m  France,  and  was  settled 
in  Kent,  where  they  held  the  manor  of 
Heckenham.  In  another  place,  however, 
he  says  that  they  received  their  name  from 
the  parish  of  Rokesle  (now  Ruxley)  in  that 
•county.  The  latter  seems  the  more  pro- 
bable aocoout ;  for  it  appears  that  Robert 
<ie  Rokele  had  land  in  Hokesle,  which,  in 
<:onsequence  of  his  joining  the  insurgent  ba- 
rons, and  being  taken  prisoner  in  Rochester 
Castle  in  17  John,  was  forfeited  with  his 
other  possessions.  His  mother,  Margaret 
de  Momngden,  negotiated  his  release,  which 
she  succeeded  in  procuring  in  the  follow- 
ing May,  on  the  payment  of  a  fine  of  five 
hundred  marks,  nis  two  sons,  Henry  and 
Richard,  becoming  hostages  for  his  good 
behaviour.  (Hot.  Pat.  161-199;  Rot.  de 
Fimbus,  696,  604 ;  Hot.  Clam.  i.  267.) 

In  18  Henry  IIL,  July  6,  1234,  he  was 
admitted  as  one  of  the  king's  justices  of  the 
bench;  but  he  does  not  appear  to  have 
joined  any  of  the  circuits.  He  died  about 
1248.  {Excerpt,  e  Hot.  Fin.  ii.  40 ;  Haded, 
i.  629,  ii.  134.) 

BOLFS,  Robert  Monset  (Lord  Cran- 
wobth),  was  of  a  family  which  has  held  a 
respectable  position  in  the  county  of  Norfolk 
lor  the  last  three  centuries,  and  his  ances- 
tors for  three  generations  have  been  bene- 
ficed clergymen  in  it.  His  grandfather,  the 
Rev.  Robert  Rolfe,  rector  of  Hilborough, 
bj  his  marriage  into  the  Nelson  family  be- 
came connected  with  the  gallant  admiral, 
who  was  first  cousin  of  the  lord  chancellor's 
Cither,  the  Rev.  Edmund  Rolfe,  rector  of 
Cockley-Clav.  His  mother  was  Jemima, 
daughter  of  ^Villiam  Alexander,  Esq.,  and 
IpMoiddaughter  of  the  celebrated  Dr.  Mousey, 
physician  to  Chelsea  Hospital.  He  was  the 
elaer  of  their  two  sons,  and  was  bom  at 
Oranworth  on  December  18, 1790. 

After  spending  some  little  time  at  the 
Bury  school  he  was  sent  to  Winchester, 
from  whence  he  proceeded  to  Trinity  Col- 
lege, Cambridge.     He  took  his  degree  as 
seyenteenth  wrangler  in  1812,  and  was  then 
elected  fellow  of  Downing  College.    Called 
to  the  bar  by  lincoln's  Inn  in  1810,  he  re- 
ceired,  after  sixteen  years'  practice  as  a  I 
junior  barrister  in  Chancery,  the  honour  of  i 
a  silk  gown  in  18^,  and  entered  parliament  • 
in  the  same  year  as  member  for  Peni^n.  | 
Supporting  there  the  liberal  side  of  politics, 
he  was  appointed  solicitor-ffeneral  on  No-  i 
Tember  o,  1834,  but  was  obliged  in  little 


BOLLE 


£65 


more  than  a  month  to  give  place  to  Sir 
William  Webb  FoUett,  on  the  accession  to 
power  of  the  conservative  party.  But  at 
the  end  of  six  months  more  he  was  restored 
to  his  place  with  the  return  of  the  whigs  to 
||Ower,  and  was  then  knighted.  He  con- 
tinued solicitor-general  from  May  4, 1835, 
to  the  end  of  November  1839.  when  he 
was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Exchequer. 
Though  he  had  only  practised  as  a  hamster 
in  the  Court  of  Chancer;^ ,  he  had  acquired 
experience  incases  atNisi  Prius  and  criminal 
law  as  recorder  of  Ipswich,  an  office  which 
he  had  held  for  many  years.  To  this  is 
to  be  attributed  the  facility  with  which  he 
entered  on  his  new  duties,  and  the  excellent 
manner  in  which  he  discharged  them. 

During  the  eleven  years  that  he  sat  in  the 
Exchequer  he  acted,  from  June  19  to  July 
15, 18^,  as  one  of  tne  commissioners  of  the 
Great  Seal,  and  on  November  3  he  was  con- 
stituted the  third  vice-chancellor.  In  the 
following  month  he  was  created  Lord  Cran- 
worth,  being  the  first  and  only  instance  of 
a  vice-chancellor  receiving  the  dignity  of 
the  peerage.  In  the  next  year  the  act 
passed  for  constituting  two  lord  justices  of 
appeal  in  Chancery;  and  on  October  8,1851, 
Sir  James  Lewis  Knight-Bruce  and  Lord 
Cranworth  were  the  first  two  selected  for 
the  experiment 

Before  fifteen  months  were  passed  he  was 
called  upon  to  take  a  still  higher  office. 
On  the  resumption  of  power  by  the  liberal 
narty,  the  Great  Seal,  on  December  28, 
1852,  was  placed  in  his  hands,  where  it  re- 
mained for  the  five  years  during  which 
they  conducted  the  administration.  On  the 
accession  of  Lord  Derby  in  February  18o8 
he  of  course  resigned  ms  office,  and  was 
not  replaced  in  it  when  Lord  Palmers  ton, 
in  June  1859,  became  prime  minister,  his 
increased  age  inducins^  him  not  to  resist 
the  claims  of  Sir  Richard  Bethell,  after- 
wards Lord  Westbuiy.  In  temporary  re- 
tirement he  devoted  himself  to  hearing 
appeals  both  in  the  House  of  Lords  and  the 
privy  council,  till  the  end  of  the  session  of 
1865,  when,  on  the  resignation  of  Lord 
Westbury,  he  accepted  the  Seal  for  the 
second  time  on  July  7.  The  conservative 
ministry  acceding  to  power  in  the  follow- 
ing year,  he  of  course  again  retired  from 
office  on  July  6,  1807.  Continuing  his 
legislative  and  judicial  duties  till  less  that 
a  week  before  ms  death,  he  succumbed  to 
the  tremendous  heat  of  the  weather  on 
July  26,  1868,  when  from  failure  of  issue 
the  title  became  extinct 

He  married  Laura,  daughter  of  William 
Carr,  Esq.,  of  Frognal,  Middlesex. 

BOLLE,  Heitrt.  The  founder  of  the 
opulent  family  of  Rolle  was  a  merchant  in 
London,  who  acquired  a  lar&e  fortune  in 
the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.,  and  settled  him- 
self at  Stevenstone  in  Devonshire.    To  a 


566 


BOLLE 


descendant  of  his  second  son,  George,  the 
barony  of  RoUe  of  Stevenstone  was  granted 
in  1748,  but  the  title  became  extinct  in 
1842.  The  Judffe  was  the  grandson  of  the 
merchant's  K)urUi  son,  Henry,  whose  eldest 
son,  Robert,  married  Joan,  the  daughter  of 
Thomas  Hele,  of  Fleet  in  the  same  county, 
and  left  four  sons,  the  second  of  whom  was 
the  judge. 

Henry  RoUe  was  bom  at  Heanton- 
Sachevil  in  Devonshire,  about  1680,  and 
was  sent  to  Exeter  College,  Oxford.  From 
thence  he  went  to  the  Inner  Temple,  where 
he  was  called  to  the  bar ;  and,  practising 
in  the  King's  Bench,  his  name  is  of  frequent 
occurrence  in  the  Reports  after  Michaelmas 
Term  1629,  the  arguments  of  the  juniors 
being  frequently  omitted  by  the  reporters. 
He  had  used  his  time  well  m  reportmg  the 
cases  of  James's  reign,  which  were  pub- 
lished after  his  death,  and  are  stiU  in  con- 
siderable repute.  That  he  had  ac(]^uired 
too  some  eminence  at  an  earlier  period  is 
manifest  from  his  being  selected  as  member 
of  the  last  parliamentof  James  I.,  represent- 
ing Kellin^n,  and  of  the  first  three  par- 
liaments oi  Charles  I.,  in  which  he  repre- 
sented Truro.  He  took  the  popular  side 
from  the  commencement  of  nis  political 
career,  in  the  first  parliament  of  Charles 
urging  a  redress  of  grievances,  and  in  the 
second  arguing  in  the  case  of  the  Duke  of 
Buckingham  that  common  fame  was  a  suf- 
ficient ground  for  accusation.  (Pari,  Hist, 
ii.  35,  55.) 

He  subsequently  devoted  himself  wholly 
to  his  profession,  and  was  fully  encaged  in 
the  courts.  Four  times  appointed  reader 
of  his  inn,  he  was  prevented  by  the  pre- 
vailing plague  from  performing  the  duties 
of  that  office  till  the  last  occasion  in  Lent 
1639 ;  but  during  his  leisure  he  employed 
himself  in  compiling  that  *  Abridgment  of 
Cases  and  Resolutions  of  the  Law,'  which 
has  been  held  up  by  some  of  the  ablest 
lawyers  as  an  example  to  be  followed  for 
its  perspicuity  and  method.  In  May  1640 
he  was  made  a  serjeant-at-law. 

He  contributed  100/.  in  1642  for  the  de- 
fence of  the  parliament  against  the  king, 
and,  siding  with  the  Puritans,  he  took  the 
covenant,  and  was  in  such  esteem  that  he 
was  recommended  as  a  judge  of  the  King's 
Bench  on  the  propositions  for  peace  which 
the  two  houses  maaeto  the  king  on  February 
1.  1642-3.     {Clarendon,  iii.   407.)     After 
tney  had  assumed  the  government,  one  of 
their  first  legal  appointments,  on  September 
30,  1045,  was  of  Mr.  Serjeant  RoUe  to  that 
office,  which  he  filled|for  three  years,  wlien, 
on  October  12,  1648^  the  Commons  voted  i 
him  to  be  chief  justice  of  the  same  court. 
The  king's  decapitation  soon  followed,  and 
Rolle  was  one  of  the  six  judges  who  ac- 
cepted a  renewal  of  their  commission,  on 
the  condition  that  they  diould  proceed 


ROLT 

according  to  the  fundamental  laws  of  the 
kingdom.  He  was  also  nominated  a  mem- 
ber of  the  council  of  state;  and,  in  his 
charges  to  the  grand  jury  on  his  difierent 
circuits,  he  endeavoured  to  settle  the  peo- 
ple's minds  in  regard  to  the  existing  govem- 
ment.  When  Cromwell  was  made  protector, 
the  chief  justice  was  appointed  in  1654  oc<? 
of  the  commissioners  of  the  Exchequer. 
(IVkitelocke,  174-397;  StyU'sReporU^m:) 

In  that  year,  being  surprised  at  Salishurr 
by  the  party  of  rovalists  who  had  seized 
the  town,  he  narrowly  escaped  bdng  hansed. 
but  was  permitted  to  depart  with  the  W 
of  his  commission  of  assize.  His  refusal  to 
assist  in  tr}dng  the  delinquents  when  taken, 
on  the  ground  of  his  being  a  party  con- 
cerned, ofiended  Cromwell,  who  soon  found 
further  cause  to  be  dissatisfied  with  hi> 
chief  justice,  as  too  honest  a  man  to  be 
relied  upon  in  the  impositions  be  attempted 
to  raise  without  the  consent  of  parliament. 
I  One  Cony  having  refused  to  pay  the  cus- 
toms diarged  on  him,  and  being  com- 
mitted by  Cromwell  to  prison,  applied  f(» 
his  Habeas  Corpus.  His  counsel  were  aihi- 
trarily  sent  to  the  Tower  for  advocatii:^  hi> 
cause ;  and  he  was  obliged  to  plead  for  him- 
self. This  he  did  so  stoutly  and  with  so 
much  reason  that  the  chief'^justice,  afraid 
of  resisting  the  ruling  powers,  yet  too  con- 
scientious to  give  judgment  against  Conr, 
delayed  his  decision  tin  the  next  term.  In 
I  the  meantime,  fearing  that  this  was  only 
I  the  beginning  of  similar  illegal  measoies, 
'  he  applied  to  the  protector  for  his  quietni, 
'  which  was  willingly  granted  on  June  7. 
1655,  and  Serjeant  (jlynne  was  put  in  E* 
place.  {Clarendon,  vii.  144,  294.)  Si- 
Matthew  Hale,  who  edited  his  'Abridg- 
ment,' in  the  preface  to  that  work  speiJ& 
in  the  highest  terms  of  his  character  as  a 
judge,  enlarging  on  his  great  learning  and 
experience,  his  profound  judgment,  hi» 
great  moderation,  justice,  and  integrity,  hi? 
patience  in  hearing,  and  his  readiness  and 
despatch  in  decidmg;  and  even  royalist- 
allowed  his  honesty  on  the  judicial  scat 

He  survived  his  retirement  little  more 
than  a  vear,  and  died  on  July  30,  105(h 
He  was  buried  in  the  church  of  Shapwickv 
near  Glastonbury,  in  Somersetshire,  wherj 
he  had  a  mansion. 

His  son.  Sir  Francis  Rolle,  of  Tuderlej 
in  Hampshire,  represented  that  county  in 
the  parliament  summoned  to  meet  at  Ox- 
ford in  1681 ;  but  the  family  of  the  chief 
justice  failed  in  two  other  generatioa<?,  hi* 
great-grandsons  dying  without  issue,  and 
leavingthe  estates  to  the  father  of  the  first 
Lord  Kolle.  ( JFoocf «  Aihen.  Oxo§l  vl 
416  5  CoBMsPeeraffe^TuLdlQ.) 

BOLT,  JoHK,  of  Ozleworth  Pari^WottoiK 
under-Edge,  Glouceetmhire,  Yrhimr'^ 
ment  from  his  zeoentlj  aoqiuni  ' 
occasioned  bj  the  Buddieii 


"t 


ROMILLY 

powers,  is  still  the  subject  of  lamentation 
and  regret  to  the  bar  and  the  public,  is  the 
son  of  John  Bolt,  an  architect  and  mer- 
chant at  Calcutta.  He  was  bom  there  on 
October  5,  1804.  His  mother  was  the 
widow  of  Mr.  Brundson,  one  of  the  mis- 
sionaries noticed  in  *  Masterman's  Memoirs.' 
His  parents  died  very  soon  after  he  was 
sent  to  England  in  1810 ;  and,  as  he  was 
left  almost  without  resources,  he  was 
educated  at  private  schools  with  a  view  to 
trade^  in  which  he  was  employed  till  1826, 
when  he  became  clerk  to  a  proctor  in 
Doctors'  Commons.  Kemaining  there  for 
nearly  seven  years,  he  boldly  entered  the 
other  branch  of  the  profession,  and  was  ad- 
mitted to  the  Inner  Temple  in  1833.  His 
call  to  the  bar  is  dated  June  9,  1837, 
having  been  in  the  interim  a  pupil  of  that 
eminent  barrister  Mr.  Sutton  Sharpe. 
Practising  in  the  equity  courts,  his 
merits  were  so  quickly  acknowledged  that 
he  was  made  a  queen's  counsel  m  1846. 
'From  that  date  tor  twenty  years  he  was 
one  of  the  most  distinguished  and  most 
successful  leaders  at  the  Chancery  bar. 
During  its  progress,  after  two  failures  to  re- 
present Stiunford  and  Bridport,  he  obtained 
a  seat  in  parliament  as  member  for  West 
Qloucestershire  in  1857,  which  he  retained 
tiU  he  was  raised  to  the  judicial  bench. 

On  October  9,  1666,  he  was  appointed 
attorney-general  and  knighted  j  and  in  less 
than  ten  months  was  promoted  to  the 
dignity  of  lord  justice  of  appeal^  on  July 
22, 1867.  Soon  after  he  was  seized  with 
an  illness  so  severe  that  he  felt  himself  com- 
pelled to  resign  his  appointment,  and  his 
successor.  Sir  Charles  Jasper  Selwyn  (whose 
death  occurred  shortly  alterwards),  received 
his  patent  on  February  8,  1868. 

Sir  John's  first  wife  was  Sarah,  daughter 
and  coheir  of  Thomas  Bosworth,  Esq.,  of 
Bosworth  in  Leicestershire ;  and  his  second 
was  IHizabeth,  daughter  of  Stephen  GodsoD, 
of  Croydon. 

SOMILLY,  John  (Lord  Romillt)^  is  the 
present  master  of  tne  Kolls.  To  him  the 
uterary  world  owes  a  deep  debt  of  gratitude, 
not  oxuy  for  the  energetic  manner  in  which 
he  has  carried  out  and  completed  the  great 
imdertaking  so  worthily  commenced  by  his 
predecessor,  Lord  Langdale,  and  rendered 
the  public  records,  political,  domestic,  and 
legal,  accessible  to  all;  but  also  for  the 
ready  aid  and  increased  facilities  he  has 
given  to  those  who  are  pursuing  historical 
enquiries.  The  useful  calendars  of  state 
papers  and  the  interesting  early  chronicles 
which  have  been,  and  wnich  continue  to 
be,  published  under  his  direction,  the  former 
afibrding  an  easy  reference  to  a  multitudi- 
nous and  valuable  collection,  and  the  latter 
adding  greatly  to  the  authentic  annals  of  the 
kingdom,  will  remain  a  lasting  monument 
of  hia  taste,  judgment,  and  discrimination. 


EOMSEY 


567 


He  is  descended  from  a  French  Protestant 
family  which  took  refuge  in  England  on 
the  revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes.  His 
father  was  Sir  Samuel  Komilly,  whose  name 
will  be  less  remembered  for  his  official  rank 
as  solicito]>^enerai  during  the  short  admi- 
nistration of  the  whigs  in  1806-7,  than  for 
his  commanding  talents  as  an  advocate,  as  a 
senator,  as  the  unflinching  assertor  of  the 
rights  and  liberties  of  the  people,  and  as  the 
first  proposer  of  those  amendments  of  the 
law,  botn  civil  and  criminal,  which,  though 
their  value  or  necessity  was  disparaged  at 
the  time,  have  since  been  fully  recognised 
and  adopted  into  our  jurisprudence.  The 
author  cannot  refer  to  his  name  without  re- 
calling the  reverence  and  admiration  with 
which  for  many  years  fi^m  his  youth  up- 
wards he  regarded  him,  nor  without  remem- 
bering, not  only  the  valuable  professional 
assistance,  but  the  kindness  wnich  he  in- 
variably experienced  in  his  intercourse  with 
him.  ny  his  wife,  Ann,  daughter  of  Francis 
Garbett,  Esq.,  of  Knill  Court  in  Hereford- 
shire, he  had  a  large  family^  of  whom  the 
master  of  the  Kolls  was  the  second  son. 

His  lordship  was  bom  at  the  beginning 
of  this  century,  and  completed  his  education 
at  Trinity  College,  Cambridge,  taking  his 
degree  of  M.A.  in  1826.  He  had  previously 
entered  Gray's  Inn,  and  was  called  to  the 
bar  in  1827.  In  1832  he  was  returned  to 
parliament  by  the  borough  of  Bridport,  a 
constituency  he  changed  for  Devonport  from 
1847  to  1862,  since  which,  having  in  the 
meantime  been  constituted  master  of  the 
Bolls,  he  has  confined  his  attention  to  his 
double  duties  as  a  judge  and  as  the  official 
comptroller  of  the  records  of  the  state,  in 
the  performance  of  the  latter  of  which  (for 
of  the  former,  as  of  all  existing  judges,  I 
purposely  avoid  any  remark)  ho  has  gained 
imiversal  admiration. 

His  professional  life  in  the  interval  did 
not  much  vary  from  the  career  of  every 
successful  barrister.  After  obtaining  the 
honour  of  a  silk  gown  he  was  appointed 
solicitor-general  in  March  1848,  and  in 
July  1860  he  became  attorney-general, 
from  which  in  eight  months  he  was  raised 
to  the  office  which  he  has  since  so  usefully 
occupied,  to  which  he  was  appointed  on 
March  28, 18^51.  On  December  19,  1865, 
he  was  raised  to  the  peerage  as  Lord 
Romilly  of  Barry,  Glamorganshire. 

He  married  Caroline,  daughter  of  the 
late  Dr.  William  Otter,  Bishop  of  Chi- 
chester. 

BOMSEY,  Nicholas  de,  performed  the 
functions  of  justice  itinerant  several  times 
in  39  and  40  Henry  lU.,  1256-6,  probably 
on  both  occasions,  but  certainlv  on  the  last^ 
taking  pleas  of  the  forest  only  in  various 
counties ;  and  also  in  46  and  63  Henry  HI. 
In  52  Henry  lU.  he  and  Walter  de  Burges 
were    employed  to  collect  the  issues   of 


568 


HOMSEY 


the   bishopric    of   Winchester.     (Madoa:, 
i.  710.) 

BOKSETy  Walter  de,  had  the  custody 
of  the  forests  of  Hampshire  in  8  Henry 
.  lU.f  1224,  and  it  was,  no  doubt,  under  this 
character  that  he  was  appointed  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  for  that  county  in  the 
next  year.  (J?ae.  Oaus.  i.  005-635,  ii.  70.) 
He  became  sheriff  of  that  county  and  of 
Wiltshire  in  13  Henry  UI.,  and  was  after- 
wards fined  one  mark  for  receiving  moneys 
in  the  latter  by  summons  from  the  Exche- 
quer which  he  did  not  account  for  at  the 
time.     {MadoXy  ii.  234.) 

BOOKS,  Giles,  bore  the  same  Christian 
name  as  his  grandfather  and  father.    The 
former  was  resident  at  Rumsey  in  Hamp- 
shire, and  the  latter  a  merchant  in  London, 
who  became  a  director  of  the  East  India 
Company,  was  the   associate  of   literary 
men,  and  indulged  himself  in  some  very 
creditable  translations  of  the  classic  poets. 
By  his  marriage  with  Frances,  daughter  of 
Leonard  Cropp^  of  Southampton,  he  had  a 
numerous  family.      His  third  child,  the 
future  judjfe,  was  bom  on  June  3, 1743, 
and  from  Harrow  proceeded  to  St.  John*8 
College,  Oxford.    There  he  was  an  inde- 
fatigable student,  and  he  used  to  relate  his 
mortification  at  the  only  reward  he  received 
from  the  college  tutor  for  the  great  pains 
be  had  bestowed  on  a  copy  of  Latin  verses 
being  the  cold  remark, '  Sir,  you  have  for- 
^tten  to  put  your  tittles  to  vour  i's.'  Hav- 
mg  taken  his 'degrees  of  A.lB.  in  1703  and 
of  A.M.  in  1705,  he  was  in  1700  elected  to 
a  fellowship  of  Merton  College,  which  lie 
held  till  his  marriage  in  1785.    Although 
intended  for  the  le^,  it  was  thought  that  | 
he  preferred  the  clerical  profession,  from 
his  devotion  to  the  study  of  divinity.    But 
his  motive  for  pursuing  the  latter  was  to  ' 
get  rid  of  early  prejudices  and  a  tendency 
to  scepticism,  and  to  satisfy  himself  of  the 
truths  of  Christianity.     The  effects  of  this  • 
study  and  conscientious  application  were  j 
evident  in  nil  his  future  life,  producing  ■ 
that  character  for  genuine  piety  by  which 
he  was  ever  distinguished.     The  deep  im-  \ 
pression  they  made  upon  him  is  shown  in  , 
a  small  pamphlet  containing  ^Thoughts  on 
the  Propriety  of  Fixing  Easter  Term,'  which 
he  pubbshed  anonymously  in  1792. 

This  did  not  prevent  bim  from  preparing 
for  the  profession  he  had  chosen,  and,  hav-  i 
inff  been  called  to  the  bar,  he  joined  the  i 
Western  Circuit,  of  which  he  eventually  be-  ; 
came  the  leader.  He  accepted  the  dignity  of  i 
the  coif  in  1781,  and  had  tlie  honour  of  being 
made  king's  serjeant  in  April  1703.     Soon 
after  he  succeeded  in  obtaining  verdicts  at 
the  Exeter  assizes  against  William  Win-  ; 
terbotham    for    preaching    two    seditious , 
sermons  at  Plymouth,  which,  as  connected  j 
with  the  French  Revolution,  were  consi-  j 
dered  especially  dangerous,  and  for  which  i 


BOS 

the  reverend  defendant  was  sentenced  to  s 
large  fine  and  a  long  imprisament  At  tint 
troubled  period  it  was  Sir  Qiles's  lot  to  be 
brouffht  very  nrominently  forwud.  Hav- 
ing been,  on  November  13  in  the  ame 
year,  appointed  a  judge  of  the  Commoo 
Pleas,  ftnd  knighted,  he  deUvered  in  his 
first  circuit  a  charge  to  the  grand  jury  it 
Readinff  on  the  excited  state  of  the  coun- 
try, and  in  July  1795  he  presided  at  Yod[ 
on  the  trial  and  conviction  of  Henry  Bed- 
head Yorke  for  a  conspiracy  with  otnen  to 
inflame  the  people  against  the  government, 
for  which  a  severe  punishment  was  in- 
flicted. {State  TriaUy  xxii.  826,  xrr. 
1049.) 

Though  not  considered  a  deep  lawyer, 
nor  very  highly  reputed  on  the  bencb^  he 
'  was  a  mild  and  merciful  judge.     A  story  ii 
i  told  of  him  that  a  poor  girl,  having  from 
the  pressure  of  extreme  want  committed  a 
theft,  was  tried  before  him  and  reluctantly 
convicted ;  and  that,  while  applanding  the 
jury  for  giving  the  inevitable  verdict,  he 
declared  that  he  so  sympathised  with  them 
in  their  hesitation  that  he  would  sentence 
I  her  to  the  smallest  punishment  allowed  hr 
I  the  law.    He  accordingly  fined  her  one 
I  shilling,  adding, '  If  she  has  not  one  in  her 
;  possession,  I  will  give  her  one  for  thejpo> 
pose/  Towards  the  end  of  his  life  he  suneied 
much  from  illness,  which  was  greatly  ag* 
'  gravated  by  his  grief  for  the  death  of  hu 
,  two  elder  sons.    After  nearly  fifteen  yein 
,  of  judicial  labours,  he  died  suddenly  on 
I  March  7, 1808,  having  gained  during  the 
whole  of  his  life  the  respect  of  his  contem- 
poraries for  his  strict  integrity,  his  amuihle 
I  temper,  and  his  love  of  literature. 

lus  wife,  Harriet  Sophia,  daughter  of 
Colonel  William  Burrard,  of  Wal^xniittHi, 
Hants,  and  sister  of  Admiral  Sir  Hany 
Burrard-Neale,  Bart,  brought  him  a  large 
family. 

BOS,  Peter  de,  was  not  improbably  a 
younger  brother  of  Everard  de  Ros,  the 
grandson  of  that  Peter  who  assumed  the 
surname  of  Ros  from  his  lordship  so  called 
in  Tloldemess  in  Yorkshire,  and  of  whom 
the  present  Baroness  de  Rods  is  a  lineal 
descendant. 

He  was  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  in 
the  county  of  Cumberland  in  1  Richard  L, 
1189;  and  in  the  ninth  year  of  that  reign 
he,  with  several  associates,  fixed  the  tallage 
in  the  same  county.  {Pipe  RoUj  1^; 
Madox,  i.  704.) 

BOS,  RoBEBT  DE,  was  the  second  son  of 
Robert  de  Ros,  lord  of  Hamlake  in  York- 
shire, and  of  Isabel,  the  daughter  of  William 
the  Lion,  King  of  Scotland.  His  fatten 
on  his  death  in  11  Henry  III.,  gave  kirn 
the  barony  of  Werke  in  Northomhiriai^ 
with  the  castle  which  he  had  foi 
and  a  barony  in  SootUmd. 
By  a  writ  dated  Julj  ^  U 


HOSSLYN 

associated  with  the  justices  of  the  bench ; 
and  in  August  of  that  year  he  was  appointed 
a  justice  on  three  iterSi 

Three  yean  afterwards  he  was  consti- 
tuted chief  justice  of  the  forests  in  the 
nortbem  counties,  and  so  continued,  at  least 
till  28  Henry  m.  He  then  retired  to 
Scotland,  where,  with  John  de  Baliol,  he 
had  the  guidance  of  that  kingdom;  and 
being  charged  with  severely  and  improperly 
tzeatingQueen  Margaret,  the  wife  of  Alex- 
ander, King  of  Scotland,  and  sister  of  Henry 
m.,  the  latter  sent  his  forces  there  to  re- 
store her  to  her  rights,  and  imposed  a  fine 
upon  him  of  one  hundred  thousand  marks ; 
but  its  payment  was  eventually  remitted. 
Dugdale  goes  on  to  relate  that  in  22  Ed- 
waxd  1.,  1293,  he  was  summoned  to  give 
the  king  counsel,  and  that  he  went  to 
Portsmouth  with  horse  and  arms  to  join 
the  expedition  to  Gascony;  and  further, 
that,  in  1295,  being  in  love  with  a  Scotch 
woman,  he  endeavoured  to  inveigle  his  kins- 
man William  de  Ros  to  the  Scots  party, 
which  he  joined  him8elf,*and  was  concerned 
in  planning  a  surprise  on  the  English  power. 

KecoUectiag,  however,  that  he  was  of  full 
age  certainly  in  12  Henry  lU.,  1228,  and 
that  these  last  events  are  stated  to  have  oc- 
eorred  about  1296  or  1297,  when  he  would 
have  been  near  ninety  years  of  as^e,  it  ia 
difficult  to  believe  that  Dugdale  has  not 
missed  a  generation,  and  that  this  lover  of 
the  Scottish  girl  was  not  his  son. 

Wliichever  the  last-mentioned  person 
was,  he  married  Margaret,  one  of  the  four 
listers  and  heira  of  Peter  deBrus,  of  Skelton, 
gvith  whom  he  had  the  lordship  of  Kendall, 
which  devolved  on  his  son  William,  whose 
family  ended  in  1359  with  a  daughter. 
{Baronage,  i.  546,  555.) 

B088LYN,  Earl  of.     See  A.  Weddeb- 

BUBN. 

BOTHESAX,  John,  was  admitted  fellow 
of  Lincoln  College,  Oxford,  in  1648,  as  of 
kin  to  the  next-mentioned  Archbishop 
Rotheram,  the  second  founder.  The  family 
ifterwards  settled  at  Luton  in  Bedfordshire, 
where  the  judge  was  bom.  His  father  was 
the  Rev.  John  Kotheram,  vicar  of  Bore- 
iiam  and  rector  of  Springfield  in  Essex,  in 
which  county  the  judge  afterwards  pur- 
chased the  manor  of  Waltham  Abbey.  He 
took  his  degree  of  B. A.  in  1649  and  of  M.A. 
in  1652,  and  received  his  legal  education 
ftt  Qray*8  Inn,  where  he  was  called  to  the 
bar  in  1655,  and  elected  ancient  in  1671. 
[Fiuti  Oxon,  ii.  120,  170;  Morant,  ii.  88.) 

Adopting  the  popular  side  in  politics,  he 
irew  the  plea  which  Algernon  Sidney  put 
in  on  his  trial ;  and  in  the  prosecution  of 
Bichard  Baxter,  when  Mr.  Wallop  had 
been  brutally  put  down  by  Chief  Justice 
feffireys,  Rotheram  stood  up  for  some 
time  boldly  in  defence,  but  all  to  no  pur- 
pose.   Being  applied  to  by  order  of  King 


EOTHERAM 


569 


James  to  know  *  whether  he  was  for  the 
dispensing  power,*  he  answered  '  No,  he 
was  against  it ;  for  it  was  both  against  law 
and  reason.'  He  was  therefore  naturally 
surprised  that  he  was  selected  for  promo- 
tion. '  as  he  thought  it  was  enough  to  have 
hindered  any  man  from  being  a  judge,  so 
freely  to  declare  his  opinion  as  he  had 
done.'  So  he  expressed  nimself  in  his  ex- 
amination before  the  House  of  Lords  in 
December  1689. 

His  promotion  as  a  baron  of  the  Exche- 
quer took  place  on  July  6,  1688,  a  week 
after  the  trial  of  the  seven  bishops.  Not- 
withstanding their  acquittal,  Kiug  James 
directed  the  judges  in  the  circuits  that  im- 
mediately followed  to  speak  against  them ; 
and  Archbishop  Sancroft  afterwards  in- 
formed the  king  that  the  new  baron  at- 
tacked thenij  '  and  endeavoured  to  expose 
them  as  ridiculous,  alleging  that  they  did 
not  write  English,  and  it  was  tit  they 
should  be  corrected  by  Dr.  Busby  for  false 
grammar.'  This  no  doubt  was  the  baron's 
cunning  method  of  avoiding  the  political 
part  of  the  question.  {State  Trials,  ix.  988, 
xi.  499,  xiL  504.)  His  judicial  career  was 
not  of  long  duration,  terminating  a  few 
months  afterwards  with  James's  flight  from 
the  kingdom,  and  leaving  him  with  the 
titie  of  knighthood  and  the  grade  of  a  Ser- 
jeant, to  resmne  his  practice  at  the  bar. 
iBramston  calls  him  '  a  phanatic ; '  but  he 
seems  to  have  been  an  honest  and  zealous 
advocate.  James  appointed  him  high 
steward  of  Maldon  under  the  new  charter, 
and  his  son  became  recorder  of  that  place^ 
(Braniston,  311.) 

BOTHEBAM,  alias  SCOT,  Thomas 
(Archbishop  of  York),  adopted  the  name 
of  his  native  place.  His  family  was  named 
Scot,  and  resided  at  Rotheram  in  York- 
shire, where  he  was  bom  on  August  24, 
1423.  His  parents,  though  not  in  an  ele- 
vated rank,  were  sufficiently  opulent  to  send 
him  first  to  Eton  and  then  to  Cambridge, 
where,  in  1444,  he  was  one  of  the  first 
scholars  at  King's  College  after  its  foimda- 
tion.  He  then  was  elected  a  fellow  of  Pem- 
broke Hall,  of  which  he  afterwards  became 
master  in  1480 ;  and  he  presided  over  the 
university  for  some  time  as  chancellor. 

Having  been  selected  as  one  of  the  chap- 
lains of  King  Edward  IV.,  he  quickly  ac- 
quired the  royal  favour,  and  in  one  year, 
1408,  was  advanced  to  the  post  of  keeper  of 
the  privy  seal,  with  the  profitable  appoint- 
ment of  provost  of  Beverley,  and  a  seat  on 
the  episcopal  bench  as  Bishop  of  Rochester. 
That  his  talents  were  not  inconsiderable 
may  be  presumed  from  his  being  sent  in  the 
following  August  as  sole  ambassador  to 
treat  for  peace  with  the  King  of  France. 
{Rymer^  xi.  625.) 

fie  remained  at  Rochester  about  four 
years,  when  he  was  translated  to  the  diocese 


570 


ROTHERAM 


of  Lincoln  in  1472;  and  two  more  years 
had  scarcely  elapsed  before  he  was  raised  to 
the  high  office  of  lord  chancellor.  Sir  T. 
D.  Hajdy  (Caial,  55)  places  his  nomina- 
tion shortly  after  February  25, 1475 ;  but 
there  seems  to  be  evidence  to  warrant  his 
introduction  nearly  a  year  earlier.  The 
parliament  that  met  on  October  6,  1472, 
was  continued  by  various  prorogations  till 
its  dissolution  on  March  14,  1475 ;  and  dur- 
ing that  short  peiiod  of  twenty-nine  months 
no  less  than  three  chancellors  presided  in 
it.  Stillington  was  chancellor  at  its  open- 
ing ;  Laurence  Bootli  prorogued  it  a.s  cnan- 
cellor  on  December  13,  1473,  and  again  on 
the  1st  of  the  following  Februarj';  and 
Thomas  Eotheram  as  chancellor  prorogued 
it  on  May  28,  1474.  The  date  of  his  pa- 
tent mu&t  therefore  have  been  between 
February  1  and  May  28, 1474.  He  acted 
in  the  same  character  at  another  prorogation 
and  at  its  ultimate  dissolution.  {Hot.  Pari 
vi.  104,  120, 153.) 

Sir  T.  D.  Hardy  refers  to  some  privy 
seal  bills,  from  which  he  collects  that  John 
Alcock,  Bishop  of  Kochester,  held  the 
Great  Seal  in  the  followingyear  from  April 
27  to  September  28,  1475.  There  are  how- 
ever in  Kymer  (xii.  6,  14)  two  documents 
in  which  Kotheram,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  is 
designated  as  chancellor,  dated  on  June  1 
and  August  13,  both  within  that  interval ; 
and  a  letter  from  Sir  John  Paston  {Letters, 
ii.  i)3)  to  his  brother  Edmund,  dated  at 
Calais  on  June  13,  1475,  mentions  the 
Bishop  of  Lincoln  as  then  chancellor.  Be- 
sides these  evidences  of  his  being  still  in 
possession  of  the  olHce,  there  are  a  large 
number  of  privy  seals  addressed  to  him  m 
that  character  during  the  whole  of  the  time 
in  which  the  same  documents  were  also  ad- 
dressed to  the  Bishop  of  Rochester,  some 
of  them,  addressed  to  both,  bearing  date  on 
the  same  day.  Xo  doubt  therefore  exists 
that  during  the  short  period  in  question 
there  were  tavo  cnAXCELLORS.  This  un- 
usual occurrence,  of  which  no  other  in- 
stance can  be  found,  arose  from  the  Bishop 
of  Rochester  being  appointed  in  contempla- 
tion of  Edward's  invasion  of  France,  and  of 
the  king's  intention  that  Bishop  Rother- 
am  should  accompany  him  in  the  expedi- 
tion as  chancellor.  The  delay  of  the  arma- 
ment for  more  than  two  months  accounts 
for  this  duplication  of  privy  seals  from  va- 
rious places  in  England  during  the  months 
of  May  and  June.  On  the  King's  return 
from  the  expedition  Bishop  Alcock*s  ser- 
vices were  no  longer  required ;  and  the  last 
privy  seal  addressed  to  him  is  dated  Sep- 
tember 28,  1475.  Bishop  Rotheram  then 
resumed  the  whole  of  his  official  functions, 
and  continued  to  perform  them  during  the 
remainder  of  Edward's  reign. 

On  the  peace  of  1476  between  England 
and  France  the  chancellor  is  reported  to 


ROtHERAK 

have  received  from  Louis  an  annual  peiuioa 
of  2000  crowns  {Lingard,  v,  225),  a  piy- 
ment  to  which  no  disgrace  seems  to  naVe- 
been  attached,  as  not  only  many  of  the 
English  nobles,  but  even  the  monarch  him- 
self, condescended  to  be  pensioners  of  the 
French  king.  Rotheram  sat  as  chancellor 
in  the  two  remaining  parliaments  of  the 
reign,  which  met  respectiyehr  on  Jaouarr 
16, 1478,  and  January  20,  1483 ;  and  in  the 
interim  he  received  his  highest  ecclesiastical 
dignity,  as  Archbishop  of  York,  on  Sep- 
tember 3, 1480. 

On  the  death  of  his  royal  patron,  to  whom 
he  was  zealously  attached,  the  archbiihop 
continued  in  possession  of  the  Great  Seal 
as  chancellor  for  about  fiye  or  six  weeks* 
that  is  to  say,  for  nearly  half  the  reign  of 
his  infant  sovereign,  Edward  V.  The 
coronation  of  the  unfortunate  child  had 
been  fixed  to  take  place  on  May  4,  but 
before  that  day  arriyed  the  Duke  of  Gloo- 
cester  had  obtained  possession  of  his  pe^ 
son.  To  dissipate  any  fears  that  nught 
arise  from  this  act,  the  wily  duke  sent  a 
messenger  to  the  archbishop  assuring  him 
that  all  would  be  weU.  *  I  assure  hLoa,' 
was  the  answer  of  the  chancellor,  *  be  it  as 
well  as  it  will,  it  will  neyer  be  so  well  as 
we  haye  seen  it.'  Arming  his  retainers,  he 
forthwith  went  to  the  queen  in  the  b§dc- 
tuary  at  Westminster,  taking  the  Great 
Seal  with  him.  This,  after  giving  her 
what  comfort  he  could,  he  placed  into  her 
hands  to  the  use  and  behoof  of  her  son, 
declaring  that  if  they  crowned  any  other 
king  than  him,  his  brother,  who  was  then 
with  the  queen,  should  the  next  day  he 
crowned.  Although  he  quickly  repented 
of  this  unauthorisecl  stirrender  of  the  Seal, 
and  contrived  to  get  it  back  on  the  same 
night,  his  devotion  to  the  royal  family  was 
not  likely  to  be  overlooked  by  a  man  of 
the  duke's  character.  The  error  he  had 
committed  was  taken  advantage  of  to  re- 
move him  from  the  chancellorship  some 
time  in  the  month  cf  May  1483. 

A  few  days  afterwaitb,  pursuing  his 
ambitious  projects,  and  to  get  rid  of  one 
who  was  likely  to  impede  them,  the  doke 
consigned  the  archbisnop  to  the  Tower  as 
a  prisoner.  His  confinement,  however,  was 
not  of  long  duration,  as  he  was  released  by 
the  usurper  about  the  time  of  his  own 
coronation  in  the  following  month. 

It  is  certain  that  Archbishop  Rotheram 
was  at  liberty  on  January  23,  1484,  when 
King  Richard's  first  parliament  met,  as  he 
was  then  appointed  one  of  the  triers  of 
petitions.  Whateyer  may  have  been  the 
inducement  for  his  appearance  on  tiitt 
occasion,  which  it  ils  not  difficult  to 


stand,  we  can  conoeire  the  pkim  hi 
experienced  in  pezforming  the  «■§  Mjf 
less  than  two  yem  •ftarwaH***  A»fal 
parliament  of  Ueuj  VIL  i  l-vi? 


ROUBURY 

238,  268),  and  in  witnessing  the  peaceful 
establishment  of  the  government  during 
the  remainder  of  his  life.  This  terminated^ 
at  the  age  of  76,  on  May  29, 1500,  when 
he  died  at  Cawood  of  the  plague  which 
then  laged,  and  was  buried  in  a  marble 
tomb  he  had  himself  erected  in  York 
Cathedral. 

The  universities  of  Cambridge  and  Ox- 
ford and  the  see  of  York  received  munifi- 
cent proofs  of  Lis  boimty,  and  in  his  native 
town  he  founded  a  college  for  a  provost, 
five  priests,  and  six  choristers,  with  three 
schoolmasters  for  grammar,  singing,  and 
writing.  {Drakes  Eborac,  446 j  Godwin, 
299,  698.) 

BOUBTJBY,  Gilbert  be,  before  he  be- 
came a  judge,  evidently  held  some  place  of 
consideration  in  the  courts,  several  instances 
occurring  of  his  name  being  added  to  those 
of  the  justices  commissioned  to  take  inqui- 
sitions^ and  of  his  carrying  records  mto 
court  His  appointment  as  a  justice  of 
the  Court  of  King's  Bench  occurred  in  23 
Edward  I.,  1295,  during  the  remainder  of 
which  reign  he  seems  to  have  taken  a 
prominent  part  in  the  administration  of 
justice.  Sunmioned  among  his  brethren  to 
parliament,  he  was  frequently  selected  as 
one  of  the  receivers  of  petitions,  and  in  the 
Statute  of  Champerty,  33  Edward  I.,  he  is 
specially  mentioned  as  clerk  of  the  king's 
council,  and  as  recommending  the  writ  of 
conspiracy.     (JRot.  Pari.  i.  29-189.) 

On  the  accession  of  Edward  II.  he  was 
re-appointed  to  his  seat  in  the  King's 
Bench,  and  on  March  10,  1316,  was  re- 
moved into  the  Common  Pleas.  Fines 
were  levied  before  him  there  from  that 
year  till  the  beginning  of  14  Edward  II. 
{Ihigdale's  Orig.  44)  j  and  the  last  summons 
to  council  addressed  to  him  is  dated  No- 
vember 29,  1320.  He  retired  from  the 
court,  or  died,  before  May  31,  1321. 

ROTJCLIPFE,  Brtan,  possessed  the  manor 
of  Colthorpe  in  Yorkshire.  His  name  does 
not  appear  as  an  advocate  in  the  Year  Books; 
but  there  is  a  letter  from  him  to  Sir  William 
Plumpton  (Corresp.  2,  259),  who  had  been 
sherin  of  Yorkshire,  which  plainly  shows 
that  he  was  conversant  with  the  practice  of 
the  Court  of  Exchequer,  with  reference  to 
the  passing  of  the  accounts  of  those  officers ; 
and  as  he  states  that  he  has  '  labored  a  felaw 
of  mine  to  be  vour  attorney  iu  the  court, 
for  I  may  nought  he  hut  of  counsel,^  it  may 
be  presumed  that  at  that  time  he  either 
hela  an  office  in  the  Exchequer  too  high  to 
appear  for  a  sheriif,  or  that  ne  practised  as 
im  advocate  there. 

He  was  constituted  third  baron  of  the 
Exchequer  on  November  2, 1458,  37  Henry 
VI., and  was  re-appointed  when  EdwardI  V. 
assumed  the  crown  in  1461.  In  1463  he 
entered  into  a  contract  with  Sir  William 
Plumpton,  in  which  he  is  called  'Brian 


RL'FUS 


571 


Houcliffe,  of  Colthorp,  gent.,  third  baron, 
&c.,'  by  which  Joan,  Sir  William's  grand- 
daughter, then  only  four  years  old,  is 
placed  under  his  government,  to  the  intent 
that  John  his  son  and  heir  shall  marry  her. 
The  imion  took  place,  and  led  to  a  long 
litigation  after  the  death  of  the  knight, 
who  seems  to  have  been  an  unprincipled 
character  between  John  Roucliffe  and  a  son 
of  Sir  William  by  a  subsequent  marriage. 

The  restoration  of  Henry  VI.  in  1470, 
and  the  return  of  Edward  iV.  in  the  next 
year,  made  no  difference  in  the  place  which 
Roucliffe  occupied  in  the  court,  nor  was  he 
advanced  till  the  accession  of  Richard  III., 
when,  on  June  26,  1483,  he  was  promoted 
to  the  office  of  second  baron.  In  this  he 
was  continued  by  Henry  VII.,  under  whom 
he  acted  for  nearly  nine  yeai*s. 

He  died  on  March  4,  1494,  and  was 
buried  in  the  church  of  Colthorpe,  or  Cow- 
thorp,  which  was  built  by  him,  and  conse- 
crated in  1458.  (Ibid.  8  n.  -,  Cal.  Mot.  Pat. 
300,  316.) 

BTJFTJ8,  Geoffrey  (Bishop  of  Due- 
ham),  is  called  only  Geoffirey  in  the  re- 
maining records  of  the  time.  The  '  History 
of  Durham '  and  Bishop  Godwin  say  that  ha 
I'eceived  the  cognomen  of  Rufus,  by  which 
he  is  now  generally  distinguished,  without 
stating  on  what  account,  and  nothing  is 
known  of  his  family  or  himself  until  he 
became  chancellor  to  Henry  I. 

He  succeeded  to  this  office  about  Christ- 
mas 1123,  and  his  name  appears  to  a 
charter  to  Exeter  Cathedral  {Monad,  ii. 
639),  which,  though  without  date,  as  is 
common  in  those  times,  must  have  been 
granted  between  August  1123,  when  God- 
trey,  Bishop  of  Bath,  one  of  the  witnesses, 
was  raised  to  that  see,  and  the  death  of 
Teoldus,  Bishop  of  "Worcester,  another 
witness,  which  occurred  some  time  in  1124. 

That  he  was  not  removed  from  his  office 
during  the  remainder  of  the  reign  may  be 
concluded  from  his  witnessing  as  chancellor 
nimierous  instruments,  the  last  of  which 
was  dated  'apud  Femeham  in  transfreta- 
tione  regis '  (madox,  i.  36),  and  was  appa- 
rently signed  in  the  autumn  of  1134,  when 
the  kmg  went  for  the  last  time  to  Normandy, 
and  died  there. 

Geoffirey  was  raised  to  the  bishopric  of 
Durham  on  August  6,  1133.  Some  authors 
fix  his  elevation  in  1128 ;  but  the  history 
of  Durham  in  the  *  Anglia  Sacra  *  gives  the 
former  year,  and  the  correctness  of  this  is 
substantiated  by  the  fact  that  his  si^ature 
to  the  Lincoln  charter  in  1132  is  only 
'  Geoffrey  the  Chancellor,*  while  that  to  the 
grant  to  Alberic  de  Vere  in  1134  is*Geof- 
trey  the  Chancellor,  Bishop  of  Durham.' 

In  the  Great  Roll  of  31  Henry  I.  there 
is  an  entry,  from  which  it  has  been  argued 
that  he  purchased  the  Chancery  for  3006/. 
ld«.  4d    It  is  there  stated  that  he  otced 


572 


RUFUS 


that  sum  *  pro  sigillo.*  How  far  the  words 
used  warrant  the  presumption  that  this  was 
a  fine  which  he  had  imdiertaken  to  pay  for 
an  office  of  which  he  had  been  in  possession 
for  seven  or  eight  years  I  have  discussed 
in  my  other  work  (Jiidges  of  EngUmd^  L  82). 
It  is  now  impossible  to  come  at  the  real 
truth,  but  the  probabilities  seem  to  be  in 
opposition  to  the  inference  drawn. 

That  roll  shows  that  he  then  had  the 
care  of  the  temporalities  of  the  bishoprics 
of  Coventry  and  Hereford,  and  of  the  abbey 
of  Chertsey,  during  their  vacancies,  and 
also  the  custody  of  various  manors  and 
lands  then  vested  in  the  crown.  From  no 
less  than  twenty  entries  of  his  being  excused 
the  pa^nment  of  Danegeld  and  other  taxes^ 
it  appears  that  he  had  property  in  fifteen 
counties,  and  that  the  impositions  from 
which  he  was  thus  exempted  amounted  to 
the  then  large  sum  of  40/.  ^a,  2d, 

lie  does  not  appear  to  have  been  con- 
tinued in  his  office  of  chancellor  by  King 
Stephen,  and  he  died  at  the  castle  oi  Dur- 
ham on  May  6,  1140.  (6rWtcm,  7i)4 ;  Lc 
JNevc,  347 ;  Madox^  i.  50,  &c.,  ii.  472.) 

BTJFTTS,  Guy  (Bishop  of  JBanoob),  was 

Presented  to  the  church  of  Swinestead  by 
Robert  de  Gant,  brother  of  Gilbert  Earl  of 
Lincoln,  before  the  year  1152.  Some  time 
afterwards,  but  before  1].05,  he  became 
dean  of  Waltham  in  Essex,  and  was  the 
last  who  bore  that  title,  King  Henry,  in 
1177,  altering  King  Harold^s  foundation, 
by  substituting  an  abbot  and  twenty  regular 
canons  for  a  dean  and  eleven  seculars. 

So  early  as  11  Henry  II.,  1104,  he  was 
one  of  the  justices  sitting  in  the  Exchequer; 
and  from  14  to  23  Henry  II.  he  was  ac- 
tively employed  as  a  justice  itinerant,  his 
pleas  being  recorded  in  at  least  sixteen 
counties. 

On  July  1,  1177,  he  was  consecrated 
Bishop  of  Bangor,  to  which  see  Henry  no 
doubt  raised  liim  for  the  purpose  of  facili- 
tating the  above-mentioned  change  in  the 
foundation  of  Waltham.  He  died  about 
IIJK),  aiid  does  not  appear  to  have  acted  in 
a  judicial  character  aJfter  his  elevation  to 
the  bishopric.  (Madox,  i.  44,  123,  &c ; 
Monast.  vi.  57;  Le  Neve,  25.) 

BUFUS,  KiciiARD,  or  BUFFUS,  was  one  of 
the  king's  chamberlains  in  14  Henry  U., 
1108,  and  held  the  office  till  his  death, 
about  5  John.  His  name  appear  as  a 
justice  itinerant  on  the  roll  of  1180,  for 
Oxfordshire.  {MadoXy  i.  137,  581.)  But 
the  pleas  there  accounted  for  eWdently, 
from  their  position,  are  those  of  a  former 
year;  and  there  seems  reason  to  doubt 
whether  his  name  has  not  been  erroneously 
substituted  bjr  the  transcriber  for  that  of 
Richard  Giflard,  who  is  inserted  on  the 
previous  roll  as  justicier  for  that  county, 
and  is  omitted  on  the  corresponding  entries 
of  this.    And  this  suspicion  derives  greater 


RUPIBTJS 

weight  from  the  fact  that  thb  is  the  only 
occasion  on  which  Richazd  Rafiu*8  name 
is  so  introduced. 

In  1  Richard  I.  he  was  custos  of  the 
honor  of  Berkh&mpstead,  and  also  held  the 
manors  of  the  county  of  Oxford  under  the 
king.    (PipeRoU,  32, 106,  149.)    Thepro- 

Eerty  which  King  Henry  save  him  to  be 
eld  by  the  service  of  the  chamber  mi  b 
Wiltshire,  and  of  considerable  amount 

BUFUS,  WiLLiAit,  often  spelled  Rufiiu, 
was  one  of  the  sons  of  Ralph  de  Rofoi, 
whose  father,  also  Ralph,  was  a  Norman 
knight  in  the  train  of  the  Conquerur,  k 
the  daughter  of  Asceline  de  Yvery.  He 
acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  from' 10  to 
26  Henry  U.,  1173-1180  (Afodar,  L  128- 
701),  ana  was  one  of  the  justiderspreeoit 
at  Westminster  before  whom  fines  ^ere 
levied  in  1182-1189,  in  the  latter  of  which 
years  he  is  styled  dapifer  regis.  {Hwde^i 
Preface.)  This  office  is  supposed  to  be  the 
same  as  seneschal  or  steward ;  but  if  so, 
from  the  number  mentioned  in  this  rdgn, 
there  must  have  been  several  at  one  time, 
probably  holding  different  grades,  with  ope 
above  them  all.  He  was  one  of  the  wit- 
nesses to  the  will  which  the  king  executed 
at  Waltham  in  1182.  {Lord  Lyttdton,  It. 
[14].)  He  siso  held  the  office  of;  sheriff  of 
Devonshire  in  22  and  23  Henry  U.,  aiido: 
the  united  counties  of  Bedford  and  BnckiDg- 
ham  firom  20  Henry  II.  (with  an  inteirop- 
tion  of  a  year  or  two)  to  6  Richard  I. 

His  death  would  seem  to  have  beai  a 
violent  one,  and  to  have  occurred  in  6  or  7 
Richard  I.,  for  by  the  roll  of  the  ktter 
year  the  hundred  of  Redderbrugg  in  Sunex 
was  fined  forty  shilling  *  pro  concelameoio 
retatorum  de  morti  Willeuni  Rufii.'  (3ffl- 
doXf  i.  544.) 

His  descendants  flourished  in  a  los^ 
succession  under  the  name  of  Rous,  snd 
the  family  is  now  lineally  represented  hr 
Thomas  Bates  Rous,  Esq.,  of  Courtyrala  in 
Glamorganshire. 

BUPIBU8,  Peter  de  (Bishop  op  Wes- 
chester),  was  a  Poictevin  by  birth.  He 
was  a  clerk  in  the  king's  chamber  in  the 
reigns  of  Henry  U.  and  Richard  I. ;  and  in 
that  of  the  former  he  held  the  rectorrof 
Dartford  in  Kent  (Htuted,  ii.  327.)  h\ 
John  he  is  called  '  clericus  noster,  and  is 
mentioned  as  prior  of  Loches  (Rot.  CharL 
10,  34) ;  and  so  early  as  3  John  he  tilled 
the  office  of  treasurer  of  Poictiers,  and  was 
also  archdeacon  of  the  church  there.  (J?o<. 
Pat,  1 ;  Godwin^  217.)  About  the  same 
time  he  was  raised  to  the  dignities  of  arch* 
deacon  of  Stafford  and  precentor  of  Lincohit 
and  was  soon  after  elevated  to  the  epismal 
bench,  being  consecrated  Bishop  A  Wtt- 
Chester  at  Rome  on  September  b,  IM^ 
Roger  de  Wendover  (iii.  181),  ia 
ing  his  election,  calls  liim  '^ 
orainis  et  in  rebus  Kfti«Aft«5.       tit  "» 


BUPIBUS 

So  high  was  he  in  the  royal  fayonr  that 
the  king  cm  this  occasion  presented  him 
with  two  tiiousand  marks,  (jfadox,  i.  888.) 
Both  before  and  after  this  erent  he  was  in 
oontiniial  attendance  on  his  sorereign  in  his 
frequent  proeresses  throughout  the  king- 
donii  many  of  the  most  mmute  as  well  as 
the  more  miportant  payments  on  the  king's 
account  heinff  made  by  him.  Throughout 
the  king's  difficulties  he  acted  as  one  of  his 
counsellors,  and  during  his  whole  reign  re- 
ceiyed  many  proofs  of  his  bounty.  In  1208 
he  is  named  as  a  justider,  fines  Deina  leyied 
before  him  in  the  King's  Court   {Sunier's 

./VltywOg.) 

When  Walter  de  Grey,  the  chancellor, 
went  on  a  special  mission  to  Flanders,  he 
sent  the  Great  Seal  to  the  kin?  at  Ospringe, 
on  October  9, 1213,  by  Richard  de  Marisco ; 
and  there  is  an  entry  on  the  Patent  Roll 
stating  that,  on  December  22,  the  king  de- 
liyered  it  to  Ralph  de  Neyille,  ^  sub  Domino 
Wintoniensi  Episcopo  deferendum.'  Al- 
tliough  Sir  T.  D.  Hardy,  and  after  him  Lord 
CampbeU,  explain  these  words  as  meaning 
that  jRalph  de  Neyille  so  held  the  Seal 
beeauae  tne  bishop  was  then  custos  of  the 
kingdom,  or  chief  justiciary,  their  interpre- 
tation cannot  be  accepted,  because  Peter 
de  Rupibus  was  not  maced  in  that  high 
podtion  till  the  following  Februaiy,  and 
because,  indeed,  there  is  no  other  instance 
of  the  Great  Seal  being  held  under  any  one 
but  a  chancellor.  In  no  list  hitherto  pub- 
lished has  the  name  of  Peter  de  Rupibus 
been  introduced  as  chancellor  or  keeper; 
but,  independently  of  the  presumption  wnich 
is  raised  oy  the  words  above  used  that  he 
held  the  former  office,  all  doubt  of  the  fact 
is  removed  by  the  entry  of  two  records  on 
the  Fine  Roll  of  the  year,  dated  respectively 
November  21  and  24,  1213  (607, 609),  in 
both  of  which  the  title  of  chancellor  is 
distinctly  added  to  his  name.  There  are 
also  no  less  than  eight  charters  between 
October  31, 1213,  and  January  3, 1214,  in- 
dnsiye,  given  under  his  hand  (liot.  Chart. 
195-^)  ;  and  though  the  title  of  chancellor 
does  not  appear  in  his  subscription  to  these, 
the  omission  probably  arose  nrom  his  hold- 
ing the  office  only  temporarily.  He  retired 
fiom  it  on  the  return  of  Walter  de  Grey, 
who  is  again  spoken  of  as  chancellor  in  a 
record  dated  January  12,  1214.  (Hot. 
Ciaus.  i.  160.) 

On  February  1,  while  the  kingwas  at 
Portsmouth  ready  to  embark  for  JPoictou, 
be  appointed  Peter  de  Rupibus  justiciary  of 
England  to  act  in  his  place  and  keep  the 
peace  during  his  absence.  {Hot,  Pat,  110.) 
in  this  character  fines  were  levied  before 
him  at  Westminster  in  16  and  10  John ; 
fTMJ  there  are  mandates  of  his  dated  as  late 
as  October  20, 1214.  {Hot.  Clous.  I  2130 
He  was  present  at  Runnymede  on  June  16, 
1215,  when  Magna  Charta  was  signed,  but 


RUSSELL 


57S 


evident'  not  as  chief  justiciary,  to  which 
office  Hubert  de  Burgh  was  a  few  daya 
afterwards  raised. 

Ten  days  after  the  death  of  KingJohu 
he  sssisted  at  the  hasty  coronation  of%[enry 
HI.  in  the  abbey  church  of  Gloucester; 
and  when,  two  years  afterwards,  William 
Mareschally  Earl  of  Pembroke,  died,  the 
custody  of  the  royal  infant  was  entrusted 
to  his  care.  A  rivalry  had  for  some  time 
existed  between  him  and  the  chief  jus- 
ticiary, which  now  led  them  into  mutual  at- 
tempts to  ruin  each  other.  In  this  contest 
Hubert  de  Burgh  obtained  such  an  as- 
cendency over  the  king's  mind  as  to  procure 
in  1227  the  dismission  of  the  bishop,  who 
soon  after  undertook  a  journey  to  the  Iloly 
Land,  where  he  remained  for  nearly  three 
years.  But  Hubert  then  becoming  unpo- 
pular,  the  bishop  was  recalled  to  court, 
where,  using  his  influence  with  the  king, 
he  soon  succeeded  in  producing  the  disgrace 
of  his  antagonist,  and  acquiring  the  chief 
conduct  of  the  royal  counsels. 

His  encouragement  of  the  harsh  treat- 
ment received  by  his  rival  reflects  as  little 
to  the  credit  of  his  generosity,  as  his  ma- 
nagement of  the  finances  and  the  introduc- 
tion of  his  countrymen  into  places  of  trust 
did  to  his  wisdom.  The  l&glish  barons 
soon  became  disgusted  with  both,  and  com- 
menced the  resistance  which  afterwards  led 
to  intestine  war.  He  is  charged  with  pro- 
curing the  betrayal  and  death  of  Richard 
Earl  of  Pembroke,  by  issuing  a  charter  in 
the  king's  name,  but  without  his  authority, 
promising  the  earl's  confiscated  lands  in 
Ireland  to  those  who  should  take  him,  dead 
or  alive. 

The  king's  eyes  were  at  length  opened 
by  the  remonstrances  of  Edmund,  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  who,  pointing  out 
the  certain  consequences  of  following  such 
counsels,  procured  the  dismissal  of  the 
bishop  in  April  1234. 

Being  called  to  account  for  his  adminis- 
tration of  the  Treasury,  he  took  refuge  with 
his  nephew,  or  son,  Peter  de  Rivallis,  at 
the  altar  of  his  church,  and  eventually 
escaped  to  Rome,  from  which  he  returned 
in  1230.  He  died  in  his  palace  at  Famham 
on  June  9,  1238,  and  was  buried  at  Win- 
chester. 

Experienced  from  an  early  period  of  his 
life  in  the  duties  of  office,' he  acquired  a 
high  character  for  wisdom  and  intelligence, 
which  he  seems  to  have  deserved,  except 
where  he  allowed  his  personal  feelings  to 
betray  his  judgment.  However  we  may 
disapprove  some  of  the  acts  of  his  life,  wo 
must  allow  him  the  merit  of  liberality  and 
piety  in  founding  monasteries,  building 
churches,  and  endowing  hospitals.  (  Godtcin, 
217 ;  Dvgdahy  Orig.  12 ;  Angl.  Sac,  ii.  306, 
606 ;  R,  de  Wendover :  Hapin,) 

BTJSSELL,  John  (Bishop  of  Lincoln), 


.574 


HUSSELL 


'was  born  in  the  parish  of  St  Peter's  in  the 
suburbs  of  Winchester.  He  received  his 
education  atOzford^beinfr  admitted  a  fellow 
of  New  College  in  1449,  and  taking  the 
degree  of  doctor  of  the  canon  law.  In 
his  after-life,  probably  about  1484,  he  was 
elected  chancellor  of  that  univeraity,  an 
office  which  in  his  time  was  converted  from 
an  annual  to  a  permanent  appointment. 
He  held  a  prebend  in  the  cathedral  of  St. 
l^aul,  and  was  collated  to  the  archdeaconry 
of  BerkH  on  February  28,  1460.  {Bi/mer, 
xi.  682,  738,  778,  793.) 

Having  attained  considerable  eminence 
at  court,  he  was  the  only  learned  eccle- 
siastic among  the  four  ambassadors  who 
were  sent  in  February  1470, 9  Edward  IV „ 
to  invest  the  Duke  of  Burgundy  with  the 
order  of  the  Garter,  when  he  was  entrusted 
T%4th  the  duty  of  making  the  complimental 
address  on  the  occasion.  The  publication 
of  this  address  in  that  year  is  connected 
with  the  earliest  history  of  English  typo- 
graphy ;  for,  although  printed  at  Bruges  or 
liouen,  it  is  the  first  specimen  of  the  press 
of  Caxton.  In  the  tollowing  Februaij, 
during  the  short  restoration  of  Henry  VI., 
])e  was  one  of  those  appointed  to  treat  with 
the  French  ambassadors,  and  again  in  Fe- 
bruary 1472  he  was  sent  by  King  Edward 
to  the  Duke  of  Burgundy  to  conclude  a 
treaty  of  peace  with  nim.  (Ibid.  xi.  651, 
737.)  In  the  latter  commission  he  is  styled 
secondary  in  the  office  of  the  privy  seal, 
to  the  keepership  of  which  he  probably  suc- 
ceeded when  Bishop  Rotheram  was  made 
lord  chancellor  in  May  1474,  but  he  is  not 
mentioned  with  the  title  till  the  following 
year.  He  retained  the  office  certainly  till 
the  end  of  that  reign  (Rot.  Pari.  vL  122, 
202),  and  probably  till  he  was  appointed 
chancellor  under  that  of  Edward  V, 

In  the  meantime  he  was  raised  to  the 
episcopal  bench  as  Bishop  of  Rochester  on 
September  20,  1476,  and  was  soon  after 
entrusted  with  the  government  of  the  king's 
infant  son.  From  Kochester  he  was  trans- 
lated to  Lincoln  on  September  0,  1480, 
and  was  one  of  the  executors  of  King  Ed- 
ward's will. 

In  that  character,  and  from  his  long  con- 
nection with  Edward  IV.,  it  is  natural  to 
suppose  that  he  would  feel  an  interest  in  the 
welfare  of  the  new  sovereign,  and  that  he 
would  not  advisedly  have  taken  any  part  in 
supplanting  him.  There  is  nothing  to  show 
that  when  he  was  fixed  upon  to  succeed 
Bishop  Rotheram  in  the  chancellorship  the 
Protector  Richard,  Duke  of  Gloucester, 
contemplated  his  subsequent  usurpation. 
Indeed,  the  contrary  would  appear  from 
the  many  acts  done  by  him  in  tne  name  of 
Kin^  Edward  V.  The  patent  of  the  bishop's 
.appomtment  as  lord  chancellor  has  not  come 
down  to  us,  but  it  may  be  presumed  that  he 
jreceivedthe  Great  Seal  about  the  middle 


BUSSELL 

of  May.  A  speech  is  extant  among  Uie 
Cottonian  MSS.  fVitell.  E.  10),  which,  if 
not  delivered,  was  prepared  for  delivery  bj 
the  bishop  to  the  parliament,  in  whidi  the 
young  king  is  spoken  of  in  terms  of  the 
highest  eulogy.  The  first  document  whidi 
we  find  with  his  name  as  chancellor  at- 
tached is  dated  June  2,  1  Edward  V. 
(Ri/mer,  xii.  185.)  We  have  also  an  m- 
stance  of  his  exercising  his  judicial  fanctians 
in  Chancery  even  in  that  short  reign,  a 
case  heard  before  him  about  Jime  22  Being 
reported  in  the  Year  Book  (fo.  6  b),  in 
wnich  it  appears  that,  besides  the  master 
of  the  RoUs,  ne  called  to  his  assistance  two 
justices,  Choke  and  Catesby. 

Whether  the  bishop  was  satisfied  with 
the  representations    made    in  support  of 
Richard's  title  to  the  crown,  or  whetl^r  he 
deemed  it  expedient  at  that  time  to  ove^ 
look  the  objections  to  them,  certain  it  ifl 
that  he  received  the  Great  Seal  from  King 
Richard  on  June  27,  the  day  after  he  begio 
his  reign.    That  the  king  considered  himt 
faithful  servant  appears  from  a  letter  dated 
at  Lincoln  on  October  12,  1483,  addiessed 
to  the  chancellor,  then  ill  in  London,  de- 
siring the  Great  Seal  to  be  sent  to  Imn,  in 
which  he  states  his  intentions  against  the 
Duke  of  Buckingham,  and  his  determina- 
tion to  'subdue  his  malys.'    While  the 
Seal  remained  in  the  king  s  hands  the  duke 
was  taken  and  beheaded,  and  it  was  re- 
turned to  the  chancellor  on  November  36. 
(Turner's  England,  iii.  511.)     He  opened 
the  parliament  in  the  following  Jannazr 
with  the  customary  speech  preceded  bj't 
text  (Rot.  Pari.  vi.  2.37),  during  which,  as 
the  king  was  present,  he  would  of  course 
avoid,  whatever  his  private  feelings  mi^t 
be,  any  but  the  most  complimentary  ex- 
pressions.   For  two  years  he  preserved  his 
Elace;  but  when  the  Earl  of  Richmond  was 
overing  about  the  English  coast  some  sus- 
picion of  his  loyalty  eyidently  arose,  for  the 
king  commanded  film  on  July  24, 1485,  to 
deliyer  up  the  Seal  to  the  master  of  die 
Rolls,  who  was  constituted  keeper  on  Au- 
gust 1,  the  very  day   on  which  the  eari 
reached  Milford  Hayen.    The  i«al  traitor 
in  Richard's  council  was  Morgan  Kydwell?, 
the  attorney-general,   whose   commonica- 
tions  enabled  Richmond  to  take  those  stepa 
which  led  to  his  success.     (  Ttimer,  iv.  30.) 
No  doubt,  however,  Bishop  Russell  was,  or 
was  considered  to  be,  fayourable  to  Rich- 
mond; for  not  only  was  he  named  one  of 
the  triers  of  petitions  in  that  prince  s  first 
parliament  after  he  became  kmg,  in  Xo- 
yeniber  1485,  but  in  the  June  and  July  fol- 
lowing he  was  employed  in  negotiatiaBi 
with  the  King  of  Scots  and  the  Duke  of 
Brittany.    (Rot.  Pari  vi.  2C8,  m  441; 
Rymer,  adi.  285,  903.)    He  HT«d  fi  fdrt 
the  remainder  of  his  days,  aad  ipiV  ^ 
the,  beginning  of  Jioiuut  MH  <  ik 


RYDER  i 

manor  of  Nettleham,  he  was  buried   in 
Ids  cathedraL 

Sir  Thomaa  More  describes  him  as  'a 
-wise  man,  and  a  good,  and  of  much  expe- 
rience, and  one  of  the  most  learned  men 
tmdouDtedly  that  England  had  in  his  time.' 
The  only  doubt  upon  his  character  arises 
from  his  continuing  in  the  chancellorshij) 
after  Richard  had  shown  himself  in  his 
true  colours.  But  we  must  remember  that 
the  usurper  had  so  much  art,  and  manners 
«>  inmnuatinffy  that  we  may  readily  believe 
that  it  would  be  lon^  before  those  about 
him,  whom  he  was  desirous  to  retain,  would 
credit  the  reports  to  his  prejudice ;  and  we 
cannot  but  give  some  weight  to  the  peril 
and  inutility  of  resistance  m  an  age  when 
most  parties  concurred  so  easily  in  a  trans- 
fer of  th wr  allegiance.   (  Oodmn,  299,  536.) 

BYBEB,  DuBLET,  was  the  grandson  of 
the  Rev.  Dudley  Ryder,  a  nonconformist 
minister  living  at  Bedworth  in  Warwick- 
49hirey  and  the  son  of  Richard  Ryder,  a 
respectable  mercer  in  the  Cloisters,  West 
Smithfield,  London,  where  his  elder  brother 
carried  on  the  same  business.  His  mother 
was  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  —  Marshall. 
He  was  bom  on  November  4,  1691,  and 
commenced  his  education  at  a  dissenting 
school  at  Hackney,  whence  he  was  sent 
first  to  the  university  of  Edinburgh,  and 
then  to  that  of  Leyden.  By  two  lines  in 
the  satirical  poem  the  '  Causidicade,'  he 
appears  to  have  been  designed  for  the  mi- 
nistry. The  author  makes  a  Puritan  can- 
didate for  the  solicitor-generalship  say, — 

The  Cloak  and  the  Band,  it  is  very  well  known, 
I're,  like  R— d — r,  declined  for  the  sake  of  this 
gown. 

That  this  had  some  foundation  seems  pro- 
bable £rom  his  not  choosing  the  law  as  his 
profession  till  he  was  twenty-two  years  of 
jiffe.  He  delayed  his  admission  to  the 
Middle  Temple  as  a  student  till  1713,  and 
was  not  called  to  the  bar  till  1719.  Like 
Lord  Talbot,  he  subsequently  removed  to 
IIdooId's  Inn,  where  he  was  called  to  the 
bench  in  1733,  and  made  treasurer  in  the 
foUovdng  year. 

His  success  in  prosecuting  his  forensic 
duties  vras  secured  by  his  abilities,  his 
attention,  and  his  punctuality,  which  met 
their  reward  in  December  1/33,  when  he 
was  made  solicitor-general.  He  had  been 
in  the  earljpart  of  that  year  elected  repre- 
sentative m  parliament  for  St.  Germains. 


RYDER 


575 


In  January  1737  he  was  appointed  attorney- 
general,  and  in  1740  was  knighted.  P^or 
more  than  seventeen  years  he  filled  this 
important  office,  no  vacancy  in  the  headship 
of  either  of  the  principal  common  law 
courts  occurring  in  the  interval.  One  of 
the  most  unpleasant  duties  he  had  to  per- 
form was  that  of  conducting  the  trials  of 
the  noblemen  and  others  who  were  con- 
cerned in  the  rebellion  of  1745,  (^State 
Trials f  xviii.  629-864.)  He  represented 
Tiverton  in  the  parliaments  of  1735,  1741, 
and  1747,  and  was  a  frequent  speaker, 
principalljr  on  subjects  connected  with  his 
official  position,  and  in  defending  biUs  intro- 
duced oy  the  government.  None  of  his 
speeches  were  particularly  brilliant,  but  all 
snowed  extreme  good  sense  and  temperance 
in  judgment. 

The  death  of  Sir  William  Lee  at  length 
gave  the  ministers  the  opportunitv  of  re- 
warding the  long  services  of  Siri)udley, 
who  was  accordingly  inaugurated  as  lord 
chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench  on  May  2, 
1754.  He  presided  in  that  court  for  little 
more  than  two  years,  but  long  enoujrh  to 
prove  himself  so  efficient  and  accomplished 
a  judge  that  his  elevation  to  the  peerage 
was  determined  upon,  the  warrant  signed, 
and  a  day  appointed  for  him  to  kiss  hands 
as  Lord  Ryaer  of  Harrowby;  but  being 
taken  ill  on  the  same  day,  ne  could  not 
attend,  and  dying  on  May  25, 1756,  the  day 
after,  before  the  patent  was  completed,  the 
creation  of  course  fell  to  the  ground.  That 
his  son's  name  was  not  immediately  substi- 
tuted was  considered  by  some  as  b.  hard- 
ship ;  and  the  omission,  which  was  probably 
occasioned  by  his  minority,  was  not  supplied 
till  twenty  years  afterwards,  when,  being 
ennobled  by  the  same  title,  he  adopted  the 
happv  motto  *Servata 'fides  cinen.'  The 
chief  justice  was  buried  at  Grantham, 
where  there  is  a  handsome  monument 
erected  to  his  memorv. 

By  his  wife,  Anne,  daughter  of  Nathaniel 
Newnham,  of  Streatham  in  Surrey,  he  left 
an  only  son,  who,  having  been  created 
Baron  Harrowby  in  1776,  was  succeeded 
by  his  son  Dudley,  who  for  his  services  to 
the  crown  in  various  important  offices  was 
promoted  to  an  earldom  in  1809,  to  which 
was  added  the  viscQunty  of  Sandon  in 
Staffordshire.  (CoUMs  Peerage,  v.  717; 
Wcdpole's  Memoirs,  ii.  46 ;  Strmige,  1133 ; 
Burroic's  S.C.  365,  368.) 


576 


s 

SACKVILLE,  Jordan  de,  or  SE  SAXnCS-    appear,  lioweTer,  that  he  held  the  degree  of 
VILLE,  80  called  from  a  town  of  that  name    a  serjeant-at-law. 

in  Normandy,  was  descended  from  Her-  He  was  appointed  to  the  office  of  cbirf 
brand,  who  *  assisted  in  King  William's  baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  March  20, 13S7, 
invasion  of  England,  and  retuminj^  home  •  11  Edward  III. ;  and  Prynne  (on  4/A  Ind. 
left  in  this  country  Robert,  hia  third  son,  4)  says  that  he  was  the  first  chief  htron 
who  held  various  manors  in  Essex  and  whom  he  finds  summoned  to  parliaoMOt, 
Suffolk.  He  was  the  grandfather  of  Geof-  meaning,  we  presume,  by  that  spedfic  title, 
frey,  the  father  of  this  Jordan,  by  Con-  On  July  25,  1339,  he  acted  as  the  loam 
stance,  dauprhter  of  Sir  Edmund  firooke.  tenens  of  William  de  Zouche,  the  treasurer, 
(Baronage,  li.  390;  Cotttfu's  Peeragcy  iii.  then  abroad:  and  from  May  2  to  June  SI, 
IK) ;  iTfi^er/,  iii.  74)  Both  father  and  son  1840,  he  hela  the  office  of  tieaaurer.  Duriog 
were  involved  in  the  proceedings  of  the  this  time  he  still  continued  chief  haroo. 
barons  against  King  John,  but  on  the  '  His  removal  from  the  treasnrership  wh, 
accession  of  Henry  III.  their  forfeited  lands  perhaps,  fortunate  for  him^  as  he  otherwise 
were  restored  to  them,  and  further  favours  would  probably  have  been  swept  away  with 
conferred.  {Rot,  Pat,  172;  Rot,  Claus,  i.  ;  the  rest  on  King  Edward*a  anpry  rstani 
;J05,  31  .M.  310.)  .lordan  de  Sauke villous  '  from  Toumay  in  the  following  November, 
name  appears  on  a  fine  acknowledged  at  On  September  29, 1343,  the  Great  Sed 
Westminster  in  3  Henry  III.,  1210,  he  was  delivered  to  him  as  chancellor.  He 
being  then,  according  to  bugdale,  a  justice  held  it  for  about  two  yeara.  During  Ui 
itinerant,  but  on  no  other  occasion  is  he  time  there  is  a  curious  entry  of  the  seiznxe. 
mentioned  as  a  justicier.  Both  he  and  his  b^  the  mayor  and  bailiffa  of  Saiidwidi,of 
father  were  aliVe  in  10  Henry  IIL  {JRot,  nme  bulls  and  numeroua  letters  and  pro- 
Clam.  ii.  140),  and  the  time  of  their  deaths  cesses  from  the  Roman  court,  attempted 
is  uncertain.  '  to  be  surreptitiously  introduced  into  fiK 

Jordan  married  Maud  de  Normanvill,  kingdom  Mn  quadam  Ixnea  tel&  ceratft  in- 
and  by  her  he  had  three  sons,  firom  William,  clusos : '  and  of  their  being  delivered  bvthe 
the  eldest  of  whom,  regularly  descended  '  chancellor,  in  *fuU  Chancery  at  Westoin- 
Thomas  Sactville,  who  in  150f  was  created  ster,'  to  the  chamberlain  of  the  Excheooer 
Lord  Buckhurst,  and  in  1603  Earl  of  Dor-  to  be  kept  in  the  treasury.  (JV.  Fcsienj 
set.  This  title  was  raised  into  a  dukedom  iii.  25.) 
in  1720,  but  all  became  extinct  in  1843.  There  is  no  trace  of  his  being  more  defi- 

8ADIH6T0H,  Robert  de.  Although  it  |  cient  or  less  successful  than  his  contem- 
has  been  suggested  that  the  names  of  the  two  '  poraries;  and  though  the  cause  of  U* 
after-named  judges  Shottindon  and  Sod-  ,  resignation  of  the  Seal  on  October  26, 1345. 
ington  may  oe  only  varieties  of  that  of ;  is  not  given,  yet,  from  anything  that  i^ 
Sadiugton,*^  there  is  nothing  positive  to  •■  pears,  it  is  quite  as  likely  to  have  irini 
prove  that  it  is  so,  nor  any  evidence  that  frem  political  as  from  legal  motiTes.  Hii 
thoy  and  the  subject  of  the  present  notice  reinstatement  as  chief  baron  of  the  Esek^ 
are  of  the  same  mmily.  Robert  de  Sading-  .  quer  on  the  8th  of  the  following  Beceubcr 
ton  was  clearly  so  called  from  a  place  of !  seems  to  exclude  the  idea  su^ffnted  If 
that  name  in  Leicestershire,  and,  we  con-  Lord  Campbell,  that  he  was  inemdeDtaii 
ceive,  was  the  son  of  John  de  Sadington,    judge. 

in  the  household  (valettus)  of  Queen  Isa-  '  In  the  next  year  he  was  appointed  oos  rf 
bella,  by  whose  request  the  custody  of  the  the  castodes  of  the  principuity  of  Wil* 
hundred  of  (tertre  in  that  county  was  the  duchy  of  Cornwall,  and  the  eaildom  of 
committed  to  him.    {Abh,  Rot,  Orig,  i.  243.)    Chester,  during  the  minority  erf  the  Knir'* 

This  connection  may  probably  account    son,  Edward,  Prince  of  Wales.    {Cd,  At 
for  Robert's  first  employment  about  the    Pat,  164.)   In  1347  he  was  the  head  of  Ae 
court.    In  3  Edward  III.   he  was  com-  ,  commission  assigned  '  ad  judicium  fewB- 
missioned,  with  the  sheriff  of  Leicester  and    dum,'  that  is  to  say,  to  sentence  and  ti) 
another,  to  sell  the  com  in  certain  manors  :  execute  the  Earls  of  Menteith  and  Fifc 
which  had  fallen  into  the  king  s  hands :  and    taken  with  King  David  in  iJie  batds  i 
his  name  occurs  in  the  Year  Books  as  an    Nevil's  Cross,  in  which  th^  are  dewrifcil 
advocate  from  that  to  the  tenth  year,  during  ;  as  traitors  to  Edward  dft  Bdiol,  Kf^ 
which  period  he  was  placed  on  two  or  three    Scotland.    Though  there    is  no 
commissions  of  enquiry.   {Ihid,  ii.  29, 107 ;  •  entiy  of  his  death,  it  pr^MblT 
iV.  Fadcra,  ii.  829,  840.)     It  does  not :  the  first  quarter  of  180a    £ 


SADINGTON 

successor  as  chief  baron,  Gerraae  de  Wilford^ 
was  appointed  on  April  7. 

He  married  Joyce,  the  sister  and  heir  of 
Kichard  de  Martival,  Bishop  of  Salisbury ; 
and  John  de  Sadington,  mentioned  in  87 
Edward  III.,  was  prob«bly  his  son.  (iVf- 
choUs's  Leioedershire,  102.) 

SADIHOTOH.  See  Thomas  ds  Sodinotok. 
SAHAX,  RiCHABD  DE.  Dugdale  names 
Eichard  de  Saham  as  havinff  oeen  consti- 
tuted a  baron  of  the  £zimequer  in  23 
Edward  L,  1295,  in  the  place  of  Master 
Ellas  de  Wynton.  The  Year  Book  (pt 
i.  35),  however,  accounts  for  the  mistake, 
for  it  there  appears  that  Richard  de  Saham 
was  sworn  in  as  baron  of  the  Exchequer  m 
Ireland  in  Trinity  Term  of  that  year,  Defore 
the  chancellor  and  barons  of  the  Exchequer 
in  England.  He  was  a  son  of  Robert  de 
Saham,  of  the  manor  of  Saham-Toney  in 
Norfolk,  and  brother  of  the  under-mentioned 
William.     {Blomefelds  NoifoOc,  i.  SOa) 

SAHAM,  William  de,  his  brother,  founded 
a  chantry  at  Saham-Toney  in  Norfolk.  He 
was  raised  to  the  bench  on  the  accession  of 
Edward  1.,  and  continued  for  many  years 
to  act  as  a  judge  of  the  Ejng's  Bench,  and 
to  be  employed  in  various  itinera  till  18 
Edward  I.  In  that  year,  althouffh  he  shared 
in  the  disgrace  of  many  of  his  brethren, 
and  was  not  only  removed  from  his  seat, 
but  fined  in  the  sum  of  3000  marks  (  Weever, 
807 ;  RoL  Pari,  i.  52,  a3),  he  is  described 
in  a  document  (Bib.  Cott.  Claud.  E.  VHI., 
p.  20C)  as  entirely  innocent, '  in  quo  dolus 
seu  fraus  non  est  inventus,'  and  aspaying 
the  fine  to  conciliate  the  king.  He  was 
alive  in  28  Edward  I.,  when  he  was 
defendant  in  an  action  brought  against  him 
for  damage  done  to  property  at  Huningham 
in  Norfolk.     (Ahh.  PlacU,  242.) 

8T.  ALBAHS,  Viscount.  See  F.  Bacok. 
8T.  EBKiniD,  Roger  de,  is  the  last  of 
the  five  justices  itinerant  who  fixed  the 
tallage  for  Norfolk  and  Suffolk  in  9  Richard 
I.,  1197-8  {Madox,  i.  705),  and  being  a 
clergyman  named  from  that  town  in  Suffolk, 
was,  according  to  the  common  practice  of 
the  time,  added  to  the  ordinary  justices  for 
the  performance  of  this  duty  m  his  own 
neiffnbourhood.  lie  had  been  previously 
in  tne  king's  service,  having  been  employed 
in  1194  to  collect  the  aid  for  the  wages  of 
the  army  appointed  to  meet  King  Richard 
at  Tubceuf  in  Normandy. 

In  10  Richard  I.  he  was  appointed  by 
the  king  archdeacon  of  Richmcfnd,  and  was 
witness  in  that  character  to  a  charter  dated 
December  10,  1 198. 

8T.  EDMUND,  AVilliam  de,  is  no  other- 
wise mentioned  than  as  having  ^nes  acknow- 
ledged before  liira  a-s  a  justicier  for  twelve 
years,  commencing  at  Midsummer  1233, 17 
Ilenry  III.,  and  ending  at  Midsummer 
1245,  during  which  peiiod  also  various 
entries  occur  of  payuients  made  for  writs 


ST.  JOHN 


577 


before  him.  {Dugdaie^B  Orig,  43 ;  Excerpt, 
e  Hot.  JFVn.  i.  256,  399,  402.) 

ST.  HELEVA,  John  db,  held  lands  of  the 
kiiup  at  Abingdoji  in  Berkshire,  which  he 
for^ited  in  17  John.  They  were  no  doubt 
restored  to  him  on  the  accession  of  Henry 
III.,  although  no  record  thereof  appears. 
In  9  Henij  in.,  however,  he  was  consti- 
tuted a  justice  itinerant  for  that  county, 
and  in  the  following  year  assessed  the 
quinzime  there.  (Mat.  Clam.  i.  236,  241, 
u.  76,  247.) 

8T.  JACOBO,  Stephek  be,  is  only  men- 
tioned as  a  justicier  in  a  fine  levied  at 
Westminster,  either  in  4  or  5  Richard  I. 
(Hunter's  Preface.) 

8T.  JOHN,  John  de,  held  the  barony  of 
Stanton  in  Oxfordshire,  and  in  9  Henry  III., 
1225,  was  appointed  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant  in  nis  own  county.  He  died  in 
14  HeniT  III.,  when  GeoflGrey  le  Despenser 

Eaid  100/.  for  the  guardianship  of  Roger 
is  heir,  who  fell  at  the  battle  of  Eve- 
sham in  1265,  after  which  none  of  his  de- 
scendants were  summoned  to  Parliament. 
(Baronage,  i.  539 ;  JRoL  Clous,  ii.  75,  7a) 

ST.  JOHN,  Oliver  (Eabl  of  Bolin- 
BBOKs),  who  was  descended  from  the  same 
family  to  which  the  last-named  John  St. 
John  belonged,  is  no  otherwise  famous  than 
for  being  one  of  the  very  few  peers  (who. 
Wood  says,  were  '  all  of  the  Presbyterian 
dye ')  remaining  with  the  parliament  after 
Charles  I.  retired  to  York,  and  concurring 
with  the  House  of  Commons  in  the  violent 
votes  and  ordinances  then  passed.  It  was 
from  this  contraction  of  choice,  rather  than 
firom  any  special  ability  in  him.  that  he 
was  selected,  in  1643,  as  one  of  the  two 
members  of  the  House  of  Lords,  to  be 
united  with  four  Commoners,  in  whom  the 
custody  of  the  new  Great  Seal  was  to  be 
placed.  They  were  accordingly  appointed 
commissioners  on  November  10.  He  oc- 
cupied this  position  about  two  years  and  a 
half,  and  died  in  possession  of  it  in  June  or 
July  1646.  The  earldom  became  extinct 
in  1711;  but  the  barony  of  St.  John  of 
Bletsoe     survived,    and    still    flourishes. 

i  Baronage,  ii.  398 ;  Athen.  Oxon,  iii.  134  -, 
^oumals,) 

8T.  JOHN,  Oltveb,  connected  by  relation- 
ship with  both  the  preceding,  was  the  son 
of  Oliver,  settied  at  Cayshoe  in  Bedford- 
shire, a  grandson  of  the  first  Lord  St.  John 
of  Bletsoe,  by  his  wife  Sarah,  daughter  of 
Edward  Buckley,  Esq.,  of  Odell  in  the 
same  county.  (  Wottons  Baronet,  iv.  178.) 
Clarendon  calls  him  '  a  natural  son  of  the 
house  of  Bullingbroke,*  and  the  writer  of 
*  The  Mystery  of  the  Good  Old  Cause '  says 
that  his  father  *  was  supposed  to  be  a  bye- 
blow  of  one  of  the  Earls  of  Bedford.*  (Pari, 
Hist.  iii.  1600.)  The  unpopularity  of  the 
man,  and  the  circumstances  of  the  times, 
win  Bufficientiy  account  for  these  reporta^ 

"9  ^ 


578 


ST.  JOHN 


but  the  above  is  the  pedigree  given  by  an 
unprejudiced  genealogist,  and  confirmed  by 
the  description  in  his  admission  as  a  mem- 
ber of  Lincoln's  Inn. 

He  was  bom  about  the  year  1598,  and 
was  sent  to  Queen's  College,  Cambridge, 
in  August  1615.  Lord  Campbell  (Ch.  Jtut. 
i.  450)  fathers  upon  him  the  '  Letter  to  the 
Mayor  of  Marlborough '  against  a  benevo- 
lence then  in  collection,  which  was  made 
the  subject  of  prosecution  in  the  Star 
Chamber  in  April  1015,  when  he  was  only 
seventeen.  To  have  formed  such  decided 
opinions,  with  reasons  so  clearly  stated,  and 
statutes  and  authorities  so  precisely  quoted, 
as  are  found  in  the  letter  in  question, 
would  be  an  instance  of  most  remarkable 
precocity  in  any  youth  who  had  not  even 
commenced  his  college  studies.  But  the 
statement  will  not  bear  the  slightest  inves- 
tigation. There  is  absolutely  nothing  in 
the  whole  proceeding  to  lead  to  a  suspicion 
that  the  writer  of  the  letter  could  have 
been  *  a  mere  stripling;'  but,  on  the  con- 
trary', it  is  manifest  from  the  letter  itself, 
and  from  Bacon's  well-prepared  speech, 
who  would  scarcely  have  wasted  his  elo- 
quence on  a  boy,  that  he  was  ^  a  principal 
person,  and  a  dweller  in  that  town,*  and  'a 
nian  likely  to  give  both  money  and  good 
example.'  {Stat^  Trials j  ii.  809.)  Instead 
of  the  youth  who  was  quietly  preparing  for 
his  academical  course,  the  person  so  de- 
scribed was  Oliver,  the  son  of  St.  John  of 
Lydiard-Trepoze,  a  seat  not  far  distant 
from  Marlborough,  whose  relative  and 
namesake  afterwards  became  Viscount 
Grandison  and  Lieutenant  of  Ireland.  (Lord 
Carew's  Letters  [Camd.  Soc.],  143.) 

From  the  university  our  student  pro- 
ceeded to  Lincoln's  Inn,  where  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  on  June  22,  102G.  He 
received  early  employment  in  the  law  busi- 
ness of  the  Earl  of  Bedford,  to  whom  he 
was  distantly  related.  In  consequence  of 
this  connection  he  was  really  brought  be- 
fore the  Star  Chamber  in  1030  j  both  he 
and  the  earl,  with  Selden,  Sir  Robert  Cot- 
ton, and  some  others,  being  charged  with 
publisliing  'A  Proposition  for  his  Majesty's 
service  to  Bridle  the  Impertinence  of  Par- 
liaments*—  a  piece  of  irony  which  was 
proved  to  be  written  by  Sir  Robert  Dudley 
at  Florence  in  the  reign  of  James  I.  The 
government  was  glad  to  withdraw  from  this 
absiutl  prosecution,  by  availing  itself  of  the 
birth  of  the  king's  son  as  a  plea  for  extend- 
ing mercy  to  the  defendants.  (State  Trials ^ 
iii.  387.)  They  were  consequently  dis- 
charged ;  but  Clarendon  (i.  325)  says  that 
St.  John  never  forgave  the  court  this  ^Jirst 
assault.*  This  feeling  of  bitterness  was  no 
doubt  increased  by  his  studv  being  seai'ched 
and  bis  papers  seized  in  163^,  in  consequence 
of  being  suspected  of  having  drawn  the 
answer  of  Burton  to  the  information  filed 


ST.  JOHN 

against  him  in  the  Star  Chamber  for  a  Ubel- 
lous  publication.     (Harrises  LiveSy  ii.  267.) 

About  1029  he  had  married  his  first  wife, 
Johanna,  sole  child  of  Sir  James  Altham  of 
Mark's  Hall,  Latton,  Essex,  and  of  Eliz*- 
beth,  daughter  of  Sir  Francia  Barrin$2^on, 
by  Joan,  one  of  the  daughters  of  SirHenrr 
Cromwell  of  Hinchinbroke,  and  aunt  botk 
to  Oliver  Cromwell  the  protector,  and  John 
Hampden  the  patriot. 

Bound  thus  more  intimatelv  to  that  partr,  t 


who  were  dissatisfied  with  the  unconstita- 
tional  measures  of  the  court,  this  connectioo 
made  St.  John  the  natural  adviser  of 
Hampden  in  the  celebrated  resistanoe  to 
the  payment  of  ship-monej.  His  argument 
against  the  legality  of  that  imposition  wa» 
so  learned  and  .so  powerful  that  he  a^ 
quired  so  much  reputation  that  '  he  wu 
called  into  all  courts  and  to  all  cao^ 
where  the  king's  prerogative  was  most  con- 
tested.' (Chrendon J  \. '^24.)  Ilia  first  wif* 
having  died  in  childbed,  he  in  16^ 
strengthened  the  tie  with  the  Cromwelli 
by  marrj'ing  Elizabeth,  the  first  cousin  oc 
Oliver,  and  daughter  of  Henry  Cromwell 
of  Upwood. 

"Wnen  the  king,  after  a  cessation  of  elero 
years,  was  obliged  to  call  a  parliament  is 
April  1040,  St.  John  was  elected  member 
for  Totnes.  (Fasti  Oxoiu  453.)  In  tk 
short  period  of  three  weeks  during  whict 
this  parliament  lasted,  though  he  does  sot 
appear  to  have  put  himself  forward  as  i 
speaker,  the  journals  show  that  he  wi£ 
named  on  all  the  committees  connected  with 
popular  grievances,  and  that  he  was  charged 
to  speak  on  one  of  them  in  the  conference? 
with  the  Lords.  Finding  that  redress  wm 
insisted  on  before  supplies  would  be  granted, 
the  king  dissolved  the  parliament,  to  tbf 
disappointment  of  the  moderate,  but  to  the 
loy  of  the  extreme  party.  Clarendon  re- 
,  lates  (i.  240)  that  within  an  hour  after  tie 
i  dissolution  he  met  St.  John,  ^  who  hid 
naturally  a  great  cloud  on  his  fauXj  and 
very  seldom  was  known  to  smile,  but  hid 
then  a  most  cheerful  aspect : '  and  thxt 
after  lamenting  what  had  taken  place,  St 
John  answered  him  with  a  little  warmth, 
'That  it  was  well;  but  that  it  must  be 
worse  before  it  could  be  better;  and  that 
this  parliament  could  never  have  done  what 
was  necessarv  to  be  done.* 

In  the  new  parliament,  which  met  in 
the  followinjj:  xSovember,  St.  John  agua 
represented  Totnes,  and  was  immediately 
appointed  on  several  committees,  and  chaii^ 
man  of  that  with  regard  to  ship-money. 
On  December  7  he  brought  up  its  reports, 
on  which  were  founded  the  memorable  re- 
solutions that  not  only  the  impost  itseH 
but  all  the  proceedings  to  enforce  it,  and 
the  decision  of  the  judges,  weie  against 
law.  These  resolutions  were  adopted  by 
the  House  of  Lords^  after  hearing  a  loim- 


ST.  JOHN  ST.  JOHN  679 

lis  address  from  St  John,  which  i»  also  i  tion  in  St  John's  conduct  the  kingp  revoke^ 
narkable  for  yindidiTe  sternness  towiurds  ■  his  appointment  on  October  30, 1043,  and 
3  judges.  (Suae  Triab,  iii.  1262.)  On  ;  put  Sir  Thomas  Gardner  in  his  place.  The 
Duarv  29,  1640-1,  within  a  fortnight  parliament  however,  refused  to  recognise 
er  tkis  speech  was  delivered,  St.  John  the  new  solicitor;  and  on  providing  a  Great 
18  constituted  solicitor-general.  (Eymer,  Seal  for  themselves,  in  lieu  of  that  which 
.  449.)  I  had  been  taken  to  the  king  by  Lord  hyt- 

This  promotion  arose  from  a  desire  to  '  telton,  and  appointing  on  November  10  two 
in  over  some  of  the  popular  party,  amone  i  Lords  and  tour  of  the  Conunons  for  its 
lom  various  places  were  to  be  distributed,  i  custody,  ^ey  named  St  John  as  the  first 
Le  Earl  of  l^edford  entered  into  the  plan,  i  of  the  latter,  with  the  title  of  'his  majesty's 
d  was  to  be  treasurer,  and  Pym  and  '  solicitor-^neral ; '  and  bv  this  designation 
lers  were  to  accept  situations  of  trust  •  he  was  distin^^uished  until  he  became  chief 
le  king  readily  consented  to  St  John's  ,  justice.  Whitelocke's  statement  (71,  88) 
pointment,  '  hoping  that  he  would  have  that  in  May  1644  he  was  assigned  to  be 
en  very  useful  in  the  House  of  Commons,  attorney-general  is  evidently  a  mistaken 
lere  his  authority  was  then  great ;  at  account  oi  an  ordinance  of  the  Commons^ 
«t,  that  he  would  be  ashamed  ever  to  enabling  him  to  do  all  acts  as  efiectually  as 
pear  in  anything  that  might  prove  pre-  i  the  attorney-general,  if  present,  might  have 
oidal  to  the  crown.'     But  the  Ean  of   done.     (Jotimab.) 

idford's  death  three  months  after,  and  i  St  John  was  one  of  the  commissioners 
her  circumstances,  stopping  these  negotia-  .  to  treat  for  a  peace  at  Uzbridge  in  January 
ms,  the  king  found  himseu  with  a  solici-  '  1645,  but,  as  neither  partv  was  sincere,  the 
^general  neither  abating  nor  dissembling  |  negotiation  failed.  In  April  of  that  year  the 
I  enmity  to  the  court,  and  who  still  re-  ■  seu-denyinff  ordinance,  by  which  St.  John 
ned  the  confidence  of  his  party.  j  and  the'  other  commissioners  of  the  Great 

Fhe  king  soon  had  reason  to  see  how  Seal  would  have  been  cQsqualified,  was 
L<2h  he  had  been  mistaken  in  his  expec-  !  passed  by  both  the  houses ;  but  before  the 
ions.  The  accusation  of  the  Earl  of ;  fbrt]^  days  limited  hj  it  had  expired  the 
mfford  by  the  Commons  had  been  made  •  parliament  voted  their  continuance  in  office 
the  previous  November,  but  the  trial  till  the  end  of  the  following  term ;  and  this 
L  not  oegin  till  the  22nd  of  March ;  and  vote  was  repeated  from  time  to  time  till 
John,  though  he  was  the  king's  officer,  October  30, 1646,  when  they  delivered  up 
L  well  knew  his  royal  master's  anxiety  the  Seal  to  the  speakers  of  the  two  houses, 
AAve  the  earl,  used  his  utmost  efibrts  to  who  were  nominated  its  keepers.  ( IJ^ite- 
ro  on  the  proceedings,  and  even  dissuaded    iockCf  124,  226.)      St  John  had,  in  the 

Commons  from  hearing  the  argument  j  previous  February,  joined  in  the  vote 
^  earPs  counsel  on  the  matter  of  law.  ;  abolishing  the  Court  of  Wards ;  and  now, 
^en  the  Commons  found  that  the  offences  resuming  his  functions  as  solicitor-general, 
96d  against  Strafibrd  could  not  be  |  he  was  ordered  to  prosecute  Jud^  Jenkins 
^ed  by  the  existing  laws,  and  that  he  ;  for  exercising  his  judicial  duties  m  defiance 

Ukely  to  be  acquitted  by  the  Lords,  ,  of  the  parliament  But  before  that  sturdy 
''  bit)ught  in  a  bill  of  attamder,  in  the  |  royalist  was  brought  to  trial,  the  Commons 
Motion  of  which  unjustifiable  course  St.  I  had  determined  to  fill  up  the  vacancies  on 
*  'Was  a  prominent  actor,  and  in  its  i  the  bench.  They  accordingly  appointed 
^ft  addressed  the  Lords  in  a  speech  i  St.  John  chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas 
^ying  so  much  sophistry,  brutality,  and  i  on  October  12, 1648,  and,  the  Lords  having 
^  as  fully  to  justify  Clarendon's  con-  i  concurred,  he  was  sworn  in  on  November 
t^tdon  of  it,  and  the  disgust  of  all  un-  22.  {Ibid.  194-366.) 
Jdiced  men.  ( Vemey's  Notes  [Camd.  i  It  was  not  then  the  custom,  any  more 
[••^O,  66 ;  Eushtoorth,  iv.  676;  Clarendon,  i  than  it  is  now,  for  the  judges  to  sit  in  the 
'•^  ,  House  of  Commons.    St  John,  therefore, 

^11  the  violent  measures  that  sue-  >  on  his  elevation  to  the  bench,  though  his 
^' — the  bill  for  the  continuance  of  the  seat  for  Totnes  was  not  vacated,  abstained 
^^ent,  the  bill  against  the  bishops,  the  '  from  attending  parliament,  and  took  no 
^^  bill,  &c. — St.  John  took  the  same  part  in  the  tragic  debates  of  the  next  two 
^^^  adverse  part.  The  king,  naturally  months,  which  Drought  his  sovereign  to  the 
^Us  of  releasing  himself  from  his  ob-  block ;  and  he  asserts,  in  the  case  which  he 
^Us  officer,  offered  the  place  to  Hyde ;  i  pubhshed  in  1660,  that,  so  far  from  being 
^^  prudently  declined  it,  and  dissuaded  one  of  the  advisers  of  the  sanguinary  pro- 
^ing  from  removing  St  John  at  that  ceedings,  he  was  not  even  consulted,  but 
'  tliough  agreeing  that  he  might  have  .  '  upon  all  occasion  manifested  his  dislike 
'  H  vnth  aoetter  man  whenthe  place  ana  dissatisfaction.'  In  this  he  is  confirmed 
^^kstually  void.  But  soon  i^r,  the  by  Thurloe,  who  acted  then  as  his  secre- 
^  with  the  Commons  becoming  com-  tary,  and  by  the  vote  which  the  Commons 
>  ^nd  no  hope  remaining  of  any  altera-    passed  when  the  Peers  rejected  the  ordir 

p  p  2 


580 


ST.  JOHN 


niuice,  that  the  Lords,  and  the  chief  judges 
of  each  courts  whom  they  had  named, 
should  be  left  out  of  the  commission  for 
the  trial.  But  his  denial  that  he  favoured 
the  alteration  of  the  government  to  a  com- 
monwealth, and  his  assertion  that  he  was 
ever  for  King,  Lords,  and  Commons,  require 
more  credit  than  can  be  easily  p^ven  to  a 
man  who  had  accepted  a  high  judicial  office 
from  the  opponents  of  the  monarchy,  and 
whO;  withm  ei^t  days  after  they  had 
murdered  their  King,  and  after  their  vote 
that  the  office  of  king  was  *  unnecessary,' 
snd  the  House  of  Peers  was  '  useless  and 
dangerous,'  and  that  both  'ought  to  be 
abolished,'  consented  not  only  to  remain  as 
a  judge  under  the  usurping  govermnent, 
but  to  be  a  member  of  its  council  of  state. 
That  he  acted  on  that  council,  and  was 
trusted  by  it,  is  apparent  from  his  being 
one  of  the  conoimittee  in  1G50  to  confer  with 
General  Fairfax  as  to  the  inyasion  of  Scot- 
land— a  conference  which  led  to  the  ap- 
pointment of  Cromwell  to  be  lord-genend 
of  the  army.     (  WhU^^key  366-462.) 

In  March  1651  he  and  Mr.  Strickland 
were  sent  ambassadors  to  the  Dutch.  It  is 
curious  that  in  speaking  of  this  embassy 
Clarendon  calls  him  '  the  known  confident 
of  Cromwell,'  and  Whitelocke  designates 
him  *  Cromwell's  creature ' — an  agreement 
between  writers  of  opposite  parties  which 
goes  far  to  show  the  general  impression  at 
the  time,  and  to  warrant  the  nickname  he 
received  of  *  The  Dark  Lanthom,'  notwith- 
standing his  denial  of  its  justice.  In  June 
he  returned  without  having  concluded  the 
treabr  he  went  to  negotiate.  His  residence 
at  the  Hague  was  not  unattended  with 
danger.  He  was  treated  with  indignity  by 
the  people,  and  with  something  like  in- 
difference by  the  States;  he  received  a 
gross  insult  from  Prince  Edward,  the  Pol- 
grave's  brother ;  he  was  engaged  in  a  per- 
sonal quarrel  with  the  Duke  of  York,  the 
details  of  which  do  not  tell  to  his  credit ; 
and  he  narrowly  escaped  an  attempt  upon 
his  life,  similar  to  that  lately  practisea  by 
the  Thugs  in  India.  The  parliament,  in- 
dignant at  the  slight  endeavours  made  to 
punish  the  delinquents,  and  at  the  trifling 
impediments  that  were  every  day  thrown 
in  the  way  of  completing  tne  treaty,  re- 
called the  ambassadors.  On  their  return 
St.  John  took  his  seat  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  and,  after  giving  a  detailed  ac- 
count of  all  their  proceedings,  they  received 
thanks  for  their  faithful  services.  (Ibid. 
487-496 ;  Pari.  Hid.  iiL  1867.) 

A  resolution  that  the  seveml  judges  who 
were  members  should  be  discharged  from 
their  attendance  in  the  house  whilst  they 
executed  their  offices,  which  was  passed  in 
October  1649,  was  rescinded  on  June  27, 
1051,  no  doubt  for  the  purpose  of  enabling 
iSt.  John  to  lefiume  hia  seat,  and  make  his  , 


ST.  JOHN 

diplomatic  report  on  Jnfy  2.    From  that 
time  he  cohtmued  bis  attendance,  and  to 
his  indignation  at  the  treatment  he  reedved 
in  Holland,  and  the  iaflure  of  the  negotia- 
tion, is  to  be  attributed  the  adoption  in  tiie 
next  month  of  the  ordinance  npon  whidi 
was  founded  the  Naviffstion  Act  passed  it 
the  Restoration,  prohibiting  foreign  shipi 
from  bringing  any  merchanaise  or  commo- 
dities into  ESigland  but  such  as  were  ikt 
proceeds  and  growth  of  their  own  countn, 
an  ordinance  which  was  much  more  biiK 
rious  to  the  Dutch,    wholly   suppressmr 
their  carrying  trade,   than   to   any  otbff 
nation.     (C/artfit<ibn,  yL  599.)    In  Septeo- 
her  he  was  one  of  the  four  who  were  sod 
to  compliment  Cromwell  on  his  victorr  it 
Worcester,  and  in  October   he   was  V 
pointed  a  commissioner  for  the  affiurs « 
Scotland.    In  November  he  was  re-elected 
on  the  council  of  state,  and  was  named  If 
the  committee  for  the  reformation  of  tk» 
universities,  chancellor  of  Cambridge. 

At  the  meeting  called  by  Cromwell  oi 
the  10  th  of  December  to  consider  what  «v 
fit  to  be  done  for  the  settlement  of  tk 
nation,  in  which  the  general  agreed  irit^ 
Whitelocke  that  the  question  vras  whether 
a  republic  or  a  mixed  monarchical  goTeo- 
ment  were  the  best,  and  gave  his  opjs» 
that  the  latter  would  be  most  effecto&I,  & 
John  declared  that '  the  ffoiremment,  'm 
out  something  of  monarchical  power,  woiK 
be  very  difficult  to  be  so  settled  as  DOt  t» 
shake  the  foundation  of  our  laws  asd'tiir 
liberties  of  the  people.'  (  niiitdocke,  bW 
Here  is  nothing  to  show  that  he  was  tki 
opposed  to  Cromwell,  who  'was  feeling  Iv 
way  towards  attaining  that  power  wbiei 
he  afteiwards  assumed,  and  who,  as  fom 
as  he  found  that  some  of  the  party  saf^ 
gested  the  selection  of  one  otthe  1^ 
king's  sons,  put  an  end  to  the  debate.  Ob 
the  14th  of  the  previous  month  St  Job 
had  been  teller  with  Cromwell  of  thi 
majority  of  two  which  voted  that  a  tia^ 
should  be  declared  beyond  which  the  ps* 
liament  should  not  sit,  which  limit  ms  oe 
a  subsequent  day  fixed  for  November  S. 
1664.     (Pari.  Hid,  iii.  1376.) 

He  then  went  to  Scotland,  where  he  vif 
actively  engaged  with  his  colleagnes  it 
arrangmg  the  intended  union  with  tbtf 
country.  After  his  return  on  May  6, 1^ 
he  was  ill  for  some  timo,  but  in  ApiS 
1653,  though  it  does  not  appear  that  k 
was  a  party  to  the  violent  mode  adopts^ 
by  Cromwell  of  dismissing  the  parliameol 
he  strongly  supported  the  general's  detff* 
mination  to  put  an  immediate  period  to  ie 
sittings.  Cromwell,  however,  did  ws 
summon  him  to  the  convention  (calM 
Barebone's  Parliament)  which  met  on  July 
4,  and  dissolved  itself  on  the  12th  of  tk 
foUowing  December,  resigning  its  power  ^» 
the  lord  general,  who  four  days  after  m» 


ST.  JOHN 

lord  pxotector  of  the  common- 
r  ihe  three  Idnffdoms.  St  John 
lat  he  had  nothing  to  do  with 
tion  of  Cromwell,  falling  danger- 
in  the  pievioua  October,  and  not 
I  till  the  May  after  the  event; 
ar  from  approving  it,  Thurloe 
bat  he  ezpresaed  himself  strongly 
.  In  furtner  proof  of  his  disUKe, 
lat,  though  Cromwell  named  him 
mcil,  and  appointed  him  a  oom- 

of  the  treasury  (  WkUdockey  617- 
aever  attended  in  either  capacityi 
^ed  any  salary, 
ing   to  St.  John's  account,  the 

between  him  and  Cromwell  had 
ice  the  latter  had  assumed  arbi- 
ter, and    their   intercourse  was 

>  formal  visits  before  or  after  the 
3ut  when  the  parliament  of  1657 

their  'Humble  Petition  and 
to  the  protector^  pressing  him  to 
title  of  King,  St  John  is  found  as 
le  conmiittee  that  waited  upon 
as  a  speaker  contending  agamst 
es.  (Par/.  JJm^.  iii.  1498.)  Crom- 
usal  to  comply  with  this  request 
new  arrangement  of  the  govem- 
which  he  was  confirmed  as  lord 

with  the  additional  power  of 
lis  successor,  and  of  calling  not 
n  seventy  nor  less    than   forty 

>  sit  in  what  was  designated  *  the 
se.*  In  the  exercise  of  this  power 
was  one  of  the  qwui  peers  whom 
3d.  They  had  not,  nowever.  a 
'ment  of  their  honours,  for  within 
it  after  the  parliament  met  the 

showed  so  much  hesitation  in 
Iging  this  upper  chamber  that 
dissolved  the  parliament  on 
4,  lGo8.  Within  seven  months 
I  Cromwell  died,  and  his  son 
who  was  immediately  proclaimed 
isor,  continued  St.  John  as  chief 
id  summoned  another  parliament 
y  27, 1059.  This  parliament  did 
Three  months,  dunng  which  the 

were  principally  occupied  in 
3  to  their  intercourse  with  the 
use,'  manifesting  all  their  former 

St.  John  states  that  he  never 
as  a  peer,  but  it  would  seem  that 
3  great  opportunity  of  doin^  so, 
J  very  limited  period  that  either 
t  sat  after  the  first  nomination  of 
peers  little  is  recorded  of  their 

IS, 

bUowing  month  (May)  the  army 
;he  remains  of  that  parliament 
iver  Cromwell  had  expelled  in 
St.  John  not  only  took  his  place 
was  named  one  of  the  council  of 
le  old  government,  '  without  a 
son,  kingship,  or  House  of  Peers,' 
^n  re-established,  St  John  and 


ST.  JOHir 


hi 


Ml 


Sir  John  Pickeriii^  waited   on  Richard 
Cromwell,  and  obtamed  his  written  acqui- 
escence in  this  arrangement^  by  whidi  he 
was    thus   deprived   of    hu   short-lived 
dignity.    The  sittings  of  the  Rump  Par- 
liament, as  it  was  called,  were  violently 
interrupted  in  October  bv  tiie  same  military 
power  that  had  called  them  together,  and 
a  Committee  of  Safety  formed.  They  were 
again,  however,  by  the  aid  of  Monk,  rein- 
stated on  December  26.    St  John  att^ided 
a  meeting  on  February  17,  1650-60,  at 
Monk's  quarters,  with  reference  to  the  mem- 
bers who  were  secluded  in  1648,  and  was 
instrumental  in   restoring  them  to  theb 

J)laces  a  few  days  after.  (Mercurius  iV 
iticuB,)  The  house  dissolved  itself  on  Marcl- 
16,  first  passing  an  act  for  anew  parliament 
to  meet  on  April  25.  Among  tne  qualifi- 
cations proposed  for  tlie  members  was  an 
oath  abjuring  the  title  of  Charles  II.,  which 
St  Jolm  declares  that  he  came  out  of  the 
country  on  purpose  to  oppose,  adding  that 
it  was  he  that  made  the  motion  to  put  a 
period  to  the  Long  Parliament. 

At  the  Restoration,  which  soon  followed, 
St  John  found  himself  in  a  difficult  position. 
His  harsh  and  active  proceedings  at  the 
commencement  of  the  troubles;  the  lead  he 
took  against  the  king  while  holding  an  office 
under  the  crown;  the  inhumanity  of  his 
speech  against  Strafford ;  his  partisanship  in 
all  Cromwell's  earlier,  if  not  later,  measures; 
his  recent  adherence  to  the  principle  of  a 
government  without  a  single  person,  king- 
ship, or  House  of  Peers;  and  even  his  relar- 
tiouship  to  the  two  protectors — setting  aside 
his  personal  collision  with  the  Duke  of  York 
at  the  Hague — could  not  but  operate  preju- 
dicially against  him.  In  the  discussions, 
therefore,  m  the  House  of  Commons  upon 
the  act  of  indemnity,  he  was  included 
among  those  reserved  for  such  pains,  penal- 
ties, and  forfeitures,  not  extending  to  life, 
as  by  a  future  act  should  be  imposed.  To 
counteract  this  vote,  he  published  the  case 
before  referred  to,  which  is  drawn  up  with 
a  great  deal  of  art  and  plausibility,  but  must 
be  received  with  an  equal  degree  of  caution 
both  as  to  its  statements  and  its  omissions. 
With  the  strenuous  aid  of  Thurloe,  who  had 
a  grateful  remembrance  of  his  early  patro- 
nage, it  had  its  desired  effect  upon  the  Lords, 
who  mi  tinted  the  clause  against  him  by 
the  substitution  of  another  (to  which  the 
Commons  afterwards  assented),  dedariug 
that  if  he  accepted  or  exercised  any  office 
after  September  1  (two  days  subsequent  to 
the  royal  assent),  he  should  stand  as  if  ex- 
cepted by  name  from  the  benefit  of  the  act 
The  king,  on  hearing  of  his  narrow  escape, 
is  said  to  have  expressed  a  wish  that  he  had 
been  added  to  those  excepted.  (Ptirl,  Hid, 
iv.  70,  91,  114 ;  ZwUow,  893.) 

St  John,  after  residing  for  a  few  years  in 
privacy  on  his  estate  at  Longthorpe,  a  hamlet 


582  ST.  LEONARD'S  ST.  PAUL 

near  Peterborougli,  -where  be  bad  erected  an  |  (Hunter's  Preface),  and  in  the  latter  year  be 

*     '  '     "      '"^'~         '  was  promotea  to  the  biahopric  of  London, 

but  was  not  consecrated  till  May  1199,  about 
two  months  after  King  Richard'a  death. 
He  was  one  of  the  biahopa  who  conTejed 


elegant  niansiouy  retired  to  the  continent 
under  the  assumed  name  of  Montagu.  It  is 
uncertain  whether  he  cTer  returned  to  Eng- 
land, authorities  differing  as  to  the  place  of 


his  death,  though  all  agree  that  it  occurred  ■  the  pope's  remonstrance  to  King  John  id 


on  December  31,  1673,  at  the  age  of  76. 

St.  John's  powers  as  an  advocate  were 
certainly  great;  of  his  qualities  as  a  judge 


1208,  and  who,  on  hia  continued  resistance. 

5 laced  the  kingdom    under  an  interdict 
Vo  years  afterwards  he  pronounced  tbe 


there  are  tew  means  of  forming,  an  opmion,  sentence  of  excommunication  against  tW 
for  there  are  no  reports  of  his  court  during  king,  which  was  not  removed  till  the  tw 
the  time  that  he  presided  in  it.    Of  his    1213.    He  was  obliged  to  fly  the  king^ 

Srivate  disposition  all  authorities  concur  in  i  and  to  remain  an  exile  till  King  John  luMi 
escribing  it  as  gloomy,  reserred,  and  un-  made  his  peace  'vv'ith  the  pope  and  receiitii 
amiable ;  but  the  charge  which  is  made  by  .  absolution.  In  the  meantime  hia  castle  a: 
some,  that  he  was  avaricious  and  died  dLs-  |  Stortford,  which  William  the  Conauercir 
gracefully  rich,  is  not  supported  by  sufficient  had  given  to  the  see,  was  entirely  denu* 
evidence.  The  Bedford  Level  was  com- i  lished.  After  his  return  to  Kngland  he  w» 
pleted  principally  by  his  exertions,  and  in  |  present  at  the  granting  of  Magna  Chirti. 
commemoration  of  his  sei^ices  his  name  is  I  in  1215. 

still  connected  with  its  greatest  work,  called  \  When  he  had  presided  over  hia  see  k 
*  St.  John*s  Eau.'  ^  twenty-two  years,  he  retired  from  its  dutiA 

His  third  wife  was  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  >  by  a  voluntary  abdication^  on  Januarr  H 
Paniel  Oxenbridge,  M.D.,  of  Daventry,  and  1221 ;  and  after  living  in  seclusion  for  liiti 
widow  of  Caleb  Cockcroft,  of  London,  mer-    more  than  three  years^  he  died  at  St.Oivtl 


chant,  who  after  his  death  married  Sir  Hum- 
phrey Sydenham,  of  Chilworthy,  Somer- 
setsliiie.  By  her  he  had  no  issue^ but  by  both 
his  other  wives  he  had  several  children. 
One  of  his  grandsons  was  made  a  baronet 


on   March  27,   1224.     (Godwin,   179:1^ 
Neve,  177;  It,  de  Wendotfer,  iii.  220-302.  • 
ST.  XABinr,  Balph  D£,  is  named  is  10 
Bichard  1.,  1198-9,  as  one  of  the  justiotf 
itinerant  fixing  the  tallage  for  the  county 


in  1715,  but  the  title  became  extinct  at  his  '  of  Surrey ;  and  in  the  same  year  the?  vt 
death  in  1766.   (Wutofi^s  Baronet A\,  178.)    recorded  as  making  amercements  in  taa 

ST.    LEOHABB'S,    LoBP.       See   E.    B.    and  Hertfordshire.     Balph  de  JVIartin.  iriu. 
SuGDEN.  I  in  31  Henry  II.,  1186,  was  one  of  tbeciH- 

ST.  MAKTiR  ECCLESIA,  WiLLiAH  DE  todes  of  the  see  of  SaUsbuiy,  then  intft 
(Bishop  of  Lokdoi^),  so  called  from  a  town  ,  king^s  hands,  was  no  doubt  the  same  persta 
of  that  name  in  Normandy,  held  some  oflice  and  was  probably  so  entrusted  in  ccnst- 
in  the  Exchequer  in  1  Bichard  L,  1189-90,  |  quence  of  holding  some  office  in  the  Ex- 
he  and  Hugh  Baidolf  then  attesting  some  chequer.  (Madox,  i.  311^  565,  733.) 
accounts  of  Henry  de  Comhill,  the  sheriff ,  ST.  OMEBO,  Williak  db,  had  the  c^- 
of  London.  (Pipe  RoU^  11.)  He  is  stated  tody  of  the  castle  of  Hereford  in  S^Ilenij 
to  have  acted  as  secretary  to  King  Bichard.  I  111.  ( CaL  Inguis.  p.  m.  i.  13)  ;  and  the  (suj 
and  appears  to  have  been  quickly  advancea  entry  on  the  rolls  of  that  reign  which  pior^ 
in  ecclesiastical  and  civil  preferment.  He  {  that  he  sat  on  the  judicial  bench  is  agmi 
held  the  living  of  Harewood  in  Yorkshire,  to  him,  in  the  fifty-third  year,  1269,  of « 
and  successivelv  became  a  canon  of  York  annual  salary  of  4(V.^  '  quamdiu  plsdv 
and  of  St.  Paul  s,  and  dean  of  the  College    praedictis  intenderit.'     Although  Ducdilt 


of  St.  Martin's-le-Grand  in  London.  He 
was  appointed  sherifi'of  Surrey  in  5  Bichard 
1.,  and  continued  so  for  two  years.     In  6 


thereupon  inserts  his  name  in  the  colosa 
of  the  justices  of  the  King's  Bench,  it » 
doubtful  whether  he  was  more  than  a  \» 


Bichard  I.  he  paid  five  hundred  marks  for  tice  itinerant.  He  is  not  mentioned  and" 
the  custody  or  the  heir  of  Bobert,  the  I  wards  in  the  former  character ;  and  d* 
younger  son  of  Bobert  Fitz-IIarding,  with  i  only  instance  found  of  hia  acting  in  tk 
all  his  inheritance,  and  the  power  of  mar-  '  latter  is  the  taking  of  an  inquiStion  ^ 
rying  him  to  one  of  bis  kinswomen ;  and  he  |  him  and  Sir  Warine  de  Chaucomb  at  Ui 
had  the  charge  of  the  abbey  of  Glastonbury,  coin  in  3  Edward  I.,  1275.  (IVocetd,  Ard 
the  honor  of  Wallingford,  and  various  Inst.  York,lS2.)  In  the  previous  year  h: 
other  lands  in  the  king's  hands.  {Pot.  attended  at  the  general  council  held  i^ 
CancelL  6,  &c.^  By  the  Norman  Boll  of  Lyons  under  Pope  Gregory  X.  (Dtrmf 
1195  (i.  clxxvi.),  it  appears  that  a  pension  I  PellPecords,  Lit,  xxxiii.) 
of  35/.  12«.  had  been  granted  for  his  and  his  ,  ST.  PAUL,  John  be  (Archbishop  tf 
mother's  lives  out  of  the  manor  of  St.  M^re  '  DrDLm),  whose  family  had  proper^  in  ^ 
^glise.  county  of  York,  was  not  improbtJoly  thf 

From  the  5th  to  the  10th  year  of  Bichard  son  of  Bobert  de  St  Paul,  lord  of  the  towin 
I.  his  name  frequently  appears  as  one  of  the  ship  of  Byram,  who  was  one  of  the  «i- 
juaticiera  before  whom  fines  were  levied    herents  of  the  Earl  of  Lancaater  in  tbe 


ST.  QUINTIN 

Teign  of  Edward  EL.  (Pari  Writs,  ii.  p. 
ii.  1387.)  John  was  a  clerk  in  the  Chancery, 
and  is  the  last  named  of  three  of  those 
oiEcers  to  whom  the  custody  of  the  Great 
Seal  wae  entrusted  at  York/ from  January 
13  to  February  17,  1334,  during  the  tem- 
porary absencu  of  John  de  Stratford,  the 
chancellor. 

On  April  28,  1337,  he  was  constituted 
master  of  the  Rolls ;  and  in  1340  the  House 
of  Converts,  in  Chancery  Lane,  was  granted 
to  him  for  life.  While  master  of  the  Rolls, 
the  Great  Seal  was  twice  deposited  with 
him  and  other  clerks — viz.,  from  July  6  to 
19,  1338,  and  from  December  8,  1339,  to 
February  16, 1340 ;  but  on  the  latter  day  he 
was  appoint^  sole  custos  till  the  restoration 
of  Archbishop  Stratford  on  April  28.  He 
again  held  it  for  a  short  time  on  the  resigna- 
tion of  the  archbishop  in  the  following  June. 

On  the  king's  hurried  return  from  the 
siege  of  Toumay,  John  de  St.  Paul  was  one 
of  the  victims  of  his  indignation.  He  was 
charged  with  some  malversation  in  his 
oiHce,  and  cast  into  prison ;  but  he  obtained 
his  release  as  a  clergvman  through  the  in- 
tervention of  Archbishop  Stratford.  He 
however  was  deprived  of  tne  custody  of  the 
Rolls  on  December  2,  two  days  after  the 
king  arrival  in  England.  {Barnes's  Ed- 
wardllL  217;  Angl  Sac,  i.  20.)  The  royal 
anger  did  not  long  continue ;  for  though 
St.  Paul  was  not  restored  to  the  mastership 
of  the  Rolls,  he  after  a  little  while  was 
allowed  to  resume  his  old  position  among 
the  masters  in  Chancery.  On  the  death  of 
the  Chancellor  Paming  on  August  26, 1343, 
he  was  again  one  of  the  three  to  whom  the 
Seal  was  entrusted  till  the  appointment  of 
llobert  de  Sadington  on  September  29. 

In  1346  he  was  made  archdeacon  of 
Cornwall  (Le  Neve,  94),  and  about  the 
month  of  October  1349  was  elected  Arch- 
bishop of  Dublin.  He  presided  there  for 
thirteen  vears,  and  died  in  1362.  (iV. 
feeder  a,  iii.  UK),  433 ;  HoUmhed,  vi.  44.) 

ST.  QTJIHTIK,  Walter  de,  is  only  men- 
tioned as  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  fixing 
the  assize  or  tallage  in  Dorsetshire  and 
SomersetHhire  in  20  Henry  II.,  1174,  incon- 
j  unction  with  Alured  de  Lincoln,  the  sheriff. 
(Madox,  i.  123.) 

ST.  YALEBICO,  or  ST.  WALEBICO,  John 
PB  (a  town  in  Normandy),  was  the  de- 
scendant of  a  noble  familv  of  that  name, 
Itanulph  the  ancestor  of  which  at  the  time 
of  the  general  survey  possessed  several 
manors  in  Lincolnnhire.  The  elder  branch 
failed  for  want  of  male  issue  in  1219. 
( Baronage  J  i.  4/)4.)  John  was  probably  an 
officer  in  the  Exchemier ;  for  m  65  Henry 
HI.  and  1  Edward  I.  he  was  appointed 
sheriff  of  the  counties  of  Somerset  and 
Dorset,  with  a  special  commission  to  enquire 
-what  debts  several  sheriffs  of  those  counties 
and  their  bailiffs  had  received,  and  not 


SALMON 


58S 


accounted  for.  He  became  a  baron  of  the 
Exchequer  about  2  Edward  I.,  1274.  He 
is  not  mentioned  after  1276,  during  which 
a  sum  of  20^  was  allowed  for  his  expenses. 
{Madox,  ii.  112, 196,  269,  320.) 

ST.  VIOOSS,  Thomas  de,  was  appointed 
in  9  Edward  I.,  1281,  to  take  assizes  in  dif- 
ferent counties.  He  was  sunaimoned  to  the 
parliament  at  Shrewsbury  in  11  Edward  L, 
and  died  in  the  twenty-third  year  of  the 
reign,  leaving  property  in  Wiltshire  and 
Somersetshire.  (Col,  Jnquis,  p.  m.  i.  123 : 
Pari  WrUsy  i.  16,  824.) 

SALOETO,  Robert  de,  or  BE  LA  8AUCET. 
was  the  son  of  Roger  de  la  Saucey,  and 
held  the  sheriffalty  of  Northamptonshire 
with  Henry  Fitz-Peter,  or  de  Nortnampton, 
in  6  and  7  John.  During  the  troubles  in  that 
reign  he  seems  to  have  been  a  wavercr,  for 
in  16  John  he  gave  hostages  for  his  faitii ; 
in  the  next  year  he  was  employed  to  ex- 
plain the  king*s  affairs  to  his  neijrhbours  in 
Northampton  and  Rutiand ;  and  m  the  fol- 
lowing his  property  was  seized,  it  must  be 
presumed  on  his  open  hostility.  (Rot,  Pat. 
47, 104, 128, 168 ;  Mot.  Claus.  i.  34, 77, 236.) 
Soon  after  the  accession  of  Henry  HI., 
however,  it  was  restored  to  him ;  and  in  the 
seventh  year  of  the  reign  he  was  engaged 
in  fixing  the  tallage,  and  again  in  10  Ilenry 
III.  in  assessing  the  quinzime  of  his  county. 
(Bot.  Clatis.  i.  306, 640,  ii.  147.)  He  was 
at  the  head  of  the  justices  itinerant  for 
Rutland  in  18  Henry  III.,  1234,  beyond 
which  date  nothing  is  recorded  of  him. 

SALISBIIBT,  Earl  of.  See  R.  Nevill, 
W.  Cecil. 

SALXOH,  John  (Bishop  of  Nobwich), 
was  the  son  of  Salomon  and  Amicia,  as 
appears  from  his  appointing  four  priests  to 
pray  for  their  souls  in  a  chapel  he  founded 
m  the  chancel  of  Norwich  Cathedral ;  and 
it  may  be  presumed  that  the  family  was 
not  of  any  eminence,  from  the  bishop^s  as- 
suming for  his  arms  a  rebus  of  his  name^ 
three  silver  salmons  hauriant  on  a  sable 
field.  He  is  sometimes  called  John  of  Ely, 
having  been  prior  of  the  convent  there. 
While  holding  this  dignity  he  was  elected 
Bishop  of  ^iorwich,  on  July  16,  1299. 
Salmon  was  not  employed  by  Edward  I., 
but  he  visited  Rome  in  130o ;  and  on  the 
accession  of  Edward  II.  he  was  sent  to 
France  as  one  of  the  ambassadors  to  demand 
Isabella,  the  daughter  of  King  Philip,  as 
the  wife  of  his  sovereign.  In  the  third 
year  of  the  reign  he  was  chosen  one  of  the 
lords  ordainers ;  and  in  the  ninth  he  was 
among  the  commissioners  to  open  the  par- 
liament then  held.  He  took  the  part  of 
his  sovereign  throughout  his  troublesome 
reign. 

On  January  26, 1320,  13  Edward  H.,  he 
was  appointed  chancellor  in  full  parliament ; 
but,  tnough  he  retained  the  office  for  three 
years  and  a  half,  he  seems  to  have  been  so 


584 


SALVEYN 


severe  a  suiFeier  firom  ill  health  that  the 
buflinefiB  of  the  Chanceiy  was  frequently 
perfonned  by  depilties.  His  deliveiT  of  the 
Seal  to  the  custoides  directed  to  act  for  him, 
on' June  5, 1323,  when  he  was  confined  to 
his  bed,  may  be  considered  as  the  date  of 
his  ultimate  retirement,  although  the  new 
clumcellor  was  not  named  till  the  20th  of 
August  following. 

He  recovered  from  that  sickness,  for  in 
the  following  year  he  went  as  ambassador 
to  the  court  of  France,  and  succeeded  in 
negotiating  a  peace  between  the  two  kin^. 
His  health,  however,  again  failing,  he  died 
at  the  priory  of  Folkestone  on  Jun^  2, 1325, 
having  presided  over  his  diocese  for  nearly 
six-and-twenty  years.  (Oodwm,  433 ;  AngL 
Sac.  I  412, 802 ;  Le  Neve,  210 :  jKo«.  Pari, 
i.  860,  443 ;  BlwnrfiM»  Norwich^  i.  497.) 

8ALYETH,  Gbrard,  had  large  possessions 
in  Yorkshire,  and  was  appointed  one  of  the 
four  justices  of  trailbaston  for  that  coun^ 
in  the  commission  dated  November  23, 
1304.  In  the  following  April  his  name 
was  omitted,  but  he  had  been  returned 
knight  of  the  shire  in  the  interval,  and  was 
agam  elected  in  35  Edward  I.  (Pari  Writs, 
i.  143,  100,  407-«.) 

The  family  was  founded  by  Josceus  le 
Flemangh,  who  came  in  with  the  Con- 
queror, and  was  settled  at  Cukenev  in 
jN  ottinghamshire.  His  grandson  Ralph  re- 
ceived the  desiflpation  of  Le  Silvan  from 
his  manor  of  Woodhouse  in  that  county ; 
and  this  was  afterwards  corrupted  to  Sal- 
veyne.  Gerard  was  the  son  oi  Ralph  Sal- 
veyn  of  Duffield  in  Yorkshire,  and  Sibilla, 
daughter  and  coheir  of  Robert  Beeston  of 
Wilberfoss.  He  was  one  of  the  assessors  of 
the  fifteenth  for  that  county,  granted  in 
30  Edward  I.,  and  two  years  afterwards 
was  sent  on  an  embassy  to  the  court  of 
Fhmce.  In  1  Edward  II.  he  was  appointed 
escheator  north  of  Trent,  and  held  it  till 
the  middle  of  the  third  year.  He  was  then 
entrusted  with  the  sheiiflTHltr  of  York  for 
four  years,  commencing  in  4  Edward  II. 
In  the  twelfth  year  he  obtained  a  pardon  as 
one  of  the  adherents  of  Thomas  Earl  of 
Lancaster,  and  died  in  the  following  year. 
Ifis  grandson,  Gerard  Salveyn,  succeeded 
him,  and  the  two  united  names  continued 
to  designate  every  head  of  the  family  for 
more  than  four  centuries,  thirteen  in  num- 
ber, and  is  still  held  by  its  representative, 
G«rard  Salvin,  Esq.,  of  Croxdale  in  Durham. 
{Inquis.  p.m.  i.  292  ;  Abb.  Rot.  Orig.  i.  169.) 

SAMTOBD,  Thomas  de,  is  first  mentioned 
in  6  John,  1203,  when  Mr.  Hunter  in- 
troduces him  in  his  list  of  the  justiciers 
before  whom  fines  were  levied.  As  this  is 
the  only  year  in  which  his  name  so  occurs, 
he  was  probably  present  only  as  an  officer 
of  the  treasury  of  the  Exchequer,  with 
which  he  was  evidently  then  connected, 
and  was  for  many  years  afterwards  em- 


SANDALE 

ployed  in  a  confidential  manner  \xw  ^e 
king.  Besides  several  entries  of  lua  ddiver- 
ing  money  and  plate  into  the  ohamber, 
there  ia  a  mandate  directed  to  him  in  16 
John   to    deliver   forty  thouaand    mAiks, 
fifteen  golden  cups,  a' golden  cio^m,  and 
various  other  valuable  articles  thm  in  Mi 
custody  to    two   persons  therein  named. 
Two  years  afterwards  he  is  a  uitted  of  sixty- 
ax  sacks  of  money,  which  were   in  tne 
treasury  at  Corfe,  and  which    ought   to 
contain  nine  thousand  nine  hundred  madcs. 
(Rot.  Pat.  61, 110, 146.) 

It  appears  from  the  Rotuli  Miaae  of  11 
and  14  John  (110,  113,  137)  that  he  wv 
at  both  periods  in  personal  attendance  on 
the  king,  when  several  paymenta  were  made 
through  his  hands,  manv  of  w^hich  relate 
to  the  royal  sports.  He  had  the  custody  of 
the  abbev  of  Malmesbury,  was  governor  of 
the  castle  of  Devizes,  and  cuatoa  of  the 
forests  of  Chippenham^  Melkeeham,  and 
Braden.  In  14  John  he  was  sent  on  a  mis- 
sion to  Flanders  {Bot.  Clatss.  i.  S95,  478 ; 
Rot.  MiscBf  244) ;  and  to  the  last  day  of  the 
reign  he  preserved  his  loyalty  to  his  sove- 
reiffn. 

Among  the  rewards  which  he  received 
are  the  manors  of  Kenine,  Potema,  and 
Lavington ;  the  lands  of  Saherus  de  Quincv, 
in  Wiltshire,  which  were  given  to  him  in 
conjunction  with  Geofi'rey  de  Neville  ;  and, 
lastly,  ten  dolia  of  good  wine.  (Roi.  CUnu. 
i.  41,  123,  230,  2G3.) 

He  was  one  of  the  ijledgea  for  the  pay- 
ment of  that  curious  tine  of  two  hunored 
hens,  which  the  wife  of  Hugh  de  Neville 
offered  to  King  John  for  liber^  to  lie  with 
her  husband  for  one  night  (MadoXy  i.  471.) 
He  died  about  6  Henry  III  iRoi,  Clam. 
i.  478,  490.) 

8AHBALS,  John  de  (Bishop  of  Wdt- 
CHESTER),  held  an  ofHce  connected  with 
the  Treasury  or  Exche<j[uer  in  30  Edward  L, 
1302,  when  he  is  mentioned  as  receiving  a 
crown  for  Queen  Margaret  (Rat,  Pea?,  i 
474);  in  the  following  year  he  and  John 
de  Drokenesford  are  called  treasurers  (De* 
von' 8  Isstie  Roll,  110) ;  and  he  was  likewise 
one  of  those  appointed  to  assess  the  tallsffe 
in  London  and  Middlesex,  &c.  In  33  £a- 
ward  I.  he  became  chamberlain  of  Scot- 
land, an  office  which  he  held  till  the  end 
of  the  reign,  being  at  the  same  time  com- 
missioned to  treat  with  the  Scota  on  the 
affairs  of  that  country.  (Abb.  Rot,  Orig, 
I  164.) 

Called  from  Scotland  at  the  accession  of 
Edward  II.,  he  was  constituted  chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer  on  August  7, 1307,  and 
at  the  end  of  the  year  was  one  of  those 
directed  to  instruct  the  sheriffs  of  London 
and  Middlesex  in  arresting  the  Knights 
Templars.  On  May  14,  1308,  we  findhim 
acting  as  loctim  tetictis  for  Walter  Reginald, 
Bishop  of  Worchester,  the  treasurer,  and 


SANDWICH 

eontinuiDg  to  do  so  till  that  prelate  became 
•chancellor,  on  July  6, 1310.  when  the  office 
of  treasurer  was  placed  in  Sandale's  hands. 
There  it  remained  until  March  14,  1312, 
when  he  was  succeeded  by  Walter  de  Lang- 
ton,  Bishop  of  Lichiield  and  Coventry, 
whose  locum  tenena  he  was  named  in  the 
following  October.  He  occupied  this  sta- 
tion till  he  was  appointed  chancellor,  on 
September  26,  1314  (Madox,  L  75,  ii.  8, 
&c.),  an  office  which  he  held  till  June 
i),  1318. 

Sandale  was  an  ecclesiastic,  and  one  of 
the  king's  chaplains.'  On  January  10, 1310, 
he  had  been  made  treasurer  of  Lichfield, 
^as  a  canon  of  York,  and  is  inserted  in  Le 
Keve's  catalogue  of  the  deans  of  London. 
It  seems,  however,  doubtful  whether  he 
•ever  held  the  latter  dignity.  During  his 
•chancellorship  the  bishopric  of  Winchester 
became  vacant,  and  he  was  elected  to  that 
see  in  August  1316,  but  presided  over  it 
for  little  more  than  th^  years.  (Le 
-.Vcic,  130,  183,  286.) 

Soon  after  his  resignation  of  the  Great 
Seal  he  was  restored  to  his  office  of  trea- 
surer, which  was  committed  to  him  on 
November  16,  1318.  (Madox,  ii.  30.)  He 
beld  it  during  the  remainder  of  his  life. 
He  died  on  November  2,  1319,  at  South- 
wark,  and  was  buried  in  St.  Margaret's 
Church  there.     (Godwin,  223:  Anal.  Sac. 

i.  310.). 

His  life  seems  to  have  been  employed  in 

a  routine  of  official  duties,  of  which  no 

further    interruption    is    noticed    than    a 

Pilgrimage  he  made  to  the  shrine  of  St. 
*homas  of  Canterbury  a  few  months  before 
he  resigned  the  Seal.  Previous  to  his 
elevation  to  the  bishopric,  his  London 
residence,  as  chancellor,  was  in  Aldgate. 
From  Edward  I.  he  received  the  manor  of 
Herghby  in  Lincolnshire,  and  from  Edward 
II.  a  house  in  the  suburbs  of  Lincoln 
belonging  to  a  religious  society  then  dis- 
solved. (Abb.  Hot.  Grig.  i.  166,  196, 197.) 
It  is  prooable,  therefore,  that  his  family 
was  settled  in  that  county,  although  from 
its  name  it  no  doubt  had  its  origin  in 
Yorkshire,  in  which,  at  his  death,  he  had 
property  in  the  manor  of  Whetlay,  near 
JJoncaster.     (  Cal.  Inqtiis,  p.  m.  i.  292.) 

BAHDWICH,  Ralph  de,  was  of  a  knightly 
family  in  Kent,  in  which  county  he  held 
the  manors  of  Eynsford  and  Ham.  In  49 
Henry  IIL  he  was  keeper  of  the  wardrobe, 
and  in  that  capacity,  during  the  temporary 
absence  of  Thomas  de  Cantilupe  the  chan- 
cellor, the  Great  Seal  was  placed  in  his 
custody  on  May  7,  1266,  under  the  seals  of 
three  clerks  of  Chancer}'.  In  1  Edward  I. 
the  custody  of  the  vacant  bishopric  of 
London  was  committed  to  him,  and  in  6 
Edward  I.  the  castle  of  Arundel.  From 
that  year  to  the  ninth  he  acted  as  escheator 
south  of  the  Trent  under  the  title  of '  senea- 


SAUNDEBS 


585 


callus  regis.*  In  14  Edward  L  he  was 
appointed  constable  of  the  Tower  of  Lon- 
don, and,  having  held  the  office  to  the  end 
of  that  reiffn,  was  confirmed  in  it  on  the 
accession  of  Edward  II.  (Abb.  Rat.  Orig, 
i.  21, 27-34, 166 ;  Madox,  L  270,  ii.  108-9.) 

Dugdale  introduces  him  as  a  judge  of 
the  Court  of  King's  Bench  in  17  Edwi^  L. 
1289,  on  the  authority  of  a  fine  leviea 
before  him  in  Michaelmas  Term  of  that 
year.  This,  however,  would  rather  seem 
to  place  him  in  the  Common  Pleas,  in 
conhrmation  of  which  there  is  a  letter 
dated  September  24,  1289,  by  which  he 
was  associated  with  John  de  Lovetot  and 
the  other  judges  of  that  court  as  chief 
justice  in  the  place  of  Thomas  de  Weyland, 
then  disgraced.  As  term  was  about  to 
commence,  King  Edward  no  doubt  com- 
missioned him,  in  his  character  of  constable 
of  the  Tower,  an  office  then  of  great 
importance,  to  act  ad  interim,  to  prevent 
an  interruption  in  the  ordinary  business 
till  the  charge  was  investigatea.  In  this 
office  he  continued  till  I«ebruary  1290. 
(Gent  Mag.  March  1862,  p.  267.)  In  30 
Edward  I.  he  is  called  'justicede  Newgate.* 
(Rot.  Pari.  i.  164  j  Hasted,  ii.  629,  x.  178.) 

He  probably  died  in  1  Eldward  II.,  when 
John  de  Crumbwell  was  appointed  con- 
stable of  the  Tower. 

SAHSETHK,  Benkdict  d£  (Bishop  of 
RocuESTEB),  was  appointed  on  March  26, 
1204.  to  the  office  of  precentor  of  St.  Paul's, 
Lonaon,  when  it  was  first  erected  and  en- 
dowed with  the  church  of  Sording,  and  he 
enjoyed  it  till  he  was  raised  to  the  bishop- 
ric of  Kochester,  in  December  1214,  16 
John.  (Rot.  Chart.  124;  Ze  Neve,  199. 
248.)  Li  3  Henry  lU.  he  was  at  the  head 
of  the  justices  appointed  for  the  four  home 
counties  (Rot.  Clans,  i.  396,  405),  and 
fines  were  levied  before  them  at  Westmin- 
ster in  that  character.  In  May,  8  Henry 
III.,  he  had  a  donum  of  twenty  marks  aa 
resident  in  the  Exchequer,  and  in  the  fol- 
lowing November  ten  marks  for  his  support 
*  dum  moram  facit  ad  Scaccarium  nostrum ' 
(Ibid,  i.  696,  ii.  8),  terms  which  seem  to 
imply  that  he  then  acted  as  a  regular  jus- 
ticier.  In  October  1226  he  went  on  an 
embassy  to  France,  and  dying  on  December 
21,  1226,  was  buried  in  his  own  cathedral 
(Ibid.  ii.  64, 1630 

SAUHDEBS,  Edxukd,  conmienced  his 
career  in  the  deepest  poverty.  His  asso- 
ciates beinp^  selected  from  the  lowest  class, 
his  habits  m  accordance  with  theirs,  and  hia 
elevation  being  of  so  short  continuance,  no 
endeavours  were  made  during  his  life  to 
trace  his  real  history.  Yet  one  would  think 
that  these  very  circumstances  would  have 
given  a  peculiar  interest  to  an  account  of 
the  process  by  which  he  first  extricated 
himself  from  his  low  condition,  of  the  meana 
which  he  iised,  and  the  energy  which  he 


586 


SAUNDERS 


exercised,  to  acquire  that  mastery  over  the 
intricacies  of  tne  law  which  hw  Reports 
exMbit,  and  of  those  powers  by  whicn  he 
gradually  acquired  the  ear  of  the  court,  and 
attained  the  high  rank  to  which  he  was  at 
last  promoted. 

Roger  North  (p.  223)  is  the  onljr  con- 


SAUNDEBS 

nature  and  disposition  in  so  great  a  dejtree 
that  he  might  be  deservedly  s^led  a  philui- 
thrope.  A  great  favourite  with  tiie  students 
of  tne  law  by  his  mirth  and  jests,  he 
gained  credit  at  the  bar  by  his  readiness 
and  dexterity  in  special  pleading,  and  his 
honesty  and  good  nature  were  universallj 


into  the  king's  business,  and  had  the  part 
of  drawing  and  perusal  of  almost  all  in- 
dictments and  informations  that  were  then 


temporary  author  who  gives  any  description  i  acknowled^d.    By  degrees  he  was  talren 

of  his  career,  but  the  colouring  with  which    ••'*^  ^^-^  '- — '~  ^—- — "    — ^  ^-^^  *^ ' 

ho  paints  it  requires  perhaps  some  softening. 
He  says  that  Saunders  'was  at  iirst  no 
better  than  a  poor  beegar  boy,  if  not  a  parish  j  to  be  prosecuted.  Sometimes  also  he  is  to  be 
foundling,  without  known  parents  or  re-  |  found  acting  for  the  defence  in  govemmeDt 
lations.'  By  his  will,  however,  it  appears  i  prosecutions — as  for  Mr.  Price  in  1(580, 
that  he  was  bom  in  the  parish  of  Bamwood,  when  indicted  for  attempting  to  subom  one 
about  two  miles  from  Gloucester,  to  the  of  the  witnessess  to  the  Popish  Plot ;  and 
poor  of  which  place  he  bequeathed  20/.  It  for  the  five  Popish  lords  charged  with  high 
leaves  legacies  to  his  *  father  and  mother  treason,  of  whom  only  Liord  Stafford  in^ 
Gregorv  *  also,  from  which  fact  Lord  Camp- 
bell (C'A.  Just,  ii.  50)  fills  up  the  blank  by 
saying,  on  what  authority  does  not  appear. 


tried. 


crown 


In  IGSl   he  was  counsel  for  the 
against    Edward    Iltzbarris  and 
_.-^.„^,  _  ^  ,    against  Lord  Shaftesbury,  and  in  1682  for 

that '  his  father,  who  was  above  the  lowest  |  the  Earl  of  Danby,  on  his  application  to  be 
rank  of  life,  died  when  he  was  an  infant,  bailed.  In  that  year  he  was  elected  a 
and  that  his  mother  took  for  her  second  ;  bencher  of  his  inn ;  and  on  Januaiy  13. 
husband  a  man  of  the  name  of  Gregory.'  1683,  he  was  suddenly  raised  to  the  chiet 
His  lordship's  su&rgestion  that  he  ran  away  iusticeship  of  the  King*s  Bench  and 
because  he  was  'hardly  used  by  his  father-  knighted.  This  elevation  he  owed,  it  is 
in-law '  seems  to  be  ignored  by  the  confi-  .'  said,  to  the  doubt  which  the  court  ente^ 


denco    placed    in    the    discretion    of   his 
'  father  Gregory '  by  his  will. 

Roger  North's  account  proceeds  thus: 
'  He  had  found  a  way  to  live  by  obsequious- 
ness (in  Clement's  Inn,  as  I  remember)  and 
courting  the  attorney's  clerks  for  scraps. 
The  extraordinary  observance  and  dili- 
gence of  the  boy  made  the  society  willing 
to  do  him  good.  He  appeared  very  ambi- 
tious to  learn  to  write;  and  one  of  the 
attorneys  got  a  board  knocked  up  at  a 


tained  whether  Chief  Justice  Pemberton  iw 
sufficiently  devoted  to  it  to  cany  out  the 
great  object  which  the  king  then  contem- 
plated of  obtaining  a  forfeiture  of  the 
charters  of  the  city  of  London,  and  to  the 
certainty  felt  that  Saunders,  who  had  ad- 
vised the  proceedings  and  settled  all  the 
pleadings,  would,  if  placed  in  that  office, 
decide  against  the  corporation.  The  case 
was  argued  before  him,  and,  though  he  was 
on  his  death -bed  when  judgment  was  pro- 


window  on  the  top  of  a  staircase.  .  .  He  .  nounced,  the  other  judges  united  in  dedar- 
made  himself  so  expert  a  writer  that  he  ing  that  he  agreed  with  them  in  decreein? 
took  in  business,  and  earned  a  few  pence  i  the  forfeiture.  In  the  interval  Saandei^ 
by  hackney- writing.  And  thus  by  degrees  !  presided  at  the  trial  of  the  sheriffe  of 
ho  pushed  his  faculties  and  fell  to  forms ;    London  and  others  for  a  riot  at  the  electi«i 


and  by  books  that  were  lent  him  became 
an  exquisite  entering  clerk.'  This  course  of 
education  was  pursued  during  the  Common- 
wealth, for  by  the  time  of  the  Restoration 
he  had  so  advanced  in  his  means  as  to  be- 
come a  member  of  the  Middle  Temple,  to 
which  he  was  admitted  on  July  4,  1660, 
beincp  described  *of  the  city  of  Gloucester, 
gentleman.'  Called  to  the'  bar  on  Novem- 
ber 25,  1664,  he  began  to  compile  his  Re- 
ports two  years  afterwards ;  and  as  he  was 
nimself  in  most  of  the  cases  in  his  work, 
and  Sir  T.  Ra}inond  mentions  his  name 
frequently  from  January  1668,  it  is  clear 
that  he  got  into  early  practice. 

A  curious  and  pictorial  description  of  his 
person,  habits,  and  general  cnaracter  is 
given  by  Roger  North;  representing  him 
as  corpulent  and  beastly  in  nis  person,  and 
offensive  to  his  neighbourSy  and  as  in- 
temperate in  his  habita*,  Wlmth  wonder- 


\ 


of  new  sherifis,  but  he  died  between  the 
conviction  and  the  sentence.  {State  Trialtj 
vols.  vii.  viii.  ix.) 

The  habits  of  his  life  were   necesaarilj 
changed  by  his  promotion ;   his  diet  wa& 
altered,  his  labour  incessant,  and  hUanxietr 
greater.      His    constitution    consequentlr, 
which  had   been  much   damaged  oj  hi^ 
former  intemperance,    soon    utterly  gave 
way.    Before  he  had  been  six  months  on 
the  bench  he  was  seized  with  apoplexrand 
palsy,  and  died  on  June  19,  1688,  at  hL« 
house  on  Parson's  Green,  whither  he  had 
removed  on  becoming  chief  iustice.   Bt 
his  will  he  makes   Nathaniel  Earle  aod 
Jane  his  wife   (his  host  and  hostess  is 
Butcher  Row)  his  leddoiury  legstedi, 'ai 
some  recompense  for  their  care  of  uflb 
and  attendance  upon  him,  for  mmjtm^ 

'While  he  sat  in  the  Comi.dFJDWil 
Bench/  says  Roger  North,  '  * 


ful  wit  and  repaTlee,  vn^  «k  ^^^iq^^ca  Q!i\Tvi\fo  \a  ^^  ^Bsofttil  aatidactfc 


SAUNDEBS 

aniTenally  allowed  that  he  was  abundantly 
vened  in  the  mysteries  and  technicalities 
of  law.  His  Reports^  printed  after  his  death, 
extend  from  16(16  t6 1672,  and  are  esteemed 
for  their  simplicity  and  precision.  They 
are  composed  in  so  dramatic  a  form  that 
Liord  Mansfield  called  him  the  Terence  of 
reporters. 

SAim>EB8,  Edwabd,  was  one  of  the 
sona  of  Thomas  Saunders,  Esq.,  of  Har- 
rington in  Northamptonshire,  by  Margaret, 
daughter  of  Richam  Cave,  of  Stanford  in 
that  county.  Admitted  at  the  Middle 
Temple,  hewas  elected  reader  in  1525,  and 
again  in  1533  and  1539.  His  call  to  the 
degree  of  the  coif  was  in  Trinity  Term 
1540,  and  he  was  made  one  of  Kmg  Ed- 
ward's Serjeants  on  February  11,  1547, 
within  a  fortnight  after  the  accession.  He 
was  successively  elected  member  for  Co- 
ventry, Lostwithiel,  and  Ssltash.  The 
Reports  of  Dyer  and  Plowden  show  that 
he  was  in  full  practice,  and  before  the  end 
of  the  reign  he  had  been  appointed  recorder 
of  Coventry.  At  the  king^  death,  in  July 
1553,  he  was  in  that  city,  and  by  his  insti- 
gation the  mayor  refused  to  obey  the  orders 
sent  by  the  l)uke  of  Northumberland  on 
the  part  of  Lady  Jane  Grey,  and  immedi- 
ately proclaimed  Queen  Mary.  (Chron.  of 
Qu,  Jane,  &c.  113.) 

This  prompt  service  was  not  overlooked, 
for  on  the  4tn  of  the  next  October  he  was 
raised  to  the  bench  as  a  judge  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  and  was  knighted  by  King 
Philip  in  the  following  January.  (Machyn's 
Diary y  342.)  Among  the  trials  on  which 
he  sat  was  that  of  Sir  Nicholas  Throck- 
morton, but  he  was  little  more  than  a  silent 
commissioner,  making  only  one  slight 
remark.  {State  Trials,  i.  894, 957.)  Though 
these  circumstances  might  raise  a  doubt  as 
to  his  being,  as  Wotton  says,  the  brother 
of  Laurence  Saunders,  who  was  burnt  for 
heresy  at  Coventry  in  May  1555,  the  more 
especially  as  on  the  deatli  of  Sir  William 
Portman  Sir  Edward  was  promoted  to  the 
chief  justiceship  of  the  Queen's  Bench  on 
May  8,  1557,  yet  two  letters  remain  from 
him  to  Lawrence  which  authenticate  the 
relationship.  Although  a  Roman  Catholic, 
Sir  Edward  was  re-appointed  by  Queen 
Elizabeth  immediately  after  Mary's  death, 
but  the  day  before  the  next  Hilary  Term 
he  was  superseded  by  Sir  Robert  Catlin, 
and  removed  into  the  Court  of  Exchequer 
as  chief  baron,  a  change  arising  probably 
firom^  the  feeling  that  the  former  place  was 
too  important  to  be  held  by  one  of  his 
religious  persuasion,  but  that  his  services 
as  a  judge  were  too  valuable  to  be  alto- 
gether dispensed  with.  He  was  present  at 
the  trial  of  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  in  1571, 
but  does  not  appear  to  have  uttered  a 
word.  In  the  business  of  his  court,  how- 
ever, this  charge  cannot  be  made  against 


SAUVAGE 


587 


him,  for  his  learning  and  his  industry  are- 
amply  exhibited  by  both  Dyer  and  Plowden. 

He  died  November  12,  1576,  and  was 
buried  at  Weston-under- Wethale,  under  a 
handsome  monument.  He  married  first 
Margaret,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Engle- 
field,  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas,  and. 
widow  of  George  Carew,  Esq. ;  and  se- 
condly Agnes  Hussey.  By  the  first  he  left 
a  daughter,  and  by  the  second  he  had  no- 
child.     {AtheruB  Cantabtigiensefi,  i.  359, 565.) 

SATJNPOBB,  John  de  ^Abchbishop  of 
DrBLnr),  was  a  justice  itmerant  in  3  Ed- 
ward I.  (7  BepoH  Pub,  J2a?.,  App.  ii.  248), 
but  whether  of  England  or  Ireland  is 
uncertain.  The  latter  seems  the  more 
nrobable,  as  he  was  the  king's  escheator  in 
Ireland  from  the  eighth  to  the  twelfth 
year.     {Abb,  Hot.  Ong,  i.  36,  42,  48.) 

In  1285,  13  Edwurd  1.,  he  was  made 
Archbishop  of  Dublin,  and  there  is  a  letter 
from  him  to  John  de  Langton,  apparently 
before  he  was  chancellor,  and  whicn  there- 
fore may  have  been  vnitten  either  before 
or  after  Saunford  was  elected  to  the  arch- 
bishopric, requesting  new  writs  relative  to 
the  process  in  the  plea  of  Pencriz,  to  bear 
the  same  date  as  the  former,  as  arranged 
when  he  attended  at  Knaresour^h  before 
Langton  and  William  de  Hamilton.  (7 
JReport,  ut  supn^  247.)  As  Pencriz  is 
either  the  collegiate  church  in  Stafibrd- 
shire  or  the  church  in  Derbyshire,  it  would 
appear  that  Saunford  was  then  acting  in  a 
judicial  capacity  in  England,  but  there  is 
nothing  positively  to  decide  the  question. 

A  contention  arose  between  the  arch- 
bishop and  William  de  Luda,  Bishop  of 
Ely,  in  21  Edward  L,  in  consequence  of  a 
man  of  the  former  having  been  Killed  by  a 
servant  of  the  latter.  {Itot.  Pari.  i.  Ill, 
152.)  The  date  of  the  archbishop's  death 
was  probably  30  Edward  I.,  as  his  successor, 
WilBam  de  Hotham,  was  then  appointed. 

SATJYAOE,  Geoffrey  le,  held  properljr 
in  the  counties  of  Warwick,  Stafford,. 
Derby,  and  Worcester,  and  on  the  death  of 
his  father,  of  the  same  name,  in  1222, 
6  Henry  Ul.,  was  excused  his  fine  for 
admission,  at  the  intercession  of  Hugh  le 
Despencer,  whose  daughter,  Matilda;  he 
married.  (Pot,  Claus.  i.  494,  ii.  94 ;  JEx- 
cerpt,  e  Pot,  Fin,  i,  205.)  In  the  following 
year  he  was  custos  of  the  forest  of  Saver- 
nake  in  Wiltshire,  in  which  county  he  wa& 
also  a  justice  itinerant  in  9  Henry  III. 
Dugdale  {Orig,  42)  notices  fines  levied 
before  him  at  Westminster  in  7  Henry  IH.,. 
and  from  that  time  till  Easter^  10  Henry 
HI.     {Pot,  Claus,  i.  528.  ii.  76.)  '*»►      ;     . 

He  died  in  1230,  when  Hugh  le  De- 
spencer paid  fifty  shillings  for  the  custody 
of  his  lands  and  the  wardship  of  his  heir. 

SAUYAOE,  Jakes  le,  was  the  rector  of 
the  church  of  St.  Peter  at  HoVkvcsi^  <s^ 
Ocham,  pioVMiWy  ^ctoti^  \rv  "^mtw^^  «o^^ 


588 


SAVILE 


probably  on  that  account  was  joined  to  the 
justices  itinerant  of  the  home  counties  in 
8  Henry  III.,  1219.  He  was  chaplain  to 
Hubert  Walter,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
and  chancellor,  and  was  one  of  the  execu- 
tors of  his  will.  {Hot,  PaL  26 ;  Hot  Clous. 
i.  60-1.)  On  that  prelate's  death,  in  1205, 
the  king  nominated  him  as  custos  of  the 
archbishopric  during  the  vacancy,  and 
made  him  one  of  his  own  chaplains.  (Hot 
Claw,  i.  46,  47,  71.) 

SAVILE,  John,  belonged  to  the  ancient 
family  of  Savile,  long  settled  in  Yorkshire, 
which  was  represented  in  the  reign  of 
Edward  I.  by  two  brothers,  John  and 
Henry.  From  John  descended  the  Marquis 
of  Halifax,  a  title  which  became  extinct  in 
1700.  From  Henry  descended  a  baronet 
whose  title  expired  in  1689,  and  Henry 
Savile  of  Bradley  Hall  in  Staiiiland,  in  the 
parish  of  Halifax,  who  by  his  wife  Eliza- 
Deth,  daughter  of  Robert  Kamsden,  was  the 
father  of  tliree  sons,  John.  Henry,  and  Tho- 
mas, the  two  elder  of  wnom  became  emi- 
nent in  their  respective  vocations,  John  as 
a  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  and  Henry  for  his 
profound  learning  and  his  valuable  publica- 
tions— the  memory  of  the  latter  being 
perpetuated  in  the  university  of  Oxford  by 
nis  endowment  of  two  professorships  in 
geometry  and  astronomy,  which  are  dis- 
tinguished by  his  name. 

John  Savile  was  bom  at  Over  Bradley  in 
1545,  and  after  studying  at  Brazenose  Col- 
lege, Oxford,  entered  tne  Middle  Temple, 
where  he  advanced  to  the  office  of  reader 
in  1586.    That  bo  was  a  regular  attendant 
in  the  Common  Pleas  and  Exchequer  (in 
the  latter  of  which  he  probably  practised) 
is  apparent  from  his  reports  of  coses  decided 
in  those  courts,  which  commence  in  Easter 
Term  1580.  He  was  about  this  time  steward 
of  the  lordship  of  Wakefield,  and  was  called 
on  November  29,  1592,  to  take  the  degree 
of  a  seijeant-at-law.      In  less  then    live 
years  afterwards,  on  July  1,  1598,  he  was 
raised  to  the  bench  as  a  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer, being  recommended  by  Lord  Bur- 
leigh, though  described  by  him  as  a  man 
of  small  living.      {Peck's  Desid,  Cur,  b.  v. 
24.)  He  sat  in  that  court  for  the  remainder 
of  his  life,  King  James  renewing  his  patent 
in  1603  and  knighting  him,  with  the  addi- 
tional grant  in  1604  of  king's  chief  justice 
in  the  county  palatine  of  Lancaster.      {Cal. 
StnU  Papers  [1603-10],  133.)     In  1599  he 
had  been  named  as  a  commissioner  Me 
schismate  supprimendo'  {Rymerj  xvi.  386) ; 
and  in  Michaelmas  Term  1606  he  joined 
with  his  colleagues  in  giving  judgment  for 
the  crown  in  the  great  case  of  impositions. 
(StaU  Trials,  ii.  382.)    This  was  one  of 
the  last  legal  duties  he  performed,  his  death 
occurring  on  February  2,  1607.    His  body 
was  buried  at  St.  Dunstan*8-in-tbe-Westyin 
fleet  Street,  London,  but  his  heart  was 


SAY 

deposited  in  the  churcb  of  Methley  in  York- 
shire, where  his  ancestors  were  intened, 
and  over  it  a  magnificent  monmnentwss 
afterwards  erected. 

He  was  fond  of  historical  studies,  and 
was  one  of  the  first  members  of  the  Societj 
of  Antiquaries.  An  intimacy  existed  be- 
tween him  and  Camden,  his  letter  to  whom 
pointing  out  a  variety  of  mistakes  in  the 
'  Britannia'  is  extant.  His  benevolence  was 
equal  to  his  learning,  and  there  was  scarcely 
a  manor  of  his  in  Yorkshire  in  which  he 
did  not  leave  some  charities  behind  him. 

He  married  four  wives — 1,  Jane,  daughter 
of  Richard  Garth,  of  Morden  in  Surrey, 
Esq.;  2,  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Thomas 
Wentworth,  of  Elmshall  in  Y'orkshire,  Esq., 
and  relict  of  Richard  Tempest,  of  Bowling', 
Esq. ;  3,  Dorothy,  daughter  of  Lord  Went- 
wortii  of  the  South,  and  relict  of  Sir  Wil- 
liam Widmerpool  and  Sir  Martin  ForbiBher: 
and,  4,  Mai^ry,  daughter  of  Ambrose 
Feate,  of  London,  and  relict  of  Sir  Jerom 
Weston.  He  had  issue  by  the  first  two  of 
these  only. 

Henry,  his  son  by  his  first  wife,  was 
created  a  baronet  in  1611,  but  the  title  died 
i  with  him  in  1632.  From  John,  his  son  bj 
his  second  wife,  descended  Sir  John  Sarile, 
who  was  installed  a  knight  of  the  Bath  in 
1749,  and  created  Baron  I'ollin^n  in  17^, 
and  Eai'l  of  Mexborough  in  1765,  both  io 
the  Irish  peerage,  the  third  possessor  of 
which  titles  stifl  enjoys  the  family  estates 
of  Methley,  (Aihen.  Oxon,  i.  773  j  Bio$. 
Peerage,  iv.  81 ;  Wottoiis  Barotiet,  L  153.) 

SAXBT,  or  SAXILBT,  Edwasd,  was 
placed  on  the  bench  ot  the  Excheouer 
on  November  28,  1649,  3  Edward  \X 
when  the  patent  merely  describes  him  as 
*•  late  clerk  in  the  Remembrancer's  Office/ 
His  re-appointment  at  the  commencemeDt 
of  the  reigns  of  Queens  Mary  and  Eliza- 
beth is  recorded,  and  on  September  dO, 
1562,  the  date  of  the  patent  of  Thomas 
Pymme,  his  successor,  he  is  mentioned  u 
lately  deceased.  No  other  event  of  hia 
private  life  is  known  than  his  marriage  ^th 
Elizabeth,  daughter  of —  Fisher,  of  Lcmg- 
worth  in  Oxfordshire,  and  relict  of  Willism 
Woodclifie,  Esq.,  citizen  and  mercer  of 
London,  lord  of  the  manor  of  Wormley  in 
Hertfordshire,    (fient.  May,  Nov.  1839.) 

BAY,  Geoffrey  de,  is  inserted  by  Dug* 
dale  among  the  judges  of  the  King's  Bench 
in  1321-2,  15  Edward  II.;  but,  for  the 
reasons  previously  given  under  the  accoont 
of  William  de  Dyve,  great  doubt  exists  as 
to  the  fact.  This  is  almost  confirmed  by  the 
additional  circumstance  that,  though  a  dis- 
tinguished member  of  an  ancient  and  noUe 
fanuly,  there  is  no  proof  that  he  wasseiled 
in  that  court 

Geoffirey  de    Say  was  deaoandp 
Picot  de  Say,  a  Shxopahire 
reign  of  the  Conqoexor.  IS 


SCABDEBUBG 

liam,  who  had  large  poesessions  in  Kent, 
beddee  some  in  other  coonties,  died  in  23 
Edward  L,  12d5,  leaving  him  an  infant  of 
fourteen  years  of  age.  He  and  his  wife 
Idonea,  the  daughter  of  William  de  Ley- 
bouniei  attended  the  coronation  of  Edward 
IL.f  in  1308 ;  and  he  was  first  sunmioned 
to  parliament  as  a  baron  in  1313.  He  was 
frequently  called  upon  to  perform  military 
serrioes,  out  was  never,  as  far  as  fuppears 
from  the  records,  employed  judicially.  It 
is  extremely  probable,  however,  that  among 
the  numerous  commissions  issued  for  the 
trial  of  the  adherents  of  Thomas  de  Badles- 
mere,  there  should  have  been  one  for  his 
county  of  Kent ;  and  that  he,  as  a  baron 
of  that  county,  should  have  been  named  in 
it^  and  thus  be  entitled  to  the  description 
of  justiciarius  regis,  which  G^rvas  of 
Canterbury  gives  to  him,  and  by  which 
every  person  so  employed  would  be  then 
designated  during  tne  continuance  of  the 
commission. 

He  died  in  1321-2,  the  very  vear  named 
by  Duffdale  as  that  of  his  judicial  appoint- 
ment, leaving  a  son,  also  Gteofirey,  only 
seventeen  years  old,  who  succeeded  him; 
but  his  male  descendants  failed  in  1382, 
and  the  barony  is  said  to  be  in  abeyance 
among  the  representatives  of  Idonea  and 
Joane,  the  two  aunts  of  the  last  baron.    In 
1447,  however,  the  grandson  of  Sir  William 
flennes,  who  had  married  the  said  Joane, 
was  summoned  to  parliament  with  the  title 
of  Lord  Say  and  Sele,  to  which  was  added 
that  of  viscount  in  1624.    The  viscounty 
became  extinct  in  1781;   but  the  barony 
still  surrived,  and  was  carried    througn 
females    into    the    family  of   Twistleton. 
(Lekmds  Collect,  i.  p.  ii.  276 ;  Baronage,  i. 
511;  Pari  Writs,  li.  p.  ii.  1402;  Nicolas' 8 
Syfwpsis,) 

80AEDEBTTBO,  Roger  de,  as  abbot  of 
Whitby,  headed  the  list  of  justices  itinerant 
appointed  for  the  county  of  r^orthumberland 
in  10  Henry  HI.,  1220.  He  was  bom  at 
Scarborough,  and  was  elected  to  the  ab- 
bacy in  1222,  having  previously  acquired 
great  veneration  during  a  long  residence  in 
the  cell  at  Middleburgh  Church.  He  was 
a  man  of  considerable  abilities,  and,  during 
the  twenty-two  years  that  he  presided  over 
the  monastery,  much  advancea  its  interests 
and  increased  its  revenues.  He  died  in  1244. 
(Hot.  Clous,  ii.  151;  Charlton's  Whi^, 
169-203.) 

SGAEDEBU&OH,  Hobebt  de.  It  has 
been  generally  believed  that  Eobert  de 
ScardeDurgb,  the  justice,  and  Robert  de 
Scorburgh,  the  baron  of  the  Exchequer, 
were  one  and  the  same  person,  from  the 
names  Scord,  Scorb,  and  Scharde  frequently 
occurring  among  the  advocates  in  the  Year 
Books  of  Edwsrd  H.  and  Edward  III.,  and 
disappearing  after  the  sixth  year  of  the 
latter  reign.    It  is  certain,  however,  that 


SCARLE 


589 


they  were  two  persons,  although  the  latter 
was  sometimes  called  by  the  tormer  name, 
and  that  the  first  derived  his  name  from 
Scarborough,  in  the  North  Riding  of  York- 
shire, while  the  last  obtained  his  from 
Scorbrough,  in  the  East  Riding.  Their 
disappearance  as  advocates  from  the  Year 
Books  arises  from  their  both  receiving 
judicial  appointments  nearly  at  the  same 
time — Scardeburgh  in  Ireland,  in  1331-2 ; 
and  Scorburgh  in  England,  in  1332. 

Robert  de  Scardeburgh  stands  at  the 
head  of  a  commission  of  assize  into  the 
islands  of  Guernsey,  Jersey,  Sark,  and 
Aldemey|in  5  Edward  JIL  (Abb.  Rot.  Orig, 
ii.  57) ;  and  at  the  close  of  that  year,  1331, 
he  was  made  chief  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas  in  Ireland,  in  which  character  he  is 
mentioned  two  years  afterwards.  In  8 
!  Edward  UI.  his  services  were  transferred 
to  the  Court  of  King's  Bench  in  England, 
of  which  he  was  constituted  a  judge  on 
September  14, 1334.  (Cal  Rot.  Pat.  113, 
117,120.) 

He  was  in  a  commission  of  array  for 
York  in  13  Edward  HI.  (JV.  Foedera,  ii. 
105);  and  on  September  6  in  that  year, 
1339,  he  changed  his  seat  in  the  King's 
Bench  with  John  de  Shardelowe,  for  the 
latter's  place  as  a  judge  of  the  Common 
Pleas.  In  this  court,  however,  he  remained 
little  more  than  a  year,  resuming  his  seat 
in  the  King's  Bench  on  January  8,  1341, 
and  retaining  it  for  nearly  four  years.  He 
was  then,  in  1344,  restored  to  his  former 
position  of  chief  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas  in  Ireland  (Cal.  Rot.  Pat.  135,  149) ; 
and  in  the  same  year  two  new  seals  were 
for  the  first  time  provided,  by  the  advice  of 
the  council,  for  sealing  the  judicial  writs  of 
the  two  benches  there,  the  custody  of  which 
was  granted  to  him,  with  the  fees  ap- 
pertaming  to  the  duty.  (Ahb.  Rot.  Or%g. 
li.  166.)  His  history  terminates  here,  for 
his  name  is  not  again  mentioned. 

SCAELE,  John  de,  was  so  call^  from  a 
place  of  that  name  in  Lincolnshire,  in 
which  county  some  of  his  family  were 
located  in  the  reign  of  Edward  \M,  (Abb, 
Rot.  Orig,  ii.  121,  155.)  He  was  a  clerk  of 
the  Chancery,  of  the  higher  grade,  as  early 
as  6  Richard  U.,  1382,  from  which  year 
till  1397  he  was  always  one  of  the  re- 
ceivers of  petitions  in  parliament,  of  which 
he  also  acted  as  clerk  for  the  eight  years 
between  9  and  17  Richard  II.  (Rot,  Pari 
in.  133-337.) 

On  July  22, 1394,  he  was  raised  to  the 
office  of  keeper  of  the  RoUs,  and  held  it 
about  three  years  and  two  months,  during 
which  he  several  times  acted  as  keeper  of 
the  Great  Seal,  and  it  was  in  his  possession 
when  Archbishop  Arundel  was  removed  on 
November  23,  1396.  On  September  11 
in  the  following  year  he  resigned  the  master- 
ship of  the  Rolls,  and  resumed  his  podtion 


690 


8CABLEIT 


as  clerk  in  the  Chancery,  as  appears  from 
his  witnessing^  under  that  title  a  charter 
to  the  city  of  Norwich,  dated  February  6, 
1399.     {BhmefiMs  Nor%oic\  i.  118.) 

After  the  arrest  of  King  Richard  he  was 
appointed  chancellor;  and  Sir  T,  D.  Hardy 

gives  September  5, 1399,  as  the  date  of  the 
rst  privy  seal  bill  addressed  to  him,  so  that 
he  held  the  office  for  twenty-five  days  of  this 
unfortunate  king*s  reign,  being  the  whole 
of  its  nominal  remainder.  He  was  of  course 
not  removed  when  Henry  IV.  was  seated 
on  the  throne,  but  he  occupied  the  post  for 
little  more  than  one  year  and  five  montlis 
under  that  king,  delivering  up  the  Seal  in 
full  parliament  on  March  9, 1401.  He  con- 
tinued, however,  one  of  the  king's  council 
for  the  rest  of  his  life.  {AcU  Privy  Cauncily 
I  126-197.) 

In  the  December  following  his  retire- 
ment he  received  the  archdeaconry  of  Lin- 
coln, which  he  enjoyed  about  a  year,  his 
death  occurring  about  April  1403.  (Le 
Neve,  166.) 

His  residence  in  London  was  in  Chancery 
Lane,  on  the  site  which  is  now  known 
as  Serjeants*  Inn.  It  is  sometimes  called 
'  Tenementum '  and  sometimes  *  Hospitium 
Domini  Job.  Skarle,'  and  belonged  to  the 
Bishops  of  Ely. 

BGABLETT,  Jamss  (Lord  Abinoer), 
.  belonged  to  that  branch  of  the  family  which 
in  the  seventeenth  century  was  settled  in 
Sussex.  His  inmiediate  ancestor,  Thomas 
Scarlett,  of  Eastbourne,  migrated  to  Ja- 
maica, where  his  brother  Captain  Francis 
Scarlett  had  established  himself  soon  after 
Cromwell's  conquest  of  that  island  in  1655, 
and  sat  in  the  first  assembly.  Thomas  be- 
came possessed  of  large  estates  there,  and 
his  descendants  were  men  of  considerable 
wealth.  Robert  Scarlett,  the  fourth  in 
lineal  succession  from  Thomas,  by  his  map- 
riage  with  Elizabeth  Anglin,  a  great-great- 
granddaughter  of  Henry  Laurence,  who 
was  president  of  Cromwell's  council,  had 
several  sons,  two  of  whom  attained  high 
legal  honours-— one,  the  subject  of  the  present 
sketch,  as  chief  baron  of  the  English  Ex- 
chequer; and  the  other,  the  youngest  son. 
Sir  William  Anglin  Scarlett,  as  chief  justice 
of  Jamaica. 

James  Scarlett,  who  was  the  second  son, 
was  bom  in  Jamaica  in  1769,  and  was  soon 
sent  to  England  for  the  purpose  of  education. 
He  was  entered  at  a  very  early  age  as  a 
fellow  commoner  of  Trinity  College,  Cam- 
bridge, and  took  his  degrees  of  B.  A.  in  1790, 
and  of  M.A.  in  1794.  In  the  meantime 
having  entered  the  Inner  Temple,  he  was 
called  to  the  bar  on  July  28,  1791.  His 
marriage  in  the  next  year  with  Louisa  Hen- 
rietta, daughter  of  Peter  Campbell,  Esq.,  of 
Kilmory  in  Argyleshire,  shows  that  he  did 
not  rely  wholly  on  his  success  at  the  bar  for 
the  support  of  a  family ;  but  his  early  in- 


8CABLETT 

dependence  did  not  render  liim  indolent,  or 
prevent  him  from  pursuing  aandoously 
those  studies  which  would  prepare  him  for 
the  contests  into  which  he  was  about  to 
enter.  He  joined  the  Northern  Circuit  and 
the  Lancaster  sessions,  and  for  nearly  a 
quarter  of  a  century  was  doomed  to  remain 
as  a  junior  counsel  undecorated  by  a  silk 
gown.  But  long  before  that  period  had 
elapsed  his  extraordinary  merits  and  intel- 
lectual powers  were  appreciated  both  on  the 
circuit  and  in  the  courts  at  Westminster. 
His  extensive  legal  knowledge,  hia  steadj 
attention  to  the  work  before  him^  his  quiet 
management  and  prudent  judgment  in  the 
conduct  of  his  case,  soon  inspired  clients 
with  entire  confidence  in  his  advice,  and 
while  yet  in  a  stuff  gown  it  was  no  uncom- 
mon thin^  to  see  him  entrusted  with  t 
leading  brief.  In  his  arguments  in  baneo 
he  was  remarkable  for  his  ingenuity  and 
acuteness,  and  for  the  peculiar  power  he 
had,  by  subtle  distinctions,  of  extricating 
the  point  in  dispute  from  the  involyments 
that  surrounded  it.  It  waa  considered  that 
he  had  too  great  an  influence  oyer  the 
judges,  and  it  was  said  of  him  that  'he  had 
invented  a  machine,  by  a  secret  use  of  which 
in  court  he  could  always  make  the  head  of 
a  jud^  nod  assent  to  his  proposition.' 

This  striking  success  rendered  it  impos- 
sible any  longer  to  refuse  him  the  accus- 
tomed   distinction,   and  in    1816  he  was 
called  within  the  bar  as   king's  oounsd. 
From  that  time  for  the  next  ei^teen  years 
he    enjoyed  such    an  ascendency   in  the 
courts  that  it  became  an  actual  race  be- 
tween litigants  which  should  secure  his 
services  in  the  impending  contest,  and  the 
loser  felt  that  one  of  his  best  chances  of 
success  was  snatched  from  him.     Ss  in- 
fluence over  juries  was  wonderful — some 
called  it  mapcal ;  it  was  not  obtained  by 
any  extraordmary  eloquence,  for  he  seemed 
carefully  to  avoid  any  rhetorical  flourishes, 
but   it  was  produced   by    laying    before 
them  in  clear  and  simple  language  such  a 
well-digested  exposition  of  the  case  of  his 
client  as  made  it  appear  that  he  himself 
was  satisfied  of  its  justice,  and  that  thej 
had  no  choice  but  to  endorse  his  opinion  by 
their  verdict.      There  was    no    apparent 
effort  in  his  argument,  no  violent  exDres- 
sion  in  his  address,  no  attempt  at  brilliant 
periods;  but  the  impression  was   effected 
by  an  easy,  ^ntlemanly,  and  colloquial 
appeal  to  their   understandin^;8 — ^perhaps 
in  some  degree  heightened  by  his  handsome 
person,  his  musical  voice,   and    pleasing 
countenance.      Yet,    when    the    occasion 
demanded  it,  neither  energy  nor  eloquence 
was  wanting.     Coleridge,  in   his  'Table 
Talk '  (June  29, 1833^  says,  '  I  think  Sir 
James  Scarlett's  speech  for  the  defendant^ 
in  the  late  action  of  Cobbett  v.  The  Urnes 
for  a  hbeli  worthy  of  the  hwt  ogeB  of 


SCARLETT 

Greece  or  Home,  though  to  be  sure  some 
of  his  remarks  could  not  have  been  very 
palatable  to  his  clients.'  Whether  the 
case  was  trifling  or  important,  he  took  the 
same  pains  for  his  client,  and  seemed  to  be 
equally  interested  in  the  result.  One  of 
his  greatest  merits  was  that  when  he  was 
engaged  in  a  cause  his  services  might 
always  be  relied  upon.  He  disdained  to 
adopt  the  vicious  practice  of  some  barristers, 
then  far  too  common,  of  wandering  about 
from  court  to  court,  and  taking  contempo- 
raneous briefs  in  all,  to  the  damage  of 
those  whose  retainers  and  even  whose 
briefs  they  had  accepted,  and  many  has 
been  the  time  when  Mr.  Scarlett,  deserted 
by  those  employed  in  the  same  cause,  has 
borne  the  brunt  of  a  long  day's  investiga- 
tion sole  and  unaided.  He  occasionally 
expressed  his  indignation  against  what  he 
deemed  dishonestpr  in  practice  or  conduct 
with  great  seventy,  and  soon  after  he 
became  a  king's  counsel  an  action  was 
brought  against  him  for  a  lashing  animad- 
version he  had  administered  to  an  attorney 
nt  the  York  assizes.  A  verdict  was  given 
in  his  favour,  which  was  afterwards  con- 
iirmed  by  the  full  court  in  London,  on  the 
.ground  that  for  words  spoken  by  a  counsel 
•pertinent  and  relative  to  the  matter  in 
•dispute  '  an  action  could  not  be  maintained. 
With  the  natural  ambition  to  enter  par- 
liament, he  contested  the  borough  of  Lewes 
twice,  in  1812  and  1810,  both  times  un- 
successfully. But  in  1818  Lord  Fitz- 
william  provided  him  with  a  seat  as  the 
representative  of  Peterborough.  In  1822 
lie  stood  a  contest  for  the  university  of 
Cambridge,  but  was  again  defeated.  He 
afterwards  sat  for  Maldon,  then  for  Cock- 
ermouth,  and  lastly,  at  the  first  election 
after  the  first  Reform  Act,  for  the  city  of 
Norwich.  In  the  senate  he  was  not  so 
successful  as  in  the  forum.  The  easy  style 
which  commanded  the  attention  of  juries 
Tvas  not  altogether  suitable  to  a  more 
enlightened  and  critical  audience^  and  failed 
to  produce  any  deep  impression.  In  politics 
be  ranked  at  first  as  a  moderate  whig,  and 
supported  Sir  Samuel  Romilly  in  his 
efiorts  towurds  the  amelioration  of  the 
criminal  law.  He  also  introduced  a  propo- 
sition for  the  improvement  of  the  Poor 
Laws,  which,  though  not  then  encouraf^ed, 
was  the  groundwork  of  future  legislation. 
When  something  like  an  amalgamation  of 
parties  took  place  on  Mr.  Canning's  be- 
coming prime  minister  in  April  1827,  Mr. 
Scarlett,  with  the  consent  of  the  whig 
leaders  and  the  approval  of  his  patron 
Earl  Fitzwilliam,  accepted  the  oflice  of 
attorney-general  on  the  27th  of  that  month, 
and  was  as  usual  knighted.  Before  the 
end  of  the  year  the  death  of  Mr.  Canning, 
and  the  failure  of  liOrd  Goderich,  his  suc- 
ceflsor,  brought  that  miniBtry  to  an  end, 


SCARLETT 


591 


and  on  the  Duke  of  Wellington  assuming 
the  administration  Sir  James  retired  from 
his  office  in  Januaiy  1828,  to  resume  it, 
however,  in  June  1829,  when  Sir  Charles 
Wetherell,  his  successor,  resigned  in  disgust 
at  the  liberal  measures  proposed  by  the  duke. 

With  the  accession  of  King  William  IV. 
came  the  triumph  of  the  whigs,  in  Novem- 
ber 1830,  and  the  conseauent  removal  of 
Sir  James,  who  from  his  nrst  entrance  into 
office  had  been  gradually  approaching  those 
conservative,  but  liberal,  principles  which 
for  the  whole  remainder  or  his  life  he  con- 
sistently maintained.  His  permanent  change 
of  opinion  was  no  doubt  confirmed  by  the 
coldness,  and  what  he  deemed  the  ingra- 
titude, of  the  leaders  of  the  whig  party, 
who  forgot  that  he  accepted  office  at  their 
reonest,  or  at  least  with  their  approbation. 

During  the  time  that  he  executed  the 
functions  of  attorney-general  he  lost  some 
of  his  popularity  by  his  prosecutions  of  the 
'Atlas*  and  'Morning  Post'  for  libels; 
but  he  amended  the  law  relating  to  them 
by  an  act  modifying  the  provisions  of  the 
six  acts  against  public  libels.  To  h  m  the 
profession  is  indebted  for  several  improve- 
ment^t  in  the  administration  of  justice.  He 
got  rid  of  the  movable  terms,  and  placed 
their  commencement  and  their  close  upon 
fixed  days  in  the  ^ear ;  and  he  prepared  the 
bill  for  the  abobtion  of  the  Welsh  judi- 
cature and  for  enabling  the  judges  of  Wesl^ 
minster  Hall  to  administer  justice  on 
circuit  throughout  the  Principality ;  at  the 
same  time  extending  the  number  of  the 
judges  from  twelve  to  fifteen. 

Joining  in  a  bold  opposition  to  the 
various  measures  of  radical  reform  that 
were  then  introduced,  and  largely  increas- 
ing his  fortune  by  his  undisputea  ascend- 
ency in  the  courts,  he  awaited  a  change  in 
the  administration  with  the  certainty  of 
then  receiving  the  reward  of  his  labours. 
That  change  was  delayed  till  1834,  when 
Sir  Robert  Peel  became  minister.  Sir 
James  Scarlett  was  then,  on  December  24, 
constituted  lord  chief  baron  of  the  Exche- 
quer. In  the  next  month  he  was  created 
Baron  Abinger  of  Abinger  in  Surrey,  an 
estate  he  had  purchased,  being  the  first 
chief  baron  who  received  while  in  that  office 
the  honour  of  the  peerage. 

His  reputation  as  a  judge  did  not  equal 
his  fame  as  an  advocate.  He  had  too  much 
the  habit  of  deciding  which  of  the  two 
parties  in  a  cause  was  in  the  right,  and 
arguing  in  his  favour;  while  juries,  who 
had  been  accustomed  to  be  led  by  his 
pleadings  as  a  counsel,  refused  to  submit  to 
nis  dictation  as  a  judge.  The  consequence 
was  that  he  freauently  lost  verdicts  which, 
had  he  shown  less  bias,  would  have  been 
conformable  to  his  opinion.  He  presided 
in  the  Excheauer  for  nearly  ten  years,  and 
attended  the  Norfolk  Circuit  in  the  s^jcvo^ 


592 


SCOBBUBGH 


SCOTT 


ofl844,  apparently  infull  health  and  vigour.  !  III.,  the  record  calling  him  Soorbazsh,  lif 
But  after  sitting  in  court  at  Bury  St.  i  which  name  he  received  knighthood  m  w 
Edmunds,  and  going  through  the  business  I  same  year.  (Dw/daUi's  Orig,  102.)  He  i» 
of  the  day  with  his  accustomed  clearness  also  so  named  in  the  following  year,  in  the 
and  skill,  till  seven  o'clock  in  the  evening,  !  record  commissioning  him  to  trnt  inth  tW 
he  was  two  hours  after  struck  with  paralvsis,  :  Earl  of  Flanders  \N.  Fcsdem,  iL  875), 
which  left  him  speechless,  and  in  five  clays  !  while  at  this  time  his  contempoiaiy  Bobot 


terminated  his  life,  on  April  7.  His  remains 
were  removed  for  interment  at  Abinger. 

His  first  wife,  after  producing  to  him 
three  sons  and  two  daughters,  died  in  1829, 
and  left  him  a  widower  for  fourteen  years. 


de  Scardeburg  was  chief  justice  of  tk 
Common  Pleas  in  Ireland. 

After  this  we  hear  notbing  of  him  iiD 
his  death  in  14  Edward  III.,  when  it  Vf- 
pears,  by  the  document  above  referred  to^ 


In  1843,  the  last  year  of  his  life,  he  married,    that  his  property  was  committed  to  d» 
secondly,  the  daughter  of  Lee  Steere  Steere,    custody  or  Wolfand  de  Clistere,  becuw 


Esq.,  of  Javes  in  Surrey,  and  the  widow  of 
the  Rev.  HL  J.  Ridley,  of  Ockley,  by  whom 
he  left  no  children.    His  eldest  daughter 


Thomas,  his  son  and  heir,  was  an  idiot 

8C0TH0U,  WiLLiAic  DE,   to  whom  w 
reference  whatever  is  made,  except  in  Dofr- 


married   Lord   Campbell,    and  before  he  i  dale's  list  of  justices  itinerant  for  Kent  is 

"22  Edward  HI.,  1348,  probably  took  ha 
name  from  a  parish  so  called  in  NorfolL 
A  Peter  de  Scothow  was  returned  monber 


attained  that  title  was  honoured  with  a 
peerage    in    her    own    right  as  Baroness 


m    ner   own   ngnt  as 

^tratGeden.    His  eldest  son  enjoyed  the 

title  after  him  till  1861,  and  was  succeeded 

by  the  present,  the  third,  baron.    The  chief 


for  Norwich  in  12  Edward  U. 
8C0TRE,  Roger  de,  was  poesetsed  of 


baron's  second  son,  Sir  James  Yorke  Scar-    Coringham  and  several  other  manon  la 
lett,  K.C.B.,  has  acquired  great  fame  as  a  \  Lincolnshire.    In  1309,  3  Edward  IL,kt 
soldier ;  and  his  youngest  son,  Peter  Camp-    and  Edmund  Passeleffb,  demgnated  as 
beU  Scarlett,  haJs  gained  considerable  dis-  '  —— -^ i-x-Y^'.  ^ .  .y    i. 

tinction  as  a  diplomatist. 

SCOSBIIBOH,  Robert  de,  took  his  name 
from  Scorbrough  in  the  East  Riding  of 
Yorkshire,  and  was  sometimes  called  by 
the  name  of  Robert  de  Scardeburgh.  Under 
the  name  of  Scorburgh  he  had  a  licence  in 
17  Edward  H.  to  assign  a  lay  fee  in  Bever- 
ley and  Etton;  and  on  his  death,  in  14 
Edward  UI.,  he  is  described,  under  the 
name  of  Scardeburgh,  as  possessing  the 
manor  of  Scorby,  and  also  property  in 
Stamford  Bridge  and  Etton,  both  of  which  | 
are  in  the  East  Riding,  and  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Beverley  and  Scorbrough. 
{Abb,  Rot,  Orig,  i.  274,  ii.  136.)  No  ques- 
tion, however,  can  be  entertained  that 
Robert  de  Scorbuigh  and  his  contemporary, 
Robert  de  Scardeburgh,  were  not,  as  has 
been  asserted,  the  same  individual.  Robert 
de  Scorburgh's  connection  with  the  law 
appears  from  his  being  employed  on  special 
commissions  in  Yorkshire  in  16  and  20 

Edward  II.   {Pari.  Writs,  ii.  p.  ii.  1406) ;  |  the  original  name  of  the  family  was  Bsliol, 
in  both  of  which  he  is  callea  Scorburgh,  I  and  that  William,   the  brother  of  Jolui 
and  is  evidently   added    to    the    regular  '•  Baliol,  King  of  Scotland,  who  freqnentlT 
judges,  as  a  serjeant  is  in  the  present  day.  j  wrote  his  name  as  William  de  Baliol  i 
In  18  Edward  II.  he  was  appointed  also  on    Scot,  after  the  contest  for  the  crown  in  tbt 
a  commission  of  enquiry,  his  name  being    reign  of  Edward  I.  had  terminated  in  his 
then  spelled  Scoreburgh.    Again,  in  2  Ed-    brother's  overthrow,  politically  dropped  hii 
ward  III.  there  is  a  petition  to  parliament  ,  patronymic,  and  retained  only  the  natioml 
by  the  people  of  *  Scartheburgh,'  relative  i  addition  he  had  assumed.    In  theragnof 
to  a  trial  before  Robert  de  Scoresburgh  j  Edward  HI.  this  family  was  seated  in  di» 
and  his  companions,  justices  of  Oyer  and    parish  of  Brabonie  in  Kent,  and  it  wuflot 
Terminer  in  that  town ;  and  in  the  fourth    till  Henry  VI.'s  time  that  they  remonAlt 
jeax  he  was  amongst  the  justices  itinerant    Scott's  Hall,  a  manor  in  the  neighboB 
into  Derbyshire,  as  Scorburgh.   {Hot,  Pari,    parish  of  Smeetb.     (Haded,  viii  &) 
i.  420,  ii.  28.)  William  Scott  waa  a  nleader  ia  H 

He  wa3  raised  to  lYie  "beiic^  o^  tbe  Ex-    from  3  Edward  III.,  ana  waa  p** 
chequer  on  ^ovembex  ^,\tV3a,  ^'EA^w^\^^\cfiB!^%^T^<8«^^ 


ieants,  were  appointed  to  transact  the  kiag^t 
Dusiness  of  pleas,  and  were  directed  t» 
appear  at  the  Exchequer  on  Michaehuft- 
day  to  do  as  the  king  and  his  council  ahoBU 
order.  On  Julv  17, 1310,  4  Edward  IL,  be 
was  constituted  a  biEuron  of  the  Excbeqaer, 
and  in  the  same  year  waa  the  first  naoud 
of  three  justices  of  assize  for  six  comi1ifl0» 
of  which  Lincoln  was  one.  His  tenon  of 
office  was  very  short,  for  he  died  hdm 
March  3, 1312,  when  his  successor,  'Walter 
de  Norwich,  received  his  patent. 

He  left  a  wife,  called  both  Agnes  ttd 
Elizabeth,  and  an  only  daughter,  nmed 
Elizabeth,  who  died  a  minor. 

SCOTT,  William.  The  name  of  Seott 
was  so  common  even  at  this  early  peiiod 
that  it  is  difficult  to  speak  with  certuntf 
of  the  family  of  this  William  Scott  u 
H.  Phillips,  in  his  *  Grandeur  of  the  Liw,' 
(1084),  is  right  in  saying  that  Sir  Thonn 
Scott,  then  of  Scott^s  Hall  in  £ent,tni 
descended  from  him,  it  would  seem  that 


SCOTT 

March  18, 1337,  11  Edward  111.,  he  was 
raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Common  Pleas, 
but  was  removed  into  the  Kind's  Bench  on 
May  2, 1839,  and  was  promoted  to  the  chief 
justiceship  of  that  court  on  January  8, 1341. 
He  still  held  that  office  at  his  death  in  20 
Edward  UI.,  1346,  though  Dugdale  by  mis- 
take transfers  him  to  the  Common  Pleas  as 
chief  justice  there  in  1342.  (Abb.  RoL 
Orig,  u.  179.) 

One  Humphrey  Hunney,  probably  a  dis- 
contented suitor,  having  complained  that 
the  chief  justice  had  awarded  an  assize  con- 
trary to  law,  was  imprisoned,  judged,  fined, 
and  ransomed  for  the  offence.  {State  Trials, 
iL1024.) 

His  descendants  numbered  among  them 
many  eminent  in  offices  of  trust,  as  well  in 
the  state  as  in  the  county;  and  the  next- 
noticed  John  Scott,  chief  buron,  is  said  to 
have  been  of  the  same  family,  which  was 
not  extinct  at  the  end  of  the  last  century. 

SCOTT,  John,  is  said  by  Phillips,  in  his 
*  Grandeur  of  the  Law,'  to  have  been  a  de- 
scendant from  the  above  William  Scott, 
but  no  means  are  supplied  for  tracing  the 
pedigree. 

An  apprentice  of  his  name  is  mentioned 
in  the  Year  Books  in  20  Henry  VII.,  1504, 
who  probably  was  the  same  person  who  on 
January  8,  1613,  4  Henr^  VUI.,  had  a 
fpcBnt  in  reversion  to  be  chief  baron  of  the 
Exchequer,  then  held  by  Sir  William  Hody. 
(CaL  State  Popers  [1509-14],  470.)  ITis 
name  does  not  occur  as  a  judge  in  any  of 
the  reporters ;  and  his  accession  to  and  con- 
tinuance on  the  bench  is  only  to  be  inferred 
from  the  fact  that  a  new  chief  baron,  John 
Pitz-James,  was  appointed  in  February 
1621. 

Dugdale  mentions  a  .John  Scott  who  re- 
ceived a  patent  as  third  baron  on  May  15, 
1528,  being  six  yesrs  after  the  appointment 
of  John  Fitz-James  as  chief  baron.  If  this 
be  the  same  man  as  John  Scott  the  chief 
baron  in  reversion,  he  must  either  have  not 
taken  the  place  under  the  patent,  or  have 
been  removed  to  make  way  tor  Fitz-James, 
and  replaced  in  an  inferior  seat  on  the  bench 
at  this  time ;  but  history  is  totally  silent  on 
the  subject,  and  the  name  of  Scott  was  so 
common  as  to  defy  the  endeavours  of  the 
most  industrious  to  determine  whether  this 
third  baron  was  or  was  not  the  same  indi- 
Tidual.  He  is  named  two  years  afterwards 
as  one  of  the  commissioners  to  enquire  into 
the  possessions  of  Cardinal  Wolsey  in  Sur- 
rey.    (Rymer^  xiv.  402.) 

8C0TT,  John  (Earl  of  Eldon),  was  the 
ffrandson  of  William  Scott  of  Sandgate  in 
Sewcastlo-upon-Tyne,  who  exerd^  the 
trade  of  a  *  fitter '  of  coals,  and  was  the 
owner  of  several  'keels;'  and  the  son  of 
William  Scott,  who  pursued  the  same 
occupation,  was  a  freeman  of  Newcastie, 
and  member  of  the  Hoastman's  Company 


SCOTT 


593 


there,  which  consisted  of  the  fisst  trades- 
men in  the  place.  He  married  Jane,  the 
daughter  of  Hennr  Atkinson  of  Newcastle, 
by  whom  he  had  thirteen  children,  tiie 
fourth  of  whom,  and  eldest  son,  William, 
became  judge  of  the  High  Court  of  Ad- 
iniralty,  and  was  created  Lord  Stowell 
in  1821;  and  the  eighth  of  whom,  and 
third  and  youngest  son,  was  John  Scott^ 
the  lord  chancellor. 

John  Scott  was  bom   in  Love  Lane, 
Newcastie,  on  June  4,  1751.    He  was  first 
sent  to  the  Royal  Grammar  School  there, 
where  he  made  great  progress  under  his 
I  excellent  master,  the  Rev.  Hugh  Moises. 
I  The  anecdote  book,  which  he  wrote  late  in 
:  life  for  the  amusement  of  his  grandchildren, 
,  contains  many  of   his   adventures  wUle 
I  there,  and  the  floggings  inflicted  upon  him, 
which  in)  this  delicate  and  effeminate  age 
:  would  be  called  indecent  and  cruel.    In 
i  May  1706,  his  father,  who  had  intended  to 
bring  him  up  to  his  own  business,  was 
i  persuaded  to  send  him  to  Oxford  by  his 
I  eldest  son  William,  who  had  by  this  time 
i  become  fellow  and   tutor   of  Universify 
College.    There  he  was  instructed  under 
the  tuition  of  his  brother,  and  was  elected 
to  a  fellowship  in  1767.    He  took    his 
degree  of  B.A.  in  1770,  and  in  1771,  being 
then  under  twenty,  gained  Lord  Lichfield^ 
prize  for  English  prose,  the  subject  being 
'The  Advantages  and  Disadvantages ^S 
Foreign  TraveU    On  November  19, 1772, 
he  was  ppuilty  of  the  apparent  indiscretion 
of  runnmg  away  with  JSlizabeth,  daughter 
of  Aubone    Surtees,    Esq.,  a  banker    at 
Newcastie;  and  though  tne  couple  were 
auickly  forgiven  by  their  parents,  they  felt 
for  some  years  the  effect  of  their  impru- 
dence.     The   husband   was,    of    course, 
obliged  to  give   up  his  fellowship,  and, 
resigning  his  hope  of  a  provision  in  the 
Church,  to  support  himself  and  his  wife  on 
the  very  small  provision  made  for  them. 

Adopting  the  law  as  his  alternative,  he 
enterea  the  Middle  Temple  on  January  28, 
1773,  and  in  the  following  month  took  his 
degree  of  M. A.    During  nis  three  ^ears  of 

Srobation  he  spent  no  more  time  m  Lon- 
on  than  was  necessary  for  the  keeping  of 
his  terms,  but  was  employed  in  assisting  his 
brother  as  tutor  at  University  College,  and 
in  acting  as  deputy  Vinerian  professor  to  Sir 
Robert  Chambers.  While  so  engaged,  he 
pursued  his  legal  studies  with  so  much 
perseverance  and  energy  that  his  health 
was  seriously  endangered,  rising  every  day 
at j  four  in  the  morning,  and  reading  at 
night  with  a  wet  towel  round  his  head  to 
prevent  him  from  falling  asleep.  At  the 
end  of  1775  he  removed  to  London  with 
his  family,  now  increased  by  an  infant  son, 
and  took  up  his  abode  in  Cursitor  Street. 
He  had  the  advantage  of  spending  the 
interval  before  hb  call  to  the  bar  in  the 

QQ 


594 


SCOTT 


office  of  Mr.  Duane,  where  he  acquired  a  ! 
perfect  knowledge  of  conveyancing.    That 
of  pleading  he  obtained  with    no    other 
instmction  than  naturally  resulted  from 
his  own  industry  in  copying  nreoedents. 
On  February  9,  1776,  he  was  called  to  the 
bar,  and  removed  into  Carey  Street,  and 
in  r^ovember    following  his  father  died. 
Though  by  that  event  his  circumstances 
were  slightly  imj^roved,  his  business  for 
some  time  gave  him  no  addition.    In  the 
first  year  his  whole  receipt  amounted  to 
half  a  guinea,  and  thousrh  he  went  the 
Northern  Circuit,  few  briefs  were  entrusted 
to  him.    But  he  made  Mends  with  the 
leaders,  and  gained  some  experience  by 
observing  how  they  managed  their  causes. 
He  at  first    attended  the    common    law 
courts,  but  soon  fancying  that  Lord  Mans- 
field did  not  encourage  young  lawyers  who 
were  not  educated  at  Westminster  and 
Christ  Church,  he  left  the  King^s  Bench, 
and  joined  the   Chancery  bar,  then  not 
exceeding  twelve  or  fifteen  in  number. 

There  his  progress  was  so  little  encou- 
raging that  he  had  almost  determined  to 
retire  to  his  native  town  as  a  provincial 
counsel,  and  had  even  taken  a  house  there, 
not  without  hope  of  being  elected  recorder 
in  the  event  of  a  vacancy.  His  prospects, 
however,  were  materially  altered  oy  a 
decision  which  Lord  Thurlow  pronounced 
in  the  case  of  Ackroyd  v.  Smithson,  in 
accordance  with  an  argument  which  he 
had  made,  against  not  only  the  opinion  of 
Sir  Thomas  Sewell,  the  master  of  the 
Bolls  (BroxmCs  Chanc.  Cases,  i.  505;  2 
JamuaCs  PoweUj  77  et  seq.),  but  even 
contrary  to  the  expectations  of  his  own 
client.  He  soon  after  had  the  good  fortime, 
by  one  of  those  accidents  which  occasion- 
ally happen,  to  be  very  suddenly  enga^d 
as  leading  counsel  in  tfie  Clitheroe  election 
case,  for  which  he  had  but  four  hours  to 
prepare.  He  exhibited  so  much  ability 
that  Sir  James  Mansfield  and  Mr.  Wilson, 
both  afterwards  judges, strongly  encouraged 
him  to  remain  in  London,  the  latter  offer- 
ing to  insure  him  400/.  the  next  year. 
From  that  time  his  success  was  no  longer 
doubtful  in  Westminster  Hall,  and  his 
practice  on  the  circuit,  which  it  was  then 
the  custom  of  Chancery  men  to  attend, 
was  equally  increased,  aided  by  some  im- 

I»ortant  causes  in  which  he  had  the  good 
uck  to  lead  and  to  be  triumphant.  At 
Carlisle,  however,  he  had  no  business  till, 
by  the  absence  of  another  counsel,  he  was 
engaged  to  defend  an  old  woman  for  an 
assadt.  and  succeeded  by  a  joke  in  getting 
her  off  with  only  nominal  damages.  This 
immediately  procured  him  briefs  to  the 
amount  of  seventy  guineas,  where  he  had 
not  received  one  for  seven  years  before. 
He  had  now  taken  up  his  residence  in 
Powis  Flacei  and  afterwards  remoyed  to 


SCOTT 

No.  42  Grower  Street,  wliere  lie  lived 
about  thirteen  years  before  he  went  to 
Bedford  Square. 

He  was  a  favourite  with  Lord  Tburlow, 
who  proved  his  friendship  hj  purposely 
refusing  him  a  commissionership  of  oank- 
rupts,  and  thus  forcing  him  to  work.  He 
received  a  patent  of  precedence  on  June  4, 
1783^  when  he  was  elected  a  bencher  oif  i 
his  inn.  In  the  same  month  he  wv,  | 
through  Lord  Thurlow's  recommendation,  i 
elected  member  for  Lord  Weymouth^a  jl 
borough  of  Weobly.  In  the  succeeding  j 
session  of  parliament  Mr.  Fox  hrou^t 
forward  his  famous  East  India  Bill,  which 
Mr.  Scott  strenuously  opposed,  and  the 
defeat  of  which  was  the  msmissal  of  the 
Coalition  Ministry.  The  storm  that  followed 
ended  in  a  dissolution.  Mr.  Scott,  in  the 
new  parliament,  again  represented  Weoblj. 
and  soon  acquired  such  an  ascendency  bj 
his  arguments  in  support  of  Mr.  Htt'i 
minist^  as  even  to  compel  Mr.  Fox'^ 
admiration  and  respect. 

In  March  1787  ne  was  appointed  chm- 
ceUor  of  Durham  by  Lord  ThurWs 
brother,  the  bishop ;  and  in  June  of  tke 
next  year  he  was  selected  by  Mr.  Pitt  as 
solicitor-general,  when  he  was  knighted. 
One  of  his  first  duties  on  the  reassemblii^ 
of  parliament  was  to  support  the  measuree 
consequent  on  the  king's  illness,  in  the  per- 
formance of  which  he  so  greatly  signalised 
himself  that  he  received  the  king^s  penonil 
thanks. 

So  high  was  his  reputation  at  this  time, 
and  so  extensive  his  practice,  that  he  ms 
enabled  in  1792  to  invest  22,000/.  in  the 
purchase  of  Eldon,  an  estate  in  the  eouthea 
part  of  the  county  of  Durham,  and  to  devote 
the  whole  of  its  rents  to  its  improyemeot 
From  this  estate  he  afterwards  took  his 
first  title  of  nobility.  Early  in  the  next 
year  (February  13,  1793),  in  the  mid«t  of 
the  anxieties  consequent  upon  the  Freodi 
Revolution,  he  succeeded  to  the  office  of 
attorney-general,  and  upon  him  devolved 
the  difficmt  duty  of  concerting  and  canr- 
ing  into  effect  the  measures  neceasaxy  to 
counteract  the  seditious  principles  that  were 
then  too^  prevalent  in  this  country.  Revo- 
lutionary agitators  formed  themselves  into 
associations,  which,  under  the  pretence  of 
seeking  a  reform  in  parliament,  had  m<Hv 
serious  objects  in  contemplation,  tending  to 
the  deposition  of  the  ^ing-  To  repreM 
these  was  the  great  object  of  the  minifitf?; 
and  to  this  ena  it  was  determined  to  pro- 
secute the  leading  insti^tors.  The  subse- 
quent trials  of  Hardy,  Home  Tooke,  and 
Thelwall,  who,  by  the  eloquence  of  Eiskine 
and  the  learning  of  Gibbs,  narrowly  escaped 
conviction  for  nigh  treason,  succeeded  in 
satisfying  the  public  of  the  danger  of  the^ 
societies,  and  eventuaU^  in  putting  a  stop 
to  tiie  seditious  agitation;  and  Sir  John 


SCOTT 

Scotty  thoogh  much  abused  by  one  party 
for  hifl  attempt  to  establisb  what  they 
termed  '  constractiye  treason,'  was  as  much 
applauded  by  the  other  for  the  energy  and 
learning,  humanity  and  courage,  with  which 
lie  conducted  the  several  prosecutions. 
Before,  however,  the  agitation  had  subsided, 
it  became  necessary  to  introduce  bills  for 
fiirtfaer  security  in  this  and  the  succeeding 
parliament  of  1706,  to  which  he  was  re- 
tumedforBoroughbridge  instead  of  Weobly. 
The  preparation  and  support  of  these 
jseasures  devolved  principally  on  the  at- 
tozney-general,  as  well  as  several  prose- 
cutions for  seditious  writings  and  other 
political  offences. 

In  July  1799  his  official  labours  termi- 
nated by  the  death  of  Sir  James  Eyre,  chief 
justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  to  which 
office  he  churned  the  right  of  succession. 
It  was  accorded  to  him  on  two  conditions — 
one,  by  Mr.  Pitt,  that  he  should  accept  a 
peerage,  so  that  his  services  in  parliament 
might  not  be  lost ;  and  the  other  bv  the 
JdnKy  that  he  should  not  refuse  the  Great 
Seta  when  he  should  be  called  upon  to 
accept  it.     He  was  sworn  of  the  privy 
comustl    on    July   17;    on    the  18tn  he 
zeceived  his  patent  as  Baron  Eldon;  and 
en  the  19th  ne  was    appointed  lord  chief 
justice  of  the  Common  Pleas.    Though  he 
A^d   that  office  less  than  two  years,  he 
mote  than  fulfilled  the  expectations  of  those 
irho  could  appreciate  his  powers.    In  the 
exercise  of  nis  judicial  functions  he  ex- 
hibited none  of  the  doubt  and  hesitation 
which  were  ascribed  to  him  in  his  subse- 
tfoent  career ;  but  both  before  and  after  the 
math  of  his  colleague,  Mr.  Justice  Buller, 
he  sustained  the  high  character  of  his  court 
liy  his  excellent  decisions. 

When  Mr.  Pitt  resigned,  on  the  subject 

of  the  Catholic  4|uestion,  Lord  Eldon,  in 

fsiformance  of  his  jpromise  to  the  king, 

aeoepted  the  Great  Seal  on  April  14,  1801, 

Ini^  owing  to  the  temporary  illness  of  his 

muesty,  did  not  resi^  the  chief  justiceship 

'till  Blay  21,  dischar^g  the  duties  of  both 

4)fioes  during  the  mterval.      Before    the 

4km  of  the  year  he  was  appointed  high 

^•waid   of  the  university  of  Oxford,   of 

■•iiich  his  brother,  Sir  William  Scott,  was 

•t  that  time  the  representative  in  par- 

^*nient    During  the  ministry  of  Mr.  Ad- 

™irton  and  hb  successor,  the  chancellor 

*•■  treated  with  the  utmost  confidence  by 

"*"•  Hng,  whose  occasional  attacks  of  illness 

JJ^great  embarrassment  to  the  government, 

***^  were  not  diminished  by  the  differ- 

S?^  which  existed  between  tne  Prince  of 

/^**ea  and  his  father.    On  Mr.  Pitt's  re- 

JJ^Ption  of  power  in  1804  Lord  Eldon 

^?*  ^ntinued  in  his  office,  and  retained  it 

j^^  ***e  death  of  that  great  minister,  on 

l]JJ2^  23,   1806,  which  made  way  for 

"^^^  (JranvUle's  and  Mr.  Fox's  ministry, 


S(X)TT 


595 


called '  All  ^the  Talents.'  He  then,  on  Fe- 
bruary 7,  resigned  the  Great  Seal  into  the 
hands  of  Lord  firskine. 

Ere  fourteen  months  were  expired  that 
administration  was  dismissed  on  the  Catho- 
lic question,  and  Lord'  Eldon  resumed  his 
seat  as  lord  chancellor  on  April  1,  1807. 
He  held  it  undisturbed  for  the  next  twenty 
years  under  the  premierships  of  the  Duke 
of  Portland,  Mjr.  Perceval,  and  Lord 
Liverpool — a  period  pregnant  with  the 
most  important  events  in  the  political  and 
domestic  history  of  the  country.  The 
malicious  attack  upon  the  Duke  of  York ; 
the  duel  between  Lord  Castlereagh  and 
Canning,  causing  the  break-up  of  the  Duke 
of  Portland's  ministry;  the  negotiations 
following,  and  the  pludc  of  Mr.  Perceval 
in  imdertakimr  the  premiership,  all  occurred 


during  the  first  three  years,  and  naturally 
occasioned  him  much  anxiety,  which  was 
not  diminished  by  Lord  Granville's  defeat- 
ing him  by  about  a  dozen  votes  in  the  con- 
test for  the  chancellorship  of  Oxford.  But 
he  found  comfort  in  his  disappointment  in 
the  conviction  that  had  the  Duke  of  Beau- 
fort, who  stood  upon  the  same  interest, 
retired  as  at  first  was  intimated,  he  would 
have  had  a  triumphant  majority  over  his 
political  rival. 

In  November  1810  the  parliament  opened 
without  the  usual  commission,  the  king 
being  visited  by  an  attack  which  prevented 
him  from  affixing  the  sign-manual,  and 
which  unfortunately  could  not  be  subdued 
as  the  former  one  had  been,  but  lasted  for 
the  ten  remaining  years  of  his  life.  This 
led  to  a  renewal  of  the  conflicts  of  1788-9, 
relating  to  the  restrictions  to  be  put  upon 
the  regency,  in  the  conduct  of  which  Lord 
Eldon  was  treated  with  the  bitterest  acri- 
mony by  Lord  Grey  and  the  expectant 
ministers.  The  prince  regent  not  only,  to 
the  surprise  of  tne  whigs,  kept  the  tories 
in  office  during  the  year  limited  for  the  re- 
strictions imposed  upon  him,  but,  to  their 
infinite  disgust  and  disappointment,  still 
continued  to  repose  his  confidence  in  the 
old  ministers  when  that  year  had  expired. 
Lord  Eldon  was  thus  confirmed  in  his 
position,  but  had  to  submit  to  the  attacks 
m  the  House  of  Commons  of  Michael 
Angelo  Taylor  on  the  alleged  delays  in  the 
Court  of  Chancerv,  and  in  the  appeals  in 
the  House  of  Lords.  A  more  serious  visi- 
tation soon  followed  in  the  assassination  of 
Mr.  Perceval,  the  prime  minister,  by  Bel- 
lingham,  on  May  11,  1812.  This  had 
nearl]^  broken  up  the  ministry;  but  the 
negotiations  with  the  whig  party  failing, 
the  prince  regent  was  compelled,  not  un- 
willingly, to  go  on  with  them;  and  the 
glorious  successes  of  the  British  arms  under 
the  Duke  of  Wellington,  which  led  to  the 
restoration  of  the  Bourbon  kin^  to  Ftinn^^ 
established  them  ^raoii^  m  Ai)[w^  ^orck^i^TtK^ 


596 


SCOTT 


of  the  country.  In  the  corn-law  riots  of 
1816  the  moh  hroke  into  Lord  Eldon's 
house  in  Bedford  Square,  and  he  himself 
narrowly  escaped  by  retiring  into  the  gar- 
den of  the  British  Museum.  Returning 
thence,  not  with  'a  band  of  fifty  chosen 
men/  but  with  a  corporate  guard  of  four, 
he  drove  back  the  mob,  showing  the  greatest 
bravery  and  presence  of  mind,  and  capturing 
two  of  them  with  his  own  hands.  In  the 
same  year  Bonaparte's  escape  from  Elba 
obligea  the  government  to  make  extra- 
ordinary efforts,  leading  to  the  crowning 
victory  of  Waterloo,  and  resulting  in  Bona- 
parte's delivering  himself  up  to  England, 
and  his  final  detention  in  the  island  of  St. 
Helena. 

On  the  death  of  George  III.,  on  January 
29. 1820,  the  prince  regent  as  kin?  for  the 
third  time  placed  the  Oreat  Seal  in  the 
hands  of  Lord  Eldon.  In  the  following 
month  he  escaped  assassination  by  the 
timely  discovery  of  the  Cato  Street  con- 
sjMracy  to  murder  all  the  ministers  at  a 
cabinet  dinner  given  by  Lord  Harrowb^. 
Soon  after  fpllowed  the  queen's  trial,  m 
which  his  conduct  as  speaker  of  the  House 
of  Lords  was  the  subject  of  unmixed  praise ; 
and  he  was  so  fully  convinced,  from  the 
evidence  produced,  that  she  was  guilty  of 
the  crime  charged  in  the  preamble  to  the 
bill,  that  he  moved  the  second  reading  in  a 
powerful  speech.  Though  the  bill  was 
prudently  withdrawn,  the  queen's  tempo- 
rary popularity  soon  subsided,  and  was  not 
restored  by  her  imad vised  and  unsuccessful 
attempt  to  take  part  in  the  king's  corona- 
tion. Previous  to  that  solemnity  the  king 
insisted,  much  against  Lord  Eldon's  inclina- 
tion, on  promoting  him  to  a  higher  rank  in 
the  peerage ;  and  he  was  accordingly  created 
Viscount  Eucombe  and  Earl  of  Eldon  on 
July  7,  1821,  the  viscounty  being  named 
from  his  estate  in  the  Isle  of  Purbeck  in 
Dorsetshire,  purchased  by  him  in  the  year 
1807,  where  he  spent  all  his  vacations. 

For  the  first  seven  years  of  the  new  reign 
Lord  Eldon  retained  his  place  under  the 
same  prime  minister.  Lord  Liverpool,  no 
otherwise  disturbed  in  his  political  feelings 
than  by  the  pressure  of  the  Catholic  claims, 
and  the  gradual  advance  of  radical  opinions. 
He  was,  however,  personally  annoyed  by 
the  captious  attacks  that  were  annually 
made  upon  him  and  his  court  in  the  House 
of  Commons,  by  those  who,  seeing  the 
powerful  influence  he  exercised  in  the  state, 
were  desirous  of  forcing  him  to  resign.  But 
these  attacks  produced  the  contrary  effect, 
and  prompted  nim  boldly  to  repel  them,  and 
to  refrain  from  insisting  on  a  retirement 
which  for  several  years  he  had  repeatedly 
pressed  upon  the  ffovemment,  but  which,  at 
one  time  from  we  representations  of  his 
ooUeagaes  that  b\&  BeceBasm  ivoxiid  bxeak 
op  the  ndiUBtry,  and  tjt  ttuc^ot  tcom  \2ki^ 


SCOTT 

personal  solicitation  of  the  Idngi  he  had  been 
mduced  to  withdraw.  When,  however, 
Lord  Liverpool  was  seized  with  an  afflictioo 
which  terminated  his  poUticid  existence, 
and  the  government  was  re-organiaed  under 
Mr.  Canning,  Lord  Eldon  felt  that  he  could 
no  longer  continue  as  the  coUeaffue  of  a 
minister  who  adopted  opinions  wiu  reepeet 
to  the  Catholic  Question  in  direct  oppoertioB 
to  those  he  had  nimself  all  along  aayoeated. 
He  therefore,  on  April  SO,  1827,  reagned 
the  Seal,  which  he  had  holden  for  the 
space  of  a  quarter  of  a  century,  minus  httfe 
more  than  a  month.  His  successor  was  Lord 
Lyndhurst 

At  the  time  of  his  retirement  he  wm  ii 
the  seventy-sixth  year  of  hia  age,  but  be 
did  not  then  whollj  withdraw  frmn  the 
political  world.  Dunng  many  of  the  eleven 
years  that  he  survived  he  took  an  actiTe 
but  ineffectual  part  in  opposing  the  name- 
rous  innovations  that  were*  inteoduced  into 
the  lepslature.    To  hia  strictly  conedeo- 
tious,  if  mistaken,  feelings,  the  repeal  of  the 
Test  and  Corporation  Acta,  the  EmaDape- 
tion  of  the  Catholics,  and  the  Reform  BSD 
were  peculiarly  distressing.  Hesawnothiiv 
that  would  result  from  tne  two  latter  hit 
the  most  calamitous  effects  upon  the  ook 
stitution,  and  during  the  time  ne  lived  aftff 
them  he  had  not  much  reason  to  alter  his 
opinion.    The  former  of  them  only  led  to 
new  demands  from  the  Catholic  agitabn^ 
and  amidst  the  various  mischiefs  uA  pff* 
tialities  of  the  latter  of  them,  the  solitny 
benefit  it  conferred  was  the  shortening  tk 
period  of  elections.  He  looked  with  scaw 
less  disgust  at  the  various  speculative  v 
terations  in  the  law  that  were  from  time  to 
time  propounded.    He  had  removed  fimi 
Bedford  Square  to  Hamilton  Place,  vi 
there  and  at  his  mansion  at  Encombe  he 
continually  resided,  with  occasional  jomney* 
to  his  property  in  Durham.    His  life  teh 
mlnated  on  Januair  13, 1838,  in  Hamiltai 
Place,  by  a  gradual  aecay  of  bod^y  sticngA. 
but  in  the  preservation  of  his  intellect  ol 
spirits  to  the  last    His  remains  were  le- 
moved  to  Encombe  for  interment  in^ 
family  vault  which  he  had  built  at  Kjngstoi 
for  the  reception  of  Lady  Eldon,  vHiom  he 
lost  in  1831,  after  a  imion  of  fiftj-niw 
years. 

Living  in  the  reigns  of  fiye  succewre 
sovereigns,  one  the  longest  in  the  annsb  of 
England,  enjoying  high  office  in  the  atite 
for  the  long  period  of  fifty  years,  it  mnU 
have  been  a  miracle  iC  whatever  were  hii 
deserts,  he  should  wholly  have  eeeifid 
censure.  But  eyen  the  small  partf  trklh 
delighted  to  attack  him  were  obugsd  fe 
acknowledge  his  superior  merits, 
mitted  his  eminent  talents^  hia  a 
learning,  the  wondered  nt»if 
anplicatioiL  and  tiie  jnsties  ^ 
\^yiss^  ^KSQ^'QsAteiy  his  jm 


SCOTT 

ing  to  the  arguments  of  counsely  liis  cour- 
teousness  to  the  bar,  and  his  conciliatory 
demeanour  to  all ;  but  they  charged  him 
with  a  habit  of  doubting  everything,  and 
attributed  to  it  all  the  delays  of  the  Court 
of  Chancery.  This  disposition  to  hesitate 
was  a  judicial  defect  with  which  he  was 
undoubtedly  chargeable ;  but  the  most 
candid  and  best  inlormed  of  his  adversaries 
in  politics  could  not  help  allowing  that  it 
arose  from  an  over-anxiety  to  do  strict  jus- 
tice to  the  litigants.  The  epigrammatic 
turn  of  the  following  lines  shows  how  his 
slowness  was  estimated  in  comparison  with 
the '  quick  injustice '  of  his  vice-chancellory 
Sir  John  Leach ; — 

In  £quity*s  high  court  there  are 

Two  sad  extremes,  'tis  clear  ; 
Excessive  slowness  strikes  us  there, 

Excessive  quickness  here. 

Their  source,  *twixt  good  and  evil,  brings 

A  difficulty  nice ; 
The  first  from  Eldon's  virtue  springs, 

The  latter  from  his  Vice. 

This  habit  of  dubitation  was  grossly  ex- 
aggerated solely  for  party  purposes.  A 
hope  was  entertained  by  his  political  an- 
tagonists that  the  personal  annoyance  he 
>9ulrered  would  induce  his  resignation,  and 
the  consequent  defeat  of  the  ministry  of 
which  he  was  one  of  the  main  supports. 
Few  indeed  were  the  cases  in  which  they 
could  make  their  charge  good ;  and  he  not 
only  justified,  but  continued  the  practice, 
upon  the  principle  that  extreme  care  to  give 
a  right  decision  prevented  not  only  the 
annoyance  and  expense  of  appeal  in  the  case 
before  him,  but  also  future  Litigation  on  the 
Aame  class  of  subjects.  The  consequences 
were  such  as  he  anticipated ;  and  the  judg- 
ments of  Lord  Eldon  are  not  only  treated 
with  the  greatest  respect,  but  regarded  as 
of  the  highest  authority.  There  is  little 
justice  in  attributing  to  him  the  delays  of 
his  court  and  the  increase  of  arrears,  since 
the  complaints  were  mere  repetitions  of  the 
same  outcry  which  had  been  heard  against 
the  Court^of  Chancery  for  hundreds  of  years 
— aggravated  bv  the  mcrease  of  population 
and  the  spread  of  commerce,  both  neces« 
sarily  leading  to  a  multiplication  of  litiga- 
tion to  an  immense  degree.  Even  with  the 
stupendous  exertions  of  Lord  Eldon  (and 
they  exceeded  those  of  any  former  chan- 
cellor) he  could  not  with  the  most  extra- 
ordinary despatch  keep  pace  with  the  per- 
petual advances  made  upon  the  list  of  causes 
set  down  for  his  heanng ;  and  it  was  at 
length  found  necessary  to  spve  him  assis- 
tance in  clearing  off  some  of  the  arrears  by 
appointing  a  vice-chancellor.  To  this  pro- 
posal the  most  violent  opposition  was  raised 
by  the  adverse  party  ^  yet  they  themselves, 
when  they  came  into  power^  added  four 
more  judges  to  the  same  court — ^namely^ 


8CB0GOS 


697 


two  additional  vice-chancellors  and  two  lord 
justices  of  appeal — ^thus  proving  the  injus- 
tice of  their  attack  upon  Lord  Eldon,  and 
acknowledging  that  the  business  of  the  court 
could  not  he  despatched  by  the  efforts  of  a 
single  individual. 

Of  his  profound  knowledge  and  superior 
excellence  as  a  judge  it  is  not  surprising 
that  the  testimoiiy  of  such  men  as  Mr. 
Charles  Butle^  Lord  St  Leonard's^  Lord 
Lyndhurst,  and  a  host  of  others,  should  be 
expressed  in  the  strongest  terms ;  but  that 
hit  nrindpal  opponents.  Lord  Broughun, 
Sir  Samoel  RomiUy,  and  more  of  the  same 
ptftj,  at  the  very  monient  of  their  attack, 
should  speak  of  him  in  the  same  euloffistic 
manner:  proves  the  universal  acknowledg- 
ment of  ms  merits.  Without  being  brilliant 
as  an  orator,  his  speeches  were  hi^v  effec- 
tive firom  his  reasoning  powers ;  and  with- 
out being  remarkable  tor  wit,  he  had  a 
great  deal  of  j[uiet  humour,  and  was 
peculiarly  happy  m  his  retorts  and  repartees. 
By  the  courtesy  of  his  demeanour,  by  the 
solidity  of  his  judgment,  and  by  the 
straightforward  consistency  of  his  conduct 
he  acquired  the  respect  of  the  Peers,  among 
whom,  while  he  presided,  he  gained  the 
utmost  ascendency.  By  the  bar  and  the 
officers  of  his  court  he  was  beloved  beyond 
any  other  head ;  and  in  his  private  life  he 
was  the  kindest  and  most  anuable  of  men. 
None  who  had  the  happiness  of  being  con- 
nected with  him,  or  the  privilege  of  practis- 
ing under  him,  but  must  regard  his  memory 
with  affection  and  veneration ;  and  as  he 
was  to  the  last  hour  of  his  life,  so  he  will 
be  for  the  time  to  come,  recognised  as  the 
unflinching  supporter  of  the  constitution. 

Of  his  six  children  two  daughters  only 
survived  him,  one  of  whom  married 
George  Stanley  Bepton,  Esq.,  and  the 
other  the  Rev.  Edwsrd  Bankes.  His  eldest 
son,  John,  left  a  son.  who  succeeded  his 
grandfather  as  second  earl,  upon  whose 
death  his  son,  also  John,  beoune  the  third 
and  present  earL 

SCOTT,  Thomas.    See  T.  Rotherajc. 

BCliOOOS,  William.  The  last  four  of  the 
I  chief  justices  of  the  King*s  Bench  in  the 
reign  of  Charles  II. — Scroggs,  Pemberton, 
Saunders,  and  Jeffreys — may  be  dted  as  re- 
markable proofjB  of  Uie  general  profligacr^  of 
the  period,  each  having  been  elevated  to 
his  high  position  notwithstanding  the 
notorious  looseness  of  his  early  life.  The 
obloquy  which  is  attached  to  the  name  of 
Scroggs  may  serve  as  a  warning  to  every 
man  to  avoid  obsequiousness  to  those  from 
whom  fiEivour  flows.  An  apostate,  firom 
partjr  spirit,  ambition,  or  personal  interest, 
to  principles  he  had  once  strongly  advocate^ 
will  ever  be  repudiated  by  both  parties  and 
defended  hj  neither.  If  Uiere  are  any  good 
points  in  his  character  they  will  be  miscon- 
strued or  misrepresented ;  and  if  there  ia 


598 


SCROGGS 


the  least  blot  in  his  escatcheon  he  will  be 
sure  to  haye 

all  bis  fiinlta  observed. 

Set  in  a  note-book,  leam'd  and  conned  by  rote, 

To  cart  into  his  teetb. 

Such  was  the  fate  of  Sir  William  Scroggs, 
whose  extravagaot  zeal  for  each  of  the  con- 
tending parties,  as  he  supposed  one  or  the 
other  to  be  in  the  ascendant^  led  to  the 
usual  consequence — his  fall  between  both ; 
his  name  being  blackened  so  universally 
that  scarcely  any  writer  shows  the  slightest 
tenderness  to  his  memory,  except  Anthopy 
Wood  in  his  'Athenes  Oxomenses'  (iv. 
116).  Even  his  lineage  does  not  escape 
calumny,  and  his  reputed  low  birth,  which 
in  the  neight  of  his  popularity  would  be 
mentioned  to  his  credit,  is  blazoned  as  an 
addition  to  his  disgrace  when  the  tables 
are  turned. 

How  true  Sir  William  Dugdale's  asser- 
tion that  his  father  was  'a  one-eyed 
butcher  near  Smithfield  Bars,  and  his 
mother  a  big  fat  woman  with  a  red  face 
like  an  ale-wife,'  may  be,  can  only  be 
collected  from  the  fact  that  the  squibs 
written  against  the  chief  justice  made  per- 
petual allusion  to  his  father^s  business,  and 
nom  the  failure  of  any  account  of  his 
ancestoN  or  family.  A.  Wood  says  that 
his  father  was  of  the  same  name,  and  that 
he  was  bom  at  Deddington  in  Oxfordshire. 
But  in  whatever  business  his  father  had 
been  engaged,  it  is  clear  that  he  was  a  man 
of  some  intelligence,  and  must  have  ac- 
quired a  comfortable  fortune,  inasmuch  as  xv.«^  ^^^^^  j»»«.wv  ^..  *,^^  ^«uk  »  .e^«.v«.^ 
he  showed  his  desire  and  nis  power  to  which  he  was  appointed  on  May  31,  \^^ 
give  his  son  a  good  education  by  sending    The  Reports  are  so  silent  as  to  ms  prenow 


SCBOQGS 

together  with  his  interest  at  court,  he 
obtained  the  honour  of  knighthood.  He  » 
dengnated  hj  his  title  in  a  petitioii  i^di 
he  preferred  m  April  1066,  allegiDg  that,  it 
being  his  duty  to  walk  befoie  tiie  Ind 
mayor  on  certain  days  of  sokauotv,  but 
being  imable  to  do  so  from  woonas  sas- 
tained  in  the  cause  of  the  late  king,  he  had 
been  therefore  suspended  from  his  jplaee, 
and  praying  redress.  (CaL  BUde  Famn 
[1064-6],  310.)  In  April  1668  he  wis 
assigned  as  counsel  for  Sir  William  Peno, 
and  in  June  1660  was  summoned  to  tik» 
the  degree  of  the  coif,  and  in  the  vor 
next  term  promoted  to  be  king's  Serjeant 
(North's  Lives,  161 ;  StaU  TrtaU,  tL  876; 
1  Siderfin,  436.)  Roger  North  peihsp» 
speaks  too  strongly  when  he  avys  tut 
Chief  Justice  Ilale  detested  bim ;  but  thtt 
estimable  judge  could  have  little  regard  for 
a  man  of  Scroggs  8  character.  Being  arrested 
on  a  King*s  Bench  warrant  for  assault  ud 
battery,  the  chief  justice  and  the  irliole 
court  refused  him  the  privilege  of  a  serjetnt, 
on  the  ground  that  the  proceeding  was  not 
against  him  only,  but  against  him  nd 
another.     (2  Levinz,  129 ;  3  KMe,  4!iL) 

Lord  Danby  was  his  principal  patni, 
and  to  his  influence  Scrogga  entirely  awi 
his  next  advances,  as  he  h^  no  repntstifli 
in  his  profession.  On  October  28,  1676^ 
a  seat  on  the  bench  of  the  OomiiMs 
Pleas  was  given  to  him,  and  ninetm 
months  afterwards  Sir  Richard  Rsiiufod 
was  discharged  to  make  way  for  him  » 
lord  chief  justice  of  the  King's  Beiidi.t(^ 


him  to  the  university  of  Oxford.  Entered 
at  first  at  Oriel  College  in  1639,  when  at 
the  age  of  16,  he  soon  after  removed  to 


Srofessional  career  that   the  three  tbir 
uring  which  he  presided  in  this  conrsmiT 
be  almost  said  to  contain  the  whole  hii- 


Pembroke  Colle^,  where    he    took    the  •  tory  of  his  legal  life.    It  presents  such  • 


combination  of  ignorance,  arrogance,  nd 
brutality  as  fuUv  to  justify  the  ceoaoie 
almost  universally  pronounced  upon  the 
judicial  appointments  of  the  latter  part  of 
this  reiffn. 
The  Popish  Plot  was  first  started  sooo 


degree  of  B.A.  m  1640,  and  of  M.A.  in 
1643.  He  entered  Gray's  Inn  in  February 
1640,  but  was  not  called  to  the  bar  till 
June  1653,  the  delay  perhaps  arising 
from  the  disturbed  state  of  the  country. 
He  was  enabled  about  1662,  either  by  his 

practice  or  his  patrimonv,  to  purchase  the  '  after  his  advancement,  and,  from  a  mu- 

estate  of  Southweald  in  Essex,  which  had    taken  idea  of  the  inclinations  of  the  covt, 

formerly  had  Lord  Chancellor  Rich  and    he  thought  he  should  be  doing  an  aocept- 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Anthony  Browne  for  I  able  service  to  the  king  by  taking  a  stroo^ 

its  owners.     {Movant,  i.  111.)  part  against  the  supposed  participaton  in 

A  bold  front,  a  handsome  person,  an  I  it,  at  tne  same  time  that  he  was  insunnf 

easy  elocution,  and  a  ready  wit  are  strong  |  for  himself  an  immense  popularity  amongst 

recommendations    for  a  young    barrister.  |  its  deluded  believers.     When  the  infamous 

The  possession  of  these  introduced  Scroggs  i  promoters  were  detailing  their  muntire 

to  some  connections  at  court,  who  would  |  before  the  Commons  he  was  sent  for,  aad. 

not  be  scandalised  by  the  irregularity  of  his  i  in  reply  to  the  speaker,  declared  he  would 

life.    He  is  described  as  a  great  voluptuaiy    use    nis  best   endeavours,  for   he  htutk 

and  debauchee,  and  so  noted  for  the  coarse-  '  the  face  of  no  man  where  the  long  ai 

nees  of  his  language  and  the  looseness  of   country  were  concerned.  {Brumdmi$Mi^ 

his  habits  as  to  be  despised  by  all  good    hiog,\79.)    Withdrawing  into  the ^r*"'*' 

and  respectable  men.    About  this  time  he   chiunber,  he  took  the  liifniinaliMa  I 

became  counael  for  ^<d  d\;^  ^  \jcnAoTi*AVA&  ■^ronante,  and  throw  hinv'^^ 

and  by  the^  pxofeKioii  ot  ofiMn^  \o^V!  ^  *^^  ^^T«3£A^>6ik^gBMA  wtikm^ 


I 


SCROGGS 

On  the  trials  he  gave  public  credit  to  the 
testimony  of  the  witneases,  e:q[>lained  away 
their  palpable  contradictiona,  browbeat  and 
threatened  those  who  came  forward  with 
opposing  evidence^  inflamed  the  jurieSy.who 
were  too  ready  to  act  on  his  suggestions, 
and  barbarously  insulted  the  unfortunate 
victims.  Even  in  the  first  state  trial  before 
him,  that  of  Stayley,  he  had  the  inhu- 
manity to  call  out  to  the  prisoner  on  the 
verdict  of  guilty  being  pronounced,  '  Now 
you  may  die  a  Roman  Catholic,  and  when 
you  come  to  die  I  doubt  you  will  be  proved 
a  priest  too.'  On  another  occasion  he  ex- 
claimed to  three  convicted  prisoners,  '  And 
now  much  ffood  may  their  thirty  thousand 
masses  do  uiem.'  The  seventh  volume  of 
the  *  State  Trials '  is  almost  wholly  occu- 
pied with  those  arising  out  of  the  Popish 
tlot,  in  which  Titus  Oates,  William  Bed- 
low^  and  the  chief  iustice  so  infamously 
di&tmguished  themselves. 

In  the  trials  of  Coleman,  of  Ireland  and 
two  others,  of  Heading,  of  Whitehead  and 
four  others,  and  of  Langhom  (^whom  he 
afterwards  acknowledged  to  be  mnocent), 
be  pursued  the  same  course ;  but  in  the 
next,  that  of  Sir  George  Wakeman  and 
three  others,  there  was  a  sudden  alteration. 
lie  there  threw  discredit  on  the  witnesses 
he  had  before  encouraged,  pointing  out 
their  several  contradictions,  and,  though 
the  evidence  was  much  the  same  as  that 
by  which  the  others  had  suffered,  summed 
up  in  such  a  manner  as  to  obtain  an  ac- 
quittal. The  former  trials  had  extended 
from  November  20, 1678,  to  June  14, 1079 ; 
that  of  Wakeman  occurred  on  July  18  fol- 
lowing, and 'the  occasion  of  the  judge*s 
conversion,'  Roger  North  (Examen^  668) 
says,  *  was  this.  The  lord  chief  justice 
came  once  from  Windsor  with  a  lord  of  the 
council  (Chief  Justice  North)  in  his  coach, 
and,  amonf^  other  discourse,  Scroggs  asked 
that  lord  if  the  Lord  Shaftesbury  (who 
was  then  lord  president  of  the  council)  had 
really  that  interest  with  the  king  as  he 
seemed  to  have  ?  No,  replied  that  lord, 
no  more  than  your  footman  hath  with  you. 
This  sank  into  the  man,  and  quite  altered 
the  ferment,  so  as  that  from  tnat  time  he 
was  a  new  man.'  Luttrell  (i.  17, 10,  74)  tells 
us  that  gross  bribery  with  Portugal  gold 
was  said  to  have  inliuenced  him  on  this 
trial,  but  the  result  was  that  he  at  once 
lost  the  popularity  which  he  so  eagerly 
fk)ught,  and,  instead  of  the  applause  he  had 
been  accustomed  to  receive,  he  was  on  one 
side  daily  assailed  with  abuse  and  lam- 
poons, in  which  he  was  commonly  desig- 
nated by  the  nickname  of  *  Mouth,' — 

*  their  work  is  done, 
Down  must  the  patriots  go,  and  Mouth  must 
run,' — 

while  his  gross  partiality  and  brutal  con- 
duct in  the  former  trials  were  exposed  on 


SCROGGS 


599 


the  other.  In  addition,  he  had  raised  two 
inveterate  enemies,  the  witnesses  Oates  and 
Bedlow,  who,  not  having  yet  lost  their 
power  and  being  still  believeid  by  the  mul- 
titude, were  not  so  easily  cowed.  As  the 
parliament  which  had  supported  all  their 
mventions  had  been  dissolved,  they  exhi- 
bited before  the  king  and  council '  articles 
of  high  misdemeanours'  against  the  chief 
justice,  char^g  him  with  browbeating 
them,  depreciating  their  evidence,  and  mis- 
leading the  jury ;  also  with  setting  at  liberty 
seyeral  persons  charged  with  high  treasoui 
with  imprisoning  loyal  subjects  for  print- 
ing books  exposing  the  errors  of  Popery, 
and  refusing  to  take  bail,  and  with  various 
other  things  tending  to  the  disparagement 
of  the  witnesses,  and  the  encouragement  of 
Roman  Catholics;  to  which  they  added 
charges  against  the  chief  justice  ot  cursing 
and  swearing,  drunkenness,  and  corruption 
in  the  sale  of  licences  to  print  the  di£ferent 
trials.  To  all  these  charges  Scroggs^  not 
having  the  fear  of  parliament  before  him, 
answered  with  contemptuous  impudence, 
and  on  the  hearing  betbre  the  kmg  ana 
council  on  January  1680  ran  down  his 
accusers  with  such  severity  and  wit  that  the 
complaint  was  dismissed. 

The  chief  justice's  triumph  was  not  of 
long  duration.  A  new  parliament  met 
towards  the  end  of  the  year,  and  the  attack 
against  him  was  renewed  before  a  more 
willing  audience.  He  and  the  other  judges 
of  the  King's  Bench  had  in  the  previous 
Trinity  Term  defeated  an  intended  pre- 
sentment against  the  Duke  of  York  for  not 
going  to  church,  by  suddenly  discharging 
the  grand  jury.  Thx%  the  Commons  made 
the  principal  ground  of  impeachment,  add- 
ing similar  charges  to  those  before  made, 
and  another  for  issuing  illegal  warrants  to 
a  messenger  of  the  press.  On  carrying  the 
impeachment  to  the  upper  house  in  Ja- 
nuary 1681,  the  peers  refused  to  commit 
the  chief  iustice,  or  to  address  the  king  to 
suspend  him  from  the  execution  of  his 
office.  This  parliament  being  dissolved  a 
few  days  after,  on  the  meeting  of  the 
new  parliament  at  Oxford  in  the  following 
Marcn  Scroggs  put  in  his  answer,  which 
was  merely  a  plea  of  not  guilty ;  but  a  dis- 
solution also  of  this  parliament,  the  last  in 
Charles's  reign,  before  the  end  of  the  month, 

Eut  a  stop  to  the  proceedings.  The  king 
owever  felt  that  prudence  required  the 
removal  of  a  judge  so  universally  obnoxious, 
and  accordingly  Sir  Francis  Pemberton  was 
appointed  on  April  11  to  fill  his  place.  His, 
dismissal  was  made  as  easy  to  him  as  pos- 
sible, beinff  accompanied  with  a  pension  of 
1500/.  to  himself,  and  a  patent  of  king  s 
counsel  to  his  son,  also  Sir  William. 

After  a  retirement  of  two  years  and  a  half, 
he  died  on  October  25, 1683,  of  a  polypus 
in  his  heart,  and  was  buried  in  Southweahl 


600 


SCROFE 


Church.  By  hiB  wife,  a  daughter  of  Mat- 
thew Black,  Esq.,  he  left  a  son,  the  above 
Sir  William,  and  two  daughters,  one  of 
tdiom  was  married  to  Sir  Robert  Wright, 
the  notorious  chief  justice  in  the  next  reign, 
and  the  other  to  a  son  of  Lord  Hatton. 

i  State  TriaU,  vi.  vii.  viii. ;  Pari  Hid,  iv. 
224,  1261, 1274;  NorOCaExamm^^y  206, 
667 ;  Burnet,  448,  466.) 

8CE0PE,  Gboffret  le,  descended  from 
a  Norman  family  which  in  the  reign  of 
Henry  II.  had  baronial  possessions  in  Glou- 
cestershire, and  in  that  of  Edward  I.  laxge 
estates  in  Yorkshire  also,  was  the  son  of 
Sir  William  le  Scrope,  a  knight  distin- 
guished both  in  tournaments  and  the  field, 
by  his  wife  Constance,  daughter  and  heiress 
of  Thomas,  the  son  of  Giuo  de  Newsom 
upon  Tyne. 

In  the  parliament  held  in  Januaiy  1316, 
0  Edward  II.,  he  is  mentioned  as  suing  for 
the  king ;  and  a  grant  was  made  to  him  of 
20/.  for  his  expenses,  in  the  liberate  of 
which,  according  to  Dugdale,  he  is  called 
Serjeant.  In  that  character  he  was  evi- 
dently summoned  to  the  councils  and  par- 
liaments of  the  seven  subsequent  years, 
and  was  also  occasionally  added  to  some 
judicial  commissions  for  the  trial  of  offen- 
ders. Dugdale  has  inadvertently  inserted 
his  name  in  the  list  of  judges  of  the  King*s 
Bench  in  0  Edward  IL,  though  he  has 
taken  no  notice  of  such  a  fact  in  his  sketch 
of  him  in  the  'Baronage.'  There  is  no 
doubt,  however,  that  this  is  an  eiror,  as  he 
is  described  as  one  of  the  king's  seijeants  in 
14  and  16  Edward  U.,  and  as  attomatus 
regis  in  the  former  year  {Ahh,  Placit, 
361),  in  the  wardrobe  account  of  which, 
also,  there  is  an  entry  of  the  payment  of 
18/.  Qs.  Sd  'To, Geofiry  le  Scrop,  king's 
seijeant,  staying  near  the  person  of  the  king 
by  his  order,  when  journeying  through 
divers  parts  of  England  in  the  months  of 
April,  May,  and  June,  in  the  present  four- 
teenth year,  of  the  king's  gift,  for  his  ex- 
penses in  so  staying.'  {Archteolopia,  xxvi. 
346.^  In  14  and  10  Edward  II.  he  was 
emploved  in  negotiating  with  the  Scots. 
(-iV.  JE^csdera,  ii.  434--624.) 

It  was  not  till  September  27,  1323,  17 
Edward  II.,  that  he  was  raised  to  the  bench, 
when  he  was  constituted  a  judge  of  the 
Conmion  Pleas,  and  Hnes  were  levied  be- 
fore him  till  the  following  Hilary  Term. 
(Dtiffdale's  Orig.  46.)  On  March  21,  1324, 
he  was  promoted  to  the  chief  justiceship  of 
the  King's  Bench ;  and  he  presided  in  tnat 
court  till  the  end  of  the  reign. 

He  was  certainly  removed  from  the  office 
on  the  accession  of  Edward  HI.,  which  not 
improbably  arose  from  a  suspicion  of  his 
bemg  a  partisan  of  the  Despencers  and  Bal- 
dock  the  chancelioT.  Whatever  was  ^e 
iVMon  of  bis  non-«i'o^\iitixi«ii\.,  Yi^  «^Ti 
tfuoceeded  in  clearing  mm^VL  'b^  VYi^  ^^ft^i- 


SCROPE 

mony  of  the  peers,  and  was  reinstated  (»t 
February  28,  1828,  2  Edward  IIL  Hii 
services  were  so  highly  appredated  hf  hia 
soverei^  that  they  were  fbequently  em- 
ployed in  diplomatic  engagements,  whidi 
obbged  him  for  a  time  to  recdgn  his  plioe 
in  the  court  Thus,  when  Edimd  went  to 
France  in  May  1320,  3  Edward  HI.,  Robert 
de  Malberthorpe  and  his  brother,  Hemy 
le  Scrope,  were  succesmvely  substitated  fiir 
him  till  December  10, 13310,  when  he  wk 
re-appointed.  Again,  Richard  de  Wilogih 
by  held  his  place  from  March  28  till  Sq^ 
tember  20, 1332,  6  Edward  III. ;  and,  oo  a 
third  occasion,  Richard  de  Wiliu^hl^  todc 
his  seat  on  September  10, 1333,  u  coom- 
quence  of  Geoffrey  le  Scrope  being  about 
to  go  on  a  foreign  embassy.  But  in  Fe- 
bruary 1334  the  King's  Bench  was  oidered 
by  the  ][>arliament  at  York  to  stay  in  Wa^ 
wickshire  after  Easter  next,  *  for  that  Sir 
Geoffrey  le  Scroop,  chief  justice,  is  boaieia 
the  king's  weigh^  affairs,  whose  plaes  to 
supply  Sir  Richaid  Wilughby  is  appointei' 
{Rot  Pari  ii  377.) 

^Dugdale  quotes  a  patent  of  July  16, 1334^ 
8'^Edward  ItL,  by  which  Scrope  was  eoo- 
stituted  second  justice  of  the  ComnMa 
Pleas,  in  the  place  of  John  de  Stonore,widi 
an  exemption  annexed  from  being  ctUed 
upon  to  go  out  of  the  kingdom  against  ^ 
king's  enemies  against  his  wilL  (jCaL  Bd. 
Pat.  118.)  As  no  fines  appear  to  have  beeo 
levied  before  him,  he  prooably  did  not  kiog 
remain  in  that  court,  and  certainly  was  not 
one  of  its  eight  judges  enumerated  by  Dn^ 
dale  {Orig.  30)  m  11  Edward  DX  Itww 
perhaps  about  this  time  that  he  resonud 
his  place  as  chief  justice  of  the  Kings 
Bench,  which  he  certainly  held  on  April  4, 
1338,  when  the  nomination  of  two  new 
judges  was  directed  to  him  in  that  chan^ 
ter.  He  is  mentioned  in  the  Book  of 
Assizes  in  the  same  year,  and  ultimatelj 
resigned  his  office  before  the  following  Oc- 
tober, a  pajment  being  then  made  to  hifli 
as  'nuper  capitalis  justiciarus.' 

He  was  employed  by  both  his  sovereigns 
to  treat  with  the  Scots,  and  by  Edwazd 
lU.  to  assist  in  the  negotiations  relative  to 
the  marriages  between  his  sister  Eleanor 
and  the  French  king*s  eldest  son,  and  be- 
tween John,  the  son  of  the  Earl  of  Kent, 
and  a  daughter  of  one  of  the  French  nobles. 
After  his  retirement  from  the  l^ng*s  Bench 
he  was  engaged  in  many  other  diplomatic 
missions  on  behalf  of  the  Idng,  in  one  d 
which  he  is  styled  '  secretarius  noster.' ; 

But  it  was  not  only  as  a  lawyer  and 
negotiator  that  he  was  distinguished ;  Is 
made  himself  equally  prominent  as  a  kncK 
and  a  soldier.  At  the  toomamenta  Ma  ft 
Northampton,  Guildfoidy  and  NeM^ 
at  the  first  of  which  he  was  ~ 
^S»^^^ReatdistinctioiL    Or 


SCBOPE 

di8][>layed  his  banner  and  pennon  at  the 
affair  of  Stannow  Park.  He  was  one  of 
the  royal  retinue  several  times  in  Flanders 
and  ^^hmce,  with  a  train  of  two  kniffhts 
and  forty  men-at-arms ;  and  he  servea  at 
the  siege  of  Toumay  in  July  1340,  14 
Edward  HI. 

An  anecdote  is  related  of  a  character- 
istic revenge  which  he  took  of  Cardinal 
Bernard  de  Monte  Faventio,  during  those 
wars,  for  some  insulting  remarks  he  had 
made  to  the  king  in  reference  to  the 
stren^h  of  the  French.  He  brought  him 
one  mght  into  a  high  tower,  and  pointing 
to  the  frontiers  of  France,  in  flames  for 
several  leagues,  he  said,  'My  lord,  what 
thinketh  your  eminence  nowP  Doth  not 
this  silken  line  wherewith  you  say  France 
is  encompassed  seem  in  great  danger  of 
being  cracked,  if  not  broken  P '  The  car- 
dinal was  struck  speechless,  and  dropped 
down  apparently  lifeless  with  fear  and 
Borrow. 

Besides  many  valuable  grants  from  both 
Edward  IL  and  Edward  III.  in  reward  for 
his  services,  he  was  in  14  Edward  III. 
created  a  banneret,  and  had  a  grant  of  200 
marks  per  annum  for  the  support  of  that 
dignity.     (Report  on  Pterage^  i.  354.) 

He  did  not  long  survive  this  last  honour, 
but  died  in  the  same  year  at  Ohent  in 
Flanders.  His  body  was  removed  to 
Coversham,  where  it  was  buried  in  the 
church  of  the  abbey,  under  a  tomb  on 
which  his  effigy  was  placed. 

He  married  first  Ivetta,  daughter  of  Sir 
William  Boos,  of  Igmanthorp;  and  se- 
condly, as  it  is  believed,  Lora,  daughter 
and  coheiress  of  Sir  Gerard  de  Fumival, 
and  widow  of  Sir  John  Ufiete.  By  the 
latter  he  had  no  children,  but  by  the  for- 
mer he  had  five  sons  and  three  daughters. 

His  second  son,  Sir  Thomas,  died  during 
his  father*8  life ;  his  third  and  fourth  sons. 
Sir  William  and  Sir  Stephen,  distinguished 
soldiers,  were  both  present  at  the  Mttle  of 
Creasy ;  and  his,  youngest  son,  Geoffrey,  be- 
came a  priest,  and  held  some  dignities  in 
the  Church. 

His  eldest  son,  Sir  Henry  le  Scrope,  who 
was  governor  of  Guisnes  and  Calais,  was 
summoned  to  parliament  as  a  baron  in 
1342,  and  was  generally  called  Lord  Scrope 
of  Masham.  His  descendants  held  the  title 
till  1517,  when  on  the  death  of  the  ninth 
lord  wiUiout  issue  it  fell  into  abeyance 
among  his  three  listers.  {Baronage j  i.  657; 
Pari  Writs,  ii.  1401) ;  Nicolas' 8  Scrope  and 
Grosvenor  Controversy,) 

0CBOPS,  Hexrt  L£,  was  the  eldest  son 
and  heir  of  Sir  William  le  Scrope,  and 
Constance  his  wife.  Like  his  brother,  the 
last-mentioned  Geoffrey,  he  was  distin- 
guished both  as  a  knight  and  a  lawyer. 

His  name  appears  as  an  advocate  in  the 
Tear  Book  of  1  Edward  II.,  and  in  the 


BOBiOPE 


601 


next  year,  on  November  27, 1308,  he  was 
raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Common  Pleas. 
Fines  were  levied  before  him  in  that  cha- 
racter till  Trinity,  10  Edward  H.  (Dug- 
dale's  Orig.  44),  and  during  the  same 
interval  he  frequently  acted  as  a  jud^  of 
assize  and  on  various  criminal  conmiissions. 

He  was  promoted  to  the  office  of  chief 
justice  of  the  King's  Bench  on  June  16, 
1317,  which  he  retuned  for  above  six 
years,  and  was  then  superseded,  about  Sep- 
tember 1323,  by  Hervey  de  Staunton,  who 
after  a  few  months  made  way  for  Henry*s 
brother,  Geoffrey  le  Scrope.  Some  con- 
fusion often  arises  in  the  reports  in  the 
Year  Books  frY>m  the  difficulty  of  distin- 
guishing which  brother  is  referred  to. 

The  cause  of  his  removal  is  nowhere  re- 
lated, nor  whether  it  was  at  his  own  request 
That  it  was  occasioned  by  no  dissatisfaiBtion 
on  the  king's  part  may  be  inferred  from  his 
being  constituted,  in  the  same  year,  custos 
of  the  forests  beyond  Trent,  an  office  which 
he  still  retained  at  the  commencement  of 
the  next  reign.  (Abb.  Rot,  Orig.  i.  271 ; 
Rot.  Pari.  ii.  10 ;  N.  Fasdera,  ii.  578.) 

Within  a  few  days  after  iJie  accession  of 
Edward  HI. — viz.,  on  February  5,  1327 — 
Sir  Henry  le  Scro^  had  a  patent  consti- 
tuting him  secotid  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas,  the  first  instance  of  such  a  designa- 
tion being  adopted,  and  the  fines  acknow- 
ledged before  him  extended  to  Hilary  in 
the  third  year.  It  was  not,  however,  till 
October  28  in  that  year,  1329,  that  he 
changed  his  position  &r  that  of  chief  jus- 
tice of  the  King*s  Bench,  to  which  he  was 
then  re-appointed  during  the  temporary 
absence  of  his  brother,  Geoffrey  It  Scrope 
who,  upon  his  return,  superseded  him  on 
December  19  in  the  following  year. 

His  judicial  services,  however,  were  too 
valuable  to  be  lost,  for  on  the  same  day  he 
was  made  chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer, 
and  he  continued  on  that  bench  during  the 
remainder  of  his  life.  There  are,  it  is  true, 
two  patents  bearing  date  respectively  the 
18th  and  19th  of  November  1333,  7  Ed- 
ward HI.,  by  the  former  of  which  he  is 
constituted  chief  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas,  and  by  the  latter  chief  baron  of  the 
Exchequer.  From  this  we  can  only  infer 
that  the  removal  into  the  Common  Pleas 
was  without  his  consent,  and  the  restora- 
tion to  the  Exchequer  at  his  solicitation, 
the  more  especially  as  William  de  Herle, 
whom  he  was  to  have  superseded  in  the 
former  court,  was  immediately  replaced. 

Besides  the  numerous  royal  rewards  for 
his  good  services  from  both  kings,  he  wu 
also  made  a  knight  banneret 

His  death  occurred  on  September  7, 
1336,  leaving  very  considerable  possessions 
in  Middlesex,  Leicestershire,  Hertfordshire, 
Rutlandshire,  and  Bedfordshire,  but  chiefly 
in  the  coim^  of  York.    He  waa  busM.^ 


602 


SOBOPE 


the  abbey  of  St  Agatha,  at  Easby,  near 
Richmond^  in  the  latter  county,  of  which 
he  was  esteemed  the  founder,  naving  pur- 
chased the  property  of  the  family  of  the 
Earl  of  Richmond,  and  been  a  large  con- 
tributor to  the  house. 

His  wife's  name  was  Margaret,  but  there 
is  a  doubt  whether  she  was  the  daughter 
of  Lord  Roos  or  of  Lord  Fitz- Walter.  She 
afterwards  married  Sir  Hugh  Mortimer,  of 
Chelmarsh  in  Shropshire,  and  of  Luton  in 
Bedfordshire,  and  hved  till  1357. 

They  left  three  sons,  all  of  whom  were 
minors  at  the  time  of  their  father's  death. 
William  and  Stephen,  the  two  elder,  died 
without  issue  before  19  Edward  HI.,  in 
which  year  the  inheritance  devolved  on 
the  third  son,' the  next-mentioned  Richard, 
the  first  Baron  Scrope  of  Bolton.  (Baron" 
age,  i.  G54 ;  Monad,  vi.  921 ;  Nicolas** 
Scrope  and  Chrosvmor  Controvert.) 

8CB0PE,  Richard  lb,  was  about  eight 
years  old  at  the  death  of  his  father,  the 
last-mentioned  Sir  Henry  le  Scrope,  in 
1336. 10  Edward  HI.  He  was  the  youngest 
of  three  sons,  and  ultimate  heir  to  his 
father's  extensive  property.  From  his 
earliest  youth  he  devoted  himself  to  arms, 
and  was  only  eighteen  when  he  accom- 
panied the  king  on  his  invasion  of  France, 
and  partook  of  the  glory  of  the  battle  of 
Cressy  on  August  20,  1340.  In  the  follow- 
ing October  we  find  him  so  signalising 
himself  at  the  battle  of  NeviVs  Cross, 
where  the  Scots  were  completely  van- 
auished,  as  to  be  knighted  on  the  field;  and 
auring  the  remainder  of  that  year  and  part 
of  the  following  he  assisted  at  the  siege  of 
Calais,  which  surrendered  into  the  king's 
hands  on  August  4,  1347.  In  1350  he  was 
present  in  the  sea-fight  near  Rye,  when 
I)on  Carlos  de  la  Cerda  was  signally  de- 
feated by  King  Edward  and  the  Black 
Prince,  and  twenty  of  his  ships  taken ;  and 
during  the  succeeding  years  nis  name  ap- 
pears in  the  array  of  his  sovereign  both  m 
the  French  and  Scottish  wars. 

In  1359  he  began  the  connection  with 
John  of  Gaunt,  Earl  of  Richmond,  which 
lasted  the  remainder  of  the  life  of  that 
celebrated  man,  serving  under  him  in  the 
army  which  then  invaded  France  (N,  Fct- 
dera^  iii.  412),  and  made  its  way  almost  to 
the  walls  of  Paris.  In  1366  ho  accom- 
panied his  patron,  who  had  been  created 
Duke  of  Lancaster,  into  Spain,  and  distin- 
guished himself  in  April  of  the  following 
year  at  the  decisive  victory  of  Najarre, 
which  restored  Don  Pedro  to  the  Spanish 
throne,  and  on  the  renewal  of  the  war  with 
France  in  1369  he  filled  his  usual  place  by 
tiie  side  of  the  duke. 

'  During    the    progress   of   hb    military 

career  in  1364  he  h^L  been  selected  by  his 

own  county  of  Yoik  %a  \ta  te^gscesentative  in 

parliament;  and  on.  3«kqbx^  ^,  \^1\,  \vb 


SCROPE 

was  summoned  to  the  upper  lioiue  as  a 
baron.  On  March  27  of  that  year  he  wis 
invested  with  the  reapooabiB  office  of 
treasurer,  the  kin^  selecting  him  when 
the  Commons  petitioned  tkat  the  giwt 
offices  should  no  longer  be  filled  by  the 
clergy.  He  retained  this  place  for  four 
years  and  a  half,  retiring  in  Sentember 
1375 ;  but  during  the  interval^  in  July  1373, 
he  again  formed  part  of  the  Duke  <a  Lib- 
caster*s  retinue  into  France,  and  in  Maick 
1375  was  joined  with  Sir  John  Kynvet  to 
act  as  attorney  for  the  duke  during  Idi 
absence  from  England.  (75tdL  1026.)  la 
the  last  year  of  Edward^a  reign  he  was  one 
of  the  commissioners  for  the  preaervsdoQof 
the  truce  with  Scotland,  and  for  the  pro- 
tection of  the  Marches. 

On  the  accession  of  Bichaid  XL  he  irw 
appointed  steward  of  the  household,  is 
which  character  he  addressed  the  Common 
in  the  first  two  parliaments  of  the  leigD. 
{Rot,  Pari,  iii.  5.)  But  a  great  honour  wi> 
reserved  for  him ;  for  on  October  29, 1378, 
the  Great  Seal  was  delivered  to  him  u 
chancellor  of  England.  He  remained  ii 
this  office  only  eignt  months,  during  iriud 
we  find  him  charging  the  judges  and  se^ 
jeants  in  parliament  to  give  ueir  opinki 
on  certain  points  of  law.  Retiring  fron 
the  chancellorship  on  July  2,  1379,  and  n- 
suming  his  miutary  duties  in  Scodni 
under  the  Duke  of  llancaster,  he  reoeived 
the  appointment  of  warden  of  the  Westm 
Marches. 

In  the  parliament  of  1381  he  is  spoken 
of  on  November  18  as  Mors  novellemot 
crees  en  Chanceller  d*£ngleterre.'  It  ii 
curious,  however,  that,  according  to  the  re- 
cord on  the  Close  KoU,  Bishop  Courteneje, 
the  late  chancellor,  did  not  give  up  the 
Seal  till  November  30,  and  Bichaid  k 
Scrope  did  not  receive  it  till  December  i 
Thus  was  he  a  second  time  chancellOT;  \Mt 
he  did  not  keep  his  place  above  sevea 
months,  his  straightforward  honesty  in- 
ducing him  to  remonstrate  with  his  royal 
master  against  ffiving  inconsiderately  awij 
the  lands  that  tell  to  the  crown.  The  king, 
incensed  at  the  interference  of  his  minister, 
is  said  by  Walsingham  to  have  sfiit 
messenger  after  messensrer  to  demand  the 
Great  Seal,  which  the  chancellor  refiased  to 
give  up  to  any  other  person  than  the  king 
himself.  The  entry  on  the  record  seems 
I  to  support  this  relation,  and  plainly  evi- 
!  dcnces  a  hasty  proceeding.  It  alleges  that, 
the  king  being  desirous  uiat  Scrope  should 
be  exonerated  from  the  office,  the  Seal  vas 
delivered  up  to  him,  tU  debmt,  and  thoqgk 
he  was  not  as  yet  provided  with  a 
cellor ;  but  being  unwilling  that  the 
of  the  kingdom  should  be  retavded  te 
of  a  Seal,  lie  delivered  it  to  oi  ^ 

misfdoners  to  be  krat  at  hia^i  ^ 

\  QKaoQstnlQn.  July  11,  iML 


SCROPB 

The  king's  irritation^  however,  seem* 
mxm  to  hmye  snhsided^  since  Scrope  was  in 
tiie  same  year  appomted  to  negotiate  a 
trace  with  Sootluid.  Although  between 
fifty  and  sixty  years  of  age,  he  exhibited  no 
diminution  of  his  military  ardour;  but 
was  present,  with  his  old  patron  the  duke. 
at  the  capture  of  Edinburgh  in  1384,  and 
jciiied  Kmg  Richard's  expedition  a^^st 
Scotland  in  the  following  year.  It  was 
then  that  he  challenged  the  right  of  Sir 
Bobert  Grosvenor  to  bear  the  arms  '  Azuie, 
a  bend  or.'  This  was  the  third  dispute  of 
a  sfanilar  nature  in  which  Scrope  had  been 
enga^^ed.  At  the  siege  of  Cfuais  in  1347 
hia  nght  to  the  crest  of  a  crab  issuing  from 
a  daaH  coronet  was  challenged ;  but  with- 
out effect,  as  he  ever  afterwards  continued 
to  bear  it.  Again,  in  Paris  in  1360,  a 
Comish  squire,  named  Carminow,  disputed 
his  light  to  the  arms  on  his  shield,  when 
both  parties  were  adjudged  to  be  entitled. 
The  third  controversy,  with  Sir  Robert 
GrosTenor,  which  lasted  four  years  in  the 
Court  of  Chivalry,  and  terminated  in 
Serope's  complete  triumph  over  his  op- 
ponent, is  the  subject  of  a  most  interesting 
work  by  the  late  Sir  Harris  Nicolas,  to 
which  we  are  indebted  for  most  of  the 
materials  from  which  this  account  has 
been  drawn  up.      (See  aUo  limner,  vii. 

eao-i,  676, 68a) 

During  tiie  remainder  of  Richard's  reign 
Scrope  was  a  regular  attendant  on  his 
parliamentary  duties,  in  1386  he  was  ap- 
pointed one  of  the  king's  permanent  coun- 
Belloirs,  and  had  the  courage  to  defend 
Pole,  Earl  of  Suffolk,  his  brother-in-law, 
when  impeached  by  the  Commons.  In 
1887  he  was  one  of  the  commissioners  on 
the  trial  of  Nevill,  Archbishop  of  York, 
Treeilian,  and  others ;  and  conducted  him- 
•df  with  such  prudence  and  moderation 
during  the  following  years,  that  when  the 
parliament  of  21  Richard  11.,  1397,  reversed 
the  proceedings  of  that  of  1386,  and  im- 
peacned  those  who  were  implicated  in  them, 
Scrope,  though  one  of  the  number,  was 
declared  innocent  by  the  Commons,  and  a 
patent  of  pardon  was  granted  to  him. 

The  Duke  of  Lancaster  died  in  February 
L889;  and  none  can  contemplate  without 
pity  the  feelinffs  which  must  have  embar- 
nuMed  the  aged  knight,  when  he  watched 
on  the  one  hand  the  mad  and  foolish  con- 
duct of  his  sovereign,  and  saw  on  the  other 
the  insidious  and  treasonable  proceedings 
of  his  patron's  son.  He  took  no  active 
pert  in  the  contest ;  and  on  the  deposition 
of  Richard,  although  his  eldest  son,  the 
Ettl  of  Wiltshire,  had  lost  his  life  for  his 
idherence  to  the  royal  cause,  he  was  sum- 
moned to  Henry's  first  parliament,  and 
ivia  among  those  peers  who  assented  to 
tbe  late  kinff  being  placed  in  imprisonment ; 
A  rote  to  wnich,  under  the  drcumstances, 


SCBOPE 


608 


he  could  scarcely  object,  qualified  as  it  was 
by  the  words  *  sauvent  sa  vie.'  The  scene 
in  the  parliament  a  few  days  afterwards 
must  have  been  most  afiectmg,  when,  on 
the  attainder  of  his  son  being  confirmed,  he 
rose  in  his  place,  his  eves  streaming  with 
tears,  and  'implored  the  usurper  that  the 
proceedinss  mi^ht  not  affect  the  inheritance 
of  himself  or  his  other  children ;  and  after 
admitting  the  justice  of  the  sentence,  and 
deploring  the  conduct  of  his  son,  the  im- 
happy  father  was  consoled  by  Henry,  who 
deigned  to  assure  him  that  neither  nis  in- 
terest nor  those  of  his  children  then  living 
should  suffer  from  it ;  for  that  he  had  al- 
ways considered  and  still  deemed  him  a 
loyal  knight'  The  only  other  instance  of 
his  mixing  in  public  affairs  after  this  event 
was  his  presence  in  parliament  in  January 
1401,  when  the  Earls  of  Kent,  Huntingdon, 
and  Salisbury  were  attainted  of  high  treason. 
(Nicolas,  30,  39;  iW/.  Hid.  iiL  437,  453, 
469.) 

He  lived  little  more  than  a  year  after- 
words, his  death  occurring  on  May  30, 
1403,  at  about  the  age  of  seventy-five. 
His  remains  were  deposited  in  the  abbey 
of  St.  A^tha,  near  Richmond,  where 
those  of  his  father  rested.  His  will  is  in 
the  <Testamenta  Vetusta'  (i.  156.) 

The  union  of  such  qualities  as  he  pos* 
sessed  both  as  a  soldier  and  a  states-* 
man  are  seldom  to  be  found  in  one  man. 
Throughout  his  long  military  career  he 
was  highly  distinguished  for  his  valour,  and 
the  talents  and  sagacity  he  exhibited  in  his 
civil  employments  were  e<jually  remark- 
able. Tnough  connected  with  all  the  in- 
tricate proceedings  of  the  unfortunate  reign 
of  Bichard  U.,  he  steered  dear  of  the  shoals 
on  which  his  contemporaries  stranded,  and, 
preserving  the  esteem  of  all  classes  to  the 
close  of  his  life,  he  well  deserved  the  cha- 
racter which  Walsingham  ffives  him,  that 
he  was  a  man  who  had  not  ms  fellow  in  the 
whole  realm  for  prudence  and  integrity. 

Some  authorities  say  that  he  was  twice 
married,  but  others  doubt  whether  he  had 
more  than  one  wife.  She  was  Blanche,  the 
daughter  of  Sir  William  de  la  Pole,  and 
sister  of  Michael  £arl  of  Suffolk.  The 
name  of  his  second  wife  is  variously  stated 
by  those  who  assert  that  be  had  one — some 
calling  her  Margaret,  daughter  of  Sir  John 
Montmrd,  and  others  describing  her  as  a 
daughter  of  —  Spencer.  By  Blanche  he 
had  four  sons,  the  eldest  of  whom,  Wil- 
liam, after  being  created  by  Bichiml  H. 
Earl  of  Wiltshire  in  1397,  and  knight  of 
the  Oarter  in  1398,  was  for  his  attachment 
to  his  bene£Bu:tor  beheaded  without  trial  in 
1399,  and  his  honours  and  estates  were 
forfeited  to  the  crown.  {Baronage^  i.  661.) 
The  second  son,  Boger,  succeeded  his  father ; 
the  third,  Stephen,  was  an  adherent  of 
j^chaxd  IL,  but  aftetwwt^  w«&  iftntsc^^ 


604 


SGROPE 


SEQBAYE 


into  Henry's  confidence ;  and  the  fourth,  |  during  which  Sir  Robert  Walnole  wasfint 
Richard,  Archbishop  of  York,  was  beheaded    lord  of  the  Treamur.    With  that  numiter 


he  was  cloeely  allied,  and  when  on  Sb 
Robert's  fall  a  secret  committee  ast  ta 
enquire  into  his  conduct  for  the  nrarioia 
ten  years,  Mr.  Scrope,  who  was  called  vpoa 
to  give  evidence  as  to  the  disposal  of  aoofe 
a  million  of  money  which  had  been  tneei 
to  his  and  Sir  Robert's  hands  as  seoet 
service  money,  refused  to  take  the  otA 
offered  to  him,  and  declared  that  he  wm 
authorised  by  his  majesty  to  state  'tint 
the  disposal  of  money  issued  for  secret  8e^ 
vice,  by  the  nature  of  it,  requires  the  utmoit 
secrecy,  and  is  accounted  for  to  his  majesty 
only,  and  therefore  his  majesty  could  not 
permit  him  to  disclose  anything  on  thit 
subject'  The  Commons  took  no  nodoe  of 
his  refusal,  and  he  enjoyed  his  place  for  ten 
tural  daughter  of  the  fifth  duke,  and  who  !  years  after  his  patron's  disnuMal.    Tindil 

says  of  him  that  he  ^was  perhaps  the 
coolest,  the  most  experienceo,  and  most 
sagacious  Mend  the  minister  ever  had.' 

lie  died  on  April  9, 1752,  at  a  great  ue, 
leaving  no  issue.  His  estate  of  Wonnwy 
is  still  in  the  possession  of  the  desoendaDti 
of  Henry  Fane,  who  married  one  of  Ui 
sisters  and  coheirs,  and  whose  eldest  sob 
became  the  eighth  Earl  of  Westnuxv- 
land.  ( CoUins'i  Peerage,  iii.  d02 ;  LuUrO, 
vi.  304,  633;  Pari.  Hist.  xu.  823;  TmH 
XX.  138,  644.) 

SEOITLEB,  Alexander  le,  of  a  fanulT 
established  in  Herefordshire,  was  probtblV 
the  son  of  Nicholas  le  Seculer,  who  assessed 
the  tallage  of  that  county  in  19  Hennr  IE 
Alexander  was  constituted,  as  the  bfifs 
'  beloved  clerk,'  one  of  the  barons  of  tbe 
Exchequer  in  Easter  1265,  49  Henij  IH. 
(Madavy  ii.  56),  after  which  date  no  fortka 
mention  of  him  occurs. 

SEFSED  (fiisnop  of  CHicHE8TEs),vbo, 

from  being  a  canon,  was  appointed  arch- 

deacoD,  of  Chichester,  was  from  19  to  ^ 

Henry    n.,    1173-1177,    employed   as  t 

:  justice  itinerant  in  several  counties.    {Ma- 


for  conspiracy  against  Heniy  in  1405. 

The  barony  of  Scrope  of  Bolton  con- 
tinued through  eleven  fenerations.  The 
last  holder  of  it,  Emanue^  was  created  Earl 
of  Sunderland  on  June  19, 1627 ;  but  dying 
without  issue  in  1640,  the  earldom  became 
extinct,  and  the  barony  devolved  on  the  re- 

g-esentatives  of  the  daughter  of  his  grand- 
ther.  It  has  been  hitherto,  however, 
unclaimed.  The  Bolton  estate  was  be- 
queathed by  the  earl  to  Mary,  one  of  his 
natural  daughters,  whose  second  husband, 
Charles  Paulet,  Marquis  of  Winchester, 
was  created  Duke  of  liolton  in  1689.  a  title 
which  became  extinct  in  1794.  The  pre- 
sent barony  of  Bolton  was  granted  in  1797 
to  Thomas  Orde,  who  had  married  a  na- 
tural daughter  of  the  fifth  duke,  and  who 
took  the  name  of  Paulet.  {Scrope  and 
Qrogpenor  Controversy^  ii.  17-39.) 

8CB0PE,  John,  had  possession  of  the 
Great  Seal  for  the  limited  period  of  three 
weeks,  but,  though  short  his  career  and 
trifling  his  services  in  this  capacity,  his 
merits  were  afterwards  rendered  highly 
conspicuous  in  another  sphere.  He  was 
the  son  of  Thomas  Scrope  of  Wonnsley  in 
Oxfordshire,  a  mansion  which  had  formerly 
been  the  seat  of  Colonel  Adrian  Scrope  (a 
scion  of  the  noble  family  of  Scrope,  barons 
of  Bolton),  who  took  a  prominent  part  on 
the  parliament  side  in  the  Great  Kebel- 
lion,  holding  among  other  important  offices 
that  of  governor  of  Bristol,  and  sitting  in 
the  High  Court  of  Justice  which  condemned 
Charles  I.,  for  which  he  suffered  death  as 
a  regicide  at  the  Restoration. 

John  Scrope  received  his  lec^l  education 
at  the  Middle  Temple,  where  he  was  called 
to  the  bar  in  1692.  After  practising  for 
sixteen  years,  he  was  in  M:ay  1708  ap- 
pointed a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  in  Scot- 
land, and  while  enjoying  that  office  the 
removal  of  Lord  Chancellor  Cowper  oc- 
curred, on  which  the  Great  Seal  of  England  'dox,  i.  43,  700.)  He  was  then  advuioed 
was  placed  in  the  hands  of  three  commis-  |  to  the  deanery,  and  appears  to  have  held 
sioners,  one  of  whom  was  Mr.  Baron  Scrope.  !  both  dignities  in  October  1180,  when  bs 
They  received  it  on  September  26,  1710,  !  was  raised  to  the  bishopric  of  that  sec. 
and  held  it  till  October  19,  when  it  was  i  {Le  Neve,  65.)  The  cathedral  and  epii- 
delivered  to  Sir  Simon  Harcourt  as  lord  I  copal  palace  having  been,  with  great  part 
keeper.  So  ended  Baron  Scrope's  judicial  |  of  the  city,  destroyed  by  fire  on  October  11^ 
character  in  England  -,  but  in  Scotland  he    1187,  he  rebuilt  and  restored  them  to  their 


continued  to  exercise  the  functions  of  a 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  till  he  was  selected 


former  splendour. 
He  was  present  at  the  coronation  of 


as  joint  secretary  to  .the  Treasury,  when  he  \  King  John  on  May  27,  1199,  and  died  on 
entered  parliament  at  the  general  election  \  March  17,  1204.     {Godwin,  502.) 


SSGEAYE,  Gilbert  de,  vras  the  second 
son  of  the  under-named  Stephen  deSegnvs^ 
by  Rohese,  the  daughter  of  Thomas  k 
Despenser:  but  his  elder  brother,  it 
dying  in  hu  father's  lifetime,  he 
to  t£9  proper^  on  his  father^a 
XL  \ii!t  i«yviius|  unu.  xub  va>nix\1241«    Dugdale  (fifig,  91)  al* 


in  1722  as  member  for  Bipon.  In  the  new 
parliament  on  the  accession  of  George  II. 
u  1728  he  was  chosen  for  Bristol  his 
native  city,  and  in  those  of  1735, 1741,  and 
1747  he  represented  Lyme  Regis.  His  se- 
natorial exertions  were  confined  to  matters 
connected  with  the  i«ve&QA,  asA  \Qa  \«nEL 
of  oflice  com' 


SfiGRAYE 

^hftt  dicnity  was  held  by  ciTilians,  he  muat 
hmwe  obtained  a  dispensation  from  his  holy 
orden  (which  he  perhaps  did  on  his 
bcother's  death  in  1231),  as  he  married 
/kmabilia,  the  daughter  and  heir  of  Bobert 
le  Chaaoomb.  (Excerpt,  e  Rat,  Fm.  i. 
102.)  In  16  Henry  III.  he  had  a  (frant 
torn  Simon  de  Montfort,  lord  of  Leicester, 
»f  the  town  of  Kegworth  in  Leicestershire, 
md  a  short  time  after  he  was  constituted 
jojemor  of  Bolsover  Castle.  In  26  Henry 
LEL,  the  year  following  his  father's  death, 
iie  was  made  justice  of  the  forests  south  of 
Fient,  and  governor  of  Eenil worth  Castle. 
-  He  was  raised  to  the  bench  at  West- 
minster in  35  Henry  lU.,  1251,  and  was 
3iie  of  the  justiciers  appointed  to  hear  such 
pleas  of  the  dty  of  London  as  were  wont 
bo  be  determined  by  the  justices  itinerant. 
Be  is  not  noticed  in  a  judicial  character 
liter  January  1252.  Two  jears  afterwards 
he  was  sent  on  a  mission  mto  Gkiscony,  on 
his  return  from  which,  in  company  with 
John  de  Plessetis,  Earl  of  Warwick,  and 
dther  nobles,  they  were,  in  spite  of  the 
King  of  France's  letters  of  safe  conduct 
irbich  they  bore,  seized  and  imprisoned  at 
Pontes,  a  city  in  Poictou.  Although  ulti- 
mately released,  his  sufferings  there  im- 
paired lus  health  and  caused  his  death, 
irhich  happened  shortly  before  Noyember 
II,  1254,  39  Henry  Hi.,  when  his  lands 
were  taken  into  the  king  s  hands^  as  usual 
on  that  event     {Ihid.  iL  108.) 

He  was  succeeded  by  his  son,  Nicholas 
ie  Segrave.  The  barony  failed  in  the  male 
Sue  in  1353,  but  survived  in  Elizabeth, 
iaoghter  of  Baron  John,  who  married  John 
Lora.  Mowbray.  Their  son  Thomas  was 
cxeated  Eari  of  Nottingham  in  1383,  and 
Duke  of  Norfolk  in  1400,  in  which  title 
this  barony  continued  merged  till  the  death 
of  John,  tne  fourth  duke,  in  1475,  and  on 
the  death  of  his  daughter  Ann  without 
iaaue  it  fell  into  abeyance  between  the 
repieeentatives  of  Margaret  and  Isabel, 
slaters  of  John,  the  second  Duke  of  Norfolk, 
the  present  Earl  of  Berkeley  being  heir  of 
the  former,  and  the  Barons  Petre  and 
Btoorton  being  heirs  general  of  the  latter. 
(Ifieoia$*8  Synopsis ;  BaronagCy  L  671.) 

nOEAYE,  Stephen  de,  was  the  son  of 
Qilbert,  son  of  Hereward,  who  assumed 
the  name  of  his  lordship  of  Segrave  in 
Leicestershire,  of  which  county  he  acted 
•8  sheriff  during  several  vears  in  the  reign 
of  Ridiard  I.  In  6  John,  Stephen  was 
excused  a  part  of  his  father*s  debt  to  the 
eiown,  for  uie  love  the  king  bore  to  Huffh 
le  Despenser,  whose  sister  Rohese  he 
aanied.  {Rot.  de  Finibus,  422.)  In  8 
John  he  was  one  of  the  two  'custodes 
ibcitQnim  ooronse '  (Abb.  Hacit,  55),  and 
IB  16  John  he  was  sent  into  !the  county  of 
l^orceeter  to  forward  the  King's  affairs. 
SSb  loyalty  during  the  barons'  wars  was 


SEQRAVE 


605 


rewarded  by  a  grant  of  the  lands  of  Stephen 
de  Gant,  and  of  the  manor  of  Kinton  in 
Warwickshire,  for  which  he  afterwards 
procured  a  weekly  market.  (JRot.  Pat, 
128 ;  RU.  Chart.  223 ;  Rot.  dam.  L  428.) 

He  had  in  his  youth  been  brought  u])  as 
an  ecclesiastic,  but  had  changed  his  clencal 
profession  for  that  of  arms.  No  doubt, 
nowever,  he  added  to  the  former,  as  was 
then  usual,  the  study  of  the  law,  and  con-* 
tinned  his  attention  to  it,  for  though  there 
is  no  account  of  his  forensic  progress,  his 
interest  or  ability  soon  raised  him  to  the 
bench.  In  2  Henry  IH.,  1218,  fines  were 
levied  before  him  as  a  justicier  at  West* 
minster,  and  he  had  a  grant  of  one  hundred 
shillings  as  his  fee  at  two  several  periods 
in  the  year.  {DugdMs  Orig.  42;  Rot. 
Clous,  i.  350,  365.)  There  are  records  of 
fines  in  which  his  name  occurs  from  this 
date  till  Michaelmas,  14  Henry  IH.,  and 
during  the  whole  of  that  time  and  in  the 
two  following  years  he  was  frequently  em- 
ployed as  a  justice  itinerant  m  the  pro- 
vinces, holding  from  the  ten^  year  the 
highest  place  in  the  commissions  to  which 
he  was  attached.  In  a  Jud^ent  of  him 
and  his  companions  pleaded  in  a  cause  of  a 
subsequent  year,  thev  are  called  '  justiciarii 
de  Banco,'  but  whether  its  date  was  before 
or  after  he  was  chief  justiciary  does  not 
appear.    (Abb.  Placit.  128.) 

During  the  former  period  he  yras  en- 
trusted yrith  other  important  conmussions. 
In  3  Henry  HL  he  was  sent  on  an  embassy 
to  the  legate;  in  the  next  year  he  was 
appointed  governor  of  Sauvey  Castle  in 
Leicestershire ;  and  for  the  three  following 
he  acted  as  sheriff  of  the  counties  of  Lin- 
coln, and  of  Essex  and  Hertford,  and  as 
constable  of  the  Tower  of  London,  with  an 
allowance  of  50/.  per  annum.  (Rot.  Clous. 
I.  396,  459,  &c.)  He  was  made  sheriff  of 
Buckingham  and  Bedford  in  12  Henry  IH., 
and  then  of  Warwick  and  Leicester  and 
Northampton  for  his  life,  and  he  was 
joined  with  the  chancellor  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  affairs  during  the  king's  absence 
in  Poictou  m  1230.  (I  Report  Pub.  Rec., 
App.  ii.  152 ;  5  Rejsortj  App.  iL  63.) 

He  had  united  himself  vrith  the  party  of 
Peter  de  Rupibus,  Bishop  of  Winchester, 
aiding  his  enorts  against  the  justiciary 
Hubert  de  Burj^h,  and  had  taken  every 
opportunity  of  ingratiating  himself  witn 
lung  Henry.  His  immediate  success  was 
evidenced  by  the  above  appointments,  and 
by  other  grants  of  great  extent  and  value. 

When  the  bishop  had  succeeded  in  pro- 
curing the  dischaiKe  of  Hubert  de  Burgh, 
his  office  of  chief  justiciary  was,  on  July 
29,  1232,  given  to  Stephen  de  Segrave 
(R.  de  Wendover,  iv.  245),  together  with 
the  government  of  all  the  castles  from 
whicm  his  predecessor  had  been  ie.mQ'<(^A^ 
The  aoqmsitioii  oi  \)i;i\!^  -^oeX.  tdly^  \^  vs^ 


606 


SEGRAVE 


SEGBAYE 


object  of  honourable  ambition,  but  his  were  meritorioua.  Butyoxcq^tiiigthehardi- 
eflforts  to  irritate  the  monarch  againat  the  .  neaa  with  which  he  urged  the  penecatian 
fallen  fiiTourite,  and  to  aggravate  the  of  Hubert  de  Bur^h,  no  imputatko  o£ 
charges  against  Mm,  deserve  another  desig-  cruelty  or  even  seventy  can  be  made  agabut 
nation.    His  ministry  was  not  a  fortunate    his  conduct  as  a  judge  either  before  or  aftv 


one,  and  in  the  next  year  he  had  the  ill- 
luck  to  be  present  when  the  king  was 
defeated  before  Grosmont,  and  to  be  one  of 


he  was  raised  to  the  hiffheat  peat;  wbik 
his  grants  to  the  abbeya^Stofneley,  Combe, 
and  Leicester,  and  hie  aubaequent  retiie- 


thoee  who  were  surprised  in  their  beds  and  ;  ment  to  the  latter,  are  evidenceaof  his  piov 


compelled  to  fly  almost  naked  from  the 
field. 

His  support  of  the  ]^ope's  exactions,  and 
his  adherence  to  the  Bisnop  of  Winchester, 
were  sufficient  to  cause  his  unpopularity, 
one  effect  of  which  was  the  burning  of  his 
mansion  at  Alcmundberrv,  while  ne  was 
with  the  king  in  the  neighbouring  town  of 
Huntingdon.      (Ibid,    278,    297.)      This 


disposition. 

After  the  death  of  his  first  wife,  RoheM, 
daughter  of  Thomas  le  Despenaer^he  mn^ 
ried  Ida,  the  sister  of  Henry  de  HMtiiy^ 
who,  six  years  after  his  death,  wis  fined 
600^  for  marrying  Hugh  Pecche.  (IMl 

By  his  first  wife  he  had  two  sons,  tbe 
elder  of  whom,  John,  dying  ten  years  bel» 


occurred  in  the  early  paft  of  February  -  him,  he  was  succeeded  by  hia  aeoood  eoi, 
1234,  and  it  was  probabnr  in  compensation  !  the  last-mentioned  Gilbert. 


for  his  loss  that,  on  March  2,  the  king 
granted  him  an  exemption  from  the  forest 
kws  in  this  manor.  But  within  a  very 
few  weeks  he  shared  in  the  fall  of  the 
disgraced  bishop,  and  in  the  middle  of  the 
following  April  was  ejected  from  the  high 
position  he  had  occupied  for  so  brief  a 
period.     (Ibid.  299.) 

Being  shortly  afterwards  summoned  with 
the  rest  of  the  discarded  ministers  to  render 
an  account  of  his  stewardship,  rather  than 
meet  his  accusers  he  retired  to  the  abbey  of 
St.  Maij  at  Leicester,  where  he  resumed 
the  clencal  tonsure  which  he  had  formerly 
relinquished.  He,  however,  eventually 
thought  fit  to  appear  on  July  4,  under  the 
protection  of  Edmund,  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury, when,  after  the  king  had  angrily 
attributed  to  his  counsels  the  disgrace  of 
Hubert  de  Burgh  and  the  exile  of  the  nobles 
of  the  kingdom,  he  was  given  till  Michael- 
mas to  prepare  his  defence.  The  times 
becoming  more  quiet,  and  milder  coimsels 
prevailing,  he  was,  in  the  following  Fe- 
bruary, allowed  to  make  his  peace  with  the 
king,  on  paying  a  fine  of  one  thousand 
marics.    (hid,  312,  314,  325.) 

Although  in  one  of  his  fits  of  fickleness 
the  king  recalled  him  to  court  after  three 
years*  absence,  made  him  justice  of  Chester 
m  21  Henry  III.  (Baronage,  i.  072),  and  for 
a  time  listened  to  his  counsels,  he  was 
never  restored  to  his  former  elevation.  His 
death  happened  in  the  abbey  of  Leicester, 
in  which  he  had  become  a  canon  regular, 
before  October  13, 1241,  on  which  day  his 
lands  were,  as  usual  on  such  events,  seized 
into  the  king*s  hands.  (Excerpt,  c  Rot  Fin, 
i.  866.) 

Evidently  a  man  of  energy  and  enterprise, 
his  grasping  and  timeserving  disposition 
threw  suspicion  over  aU  he  did;  and  the 
popular  hatred  that  he  incurred  by  his  en- 
couragement of  the  king's  extravagance, 
and  uie  expedients  he  used  to  supply  it, 
blinded  the  people  V>  mx^  oi  \ae  w:\a  u^  \ 


SSGEAYS,  Hugh  de,  was  one  gI  tb 
branches  of  the  illustrious  house  of  Segim, 
and  is  first  noticed  in  the  recoids  by  ^ 
confirmation,  in  43  Edward  IQ.,  of  Qva 
Philippa's  grant  to  him  (styled  a  knidtt) 
for  life  of  the  officea  of  constable  tftk 
castle  of  Brustwyk,  and  of  keeper  of  tk 
foresta  of  Kingswood  and  Fuwood  ii 
Gloucestershire.  (Ahb.  Hat.  Orig,  iL  dOi) 
In  46  Edward  III.  he  was  one  of  tte 
commissioners  to  treat  with  the  Flemi^B, 
and  held  the  same  diplomatic  chancterio 
the  last  year  of  Edward's  reign.  (X 
FfBdera,  iu.  932,  1076.) 

On  the  accession  of  Hichaid  H.  he  ms 
selected  as  one  of  the  king*s  council,  sod  is 
the  thiid  year  was  appointed  steward  of 
the  household.  (C<d,  Rot,  PaL  20a.)  h 
that  and  the  following  year  he  was  one  d 
the  ambassadors  employed  to  treat  witk 
France,  and  to  negotiate  the  Idng's  nuumife 
with  Anne,  the  sister  of  the  emperor. 
(Rymery  vii.  161,  229,  281.) 

Two  days  after  tiie  brutal  murder  of 
Archbishop  Sudbury  the  Great  Sealtw 
placed  in  Segrave's  hands,  on  June  1^ 
1381,  to  be  held  as  keeper  until  the  Idag 
could  more  conveniently  appoint  a  chu- 
cellor;  and  he  performed  all  the  dotiff 
}>ertaining  to  the  office  for  eight  we^ 
till  August  10.  On  the  same  day  he  wv 
made  treasurer  in  the  room  of  Kobertde 
Hales,  another  victim  of  the  popular  foxy. 
In  that  year  also  he  had  a  grant  of  t&e 
manor  of  Overhall  in  Essex,  to  hold  by  the 
service  of  making  '  w»&es,'  and  attoidiog 
on  the  king  at  his  coronation.  (CaL  SxL 
Pat,  205.)  In  the  parliunent  that  met  in 
Novembe^  he  opened  tiie  buainess  on  ^ 
part  of  the  king. 

On  July  11/1382,  when  the  king  ai^ 
took  away  the  Seal  from  Richard  la  Sa«M 
Segrave  again  received  it  as  the  haii«  • 
commission  of  three,  and  thcfy  eealiiMlli 
hold  it  till  September  90^  a  p«M.inB 
'^(^Qka. 


f 


SEINGES 

Segraye  oontinaed  treasurer  till  January 
17,  1386,  i^ut  which  time  his  death 
oecunvd.    {(kiL  Inqms.  p.  m.  iii.  84.) 

tSXV0X8,  RiCHABD  TUB,  was  probably  an 
tifficer  in  one  of  the  departments  of  the 
Curia  Regis,  being  united  with  Hubert  de 
Boi^  as  lus  deputy  in  the  sherifialty  of 
Hereford  for  three  years,  commencing  3 
John.  (Bot.  Caned.  106,  360.)  He  had 
the  cofliody  of  the  castle  of  Wilton,  which, 
in  6  John,  he  was  ordered  to  deliver  to 
William  de  Cantilupe  {Rot.  Pat,  46) ;  and 
in  the  same  year  he  was  fined  one  hundred 
•hillings  in  respect  of  a  false  oath  taken  in 
«n  assize  of  novel  disseisin  between  Cecil 
4e  Felsted  and  Huffh  de  Windsor,  who  was 
in  his  custody.  (Bot,  de  FinibtM,  237.) 
The  offence,  nowever,  does  not  seem  to 
liaire  been  very  flagrant,  as  two  years  after- 
WBida  a  great  many  fines  were  levied  at  St. 
Edmunds,  Cambridge,  and  Bedford,  before 
Humfrey,  archdeacon  of  Sarum,  and  him. 
In  3  Hcoiry  HI.,  1219,  he  appears  as  one  of 
thejosticiers  before  whom  noes  were  levied 
•t  Westminster,  and  in  1226  he  was  sent 
-with  other  justiciers  to  try  certain  male- 
factors in  Norfolk.    (Hot.  dam,  ii.  159.^ 

SKLBT,  Ralph  de,  is  described  with 
the  addition  '  Magister,'  showing  that  per- 
sons in  orders  were  still  appointed  to  the 
office  of  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  his  patent 
to  which  is  dated  October  24,  1303,  17 
Richard  XL  Little  more  is  to  be  found 
concerning  him,  unless  he  were  the  Ralph 
8elby  *  in  utroque  jure  Doctor  *  who  was 
made  master  of  King's  College,  Cambridge, 
in  the  fourteenth  year.  (Co/.  Hot,  Pat, 
221.)  He  is  mentioned  as  of  the  council 
of  the  king  in  21  Richard  H.  (Proc,  Privy 
CatmcUf  L  75),  but  evidently  retired  or 
died  soon  after,  as  his  name  does  not  occur 
on  the  Liberate  Roll  of  the  first  day  of 
the  reign  of  Henr^  IV.,  directing  the  pay- 
ment of  the  salanes  of  the  barons  for  the 
pievious  half-year. 

UBLWYfl,  Charles  Jasper,  late  Lord 

Justice  of  Appeal,  whose  recent  death  has 

been  univerMlly  regretted,  was  bom  in 

Church  Row,  Hampstead,  Middlesex,  on 

October  13,  1813.    His  father,  William 

8elwyn,  of  whom  he  was  the  youngest  son, 

attained  great  eminence  in  the  law  as  a 

xeporter  in  the  Court  of  King's  Bench  from 

1€&4  to  1817,  as  recorder  of  Portsmouth 

and  queen's  coimsel,  as  instructor  of  the 

Ptinoe  Conisort  in  the  laws  and  constitution 

of  the  kingdom,  and  as  the  author  of  an 

abridgment  of  the  law  of  Nisi  Prius,  of 

snch   standard  reputation   that  it  passed 

through  nine  editions.    His  mother  was 

Letitia,  daughter  of   Thomas    Kynaston, 

Esq.,  of  Witham,  Essex,  the  grandfather 

«f  the  jpresent  head-master  ot  St.  Paul's 

Behool  m  London.    His  two  brothers  at- 

tiined  hi£|ii  positions  in  the  Church,  one  as 

tooceneiyely  bishop  of  New  Zealand  and  of 


SETONE 


607 


Lichfield,  and  the  other  as  canon  of  Ely 
and  Margaret  Professor  of  Divinity. 

Charles  was  educated  first  under  Dr. 
Nicholson  at  Ealing,  then  at  Eton,  and 
next  at  Trinity  College.  Cambridge,  where 
he  took  his  degrees  or  B.A.  and  M.A.  in 
1836  and  1830.  Following  his  father's 
profession,  he  entered  Lincmn's  Inn,  and 
was  call^  to  the  bar  in  January  1840. 
He  practised  with  such  success  in  the 
Court  of  Chancery  that  he  was  made 
queen's  counsel  in  1856,  and  having  in  the 
previous  year  been  appointed  commissary 
of  his  university,  he  was  elected  one  of  its 
representatives  in  parliament  in  1859.  In 
that  assembly  he  took  an  active  part  in  the 
debates  upon  the  engrossing  topics  of  the 
day,  in  speeches  that  were  both  intelligent 
and  effective,  as  a  churchman  and  con- 
servative. 

In  July  1867,  while  yet  member  for  the 
university,  he  received  the  appointment  of 
solicitor-general  and  was  knitted.  Soon 
after,  a  vacancy  hapj^mn^  in  the  Court  of 
Appeal  by  the  resignation  of  Sir  John 
Rolt,  he  was  selected  to  fill  it  on  February 
8. 1868.  Before  the  end  of  that  month,  his 
aole  senior,  Lord  Cairns,  being  invested  with 
the  Great  Seal  as  lord  chancellor,  the  va- 
cancy was  filled  up  by  Vice-Chancellor  Sir 
WilfiamPage  Wood  (now  LordHatherley), 
who  would  of  course  take  the  second  seat 
in  the  court  But  Sir  Charles  Selwyn, 
modesti}r  feeling  that  it  would  be  unbe- 
coming in  him,  so  recenUy  placed  on  the 
judgment  seat,  to  take  precedence  of  a 
judge  who  had  already  presided  over  a 
court  of  equity  for  fifteen  years,  nobly  in- 
sisted that  Sir  William  Wood  should  take 
the  senior  place,  a  course  of  conduct  which 
gave  no  surprise  to  those  who  knew  his 
character,  and  which  increased  the  respect 
and  admiration  with  which  he  was  gene- 
rally re^rded. 

His  judicial  dignity  was  of  short  dura- 
tion. Before  eighteen  months  had  elapsed 
he  died  at  his  house  at  Richmond  in  Surrey, 
on  August  11^  1860,  from  the  effects  of  a 

Eainful  operation.    He  was  buried  at  Nun- 
ead  Cemetery. 

He  married  first  Hester,  daughter  of  J. 
G.  Ravenshaw,  Esq.,  chairman  of  the  old 
East  India  Company,  and  widow  of  Thomas 
Dowler,  Esq.,  M.D. :  and  secondly  Ca- 
therine Rosalie,  daughter  of  Colonel  G.  S. 
Green,  C.B.,  and  widow  of  the  Rev.  Henry 
Dupuis,  vicar  of  Richmond. 

SETOKE,  Thomas  de,  is  named  in  the 
Year  Books  for  ten  years  before  he  was 
raised  to  the  bench.  He  was  one  of  the 
king's  Serjeants  in  10  Edward  III.,  when 
ho  appliea  to  the  council,  on  behalf  of  the 
community  of  the  bbhopric  of  Durham,  to 
forego  the  iter  there  for  that  year ;  and  he 
obtained  his  prayer  on  their  paying  600 
marks  for  the  favour.    (A66.  Kot,  Oryj.  yl. 


608 


SEWELXi 


177.)  Dugdale  placeA  him  as  a  judge  of 
the  King's  Bench  in  28  Edward  III.,  and 
of  the  Common  Pleas  in  29  Edward  III., 
without  any  date  of  appointment  to  either. 
He  may,  however,  have  heen  mistaken,  as 
the  autnority  he  quotes  is  the  Liberate  Roll, 
in  which  the  word  'bancum'  sometimes 
applies  to  both  courts.  He  was  certainly  a 
judge  of  one  of  them  in  April  1354,  28  Ed- 
ward in.,  for  he  was  one  of  the  triers  of 
petitions  in  the  parliament  then  held  (Hot, 
Fori,  ii.  264)  ;  and  he  was  a  judge  of  the 
Common  Pleas  in  Michaelmas  1355,  29 
Edward  IIL,  for  fines  were  then  acknow- 
ledged before  him ;  and  it  appears  probable 
that  he  was  appointed  to  this  court  oetween 
the  previous  Hilary  and  Trinity  Terms,  as 
the  bst  in  the  Year  Book  omits  his  name 
in  the  former,  and  includes  it  in  the  latter 
term.  In  30  Edward  HI.  he  ijecovered 
damages  from  a  woman  for  calling  him 
*  traitor,  felon,  and  robber '  in  the  public 
court.     (Lib,  Assis.  177.) 

On  July  5,  1357,  he  was  made  chief 
justice  of  the  King's  Bench;  but  it  would 
seem,  from  the  words  '  ad  tempus '  in  the 
mandate,  that  it  was  at  that  time  a  mere 
temporary  appointment ;  and,  from  the  fact 
that  his  name  appears  un  fines  up  to  Mid- 
summer, 33  Eaward  HI.,  we  may  infer 
that  he  acted  up  to  that  date  as  a  judge  of 
the  Common  Pleas  also,  esneciaUy  as  in 
the  same  year  he  is  desi^atea  by  the  latter 
title,  when  he  was  admitted  of  the  king's 
secret  council.  Thus  it  was  not  till  after- 
wards that  he  was  permanently  fixed  in  the 
presidency  of  the  King's  Bench  ;  but  there 
IS  no  doubt  that  he  then  held  it  till  the 
thirty-eighth  year,  when,  on  May  24, 1360, 
Henry  Green  was  appointed  his  successor. 
(Dugdale'ft  Orig,  45  j  Cd,  Rot,  Pat.  171.) 

SEW  ELL,  Thomas,  was  the  son  and  heir 
of  Thomas  Sewell,  of  West  Ham,  Essex, 
Esq.,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the 
Middle  Temple  on  May  24,  1734.  It  is 
told  of  him  that  in  his  youth  he  was 
'  bred  up  under  an  attorney,  and  afterwards 
engaged  in  the  laborious  business  of  a 
draughtsman  in  Chancery,'  and  that  'he 
was  called  to  the  bar,  where  he  procured  a 
considerable  practice,'  making  at  the  time 
he  was  made  master  of  the  Rolls  '  between 
3000/.  and  4000/.  per  annum.'  In  1754  he 
was  appointed  one  of  the  king's  counsel. 

He  was  a  member  of  the  two  parliaments 
of  1754  and  1761,  representing  Harwich  in 
the  former,  and  Winchelsea  m  the  latter. 
A  story  is  told  that  on  the  debate  relative 
to  the  illegality  of  general  warrants  he 
spoke  in  fi&vour  of  an  adjournment  of  the 
debate,  because  it  would  afford  him  oppor- 
tunity to  examine  his  books  and  authorities, 
and  he  should  be  prepared  to  give  an  opi- 
nion on  the  subject,  'which  at  present  he 
was  not.'  Appearing  on  the  adjournment 
in  his  great  wig,  as  his  custom  was,  he  said 


SHADWELL 

that '  he  had  turned  the  matter  over  as  he 
lay  upon  his  pillow,  and  after  rummadng 
and  considering  upon  it  a  great  deal,  he 
could  not  help  declaring  that  ne  was  of  the 
same  opinion  as  before.'  On  which  Mr. 
Charles  Townshend  started  up  and  said 
'  he  was  very  sorry  that  what  the  learned 
gentleman  had  found  in  his  nightcap  he 
had  lost  in  his  periwig.' 

On  the  deatn  of  Sir  Charles  Clarke  he 
was  very  unexpectedly  offered  the  place  of 
master  of  the  Kolls,  which  he  accepted  oo 
December  12, 1764,  to  the  surprise  of  the 
bar,  as  his  professional  income  greatly  ex- 
ceeded that  attached  to  the  office.  He  was 
thereupon  knighted.  He  presided  most  effi- 
ciently in  his  court  for  twenty  years,  bat 
in  the  latter  part  of  his  career  he  suffered 
much  from  those  infirmities  the  anticipa- 
tion of  which  no  doubt  influenced  his  de- 
termination to  quit  the  laborious  duties  of 
a  leading  barrister.  His  offers  of  resigna- 
tion were  ineffectual,  the  terms  he  reqmred 
being  too  high  to  be  granted.  He  therefore 
died  '  in  harness/  on  March  6,  1784,  and 
was  buried  in  the  Rolls  ChapeL 

He  married  twice.  His  first  wife  was 
Catherine,  daughter  of  Thomas  Heath,  of 
Stansted  Mountfichet  in  Essex,  M.P.  for 
Harwich ;  and  his  second  was  Mary  Elixa- 
beth,  daughter  of  Dr.  Coningsby  Sibthoip^ 
of  Canwick  in  Lincolnshire,  professor  of 
botany  at  Oxford.  He  had  issue  by  both 
marriages.  (Corr,  of  Lord  Chatham;  GetU, 
Mag,  liv.  237,  267;  Notes  attd  Queries,  Ifi 
S.  vii.  388,  621, 621,  ix.  86,  2nd  S.  x.  396; 
Manning  and  Bray's  Surrey ^  i.  498,  liL 
196.  304.) 

SETTOK,  Roger  be,  who  was  of  tke 
clerical  profession,  is  not  mentioned  till 
April  1268,  62  Henry  lU.,  from  which 
date  fines  were  acknowledged  and  paj- 
ments  made  for  assizes  before  him  tillue 
end  of  the  reign.     (DugdMs  Orig.  44.) 

On  the  accession  of  Edward  L  he  ww 
continued  in  the  Common  Pleas,  and  waa 
constituted  chief  justice  of  that  court  in 
Michaelmas  of  the  second  year,  in  which  he 
also  stands  at  the  head  of  the  justices  iti- 
nerant. As  the  last  fine  acknowledged 
before  him  is  dated  on  the  octaves  of  le- 
nity, 6  Edward  I.,  1278,  the  period  of  his 
death  or  retirement  may  be  fixed  about 
that  time.  In  the  same  year  he  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Thomas  de  Weyland. 

SHADWELL,  Lancelot,  was  the  eldwt 
son  of  Lancelot  ShadweU,  Esq.,  of  Lin- 
coln's Inn,  and  Elizabeth,  third  dau^ter 
of  Charles  Whitmore,  Esq.,  of  South- 
ampton. His  father  was  a  barrister  of  high 
reputation  and  immense  practice  as  a  real 
property  lawyer,  firom  whom  he  naturally 
inherited  his  great  love  of  that  branch,  and 
the  excellence  in  it  which  he  afterwards 
exhibited.  He  was  bom  on  May  3, 1779, 
and  was  educated  at  Eton,  from  whence  he 


SIIADWELL 

removed  to  St.  John's  CoUecfe,  Cambridge, 
where  he  exercised  that  industry^  without 
which  no  success  is  to  be  attained,  to  so 
good  an  effect  that  on  his  taking  his  degree 
of  B.A.  in  1800  he  was  honomably  placed 
as  seventh  wrangler,  and  highly  distin- 
guished himself  in  classics  by  obtaining 
one  of  the  chancellor's  medals.  With  such 
results  he  was  nearly  sure  to  succeed  in 
passing  the  very  strict  examination  for  a 
fellowship  in  the  college,  to  which  he  was 
accordingly  elected,  and  he  proceeded  M.A. 
in  1803,  to  which  was  added  in  1842  the 
honorary  degree  of  LL.D. 

Following  his  father's  footsteps,  he  en- 
tered the  society  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  bv  which 
he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1803,  and  in 
little  more  than  a  year  lost  his  fellowship 
by  marrying  a  sister  of  Sir  John  Richard- 
son, the  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas.  After 
a  very  successful  practice  in  the  Court  of 
Chancery  as  a  junior  barrister  for  eighteen 
years,  he  was  honoured  with  a  silk  gown 
m  1821.  He  then  acquired  a  considerable 
lead,  but  submitted  to  a  serious  loss  in  a 

Eecuniary  sense,  by  honourably  confining 
imself  to  the  lord  chancellor's  court,  and 
not  following  the  practice,  which  was  then 
too  commonly  adopted,  of  taking  briefs  in 
the  other  equity  courts;  not  being  able, 
according:  to  his  own  expression, '  to  induce 
himself  to  think  that  it  is  consistent  with 
justice,  much  less  with  honour,  to  under- 
take to  lead  a  cause,  and  either  to  forsake 
it  altogether  or  give  it  an  imperfect,  hasty, 
and  divided  attention — consequences  that 
inevitably  result  from  the  attempt  to  con- 
duct causes  before  two  judges  sitting  at  the 
same  time  in  different  places.' 

In  1820  he  entered  parliament  as  mem- 
ber for  Ripon,  a  borough  in  which  he  had 
the  opportunitv,  of  which  he  fully  availed 
himself,  of  doing  much  good,  as  the 
manager  of  the  large  property  of  Miss 
Lawrence,  the  principal  owner.  In  the 
year  to  which  nis  senatorial  career  was 
confined  he  applied  himself  t«i  remedy 
some  of  the  evils  attendant  upon  the  exist- 
ing laws  of  real  propertv,  by  limiting  the 
periods  during  which  titles  might  be  dis- 
puted. Time  wa.s  not  given  him  to  bring 
mA  suggestion**  to  a  successful  issue,  but  | 
many  of  them  have  since  been  adopted. 

He  was  appointed  vice-chancellor  of 
England  on  November  1,  1827,  and  pre- 
mded  in  his  court  for  twonty-three  years, 
during  which  he  twice  tilled  tlie  office  of 
second  commi8si(^ner  (>f  the  Great  Seal — 
the  first  time  from  April  23,  1835,  to 
January'  10,  1830,  in  conjunction  with  Sir 
Charles  Pepys  (afterwards  I/ord  Cotten- 
ham),  the  master  of  the  Rolls,  and  Mr. 
Justice  Bosanquet ;  and  the  second  time 
from  June  10  to  July  15,  1850,  his  col- 
leagues being  Lord  I^ngdale,  the  master 
of  the  Rolls,  and  Mr.  Baron  Rolfe  (after- 


SHAFTESBURY 


609 


wai'ds  Lord  Cran worth).  Whether  as  vice- 
chancellor  or  lord  commissioner,  he  was  a 
universal  favourite  both  with  the  bar  and  the 
public  for  the  courteousness  of  his  demeanour 
and  the  kindness  of  his  nature.  No  one  who 
ever  advised  with  him  as  a  barrister  or  sat 
under  him  as  a  judge  can  remember  a  word 
of  harshness  coming  from  his  lips,  or  can 
forget  the  patient  way  in  which  he  listened 
to  the  arguments  of  counsel  or  the  pleasant 
mode  in  which  he  delivered  his  judgments. 
Yet  there  was  no  want  of  decent  gravity  in 
his  manner,  nor  of  solidity  in  his  decisions. 
They  exhibited  the  legal  learning  he  had 
early  imbibed,  and  proved  his  eminent 
qualifications  for  the  judicial  chair. 

His  handsome  person  and    sweet   yet 
manly  countenance  impressed  all  in  his 
favour,  and  his  active  habits,  with  the 
custom  he  had  of  bathing  every  day,  what- 
ever the  weather,    gave    him    a    robust 
appearance  that  promised  an  extreme  length 
of  life.     So  fond  was  he  of  the  water  that 
it  was  said,  with  what  truth  we  will  not 
decide,  that  he  once  granted  an  injunction 
during  the  long  vacation  while  immersed 
in  that  element.    But  he  was  not  destined 
for  the  long  life  that  his  healthy  aspect 
promised.    Soon  after  the  termination  of 
the  duties  of  his  last  commission  he  was 
seized  with  an  illness  which  terminated 
fatally  at  his  residence  at  Bam  Elms  in 
Surrey  on  August  10,  1850.     The  estima- 
tion in  which  he  was  regarded  by  his 
brother  judges  may  be  judged  from  the 
afl\)cting  language  used  by  Vice-Chancellor 
ICnight-Bruce  on  opening  his  court  at  the 
beginning  of  the  next  term.     Addressing 
the  attorney-general,  Sir  John  Romilly, 
he  said, '  It  has  been  impossible  for  me  to 
enter  the  court  to-day  without  a  renewal 
of  sorrow  for  the  loss  of  one  so  lately  taken 
from  us,  by  whom  for  so  many  years  this 
chair  was'  filled,   and  from  which  it  is 
almost  startling  to  hear  another  voice  than 
his.    In  these  feelings  I  am  sure  the  bar 
participate.    We  have  lost  at  once  a  friend 
dear  to  us  all,  and  a  judge  distinguished 
for  his  great  knowledge  of  the  law  that  he 
administered  —  distinguished  for    various 
acquirements  —  distinguished  for  judicial 
patience — ever  "  swift  to  hear  and  slow  to 
decide'' — pure  and  blameless  in  life — an 
example  ot  courtesy,  gentleness,  and  ame- 
nity— who  never  said  a  word  intended  to 
give  pain,  nor  ever  harboured  an  unkind 
thought,  or  one  acrimonious  feeling — ^^Jle.re 
ct  ffieiniHisde  relictnm  est.^'' ' 

Sir  Lancelot's  first  wife  died  after  bring- 
ing to  him  six  sons.  His  second  wife  was 
Frances,  daughter  and  coheir  of  Captain 
Locke,  and  by  her  he  had  six  more  sons  and 
five  daughters,  in  all  seventeen  children, 
of  whom  he  left  eleven  surviving. 

SHAFTESBUBT,  Earl  oy.  See  A.  A. 
Cooper. 

BB 


610 


SHAEDELOWE 


SHABDELOWE,  Robert  be,  or,  as  his 
name  is  sometimes  spelled,  CH^EtDELAWE, 
united  the  clerical  and  the  legaljprofessions. 
He  was  one  of  the  justiciers  at  Westminster 
from  Michaelmas,  13  Henry  IH.,  1228,  to 
Easter  1232.  (DtufdiUe's  Orip.^,)  During 
this  period  he  is  recorded  to  have  been 
appointed  to  three  circuits.  He  was  of  the 
same  Norfolk  family  to  which  the  next- 
mentioned  John  de  Shardelowe  belongred. 
(  Thorototi'a  Notts,  i.  375 ;  Gage's  Suffolk,  59.) 

SHAEDELOWE,  John  de,  belonged  to  a 
family  settled  at  Thompson  in  Norfolk,  in 
the  church  of  which  liis  ancestors  were 
interred,  and  both  he  and  his  wife  reposed. 
Besides  possessions  in  this  county,  he  had 
manors  m  Suffolk  and  Cambridge,  and 
considerable  property  in  the  latter. 

EQs  name  appears  as  an  advocate  in  the 
Year  Books  of  Edward  U.  and  HI.,  and  in 
the  sixth  year  of  the  latter  reign  he  was 
raised  to  tne  bench  of  the  Common  Pleas, 
and  wafl  created  a  knight  of  the  Bath. 
Duffdale  says  that  he  exchanged  his  court 
with  Robert  de  Scardeburgh  for  that  of 
the  King's  Bench  on  September  6,  1339. 
Yet  the  same  author  states  that  fines  con- 
tinued to  be  levied  before  him  till  a  month 
after  Michaelmas  1340,  and  this  being  a 
duty  solelv  devolving  on  judges  of  the 
Common  t'leas,  it  would  seem  that  his 
absence  from  the  court  was  but  texnporary. 
It  was  about  the  latter  period  that  Edward 
m.  returned  to  England  from  Toumay, 
and  visited  upon  his  ministers  his  disap- 
pointment at  the  failure  of  supplies.  Sharde- 
lowe, in  whichever  court  ne  then  acted, 
was  one  of  the  victims,  being  removed 
from  his  office  and  imprisoned.  The  charge 
against  him  does  not  appear,  but  in  littie 
more  than  a  year  he  was  restored  to  his 
place  in  the  Common  Pleas,  his  patent 
being  dated  May  16,  1342.  He  was  a 
trier  of  petitions  in  the  parliament  of  the 
next  year,  and  died  in  18  Edward  HI. 

He  left  two  sons,  John  and  Thomas,  the 
latter  of  whom  we  take  to  have  been 
attorney-general  in  40  Edward  UI.  The 
family  continued  to  flourish  in  Norfolk  till 
11  Bfenry  VI.,  1433,  when  it  failed  for 
want  of  male  issue.  {Blomefield's  Norfolk, 
I  476,  625-630 ;  Dugdah's  Grig.  39,  45, 
102  ;  Rot  Pari.  ii.  135  j  Cal,  Inquis,  p.  m. 
ii.  117  ;  Gage's  Suffolk,  60.) 

SHABESHULL,  WiLLiiJC  de,  was  bom 
at  the  manor  of  Shareshull  in  the  county 
of  Stafford.  He  is  mentioned  among  the 
advocates  in  the  Year  Book  of  Edward  II. 
Li  5  Edward  IH.  he  was  a  king's  Serjeant, 
and  in  the  next  year  was  one  of  the  council 
whom  the  king  selected  to  advise  him 
(Sot  Pari  ii.  69),  being  about  the  same  time 
invested  with  the  knighthood  of  the  Bath. 

On  March  20, 1333,  he  was  constituted  a 
judge  of  the  £anfl:^<  Bench,  but  remained 
in  that  couit  foi  Uttle  more  than  two 


SHEE 

months,  being  removed  into  the  Common 
Pleas  on  Mav  30  following.  His  con- 
tinuance on  tlie  bench  was  interrupted  in 
December  1340,  by  his  dismissal  and  im- 
prisonment on  some  char^  of  maladminis- 
tration made  by  the  king  on  his  return 
from  the  siege  ot  Toumay.  (^Barnes's  Ed- 
ward III.  212.)  The  particulars  are  not 
recorded ;  but  in  no  very  long  time  he  re- 
covered the  royal  favour,  being  reinstated 
on  May  10,  1342 ;  and  on  July  2,  1344,  he 
was  raised  to  the  office  of  chief  baron  of 
the  Exchequer.  He  sat  in  that  court  aboa: 
sixteen  months,  when,  on  NoTember  10, 
1345,  he  was  removed  to  the  CommoD 
Pleas,  with  the  tide  of  second  justice, 
which  he  retained  for  the  next  five  yeara, 
and  was  appointed  one  of  the  custodes  d 
the  principality  of  Wales,  &c.,  during  the 
minority  of  the  king's  son.  (Cal.  Rot.  PbL 
164.) 

On  October  26,  1350,  he  ^^as  advanced 
to  the  head  of  the  Court  of  King's  Beneb, 
and  presided  in  it  till  July  5, 1367.  While 
holding  that  office  he  declared  the  causes  of 
the  meeting  of  five  parliaments,  from  25  to 
29  Edward  IH.  (Rot.  Pari.  ii.  226-261) 
He  seems,  indeed^  at  this  time  to  hare 
been  more  a  political  and  parliamentar? 
judge  than  a  man  of  law,  for  no  chi^ 
justice  is  so  seldom  mentioned  in  the  Yetr 
Books.  Having  pronounced  a  judgment 
against  the  Bishop  of  Ely,  for  harbouiinf 
one  of  his  people  who  had  slain  a  man  i 
Lady  Wake's,  he  was  excommunicated  hj 
the  pope,  in  the  last  year  of  his  judidil 
career,  for  not  appearing  when  summoned. 
(Barnes's  Edward  III.  651.) 

In  Clarke's  'Ipswich'  (p.  14)  it  is  related 
that  at  that  town  some  sailors  thinking  li< 
stayed  too  long  at  dinner,  one  of  uem 
mounted  on  the  bench  and  fined  the  jadge 
for  not  appearing.  He  took  such  oiTence  at 
this  joke  that  he  induced  the  king  ik^ 
only  to  take  away  the  assizes  firom  the 
town,  but  also  to  seize  the  liberties  of  tlie 
corporation  into  his  own  hands,  which  be 
held  for  about  a  year. 

After  retiring  firom  the  bench^  on  which 
he  had  sat,  with  a  slight  interruption,  fof 
above  twenty-four  years,  he  still  retamed 
the  royal  favour ;  for  we  find  him  in  confi- 
dential positions  as  late  as  the  thirty-fooith 
year  of  the  reign.    (N.  Fasdera^  iii.  4o7, 469.) 

He  lived  beyond  37  Edward  HL,  is 
which  year  he  granted  hia  manor  d 
Alurynton  in  Uloucefltershire  to  tbe 
abbot  and  convent  of  Osenej,  in  additios 
to  lands  at  Sandford  in  Oxfordshire  whick 
he  had  given  six  years  before.  He  was  t 
benefactor  also  to  the  convents  of  Bruera 
and  Dudley. 

8HES,  WiLLiAJL  was  the  first  jadfle  who 
was  rused  to  the  English  bench  xmaer  th« 
Roman  Catholic  Rdief  Act,  which  w 
I  passed  nearly  forty  years  before,  to  tab 


SHELLEY 

«way  the  disabilities  which  attached  to 
'persons  of  that  persuasion.  In  all  other 
departments^  civil,  military,  and  legislative, 
it  nas  been  ever  since  acted  upon ;  but  the 
judicial  office  had  been  hitherto  excepted. 

William  Shee  was  of  an  old  Irish  family. 
•His  father,  Joseph  Shee,  Esq.,  of  Thomas- 
town  in  the  county  of  Edlkenny,  was  a 
LfOndon  merchant,  and  his  mother  was 
Teresa,  daughter  of  John  Darell,  Esq.,  of 
Scotney  Castle  in  Kent.  He  was  bom  at 
flnchley  in  Middlesex  in  1804,  and,  being 
brought  up  in  the  religion  of  his  parents^ 
y/nLS  sent  for  instruction  to  the  Koman 
•Catholic  College  of  St  Cuthbert,  near 
I>urham,  from  whence  he  proceeded  to  the 
university  of  Edinburgh.  Having  next 
l>een  admitted  a  member  of  Lincoln's  Inn, 
he  was  called  to  the  bar  by  that  society  on 
June  19,  1828,  and  began  his  forensic 
labours  by  travelling  the  Home  Circuit,  and 
attending  the  Surrey  sessions.  Both  there 
and  in  uie  London  courts  his  advocacy  re- 
-ceived  great  encouragement,  and  in  a  few 
Tears  he  gained  such  a  position  as  to  justify 
liim  in  accepting  the  seijeant's  coif  in  1840, 
'when  that  honourable  degree  was  for  a 
short  period  restored  to  all  its  privileges. 
Hia  reputation  was  greatly  increased  by 
his  puolication  in  the  same  year  of  an 
edition  of  Lord  Tenterden's  work  on  Ship- 
ping, and  the  extensive  knowledge  he  dis- 
played on  that  branch  of  law.  In  1847  he 
leceived  a  patent  of  precedence,  and  ten  years 
afterwards  he  was  made  queen's  serjeant. 

On  the  liberal  side  of  politics,  to  which 
he  had  attached  himself  from  the  outset  of 
his  career,  he  was  desirous  of  entering  par- 
liament ;  and  after  an  unsuccessful  attempt 
in  1847  to  represent  the  borough  of  Moryle- 
bone,  he  obtained  a  seat  in  1852  for  his 
&mily  county  of  Kilkenny,  which,  how- 
ever did  not  return  him  at  the  next  elec- 
tion in  1857.  In  the  House  of  Commons 
he  supported  the  principles  which  he  had 
always  professed,  and  naturally  advocated 
the  claims  of  the  Homan  Catholics. 

In  his  professional  course  he  had  long 

been  the  head  of  his  circuit,  and  in  London 

he  was  one  of  the  most  popular  leaders.   It 

iras  not,  however,  till  he  had  been  more 

than  thirty-five  years  at  the  bar  that  he 

"Was  called  to  the  bench,  although  on  more  [ 

than  one  occasion  he  had  been  employed  on  I 

the  circuit  to  preside  in  the  place  of  an  | 

%l»ent  judge.    He  was  at  length  selected  i 

%a  a  juage  of  the  Queen*s  Bench  on  Decem-  ; 

l>«r  is,  1863 ;  but  an  attack  of  apoplexy  i 

"terminated  his  career  on  February  19, 1868. 

He  married  Mary,  daughter  of  Sir  James 
"Qcttdon,  the  premier  baronet  of  Scotland. 

IHELLET,  WiLLiA3i,  was  of  an  ancient 
^^■ailv  of  Norman  extraction,  one  of  whose 
^■woiDers  accompanied  William  the  Con- 
^i^>Qor  in  his  expedition  against  England. 
^^bts  exist  as  to  the  precise  branch  to 


SHELLEY 


611 


;  which  the  judge  belonged,  but  he  is 
claimed,  and  apparently  on  valid  grounds, 
as  the  ancestor  of  the  baronet  of  Michel- 
grove.  If  this  be  so,  hU  grandfather  was 
John  Shelley,  member  for  Rye  from  1415 
to  1428;  and  his  father,  another  John, 
married  Elizabeth,  daughter  and  heir  of 
JohnMichelgrove,of  Michelgrove  in  Sussex. 
(Horsfield' 8 Lewes fU,17Q;  notion^ s Baronet, 
i.  59.)  He  was  the  second  son ;  and  after 
studying  the  law  at  the  Inner  Temple,  he 
was  appointed  reader  there  in  autumn  1517. 
At  that  time  he  was  one  of  the  judges  of 
the  Sheriff's  Court  in  London,  from  which 
office  he  was  raised  to  the  recordership  of 
that  city  in  1520;  and  three  years  after- 
wards he  was  elected  one  of  its  representa- 
tives in  parliament.  He  took  the  degree  of 
the  coif  m  1521,  and  was  promoted  to  be  a 
judge  of  the  Common  !Pleas  about  the 
beginning  of  1527,  the  first  fine  levied  be- 
fore him  being  dated  on  the  octave  of 
Hilary  in  that  vear,  18  Henry  VIU. 
{Dugdale's  Orig.  47,  103.) 

Soon  after  Wolsey*s  disgrace.  Judge 
Shelley  was  selected  to  apply  to  him  for 
York  House,  the  London  residence  of  the 
Archbishops  of  York,  to  which  the  king 
had  taken  a  great  fancy.  The  cardinal, 
objecting  that  it  was  not  his  to  give,  as  he 
was  only  tenant  for  life,  Shelley  informed 
him  that  all  the  judges  and  learned  counsel 
were  resolved  that  his  grace  might  make  a 
recognisance  thereof  to  the  king,  which 
would  be  a  sufficient  surrender.  '  Tell  his 
highness,'  answered  the  cardinal,  *  that  I 
am  his  most  faithful  subject  and  obedient 
beadsman,  whose  command  I  will  in  nowise 
disobey,  but  will  in  all  things  fulfil  his 

Pleasure,  as  you  the  fathers  of  the  law  say 
may.  Therefore  I  charge  your  conscience 
to  discharge  me,  and  show  his  highness 
from  me  that  I  must  desire  his  majesty  to 
remember  there  is  both  heaven  and  hell.' 
{Cavendish's  Wolsey,  155.)  He  then  ex- 
ecuted the  instrument,  and  York  House 
changed  its  name  to  Whitehall.  It  was 
probably  soon  after  performing  this  service 
that  Shelley  had  the  honour  of  entertaining 
the  king  at  Michelgrove.  {Gent,  Mag, 
iv.  713.) 

The  judge  seems  to  have  been  somewhat 
of  a  humourist  on  the  bench.  In  a  case 
which  he  thought  overlaboured  beyond  its 
merits  he  '  compared  it  to  a  Banbury  cheese, 
which  is  worth  little  in  substance  when  the 
parings  are  cut  off;  for  so  this  case,'  said 
ne,  'is  brief,  if  the  superfluous  trifling 
which  is  on  the  pleadings  be  taken  away.* 
{Dyer,  i.  42  b.)  He  was  continued  in  his 
place  on  the  accession  of  Edward  VI.,  and 
nis  death  occurred  between  November  3, 
1548  (the  date  of  his  last  fine),  and  May  10, 
1549,  when  his  successor  was  appointed. 

His  property  was  maktV^  YJi'cw^safe^  V^ 
his  mamage  \n^  A^ee,  m^  ^wx^goXwt  ^1 


612  SHIRLAND  SHUTE 


Sir  Henry  Bulknap,  grandson  of  the  chief 
justice  in  the  reign  of  Richard  II.  They 
nad  several  children,  one  of  whom  was  Sir 
Riche^  Shelley,  the  last  English  prior  of 
St.  John  of  .Teruf*alem.  From  their  eldest 
son  descended  John  Shelley  of  Michelprove, 
who  was  one  of  the  first  baronets  created 
by  James  I.  on  May  22,  IGll. 

The  baronetcy  of  Shelley  of  Castle 
Goring  in  Sussex  was  j^'anted  in  180G  to 
Bysshe  Shelley,  Esq.,  the  descendant  of  a 
youngrer  brother  of  the  judge.  He  was 
grandfather  of  the  eminent  poet  of  that 
name,  who  was  unfortunately  drowned 
during  his  father's  lite,  and  whose  son  now 


his  office  and  a  large  part  of  the  manor, 
whereupon  compensation  was  awarded  to 
hinL  (Eift,  Pari.  ii.  41.)  From  the  pre- 
vious year  to  the  end  of  nis  life  he  was  per- 
petually engaged  in  missions  to  differoit 
courts,  *  both  before  and  after  he  was  ap- 
pointed second  baron  of  the  Exchequer  on 
November  10,  1336,  10  Edward  IH.  {Cd. 
Rot  Pat,  120.)  How  long  he  remained  ia 
office  does  not  appear :  but  when  the  court 
was  reconstituted  on  January  20,  1342,  lu5 
name  was  omitted.  He  continued,  how- 
ever, to  be  engaged  in  diplomatic  employ- 
ments till  the  eighteenth  year,  about  which 
time  his  death  probably  occurred,  as  be  i? 


enjoys  the  title.  The  second  son  of  the  not  mentioned  subsequently.  {N.  FtBdere. 
first  Bysshe  Shelley  inheriting  the  estates  ii.  772-1241,  iii.  12.) 
of  his  mother,  the  granddaughter  of  Kobert,  SHOTTOIBON,  Robert  de,  was  of  a 
fourth  Earl  of  Leicester,  assumed  her  maiden  |  Kentish  family,  and  farmed  property  at  Os- 
name  of  Sidney,  and  was  created  a  baronet  I  pringe  under  the  crown.  In  123o  the  Tacint 
lof  Penshurst)  in  1818 ;  and  his  son,  having  bishopric  of  Norwich  was  committed  to  Ii* 
married  the  Lady  Sophia  Fitz-Clarence,  charge,  and  in  1243  he  had  a  grant  of  tb 
was  raised  to  the  peerage  in  1835  as  Baron  custody  of  the  land  and  heirs  of  Thomas  de 
Do  risle  and  Dudley.  Acton,  for  a  fine  of  thirty  marks.    Matther 

SHTEtLAKD,  Almaric  de,  had  a  convey-  :  Paris  calls  him  '  domini  regis  clericus  spe 
ance  to  him  of  the  manor  of  Mutford  m  cialis.'  He  was  raised  to  the  bench  about 
Suffolk  in  45  Edward  III.  He  was  placed  the  beginning  of  39  Henry  HI.,  1254,  and 
on  the  bench  of  the  Exchequer  as  t'ccond  his  name  appears  upon  fines  till  1257.  Ife 
baron  on  October  29, 1305, 39  Edward  III.,  ,  died  in  that  year  at  Hertford,  while  on  hL< 
when  a  considerable  change  was  made  in  |  circuit,  and  was  buried  in  the  priory  tbeie. 
the  judges  of  all  the  courts.  Beyond  that  j  Weever  (543)  calls  him  Sotiimton  or  Sad- 
dav  his  name  does  not  appear  in  the  pub-  !  ington  ;  so  that  he  may  have  been  the  as- 
lished  records,  except  in  the  forty-fourth  I  cestor  of  Thomas  do  Sodingt<m,  the  justif* 
year,  when  he  was  sent  into  Lincolnshire  |  itinerant  under  Edward  I.,  and  Robert  i 
and  three  neighbouring  counties  to  borrow  Sndington,  chief  baron  and  lord  chancell*? 
monev  for  the  kind's  use.  ( Cal.  Inquis.  p.m.  under  Edward  III.  (Excerpt,  e  Rot  Fm. i 
ii.  315 :  Issue  Roll,  112,  340.)  [  398,  429  ;   Abb.  Rot.  Oriff.  i.  2 ;   Dugide'i 

8H0BDICH,  John  de,  whose  name  is  un-  Ori{f.  43.) 
questionably  derived  from  the  parish  so  !  SHTTTE,  Robert,  was  of  Hockington  in 
called,  formerly  in  the  suburbs  of  London,  j  Cambridgeshire,  in  which  county  and  b 
and  now  forming  part  of  it,  was  not  impro-  Leicestershire  his  family  was  of  somestaDd- 
bably  the  son  of  Benedictus  de  Shordich,  ing ;  but  he  was  bom  in  Yorkshire,  u 
who  in  the  reign  of  Edward  I.  had  a  grant  j  appears  by  a  licence  to  him  to  hold  asaif? 
from  the  king  of  some  houses  of  a  Jew  in  i  in  that  county,  notwithstanding  his  birth, 
the  Old  Je>\Ty,  in  the  parish  of  St.  Olave,  '  {Rot.  Pat.  7.) 
in  Oolchorclie-streto.   (Abb.  Rot.  On'qA.  74. )        Having  passed  through  his  legal  studies. 

John  wns  an  advocate  in  the  Court  of  first  at  Barnard's  Iim  and  then  at  GraT* 
Arches,  and  in  18  Edward  II.  was  employed  Inn,  he  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  lati?r 
as  one  of  the  nuncios  to  treat  in  Flanders,    in  1552,  and  became  reader  in  1568,  aui 

being*  summoned  to 

He  must  bar.* 

putation  in  tb** 

Serjeant  who  wi? 

'Magister'  which  is  sometimes  prefixed  to  raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Exchequer  as  a 
his  name  applies,  no  doubt,  to  this  degree,  puisne  baron,  and  the  terms  of  his  patent 
and  not  to  any  clerical  order,  as  he  was  show  that  a  new  system  was  then  introduced 
knighted  in  17  Edward  III.,  and  is  always  into  that  court  Up  to  this  time  the  puian*- 
afterwards  described  with  that  rank.  For  barons  had  been  principally  selected  firoffl 
his  ser\'ice8  to  Edward  II.  he  was  rewarded  the  other  officers  of  the  deportment;  thejr 
with  the  chief  clerkship  of  the  Common  were  not  looked  upon  as  lawvers,  and  did 
Bench,  and  with  the  manor  of  Passenham  ,  not  go  the  circuits ;  varioua  instances  fc^J* 
in  the  county  of  Northampton.  But  bv  a  been  mentioned  of  their  still  conthniV* 
petition  to  parliament  in  4  Edward  fll.  their  original  inn  of  court  after  IH*^*^ 
(after  the  king  l\ad  fteed  himself  from  the  '  coming  barona,  and  there  is  no  ^^ 
control  of  hia  mot\ieT>  \i^  com^\K^«^  \\i<«X.  v'^XJ^Mk  i^riod  they  held  an 
iie  had  Veen  ousted.  \>y  ^e  c^<^«ii  V^^iXi  qva^  '^^  is^i^^s^  ^  ^^'^am  < 


SIGILLO 

But  cases  connected  with  the  revenue  and 
crown  debts  becoming  more  numerous  and 
intricate,  it  was  deemed  expedient  that  the 
court  should  be  gradually  filled  with  able 
lawyers ;  and  accordingly,  in  Serj  eant  Shute^s 
patent,  dated  June  1,1579.  constituting  him 
second  baron,  it  is  for  the  first  time  oidered 
that  'he  shall  be  reputed,  and  be  of  the 
aaxne  order,  rank,  estimation,  dignity,  and 
pre-eminence,  to  all  intents  and  purposes, 
as  any  puisne  ludge  of  either  of  the  two 
other  courts. '  After  nearly  nine  years'  occu- 
pation of  this  seat,  during  which  he  acted 
occasionally  as  a  judge  of  assize,  he  was  re- 
moved to  the  Queen^s  Bench  on  February  8, 
1586,  where  he  remained  till  his  death, 
which  occurred  in  1590.  {Sarnie's  Reports, 
W  ;  Bugdal^s  Orig.  294.) 

He  left  a  son,  Francis,  who  was  settled 
at  Upton  in  Leicestershire,  and  whose 
grandson,  John  Shute,  having  had  a  large 
•estate  bequeathed  to  him  bv  Francis  Bar- 
rington,  Esq.,  of  Tofts  in  Essex,  assumed 
tliat  gentleuian*s  name,  and  was  raised  in 
1720  to  the  Irish  peerage  as  Baron  and 
Viscount  Barrington.  (Biog,  Peerage,  iv. 
224 ;  NichoVs  Lit  Anecdotes,  vi.  444.') 

SIOILLO,  Nicholas  de.  Among  the 
iostices  itinerant  of  this  reign  the  name  of 
j^icholas  occurs  three  times,  and,  though 
distinguished  on  each  occasion  by  diiferent 
appellations,  it  is  probable  they  all  belong 
to  the  same  individual. 

Firrt,  in  19  Henry  II.,  1173,  'Nicholas 
-de  Sigillo  et  Ricardus  Thesaurarius '  set 
the  assize  on  the  king's  demesnes  in  Oxford- 
shire {MadoXj  i.  701 ) ;  and,  as  his  name  is 
placed  before  the  king's  treasurer,  it  may 
be  presumed  he  held  a  high  rank. 

Again,  in  the  roll  of  1174,  the  assizes 
set  by  Nicholas  the  archdeacon  *  et  socios 
auoe'  in  Buckinghamshire  and  Bedlbrdshiro 
appear  {Ibid,  123) ;  and  they  are  clearly 
■assizes  made  of  a  former  year,  as  the  new 
assize  for  that  year  is  made  by  other  jus- 
ticesL  Le  Neve  (158)  says  that  Nicholas 
de  Sigillo  was  archdeacon  of  Huntingdon 
as  early  as  1155.  It  appears,  therefore,  by 
the  first  of  these  entries,  that  it  was  not 
always  the  custom  to  designate  the  clerical 
4ignitv. 

And,  thirdly,  when  the  kingdom  was 

•divided  by  the  council  of  Windsor,  in  1179, 

into  four  districts  for  judicial  purposes,  and 

jadges  were  sent  into  each,   *Nicholau8, 

Capellanus  Regis,'  was  the  second  of  five 

appointed  to  act  in   Cambridgeshire   and 

eight  other  counties.    It  is  not  unlikely 

that  the  title  of  king's  chaplain  may  have 

^een  considered  equal,  if  not  superior,  to 

tliat  of  archdeacon ;  and  we  have  alreistdy 

that  the  latter  was  not  always  used. 

The  official  position  of  Nicholas  de  Sigillo 

■a  no  doubt  the  same  as  that  held  under 
^feniy  !•  by  Robert  de  Sigillo,  afterwards 
^iehon  of  London.     It  was  called  Clericus 


SKIPWITH 


613 


or  Manster  Scriptorii,  and  in  the  Red  Book 
of  the  Exchequer  is  placed  next  in  order  to 
the  chancellor,  with  considerable  allow- 
ances, which  that  king  increased  for  Robert 
de  Sigillo  to  two  shillings  a  day,  with  one 
sextary  of  household  wine,  one  seasoned 
simnel,  one  taper,  and  twenty-four  pieces 
of  candle.     {Ibid.  195.) 

In  1150  Nicholas  de  Sigillo  accounted 
for  two  hawks  in  Lincolnshire,  being  pro- 
bably his  fine  for  his  archdeaconry,  wldch 
was  in  that  diocese ;  and  other  entries  in 
the  Pipe  Rolls  in  that  and  the  two  fol- 
lowing years  plainly  prove  that  he  was 
connected  with  the  Exchequer.  In  1172 
Nicholas,  the  king's  chaplam,  was  sent  to 
assist  At  the  counsel  of  the  clergy  held  at 
Cashel  in|Ireland.  {Erodes  England,  300.) 
He  is  mentioned  in  1  Richard  I.,  1189 
(Pipe  Boll,  200),  but  the  archdeaconry  was 
held  bv  another  in  1191. 

SIMON  was  the  tenth  abbot  of  Reading, 
succeeding  Helias  in  1212.  He  was  fre- 
quently employed  under  both  John  and 
Henry  III.  In  16  John  he  was  sent  on  a 
mission  to  France,  and  in  4  Henry  III.  he 
was  in  the  commission  of  enquiry  issued  as 
to  the  forests,  and  also  had  the  custody  for 
a  short  time  of  the  castle  of  Devizes.  In  5 
Henry  IIL  he  was  placed  at  the  head  of  the 
justices  itinerant  sent  into  nine  counties ; 
and  in  the  next  year  he  had  a  grant  of 
twenty  oaks  from  the  New  Forest  to  repwr 
his  houses  at  Wichebury.  He  died  in 
February  1226.  (  Willis's  Mitred  Abbeys  ; 
Rot  Claus.  i.  175,  434,  458,  476,  513,  ii. 
99.) 

SIMPSON,  William,  is  described  in  his 
admission  to  the  Inner  Temple  in  Novem- 
ber 1657  as  of  Bromsgrove  in  the  county  of 
Worcester.  His  call  to  the  bar  did  not 
take  place  till  November  1674,  seventeen 
vears  after;  and  he  was  not  elected  a 
bencher  of  the  society  till  he  was  consti- 
tuted cursitor  baron.  To  that  office  he  was 
appointed  on  October  2,  1697,  receiving 
tne  honour  of  knighthood,  and  tilled  it 
nearly  nine-and-twenty  years  (under  three 
sovereigns),  when  his  great  age  obliged  him 
to  surrender  it  on  May  23,  1726.  {Lord 
Raymond,  748, 1317 ;  LuttreU,  iv.  287, 319.) 

SKIPWITH,  William  de,  the  linead 
descendant  of  Robert  de  Stuteville,  whose 
younger  son  assumed  the  name  in  the  reign 
of  Henry  111.,  from  the  lordship  so  called 
in  Yorkshire,  which  he  received  as  his  por- 
tion from  his  father,  was  the  second  son  of 
another  William,  by  Margaret,  the  daughter 
of  Ralph  Fitz-Simon,  lord  of  Ormsby  in 
Lincolnshire.  His  father  died  in  10  Edward 
III.,  and  his  brother  a  few  months  after- 
wards, so  that  he  then  succeeded  to  the 
estates.  He  is  stated  (but  upon  somewhat 
questionable  evidence)  to  have  belonged  to 
tne  society  of  Gray's  Inn,  and  to  bAi^^\)i^«<i 
the  first  reader  iVier^.    Waa  ^xciYRKftRfe  ^s^ 


614  SKIPWITH  SKIPWITH 

ndvocato  iuav  be  inferred  from  the  frequent  penses  and  equipment  in  gomg  there  (L 
recun*ence  of  his  arguments  in  tlie  Year  '  JRolif  458),  showing,  therefore/  that  he 
Books  from  17  Edward  III.  He  was  ap-  went  from  England.  This  is  a  fact  which 
pointt'd  one  of  the  kind's  Serjeant**  in  28  the  genealogists  have  entirely  omitted, 
Edward  HI.,  and  was  raised  to  the  bench,  and  it  wouldlie  difficult  to  accommodate  it 
as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas,  on  Octo-  to  their  accoimt.  If  the  father  was  dead, 
ber  25,  1360,  33  Edward  III.,  soon  after  as  they  state,  then  it  must  have  been  tbe 
which  he  was  created  a  knight.  From  this  ;  son,  which  would  thus  take  six  more  yeare 
bench  he  was  advanced  in  less  than  three  from  his  age  as  a  judge,  and  consequently 
years  to  be  chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  create  a  greater  improbability.  But  if  h 
(KaL  Ej'ch.  i.  105.)  j  were  the  father,  as  we  feel  satisfied  it  was, 

Eis  removal  from  this  office  took  place  it  is  easilv  reconciled  to  the  suppositioD 
on  October  29,  13C5,  39  Edward  HI.,  that  King  fedward,  having  satisfied  himaelf 
when  both  he  and  Sir  Henry  Green,  the  that  the  charges  against  him  were  un- 
chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench,  who  was  '  founded,  restored  the  victim  of  his  haite, 
deprived  of  his  place  on  the  same  day,  were  '  as  he  did  on  several  other  occasions,  to  \k 
imprisoned  on  the  charge  of  various  enor-  i  judicial  functions  on  the  first  opportunity, 
mities.  which,  according  to  the  historian,  '  Fourthly,  in  the  pedigree  of  the  familr. 
the  king  vnder^ood  they  had  committed  '  to  which  we  have  had  access  through  tif 
agninst  law  and  justice;  and  it  is  added  '  kindness  of  the  late  Sir  Gray  Skipwith. 
tliat  they  did  not  get  their  discharge  until  Bart.,  and  which  appears  to*  have  been 
thov  had  refunded  large  sums  of  money  drawn  up  about  the  end  of  the  seventeenth 
which  they  had  unjustly  acquired.  Barnes  century,  Sir  William,  the  undoubted  judge, 
(p.  007)  states  that  they  were  ever  after  |  is  called  '  capitalis  justidarius^^  and  hi5  soa 
secluded  from  their  places  and  the  king's  |  William  is  not  described  as  a  judge  at  all 
favour.  Whether  this  were  so  with  regard  '•  Now  the  former  never  was  chief  justice, 
to  Skipwith  remains  to  be  considered.  unless  he  was  the  chief  justice  of  Ireland: 

AVolton  and  Collins,  in  their  Baronetages,  !  and  if  he  were  so,  of  which  this  entry  seenL* 
stato  that  Skipwith  continued  in  office  a  confirmation,  then  he  could  not  have  difd 
till  40  Edward  ill.,  at  which  time  he  died,  '  at  the  period  named  by  Wotton  and  Collins: 
and  that  his  son  WiUtam  was  constituted  while  the  fact  of  the  latter  having  been  a 
a  judge  of  the  Common  lUeas  in  60  Edward  judge,  if  he  had  indeed  been  the  man,  could 
111.  In  the  firyt  of  these  assertions  they  not  have  been  overlooked  by  the  herald, 
are  manifestlv  wrong,  ns  the  records  clearly  '  when  there  was  exposed  tefore  him  a 
pn»vc  that  tbe  new  chief  baron  was  ap-  painted  window  in  the  mansion  at  Xewbold 
pointed  in  39  Edward  HI.  Hall,  presenting  a  portrait  in  judge's  robe?. 

ist    and  inscribed  in  allusiou  to  an  incident  of 


Barnes's  relation  proves  that  they  mu 


»1» 
this  latter  event,  the  question  arises  whether    deoimo  Jticardi  2'". 


we  are  inclined,  for  several  reasons,  to  think  i  judge,  neither  would  the  father  have  been 
that  this  was  so.  !  too  old  in  10  Richard  U.,  138t>,  the  alleged 

In   the  iiif!t  place,   there  is  no  second  '  time  of  his  final  rt'tirement,  to  sit  on  the 


was  constituted  chief  justice  of  the  King's 
Bench  in  Ireland  (A\  Fadera,  iii.  887) ; 


ceeded,  is  not  mentioned  as  an  adfOfliiitiD 


that  a  man  would  be  raised  to  the  bench  hostage  in  the  barons'  wars,  9  Joun,  1209. 
who  had  not  previously  distinguished  him-  '  The  chief  baron's  father  died  in  1»W  10 
self  in  some  wav  in  the  courts.  Edward  HI.,  leaving   an  interval  of  \i' 

Secondly,  it  is  not  probable,  and  indeed  years,  during  which  there  were  four  gene- 
scarcely  possible,  as  we  shall  presently  show,  ratioii.s,  thus  giving  to  each  little  uioie 
that  the  chief  baron  could  have  had  a  son  than  thirty  years.  It  is  clear,  therefore, 
old  enough  to  be  made  a  judge  in  60  Edward  j  that  the  chief  baron's  father  could  not  hare  I 
III.,  a  period  when  lawyers  are  reputed  to  been  an  old  man  when  he  died ;  and  there  I 
have  passed  through  a  lengthened  ordeid  is  every  'appearance  that  all  his  duldien  Ij 
before  they  were  raised  to  the  bench.  were  minors  at   his    death.    The  eldert,    W, 

Thirdly,  we  find  that  on  February  16, 1370,  1  John,  died  in  the  same  year  with  his  fether,   |t 
44  Edward  HI,  a  Sir  William  de  Skipwith    childless;  and  the  chief  baron,  who  fio-  |i 


i5ench  in  Ireland  (A\  Fadera,  iii.  887);    seven  years  afterwarda.    Preiov  1 1 

and  thatonthe21stt\iQsvmiQl^A^.4d..^lthat  he  was  eighteen  yean  «^  1 1 

or  40  marks,  -wan  ^^  to  Yonv  lot  \a&  cx-\ii^^^^  ^x^V^^^so&d  be  twa  |  \ 


SKIRLAWE 


615 


SKIPWITH 

lie  appeared  in  the  courts^  thirty-six  when 
he  became  a  Serjeant,  forty-one  when  made 
a  judge,  forty-four  as  chief  baron,  fifty-two 
as  chief  justice  of  Ireland,  fifty-eight  when 
he  returned  as  a  judge  to  England,  and  only 
sixty-eight  or  sixty-nine  at  the  date  of  his 
retirement  in  10  or  11  Richard  IL  Even 
if  three  or  four  years  were  added,  his  a^e 
would  not  exceed  the  bounds  of  reasonable 
probability. 

It  will  be  at  once  seen  that,  if  this  cal- 
culation approaches  in  any  degree  to  cor- 
rectness, it  would  be  next  to  impossible 
that  ho  should  have  a  son  old  enough  in 
1:^70  to  be  placed  in  so  high  a  'judicial 
ofiice  as  chief  justice  of  the  lung's  Bench 
in  Ireland ;  and  this  becomes  still  less  pro- 
bable when  we  find  that  the  chief  barou*s  ,  illness,  he  fortunately  escaped  the  conse- 
second  son,  John,  ultimately  succeeded  to  guenccs  in  which  they  involved  themselves, 
the  estates  by  the  death  of  the  elder  son, 
William,  without  male  issue,  and  lived  till 
9  Henry  V.,  I4'2'2f  in  which  reign  he  was 
returned  t*)  parliament  as  one  of  the  mem-  !  the  followfng  February,  in  which  all  his 


the  court  after  his  return  from  Ireland,  his 
re-appointment  being  dated  October  8, 1376. 
On  the  accession  of  Richard  II.,  in  the 
following  Year,  he  was  retained  in  his  place 
as  second  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  and 
continued  in  the  active  performance  of  his 
duties  throughout  the  first  ten  years  of 
that  reign.  He  was  summoned,  with  the 
rest  of  the  judges,  to  the  council  of  Not- 
tingham in  August  1387,  11  Richard  11., 
when  the  king*s  favourites  compelled  hia 
brethren  to  subscribe  certain  questions  and 
answers  condemnatory  of  the  proceedings 
of  the  parliament  in  appointing  a  coun- 
cil for  the  government  of  the  kingdom. 
Whether  he  did  or  did  not  suspect  the 
object  does  not  appear;  but,  by  pleading 


He  was  the  only  one  of  those  who  had 

previously  sat  on  the  bench  who  acted  as 

,  a  trier  of  petitions  in  the  parliament  of 


bers  for  Lincolnshire. 

If  the  father  died,  as  is  alleged,  in  1306, 
leaving  one  8on  of  sulficient  age,  in  1370, 


brethren  were  impeached  and  attainted. 

They  were  all  of  course  removed  from 
their  seats,  and  he  seems  to  have  taken  the 


to  be  made  a  judge,  and  another  not  too  same  opportunity  of  retiring  from  the  bench, 
old,  lifty  years  afterwards,  to  be  member  of  I  as  no  fines  were  levied  before  him  after 
parliament,  the  discrepancy  between  the  that  date.  His  death  did  not  occur  till 
two  Hges  must  have  been  somewhat  extra-  some  years  afterwards,  as  ho  was  alive  in 
ordinary ;  while,  if  the  father  lived,  as  the    15  Richard  II. 

evidence  seems  to  justify  us  in  supposing,  j  He  married  Alice,  sole  daughter  and  heir 
till  after  li>>7,  all  difficulty  is  removed,  and  '  of  Sir  William  de  Hiltoft,  lord  of  Ingold- 
everything  appears  njitural  and  in  common    mells  in  Lincolnshire,  by  whom  he  had 


course. 

We  feel  that  we  are  warranted,  there- 
fore, in  regarding  the  Sir  William  de  Skip- 


several  children.  On  the  death  of  his  elder 
son,  William,  without  issue  male,  the  bulk 
of  his  estate  descended  to  his  second  son, 


with  who  was  appointed  chief  justice  of  the  John,  whose  family  was  distingiushed  by 
King's  Rench  in  Ireland  in  1370  as  the  .  no  less  than  three  btironetcies,  two  of  whicn 
same  person  who  was  removed  from  the  ,  are  now  extinct — \\z.,  1.  Sir  Fulwar  Skip- 
oilioe  of  chief  baron  in  l.*]()5,  and  conse-  *  with,  of  Newbold  Hall,  Warwickshire,  re- 
quently  as  the  same  pei*son  who  was  re-  '  ceived  the  title  on  October  25, 1070,  which 
stored  to  hi.s  old  position  as  justice  of  the  !  failed  in  1790  j  2.  Sir  Thomas  Skipwith,  of 
Common  Pleas  in  England  in  1370.  It  is  j  Metheringham  in  Lincolnshire,  a  serjeant- 
evident  that  Dugdale  so  considered  him,  as  ,  at-law,  wu.«*  created  a  baronet  on  July  27, 
iu  his  list  of  the  judges  {Oriy.  45)  before  i  1078,  but  hL*  jn-andson  dying  without  issue 
whum  tines  were  levied  he  mentions  only  in  1750,  the  title  expired.  The  third,  how- 
one  William  Skipwith,  and  connects  the  ever,  which  is  the  more  ancient,  being 
two  periods  of  his  acting  by  the  words  *  et  \  granted  to  Sir  Henry  Skipwith,  of  Prest- 
iteruui;'  and  no  one  can  observe  the  man-  ;  would  in  Leicestershire,  on  December  20, 
ner  in  which  Skipwith  is  noticed,  in  the  1022,  still  survives, 
only  case  in  which  his  name  is  mentioned,  SKIBLAWE,  Walter  (Bishop  of  Dur- 
in  Michaelmas,  50  Edward  III.,  in  the  Year  i  ham),  had  the  custody  of  the  Great  Seal 
Books,  without  being  satisiied  that  it  is  no  ,  with  three  others  for  the  period  of  six 
new  judge  who  speaks,  but  one  who  had  "  weeks,  from  August  8  to  September  20, 
experience  and  authority.     *  Et  adonques  !  I.*i82.  It  had  been  first  committed  to  Hugh 


vient  Mons.  W.  Skipwith  en  le  place  quant 
le  matt,  fuit  pled,  et  did,'  &c.  The  great 
case  of  the  Bishop  of  *  Sancto  Davy,  and 
John  Wyton,  clerk,  was  then  in  discua-ion. 


de  Segrave,  William  de  Highton,  and  John 
de  Waltham  on  July  11;  but  Skirlawe, 
having  succeeded  Dighton  as  keeper  of  the 
privy  seal,  was  then  added  to  them  in  the 


and  his  opinion  having  been  given  with  .  execution  of  this  duty, 
dignity  and  distinctness,  the  other  judges  According  to  tradition,  ho  was  the  son  of 
concurred,  and  the  judgment  was  pro-  |  a  sieve-maker,  and  was  born  at  Swine  in 
Dounced  in  accordance  with  it.  (I'ear  Hook,  :  Ilolderness,  Yorkshire.  Educated  at  Dur- 
50  Edicard  III.  fo.  27,  pi.  8.)  This  pro-  |  ham  College,  Oxford,  he  took  the  degree  of 
bably  took  place  on  his  first  appearance  in    Doctor  in   Laws,  or^  as  he  is  frequently 


616 


SKYNNER 


SMITH 


called  '  Decretorum  Doctor.'  He  seems  to  1 1771  he  was  made  kiog*8  connad,  and 
hare  been  one  of  the  clerks  in  Chancer^*,  !  attorney  of  the  duchy  of  Lancaster ;  and  in 
as  he  was  named  a  receiver  of  petitions  m  the  next  year  he  was  constituted  second 
the  parliament  of  January  1377,  this  func-  judge  on  the  Chester  Circuit, 
tion  being  usually  assigned  to  that  class  of  On  November  17, 1777,  he  was  promoted 
officers.  He  held  the  same  position  also  in  to  the  head  of  the  Court  of  Exche^oer,  in 
the  first  four  parliaments  of  Kichard  II.    which  he  presided  with  great  leammg  and 


(Eot.  Pari  ii.  8(W,  iii.  4-89.^  As  was 
usual  with  the  Chancery  clerKS,  he  soon 
received  ecclesia^ical  dignities.  He  was 
lirst  made  dean  of  St.  ^Martin's  in  London, 
and  held  that  rich  benefice  on  April  26, 
1377,  when  he  was  sent  by  King  Ldward 
as  one  of  the  ambassadors  to  negotiate  a 
treaty  with  France.  (A'.  Fccdera,  iii.  1070.) 
In  the  beginninff  of  the  next  reign  he  was 
likewise  engaged  in  other  diplomatic  mis- 
sions. {Bymer,  vii.  223,  229.)  About  1381 
he  became  treasurer  of  Lincoln  and  arch- 
deacon of  Northampton,  and.  soon  after, 
archd«'acon  of  tb(»  East  Kidmg  of  York. 
{Le  Neve,  152, 1«2,  327.) 

His  elevation  to  the  ofKce  of  keeper  of 
the  privy  seal  took  place  as  we  have  seen 
in  1382,  and  he  held  it  till  he  was  elected 
Bishop  of  Lichfield  and  Coventry  in  1385. 
During  his  possession  of  this  post  ho  was 
selected  to  announce  to  the  parliament  of 
October  138.')  the  crt?ntion  of  the  king's 
uncles,  Edmimd  and  Thomas,  to  the  duke- 
doms of  York  and  Gloucester,  and  of  Michael 
de  la  Pole  to  the  earldom  of  Suffolk ;  and 
the  Parliament  Itoll,  in  describing  the  cere- 
monv,  calls  him  *  doctor  egregius,  eloquens 
ot  diseretup.'    {Rot.  Pari.  iii.  205-0.) 

He  had  held  the  bishopric  of  Lichfield  and 
Coventry  for  a  year  only,  when  he  was 
removed  to  that  of  Bath  and  Wells  in 
August  1380,  where  lie  remained  less  than 
two  years,  being  translated  to  the  richer  see 
of  Durham  in  April  1388.  He  presided 
over  this  diocese  for  seventeen  years,  and, 
dying  on  March  24, 1405,  was  buried  in  his 
cathedral. 


ability  for  nine  years.  His  want  of  heslth 
obliged  him  Xa>  resign  his  seat  in  Janiuiy 
1787,  when  he  was  honoured  with  a  seit 
in  the  privy  council 

The  chief  baron  lived  nearly  mne  yeta 
after  his  retirement,  and  died  on  November 
20,  1805,  at  Milton,  where  he  was  bmiBd 
in  the  same  vault  with  his  wife,  Mtii^ 
the  daughter  of  Edward  Bum  and  Itfaitk 
Davie.  They  left  a  daughter,  Fredflria, 
who  married  Richard  Kyder,  brother  of 
the  first  Earl  of  Harrowby,  and  afterwanli 
secretary  of  state.  (CM'ns's  Peerage,  t. 
718;  Gent.  Mag.  xc.  107 ;  Blackdone'iRif, 
1178;  1  Terjn  Rep.  ^\,) 

SMITH,  JoHX.  The  original  name  of 
this  family,  tracing  its  lineage  to  the  stan- 
dard-bearer of  Richard  I.,  was  Carrington, 
which  was  changed  in  the  reign  of  Hemy 
VI.  to  that  of  Smith,  by  John  Carrington, 
who  was  obliged  to  fly  the  countrv.  Hii 
son  Hugh,  of  Cressing*  in  Essex,  wlin  died 
in  148o,  was  father  to  this  John  Smith, 
who  became  a  clerk  in  the  office  of  tm- 
8urer*s  remembrancer  in  the  Sxchequer, 
and  had  a  grant  of  that  office  in  Janmuj 
1513.  On  August  1,  15;)0,  he  received  i 
grant  of  the  oiHce  of  second  baron  of  that 
court,  in  reversion  after  the  death  or  re- 
tirement of  John  Hales,  whom  it  appean 
he  succeeded  in  the  following  Michaelmis 
Term.  He  preserved  his  seat  on  the  bench 
during  the  remainder  of  the  reign,  but  was 
not  re-appointed  on  the  accession  of  Ed- 
ward VI. 

He  married  twice.  Bv  his  first  wife, 
Alice,   daught(»r    and    colieir   of  Edward 


Surtees  describes  him  as  '  a  pious  and  Wood,  grocer,  of  London,  ht*  had  six  sons, 
humble  prelate,  whose  name  is  transmitted  i  ]5y  his  second  wife,  Agnes,  daughter  and 
to  posterity  only  by  his  works  of  charity  ;  heir  of  John  Harwell,  of  Wotton  Waren 
and  munificence,-  and  of  these  many  are  !  in  "Warwickshire,  he  had  two  sons  and  six 
recorded.  {Godwin,  321,  378,  751 ;  Sur-  ;  daughters.  From  one  of  his  sons  descended 
t£cs  Durliam,  i.  liv.  Iv.)  I  Sir  Charles  Smith,  whom  Charles  I.  created 

SKTNNEB,  John,  had  not  the  advantage  '  Ix)rd  Carrington  of  Wotton  Waven  on 
of  a  very  opulent  parentage,  but  owed  his  October  31,  1G43,  adding  on  November  4 
success  m  life  to  his  own  exertions.  He  '■  the  Irish  viscounty  of  Carrington  of  Baire- 
was   one  of  the  sons  of  John  and  P^liza-  i  fore,  but  both  titles  became  extinct  in  1705. 


The  date  of  his  call  to  the  bar  has  not  been 
found,  nor  any  incidents  of  his  early  career, 
but  he  must  soon  have  acquired  consider- 
able practice  and  reputation  in  the  courts 
to  enable  him  to  obtain  a  seat  in  the  par- 
liaments of  1708  and  1774,  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  Woodstock.  There,  though 
not  a  frequent  speaVex,  "Vift  ftYio^^\i\a  «»m- 


perior  qunlitications  in  8e\eTt\\  ^«i\wt\^i^,   "Vxi^  \t^«tv\  c«iw  W^xt^toS^F^  24^  Wf* 


V 


SKITH,  Jonx,  is  distinguished  by  having 
held  a  judicial  seat  in  each  of  the  thne 
kingdoms.  He  was  the  son  of  Roger 
Smith,  Esq.,  of  Frolesworth  in  Leicestw- 
shii-e,  and  went  through  his  legal  tni 
at  Gray's  Inn,  by  which  socielj  te 
called  to  the  bar  on  May  2,  IC^ 
sent  as  a  judge  of  the  ComaafBt 


r 


SMITH 


SNIGGE 


617 


than  ft  eouple  of  years  he  was  recalled  and 
4Biade  a  baron  of  tne  English  Exchequer,  on 
June  24,  1702. 

In  the  mat  case  of  Ashby  and  White 
<m  the  A^desbury  election,  he  opposed  the 
judgment  of  the  three  puisne  judges  of  the 
Queen's  Bench,  concurring  in  the  opinion 
of  Chief  Justice  Holt  in  favour  of  the  voter 
who  had  been  deprived  of  his  franchise  by 
the  returning  officer.  The  reversal  of  that 
Judgment  and  the  confirmation  of  Holt's 
-opinion  by  the  House  of  Lords  was  then 
lepreaented  as  a  whig  triumph,  but  must 
be  considered,  now  that  party  spirit  no 
longer  is  predominant,  as  a  triumph  of 
common  sense  over  a  fanciful  claim  of  privi- 
lege by  the  House  of  Commons.  In  May 
1706  he  was  selected  to  settle  the  Exche- 
mier  in  Scotland,  and  was  sent  as  lord 
chief  baron  for  that  purpose,  being  still 
allowed,  though  another  baron  was  ap- 
pointed here,  to  retain  his  place  in  the 
£nglish  court,  and  receiving  500/.  a  year 
in  addition  to  his  salary.  He  enjoyed  both 
positions  till  the  end  of  his  life,  being  re- 
sworn on  the  accession  of  Georg-e  I.  in  his 
office  of  baron  of  the  English  Exchequer, 
although  he  performed  none  of  its  duties. 
He  died  on  June  24,  1726,  and  by  his  will 
he  founded  and  endowed  a  hospital  at  his 
native  village  of  Frolesworth  for  the  main- 
tenance of  fourteen  poor  widows.  (iV7- 
chofs  JjcicefierBh.  18o ;  Lord  JRaymondf  769, 
1317;  LiUtrell,  iv.  713,  v.  184,  vi.  2i)9; 
Pent,  Mag.  Ixiii.  1131.) 

SMITH,  MoNTAGrE  Edward,  one  of  the 
present  judjjes  of  the  Common  Pleas,  was 
bom  at  Bideford  in  Devonshire,  where  his 
lather,  Thomas  Smith,  Es<].,  resided.  His 
mother  was  Margaret  Colville,  daughter  of 
M.  Jenkyn,  Esq.,  commander  in  the  navy. 
After  an  education  in  the  grammar  scliool 
of  his  native  town,  he  entered  the  Middle 
Temple,  by  which  society  he  was  called  to 
the  bar  on  November  18, 1835.  He  joined 
the  Western  Circuit,  and,  after  nearly  seven- 
teen years  of  successful  practice,  he  was 
honoured  with  a  silk  gown  in  1852.  After 
two  unsuccessful  attempts,  in  1840  and 
1852,  he  entered  parliament  in  1850  for 
Truro,  which  he  continued  to  represent  till 
February  7,  1865,  when  he  was  appointed 
a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  and  was 
Imighted. 

SMYTHE,  SiDXEr  Stafford,  descended 
from  Thomas  Smythe,  commonly  called 
Customer  Smythe,  from  his  being  farmer 
of  the  customs,  who  iirst  settled  himself  in 
the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth  at  Westen- 
hanger  in  Kent,  was  the  son  of  Henry 
Smythe,  of  Bounds,  and  Elizabeth,  daugh- 
ter of  Dr.  John  Lloyd,  canon  of  Windsor. 

He  was  an  infant  at  his  father's  death, 
and  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  Inner 
Temple  in  February  1728.  He  travelled 
the  Home  Circuit,  and  in  1740  was  made 


steward  and  one  of  the  judges  of  the  Palace 
Court  at  Westminster.  In  June  1747  he 
received  the  honour  of  a  silk  gown,  and  as 
a  king's  counse)  he  was  engaged  for  the 
crown  in  1749  in  the  special  conmiission  in 
Sussex  for  the  trial  of  a  band  of  smugglers 
for  the  heinous  murder  of  a  tide-waiter  and 
another  man  who  was  a  witness  in  a  trans- 
action in  which  they  were  concerned.  He 
was  returned  as  member  for  East  Grinstead 
to  the  parliament  of  1747,  and  between  its 
second  and  third  sessions  was  promoted  to 
the  bench  of  the  Exchequer  in  June  1750, 
being  soon  after  knighted.  {Gent.  Mag,  x. 
xvii.  XX. ;  State  Trials^  xviii.  1086.) 

He  sat  as  a  puisne  baron  for  more  than 
two-and-twenty  years,  during  which  period 
he  was  twice  appointed  a  commissioner  of 
the  Great  Seal.  On  the  first  occasion  he 
held  it  from  November  9, 1756,  to  June  30, 
1757,  and  on  the  second,  when  he  was 
principal  commissioner,  from  January  21, 
J  770,  to  January  28,  1771.  These  appoint- 
ments manifest  that  he  held  that  high  re- 
putation as  a  judge  that  secured  him  an 
advance  to  the  higher  dignity  of  this  court 
as  soon  as  a  vacancy  occurred.  This  did 
not  happen  till  Octolber  28,  1772,  when  he 
was  raised  to  the  place  of  lord  chief  baron 
of  the  Exchequer,  where  he  presided  for 
the  next  five  years.  His  infirmities  then 
obliged  him  to  resign  in  December  1777, 
when  he  received  a  pension  of  2400/.  a 
year,  and  was  immediately  sworn  of  the 
privy  council. 

He  died  in  less  than  a  year  afterwards, 
on  October  30, 1778,  leaving  no  issue  by  his 
wife,  Sarah,  the  daughter  of  Sir  Charles 
Farnabv,  Bart.,  of  Kippington  in  Kent. 
{Hastei,  iii.  ^^  237,  v.  274 ;  Blackstonea 
Rep.  1178.) 

SNIGKFE,  Gkorgb,  belonged  to  a  family 
at  Bristol,  several  of  whom  had  filled  the 
otiices  of  sherift'  and  mayor  of  the  city.  His 
father,  George  Sni«rge,  was  sheriff  in  1556 
and  mayor  in  1574-5;  and  his  mother  was 
Margery,  daughter  of  —  Taylor.  He  was 
born  about  1545,  and  was  called  to  the  bar 
of  the  Middle  Temple  on  June  17,  1575, 
was  nominated  reader  in  1560  and  1598,  and 
in  May  1  (502  was  elected  treasurer  of  the 
society.  He  became  recorder  of  his  native 
citv,  was  raised  in  Easter  Term  1604  to 
the  degree  of  the  coif,  and  on  June  28  was 
placed  in  the  Court  of  Exchequer  as  an 
additional  or  fifth  baron.  {Rot.  Pat.  Jac. 
p.  7.)  It  is  curious  that  there  are  two  grants 
to  him  of  this  office,  one  as  '  baron  of  the 
Exchequer,-  and  the  other  as  '  baron  of  the 
coif  of  the  Exchequer  *  (Co/.  State  Papers 
[1603-10],  125,  156),  an  example  of  the 
change  that  was  then  taking  place  in  the 
court,  rendering  it  neoessair  to  appoint  a 
cursitor  baron.  In  May  1608  he  was  ap- 
pointed a  W^elsh judge  in  addition,  (Cwd. 
420.)  In  Bateo^'a  caoe^oii  \)dl^  ^xjSc^  VmYJWRA. 


618  SNYTERTON  SOMERS 

on  currants  by  the  kinj^s  authority,  he  ;  (JDevotCs  Issue  JtoU,  274-28(5.)  In  the 
joined  with  his  brethren  in  the  decision  in  .  seventh  year  the  Commons,  suspecting  that 
favour  of  the  crown,  and  was  one  of  the  ,  their  proceedings  were  not  properly  entered, 
majority  in  affirming  the  rights  of  the  pod  i  selected  him  as  one  of  those  who  were  to 
fiiUi;  but  in  neither  case  is  his  argument '  overlook  the  engrossment  of  the  KolL;  of 
preserved.  (State  Ttials,u.S82,67ii.)  After  i  Parliament.  (Eat.  Fori  iii.  685.)  He  was 
sitting  on  the  bench  for  nearly  thirteen  made  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  Novem- 
years,  he  died  on  November  11,  1617,  and    ber  8,  1407  j  and  on  January  23,  1413,  he 


was  buried  in  St  Stephen's  Church,  Bristol. 
By  his  wife,  Alice,  daughter  of  William 
Youug,  of  Ogbome,  Wiltshire,  he  had  nine 
children.  {Barrel s  Bristol^  614;  MSS. 
ColL  Arms,  G,  77.) 


was  advanced  to  the  office  of  chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer.     {Kal,  Exch,  ii.  85.) 

He  was  also  under-treasurer,  as  we  iind 
from  a  song  written  bv  Occleve  (JVork*^ 
^a^on^ 69-70)  thus  entitled :  'Castes  Balade 


SKYTESTON,  Thokas  be,  took  his  name    et  Chanceon  Ensuyantz  Feurent  Faites  a 


from  Snyterton,  a  village  in  Norfolk.  In 
29  Edwsurd  I.  he  was  engaged  in  a  suit  in 
which  he  claimed  the  manor  of  Denham  in 
Suiiblk.  {Abb.  Pladt.  243.)  He  is  only 
mentioned  once  as  employed  in  a  j  udicial 
capacity,  being  one  of  the  justices  of  trail- 
baston  appointed  in  35  l!dward  I.,  1307, 
for  Essex  and  ten  other  counties,  but  not 
including  Norfolk  {Rot,  Pari.  i.  218),  from 
which  omission  it  would  seem  that  he  was 
a  lawyer  by  profession.  In  the  same  year 
.  he  wius  returned  as  knight  of  the  shire  for 
Norfolk.     (Pari  Wiits,  i.  187.) 


Mon  Meistre  U.  Somer  quant  il  Soustie- 
sorer.'  WTiether  this  oftice  was  then,  a* 
now,  united  with  that  of  chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer  is  uncertain ;  but  we  should 
judge  not,  from  the  more  respectful  address 
which  Occleve  prefixed  to  another  soug, 
entitled,  ^Cestes  Balade  Ensuyante  Fust 
Par  la  Court  de  Bone  Compagnie  Envoiee 
a  Lonure  Sire  Henri  Somer  Chancellor  De 
Leschequer  et  un  De  la  Dite  Court.' 

This  *  court'  was  evidently  a  con\-ivial 
association  of  good  fellows,  and  forms  an 
early  example  of  the  modern  club.     The 


SODINGTOK,orSABINGTON,  Thomas  DE.  |  iirst  of  these  ballads  was  the  congratulation 
Weever  (643),  in  speaking  of  the  death  of  i  of  his  brethren  on  his  appointment  as  sub- 
Robert  de  Sliottincfen,  the  justice  itinerant  ;  treasurer,  and  the  second  appears  to  be  an 
in  the  reign  of  Henry  111.,'^calls  him  So-  '  answer  to   a  letter  of  remon^^trauce  the 
tingdon  or  Sadington.     If  he  is  correct  in    *  court  '  had  received  from  him  for  undue 
this,  probably  he  was  the  father  or  grand-  j  extravagance  and  a  breach  of  some  o^iheir 
father  of  this  judge,  whose  name  is  written  •  rules.     In  reply  to  which,  with  true  Eae- 
both  ways,  and  in  some  instances  Sudding-    lish  freedom,  their  poet  says, — 
ton.    (Abb.  PlacU.  229  )    He  was  a  clergy-  I  ^o  the  which  in  this  wyse  we  an>wen>, 
man,  and  was  probably,  therefore,  one  of    Excesso  for  to  do  be  yec  nat  bounde 
the  officers  of  the  court  before  he  became  a  |  Ne  noon  of  up,  but  do  oa  we  may  b<»n.», 
justice  itinerant.     His  first  appointment  to  ,  l-'p  on  swich  rule  we  nat  us  in  grownrlo, 
that  dutv  was  in  4  Edward  I.,  1270,  when  '  )>*  ^^^  discreet,  though  yee  in^-ood  h.ibownd^, 
he  acted'in  the  city  and  Tower  of  London ;    ?^^^'*^  ^  yow  th.-nkith  for  you  hone^tec. 


Yee  and  we  all  arn  at  our  libertee. 

It  is  not  improbable  that  Geofirey  Chau- 


and  from  that  time  he  was  regularly  era- 
ployed  in  various  parts  of  the  kingdom  till  ^  _  . 
17  Edward  I.    He  was  one  of  the  ambassa-  ,  cer  was  a  fellow  of  this  '  good  company,*** 
d6rs  to  the  Earl  of  Holland  in  12  Edward  I  ^^    ^^^  that  Henry  Somer,   on  June  o. 
I.,  and  was  a  party  to  the  contract  for  the  !  1*^00,  1  Henry  IV.,  received   his  peniiv«B 


all  ciillecl  upon  to  make ;  he  wm  dismissed  '  80MKES,  John  (Lord  Souers).  It  bw 
with  disgrace  from  his  office  in  1280,  when  :  been  too  much  the  practice  of  party  wriiera, 
he  was  sent  a  prisoner  to  the  Tower,  from  •  in  the  absence  of  other  objections,  to  en- 
which  ho  was  only  discharged  on  the  pay-  deavour  to  depreciate  their  antagonists  bj 
ment  of  a  fine  of  2000  marks.  He  died  in  27  ;  allusions  to  their  low  birth.     W  hen  Dean 


Edward  I.,  in  possession  of  the  manor  of  Swift,  following  the  vulgar  example, 
Tidberst  in  Hertfordshire,  and  considerably  ;  that  Somers  ^  sprang  from  the  dregs  of  the 
in  debt  to  the  king,  inasmuch  as  all  his  I  people,'  he  not  only  disregarded  truth,  but 
goods  were  sequestered  in  the  dioceses  of  i  failed  to  reflect  how  nearly,  if  true  as  to 
York,  Lincoln,  Chichester,  and  Sarum,  and  Somers,  the  assertion  might  be  apphed  to 
in  the  county  of  Northampton.  (Cal.  Inquis.  himself.  Swift's  grandfather  was  the  vicar 
p.  m.  i.  153 ;  Abb.  Rot.  Orig.  i.  104.)  '  of  a  country  parish ;  JSomers's  mndfather 

SOMEB,  Henky,  was  a  clerk  of  the  Ex-  was  the  possessor  of  considerable  landed 
chequer  by  whom  payments  were  made  in  property  which  had  belonged  to  his  fiMnilr 
the  first  years  of  the  reign  of  Henry  IV.    for  many  generations.     Swift's  father  wm 


SOMEKS  SOM£RS  619 

an  Iriflli  attorney  of  no  eminence,  and  he  and  rebuilding.  At  the  Restoration  he 
himself  almost  a  child  of  charity;  Somers^s  followed  the  example  of  others  who  had 
father  was  a  member  of  the  same  profes-  been  implicated  in  the  Bebellion,  by  suing 
sion,  in  extensive  practice,  farming  his  own  :  out  a  full  pardon  for  all  offences  he  had 
estate^  and  affording  to  his  son  the  best  of  I  committed,  and,  with  an  excellent  character 
educations.  The  imputation  therefore  i  for  integrity  and  charity,  he  died  in  January 
comes  with  peculiarly  bad  pace  from  1G81,  nearly  five  years  after  his  son  was 
Swift ;  but,  be  it  true  or  false,  it  will  have  '  called  to  the  bar. 

no  intluence  on  unprejudiced  minds,  or,  if  The  biographers  of  the  chancellor  all 
it  operates  at  all,  it  will  be  to  the  advan-  concur  in  stating  that  he  was  bom  in  the 
tage  of  the  object  of  it,  telling  rather  to  his  '  mansion  of  White  Ladies,  the  remains  of 
credit  than  to  his  dishonour.  Few  will  an  ancient  nunnery  in  the  parish  of  Cluines, 
deny  that  the  man  who  has  raised  himself  contiguous  to  the  city  of  Worcester,  which 
by  his  own  merits  has  more  true  nobility  had  been  held  sacred  and  left  uninjured  by 
than  one  who  can  only  boast  an  unim-  both  parties  in  the  convulsions  of  the 
peachable  pedigree.        *  times.     It    was    then    occupied    by  Mr. 

No  means  exist  of  tracing  whether  the  Blurton,  the  husband  of  the  chancellor's 
ancestors  of  the  great  lord  chancellor  were  ,  aunt,  on  whom  it  had  been  settled  by  her 
allied  with  the  last-noticed  Henry  Somer,  '  father  as  a  marriage  portion :  and  Mrs. 
but  this  family  origiually  spelling  their  Somers  is  represented  as  retiring  to  this 
name  Somer  would  seem  to  give  probabi-  i  mansion  as  a  safe  retreat  to  await  her 
lity  to  the  connection.  Subsequently  it ;  accouchement  of  her  second  child,  the 
was  changed  to  Sommers,  often  written  .  future  chancellor,  with  whom  she  was 
Somers,  with  a  circumiiex  over  the  m,  ■  then  pregnant.  It  turns  out,  however, 
denoting  the  double  letter.  13y  degrees  !  that  this  account  is  totally  incorrect.  He 
the  circumflex  was  omitted,  and  the  modem  was  bom  in  the  city  itself;  the  house  is 
method  of  writing  the  name  adopted.  shown  in  which  his  father  then  resided  f 

The  father  of  Lord  Somers  was  John  and  the  register  of  the  parish  of  St. 
Somers,  a  respectable  attorney  practising  Michael's,  which  is  close  to  the  cathedral 
at  Worcester,  who  had  taken  arms  during  '  and  nearly  a  mile  from  the  White  Ladies,, 
the  civil  war  on  the  side  of  the  parliament,  |  records  his  birth  there  on  March  4, 1660-1. 
and  commanded  a  troop  of  horse  in  Crom-  :  As  the  battle  of  Worcester  was  not  fought 
well's  araiy.  So  zonlous  a  partisan  was  he,  till  September  1051,  Mrs.  Somers  must 
that  while  attending  divine  ser\'ice  at  have  retired  there  ajfter  the  birth  of  her 
Sevemstoke,  near  which  he  was  quartered,  I  child ;  and  King  Charles,  whose  last  resort 
he  is  said  to  have  once  fired  a  pistol  over    it  was  before  his  escape,  must  have  found 

the  boy  six  months  old. 

Young  Somers  was  brought  up  under 
the  care  of  his  aunt  at  the  house  of  White 
Ladies,  which  was  his  home  till  he  went 
to  the  university.  The  rudiments  of  his 
education  he  received  partly  at  the  college 
school  in  Worcester,  and  partly  at  private 
schools  at  W^alsall  in  Stafibrdshire,  and  at 
Sheriff'-IIales  in  Shropshire.  While  at  the 
school  at  Worcester  he  regularly  dieted 
with  his  father,  at  whose  country  house  at 
Clifton  in  Sevemstoke  he  also  spent  his 
summer  vacations.  At  this  period  of  his 
life  he  showed  little  inclination  for  the 
amusements  of  boyhood,  seldom  joining  in 
the  games  of  his  schoolfellows,  and  more 
often  to  be  seen  with  a  book  in  his  hand. 
{Setoartta  AnecdoteSj  ii.  112.)  His  early 
biographers  fix  his  entrance  into  Trinity 
Coflege,  Oxford,  so  late  as  the  year  1674, 


the  head  of  the  clergyman,  a  funous  loyal- 
i>t,  who  was  haranguing  his  congregation 
with  violent  invectives  against  the  opposite 
party.  The  shot,  which  was  meant  to 
caution,  not  to  injure,  the  indiscreet  minis- 
ter, whom  he  had  frequently  warned, 
lodged  in  the  sound ing-}x)ard  of  the  pulpit, 
where  its  mark  is  still  pointed  out.  when 
he  performed  this  foolish  feat  he  was  still 
a  young  man,  for  his  marriage  with  Cathe- 
rine Ceavem,  of  a  good  Shropshire  family, 
did  not  take  place  till  November  164i<, 
when  his  father  settled  the  family  estate  of 
Sevemstoke  upon  him.  On  the  termina- 
tion of  the  civil  war  with  the  battle  of 
Worcester,  fought  on  September  3, 1651, 
Mr.  Somers  returned  to  that  city,  and 
commenced  or  resumed  his  practice  as  an 
attorney,  for  it  is  uncertain  whether  he 
had  actually  entered  the  profession  before 

he  had  adopted  the  military  life.  He  soon  '  when  he  was  twenty-two  or  twenty-three 
established  a  very  profitable  business  in  years  of  age,  and  consequently  find  a  dilfi- 
settling  the  deranged  afflairs  of  those  who  culty  in  accounting  for  his  time  in  the 
had  suffered  in  the  late  disturbances,  and  interval  between  this  date  and  his  leaving 
in  superintending  the  estates  of  the  Earls  \  school.  Subsequent  enquiry  has  removed 
of  Shrewsbury,  at  the  same  time  engaging  the  difficulty,  by  showing  that  he  was 
in  the  clothing  tnide,  then  a  staple  emplov-  matriculated  on  March  2a,  1667,  at  the 
ment  of  his  county,  and  also  in  brick-  age  of  16,  and  the  books  of  the  Middle 
making,  a  profitable  speculation  at  a  time  Temple  record  his  admission  into  that 
when  hia  city  required  extensive  repairs    society  on  May  24, 1669.    The  eminence 


620                      SOMERS  803nSBS 

to  which  he  attained  in  his  future  career  ;  of  CharWs  reign,  and  the  whole  of  James'i^ 

both  in  literature  and  in  law  sutiicientlY  prevented  the  promotion  in  his  profesooB 
proves  how  industriously  he  must   have  ;  which  his  talents  would   have  otherwin 

employed  tlie  years   he  spent  in  each  of  commanded.     His  reputation  among  bu 

these  seminaries.     In  the  former  he  con-  legal  companions,  as  a  staunch  advocate  d 

tinued  occasionally  to  reside    till    UJ82,  popular  principles  at  this  early  period,  k 

though  he  did  not  aspire  to  any  academical  exemplified    by  a    curious    scene    whuk 

honour,  nor  even  take  a  degree ;  and  by  the  Narcissus  Luttrell,  under  the  dat«  of  June 

latter  he  was  called  to  the  bar  on  May  0,  16,  1681,  thus  describes : — 
167r).                                                      *       '      '  An  address  of  thanks  to  the  king  for 

While  his  father  lived  he  retired  in  the  his  late  declaration  [with  his  reasoDB  fir 

vacations  to  White  Ladies,  where,  in  1072,  disaohing  the  last  two  parliaments]  mofed 

Charles,  Earl  (afterwards  Duke)  of  Shrews-  in    the    Middle    Temple,    where    sewnl 

bury,  then  a  boy  of  eleven  or  twelve  years  ;  Templars  meeting  began  to  debate  it,  bat 

old,  came  to  reside.     Between  him  and  they  were  opposed  till  the  hall  began  to 

*SonK*rs  was  then  formed  a  close  intimacy,  .  iiU,  and  then  the  addressers  called  oat  for 

which  lasted  throughout  their  lives,  the  Mr.   Montague  to  take  the   chur;  tbon 

young  lawyer  benetiting  by  the  society  to  against  it  called  for  Mr.    Sommers;  qd 

which  }iis  noble  friend  introduced  him,  and  which  a  poll  was  demanded,  but  the  ad- 

the  young  earl  protitino:  by  the  wise  and  dressers  refused  it,  and  carried  Mr.  Mob- 

<:onHtitutioual  lessons  which  he  insensibly  tague  and  sett  him  in  the  chair,  and  tb 

imbibed  from  the  conversation  and  conduct  other  party  pulled  him  out:  on  wluch  hi|^ 

of  his  more  staid   companion.     The  total  words  grew,  and  some  blows  were  givai; 


want  of  any  authentic  particulars  of  his 
occupations  or  course  of  study  during  these 
years  some  of  his  biographers,  regardless  of 


but  the  addressers,  seeing  they  could  do  ao 
good  in  the  hall,  adjourned  to  the  DiTlQ 
tavern,  and  there  signed  the  addresse;  the 


date  or  probability,  have  supplied  by  mi-  !  other  party  kept  in  the  hall,  and  fell  to 
uute  details  that  exhibit  more  of  fancy  '  protesting  against  such  illegal  and  arbitmr 
than  ingenuity.  The  story  that  he  held  a  proceedings,  &c.,  and  presented  the  mm 
desk  in  his  father's  office,  by  which  they  to  the  bench  as  a  grievance.' 
attempt  to  iill  up  the  supposed  inter\'al,  is  The  tracts  the  reputation  of  which  lud 
refuted  by  the  fact  that  he  was  sent  at  •  raised  Somers's  fame  among  his  brother 
sixteen  to  the  university,  and  that  he  was  Templars  were  *  A  History  of  the  Saccet- 
ontered  two  years  after  as  a  student  in  an  ;  sion/  published  during  the  discussion  of  the 
inn  of  court,  and  is  rendered  still  more  '  Exclusion  Hill  in  1679  and  1080;  and  'A 
mprobable  by  their  making  him  at  the  .  j  ust  and  modest  Vindication  of  the  proceed- 
same  liino  clerk  to  Sir  Francis  AVinniugton.  mgs  of  the  two  last  Parliaments,'  written  in 
This  honest  lawyer  and  statesman  was  a  ,  answer  to  the  king's  declaration  of  Aprils 
nativoof  Worcester  and  a  friend  of  Somers's  1(>81,  on  the  dissolution  of  the  Oifad 
father.     In   his  chambers   young  Somers  i  parliament.   To  the  latter  Algernon  Sidnej 


was  doubtless  at  one  time  a  pupil ;  but,  as 
Sir  Francis  was  removed  from  his  office  of 
solicitor-general  in  1670,  and  was  not 
elected   member  for  Worcester  till   that 


and  Sir  AVilliam  Jones  contributed,  but  i 
was  principaUy  composed  by  Someii 
Subsequently  appeared  'The  memonUe 
case  or  Denzil  Onslow,'  tried  at  Kingsw 
year,  it  fceius  likely  that  his  then  joining  ■  in  July  1681,  in  which  the  rights  of  elec- 
the  party  in  opposition  to  the  court  was  .  tors  were  supported ;  and  *  The  securitr  d 
the  coinmoncement  or  the  increase  of  the  \  Englishmen  s  Lives,  or  the  Trust,  Pow« 
intimacy  between  the  families.  Young  .  and  Duty  of  Grand  Juries  in  England.'  in 
Somers  at  that  time  had  been  for  three  ]  which  the  privilejjes  of  that  important  bodj 
years  called  to  the  bar,  and  there  can  be  no  were  defended.  The  latter  arose  from  the 
doubt  that  Sir  Francis's  countenance  and    abuse  vented  against  the  grand  jury  which 


advice  greatly  asHsted  him  in  his  profes- 
sional pursuits. 

The  political  principles  of  Somers  were 


refused  to  find  the  bill  of  indictment  agw 
the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury  in  November  16S1, 
and  passed  at  the  time  as  written  by  ^ 


already  known,  from  his  association  with  !  Earl  of  Essex,  but  was  afterwards  know 
the  leaders  of  the  liberal  part}-,  and  his  j  to  be  the  production  of  Somers.  {Bwn^ 
talents  were  soon  recognised  by  the  use  j  ii.  276,^290;  State  Trials,  xiv.  707,  a)- 
they  made  of  his  pen.  AVithin  the  next  Classical  subjects  also  employed  his  pi? 
two  years  several  pamphlets,  both  legal  ;  and  some  translations  from  Ovid  which  k» 
and  political,  appeared,  of  which,  though  produced  are  elegant  samples  of  bis  poetied 
published  without  his  name    and    never    powers.      'Dryden*8  Satire  to  l^.^'^ 

eublicly  acknowledged,  he  was  then  be-  |  occasioned  by  liie 'Absalom  and  AehilB>tf 
eved,  and  has  since  been  proved,  to  have    of  that  poet^  though  often  givoi  ^  ' 
been  the  author.    Their  ability  and  power    could    not  have   oeen  whollv 
at  once  marked  him  as  an  op^nent  of  the    Cooksey  considerB  it  m  the  jo 
co\\7\,  and  no  do\\bt,  ^vmn^^^  TvmKov^st   oi  Yiim^BLd  Lord  Shrewabur 


SOMERS  SOMERS  621 

poBfdbly  have  been  so,  pnrts  of  the  poem  all  ranks  of  people.  So  greatly  was  bia 
Deing  too  coarse  for  the  polished  lawyer,  i  popularity  increased  that  when  James, 
and  parts  too  well  balanced  for  the  freehand  ,  frightened  at  the  threatened  approach  of 
easy  earl.  To  their  united  genius  also  Mr.  '  the  Prince  of  Orange,  restored  the  charters 
Cooksey  attributes  the  original  conception  \  to  the  city  of  London,  the  citizens  elected 
of  *  The  Tale  of  a  Tub/  which  Swift,  with  Somers  their  recorder  on  October  28, 1688, 
their  permission,  afterwards  (in  1704)  pub-  an  oHice  which  he  respectfully  declined^ 
linhed  as  his  own.  The  evidence  adduced,  '  anticipating  no  doubt  the  princess  persever- 
however,  will  not  be  considered  suliicient  I  ance,  notwithstanding  the  dispereiion  of  his 
to  disprove  the  dean's  authorship;  but  the  invading  fleet  a  few  days  before.  To  the 
biographer,  had  he  been  aware  of  the  Convention  Parliament,  summoned  by  the 
foUowmg  incident,  would  doubtless  have  prince  for  the  following  January,  Somers 
pressed  it  into  his  service,  as  a  remarkable  was  returned  as  the  representative  of  his 
coincidence  confirmatory  of  his  argument,  I  native  city.  In  it  he  acted  a  most  con- 
and  would  have  quoted  it  as  suggesting  to  I  spicuous  part.  Appointed  one  of  the 
the  young  lawyer  a  title  to  the  amusing  managers  of  the  conference  with  the  Lords 
tale  he  was  then  engaged  in  sketching.  On  upon  the  word ' abdicated, 'Tie  learnedly  jus- 
the  trial  of  Sheriii*  Pilkington  and  others  in  ,  titled  the  vote  of  the  Commons,  and  induced 
May  1683  for  a  riot,  Somers,  who  was  one  the  Lords  to  agree  with  the  resolution. 
of  the  counsel  for  the  defendants,  challenged  !  As  chairman  of  the  committee  to  whom  tlie 


the  array,  and  Serjeant  (afterwards  Chief 
Justice)  Jefireys,  upon  the  challenge  being 
reAd,  called  out,  '  IIere*s  a  Tale  of  a  Tub 
indeed!'      (Cooksey's  Life,  18,  23;  State 


Declaration  of  Rights  was  referred,  that 
valuable  charter  of  England's  liberties 
owes  much  of  its  excellence  to  his  judg- 
ment and  care:    and  to  his  temperance, 


Triab,  ix.  220.)  I  caution,  and  foresight  the  (H)untry  is  mainly 

It  is  manifest  that  Somers  must  have  had  I  indebted  for  the  happy  settlement  that  waa 
some  business  in  the  courts  long  previous  then  secured,  and  for  the  freedom  it  now 
to  that  trial,  if  the  anecdote  be  true  of  his  ■  enjoys. 

being  engaged  in  a  case  before  Lord  '  In  the  re-establishment  of  the  legal 
Nottingham.  He  is  stated  to  have  been  '  courts,  and  tlie  appointment  of  the  new 
the  junior  of  several  counsel  employed  in  oflicers,  the  claims  of  Somers  were  sure 
it,  and  that  on  rising  after  them  he  said  |  not  to  be  overlooked.  In  May  1680  he 
that  '  he  would  not  take  up  his  lordship's  |  was  named  solicitor-general,  and  was 
time  by  repeating  what  had  been  so  well  j  knighted  in  the  following  October,  having 
urged  by  tne  gentlemen  who  went  before  been  elected  bencher  of  his  inn  on  May  10. 
him  ;*   to  which   the   lord   chancellor  re 


During  the  remainder  of  this  parliament  he 
plied,  *  Pray  go  on,  sir ;  I  sit  in  this  place  to    entered  actively  into    all    the    important 

debates,  and  by  his  efiectiye  services  in  this 
critical  time  he  gained  a  great  ascendency 
in  the  counsels  oif  the  state.     In  1600  he 


near  everybody ;  you  never  repeat,  nor 
will  you  take  up  my  time,  and  therefore  I 
shall  listen  to  you  with  pleasure.'     Lord 


Nottingham  died  in  December  1682,  having  |  was  elected  recorder  of  Gloucester,  and  in 
been  for  many  months  before  confined  by  |  the  next  parliament,  meeting  in  March  of 


iUness,  and  could  not  have  made  such  a 
reply,  unless  he  had  had  several  previous 
opportunities  of  noticing  Somers's  talents 
as  an  advocate. 

During  the  next  few  years  he  indus- 
triously pursued  his  profession,  and  with 
such  success  that  his  feea  amount^nl  to 
700/.  a  year.  With  such  a  proof  of  business, 
added  to  his  political  associates  and  literarv 
reputation,  it  seems  imaecountable  that  Sir 
Henry  J*ollexfen  should   have  found   any 


that  year,  he  sat  again  for  Worcester,  and 
pursued  the  same  course,  ably  defending 
the  principles  of  the  Revolution,  and  cart>- 
fuUy  guarding  the  liberty  of  the  subject. 
When  this  parliament  had  sat  three  sessions 
Somers  received  in  May  1002  the  office  of 
attorney-general;  and  within  a  year  he 
was  removed  to  a  more  responsible  station. 
Upon  a  change  in  the  ministry  the  Great 
Seal  was  taken  out  of  the  hands  of  the 
commissioners,    and    offered  to  Sir  John 


diiKculty  in  inducing  the  seven  bishops  to  Somers,  who,  after  attempting  to  decline  it 
employ  him  for  their  defence,  or  that  they  i  for  some  time,  was  at  last  induced  to  accept 
should  have  objected  that  he  was  too  the  charge  as  lord  keeper  on  March  23^ 
jroung  and  obscure — he  being  then  in  his  i  16*. »3,  with  a  pension  of  4000/.  a  year.  On 
thirty-eighth  year  and  one  of  the  *ron-l  his  elevation  he  took  up  his  residence  in 
siliarii '  of  the  dean  and  chapter  of  Wor-  i  Powis  House,  Lincoln's  Inn  Fields, 
cester.  PoUexfen's  threat  to  withdraw  i  King  William  left  England  at  the  end  of 
unless  Somera  was  engaged  was  eff'ectual,  ;  the  month,  and  remained  abroad  till  No- 
and  the  bishops  had  ever\'  reason  to  be  '  yember,  when,  on  the  meeting  of  the  par- 
grateful  for  his  pertinacity,  as  Somere's  l  liament,  the  new  lord  keeper,  not  being  yet 
assistance  contributed  in  a  considerable  '  a  peer,  sat  (as  in  its  future  sessi(ms)  a  silent 
degree  to  secure  the  triumphant  result,  j  speaker  of  the  House  of  I^ords.  On  its  pro- 
whkli  was  hailed  with  so  much  delight  by  |  rogation  in  May  1605,  after  the  queen's 


622  SOHERS  SOMERS 

death,  the  kmg  proceeded  to  his  customary  '  for  the  individuals  interested,  joined  vith 
campaign  in  Flanders,  leaving  Somers  as    the  spirit  of  party,  than  from  a  conaden- 


lord  keeper  one  of  the  lords  justices  for  the 
administration  of  the  government  during 
his  absence — a  position  which  he  occupied 
in  nil  the  future  years  in  which  he  held  the 


tion  of  the  lef^l  points  on  which  it  turned. 
His  decisions  in  Chancery  are  reported  br 
Vernon  and  Peere  Williams ;  and  there  vk 
two  stUte  trials  on  which  he  presided  » 


Groat  Seal.  In  tne  next  session  the  ruinous  lord  high  steward  while  he  held  the  Setl 
depreciation  of  the  coin  by  clipping  and  one  of  Lord  Warwick,  and  the  other  cf 
sweating  was  brought  under  consideration ;  '  Lord  Mohuu)  both  for  murder,  the  former 
and  the  remedy  boldly  proposed  by  Somers  '  of  whom  was  found  guilty  of  manslaughter, 
and  Montagu,  with  the  advice  and  assistance  I  and  the  latter  was  a  second  time  acquitted, 
of  Locke  and  Newton,  was  adopted,  by  \  So  deep  was  the  admiration  of  lus  abilitj 
which  the  currency  was  restored  to  a  healthy  i  among  the  lawyers,  and  so  great  their  h&h 
state.  On  April  22,  1697,  his  title  of  lord  tation  to  risk  a  comparison  with  him,  tbt 
keeper  was  chanfred  to  that  of  lord  chan-  King  William  found  a  difficulty  in  pro- 
cellor ;  and  in  December,  though  he  had  curing  a  successor,  many  eminent  memMn 
several  times  previously  refused  a  peerage,  of  the  legal  body  refusing  to  accept  the 
he  was  created  Baron  Somers  of  Evesham ;    offer  of  the  Seal. 

at  the  same  time  receiving  from  the  king        But  Lord  Somers  had  still  another  ordeil 
for  the  support  of  his  honours  some  con-    to  undergo.    The  tones,  now  being  admitted 
siderable  grants,  among  which  were  the  ,  into  power,  renewed  their  attack  upon  him  . 
manors  of  Keigate  and  Hawleigh  in  Surrey.  I  in  the  next  parliament,  which  met  in  Fe-  j 
A  new  parliament  was  called  at  the  end  of   bruary  1701.     On  April  1  they  carried  i  | 
the  following  year,  which  only  sat  till  April    vote,  by  the  small  majority  of  ten,  tiitt  *Vr 


1700.  In  its  last  session  the  tories,  havmg 
obtained  a  great  ateendency,  assailed  the 
ministry,  and  directed  their  principal  attack 


advising  his  majesty  in  the  year  lOOdtotbe 
Treaty  of  Partition  of  the  Spanish  moDtidiT. 
whereby  large  territories  were  to  be  de> 


against  Lord  Somers,  as  having  the  greatest  livered  up  to  France,'  he  was  *  guilty  of  i 
influence  over  the  king,  and  forming  the  |  high  crime  and  misdemeanour; 'and there- 
strongest    barrier  to  their   acquisition  of  I  upon  they  sent  up  to  the  House  of  Lonbao 


power.  So  high  ran  party  rage  that  a 
motion  was  made  for  an  address  to  remove 
him  from  his  majesty's  presence  and  councils 


impeachment  against  him,  together  witk 
Lords  Portland,  Orford,  and  Halifax,  sgiiitft 
whom  they  had  passed  similar  votes.   IV 


for  over.  Though  this,  as  were  two  other  ■  articles  against  Lord  Somers,  which  ¥«« 
motions  levelled  against  him,  was  negatived  j  not  presented  till  May  19,  were  fourteesis 
by  a  large  majority,  the  king,  desirous  of  >  number,  six  of  which  had  reference  to  tli* 
trying  the  eflect  of  a  complete  change  in  !  Partition  Treaty ;  ^ve  were  charges  of  ob- 
his  ministry,  recommended  Lord  Somers  to  i  taining  extraordinary  grants  for  his  own 
resign ;  but  his  lordship,  disdaining  to  quail    benefit ;  another,  that  he  granted  a  com 


before  his  enemies,  declined  to  take  this 


course :  and  at  length  the  king  sent  him  an    of  the  Adventure  gaUev,  with  a  view  d 


mission  to  the  famous  pirate  William  Kidd, 


donee  of  the  king,  was  Lord  Somers  by  the  and  making  illegal  orders  in  the  c«w* 
malice  of  faction  (for  the  term  may  be  ap-  ,  before  him.  To  these  charges  he  gave  foB 
plicnble  to  either  painty)  dismissed  from  an  i  and  satisfactory  answers  five  daysaft^tlieT 
office  which  he  had  held  for  seven  years  i  were  delivered.  A  dispute  then  arow  ht- 
with  the  most  unimpeachable  integrity,  pre-  i  tween  the  two  houses  as  to  the  order  awl 
serving  in  the  performance  of  its  duties  the  ,  time  of  proceeding,  which  was  asgraTated 
high  reputation  he  had  previously  gained,  '  by  some  oitter  truths  uttered  by  Lord  H»- 
administering  justice  with  inflexible  impar-  j  versham  at  a  free  conference.  The  CommoBS 
tiality,  and  establishing  for  himself  a  name,  :  took  advantage  of  these  to  refuse  to  appear 
among  lawyers  for  his  capacity  as  a  judge,  |  at  the  trial,  which  was  fixed  for  June  1'. 
and  among  statesmen  for  his  ability  as  a  ,  on  which  day  the  Lords,  in  consequence  of 
legislator,  which  has  lived  in  honour  to  the  the  absence  of  all  evidence  in  support  of  the 
present  day,  and  which  even  those  who  charges,  acquitted  Lord  Somers  and  di«- 
differ  from  him  in  politics  do  not  venture  to  ;  missed  the  impeachment.  The  same  coune 
sully.  So  anxious  was  he  to  form  correct  i  was  i^terwan^i  taken  on  the  trial  of  Loid 
opinions  on  the  (j^uestions  that  came  before  I  Orford ;  and  the  impeachments  aeainst  tk 
him  that  ho  is  said  to  have  expended  many  I  other  lords  were  dismissed  at  the  6kmd 
hundred  pounds  in  the  purchase  of  books  to  ;  the  session,  no  articles  being  eiliiliM 
prepare  his  £unous  judgment  in  the  bankers'  i  against  them.  The  whole  of  thMt  p^ 
case ;  the  reversal  of  which  by  the  House  j  ceedings  were  prompted  by  pai^f«iBoak 
of  Lords,  lufit  WoTe  \n&  ^^BnAwaX,  «xqaa^  it  i  and  it  seems  evident  that  ur  '^'""^mt' 
is  believed,  more  from  u  eensA  ol  C)(ffxi'^«a^^.  ki^  i»i^  VoNiiSGfiQktscL  ^  Inao^pr  li  1i 


SOMERS  SOMERS  623 

trial,  and  got  up  tbe  disagreement  with  the  it  was  lauded  bv  his  supporters,  the  esti- 
other  house  as  a  pretext  for  not  proceeding  mat«  of  each  being  possioly  greatly  exag- 
in  the  business.  To  put  an  end  to  these  i  gerated.  But  the  same  individual  is  very 
heats  the  king  first  prorogued  and  then  dis- 1  rarely  to  be  found  in  the  ranks  both  of  ex- 
solved  the  parliament,  calling  another  to  tollers  and  detractors  who  is  so  indiscreet 
meet  in  December  1701.  In  the  interim  a  '  as  to  leave  a  public  record  of  his  contra- 
plan  was  formed  by  Sunderland  to  restore  ,  dictoiy  judgments.  Dean  swift  was  not 
the  Seal  to  Somers,  who^  though  he  held  j  ashamed  to  be  guilty  of  this.  In  his  '  Dis- 
no  ostensible  place  in  the  ministry,  is  sup-  .;  course  of  the  contests  and  dissensions  be- 
posed  to  have  assisted  in  framing  the  king*s  |  tween  the  Nobles  and  Commons  in  Athens 
speech  on  the  opening  of  the  new  parlia- '  and  Rome,'  written  while  he  was  united 
ment.  This  speech,  in  consequence  of  the  with  the  whig  party,  he  represents  Lord 
recent  recognition  by  the  King  of  France  of  Somers,  under  the  character  of  Aristides, 
the  son  of  James  II.  as  successor  to  the  as  a  person  of  the  strictest  justice,  and  as 
throne  of  England,  was  rapturously  wel-  having  performed  such  mighty  service  to 
comcd  by  the  people  as  highly  spirited  and  his  country  that  to  his  recall  to  power  the 
patriotic,  and  was  the  more  valued  as  it  was  ,  state  would  owe  its  preservation.  His 
the  last  which  William  addressed  to  par-  '  History  of  the  last  years  of  the  Queen,' 
liament,  his  death  occurring  on  the  8th  of  '  published  when  he  was  connected  with  the 
the  following  March.  To  his  last  moments  |  tories,  is  written  in  a  directly  contrary 
he  continued  his  friendship  for  Lord  Somers,  ,  spirit,  depreciating  the  services  liis  lordship 
and  had  so  complete  a  confidence  in  him  i  had  performed,  imputing  selfish  motives  to 
that  he  was  privately  enga^d  with  him  in  j  all  his  actions,  and  disparaging  all  the  good 
reconstructing  the  whig  mmistry  when  his  qualities  attributed  to  him.  Addison's 
decease  confirmed  the  tories  in  power.  noble  character  of  Somers  in  the  '  Free- 

During  the  first  six  years  of  the  reign  of  |  holder,'  written  soon  after  his  death,  affords 
Queen  Anne,  to  whom  Somers  was  per-  |  a  picture  which,  though  somewhat  too 
sonally  obnoxious,  he  confined  himself  to  i  strongly  coloured  to  suit  all  opinions,  is 
his  duties  as  a  peer  of  parliament.  He  |  recojpised  in  the  present  day,  even  by  those 
carried  a  bill  for  the  amendment  of  the  law ; '  of  different  politics,  as  forming  a  just  and 
he  laid  the  foundation  of  improvements  in  fair  representation.  The  truest  estimate  of 
the  introduction  of  private  bills ;  he  greatly  '  a  man  s  character  is  made  by  those  who 
assisted  in  passing  the  Regency  Bill,  which  .  come  after  him  and  are  not  influenced  by 
provided  for  the  Hanoverian  succession ;!  personal  partialities  or  prejudices;  and 
ne  took  an  active  part  in  promoting  the  |  bomers's  learning  and  judgment,  his  ho- 
union  with  Scotland,  the  scheme  of  which  nesty,  his  eloquence,  his  modesty,  mildness, 
he  had  projected  in  the  previous  reign,  and  ,  canaour,  and  taste,  together  with  his  sweet- 
one  of  the  managers  of  which  he  was  now  |  ness  of  temper,  have  been  acknowledged  by 
appointed ;  and  from  his  pen  proceeded  all  modem  authors  of  whose  vmtings  he 
most  of  the  important  papers  of  the  time.  >  has  been  the  subject.  He  was  elected  pre- 
The  prejudices  of  tlie  queen  were  in  some  '  sident  of  the  Royal  Society  in  1698,  and 
measure  softened  in  170o,  and  on  the  death  resigned  it  in  1703  in  favour  of  Sir  Isaac 
of  her  husband,  Somers  was,  in  November  Newton ;  and  among  the  men  of  literature 
1708,  again  taken  into  the  ministry  as  lord  I  and  science  whom  ne  honoured  with  his 

g resident  of  the  council,  an  office  which  he  patronage  were  Newton,  Locke,  Addison, 
eld  for  two  years,  when  on  another  change  and  Bayle.  The  encouragement  he  ex- 
it was  given  to  the  Earl  of  Rochester.  !  tended  to  the  publication  of  that  yaluable 
Though  the  queen  dismissed  him  with  the  ■  collection  of  state  papers  called  ^  Rymer'a 
rest  of  the  whigs,  she  professed  great  regard  |  Foedera,'  and  also  to  tnat  excellent  history 
for  him,  and  declared  that  she  could  always  |  of  the  Excheq^uer  by  Madox,  justifies  the 
trust  him,  for  he  had  never  deceived  her.  '  latter  author  m  placing  him  in  the  upper 
She  died  in  August  1714,  and  for  the  two  !  ranks  of  the  lovers  of  antiquity,  and  in 
years  that  he  survived  in  the  reign  of  I  celebrating  in  his  ^  Prefatory  Epistle '  the 
Ueorge  I.,  though  his  friends  were  restored  <  public  benefit  he  conferred*  on  the  nation 
to  power,  and  he  had  a  place  in  the  cabinet  |  oy  the  care  of  its  ^positories  and  the  pre- 
without  office,  he  took  no  public  share  in    servation  of  its  lecoras. 


business,  being  gradually  incapacitated  by 
a  paralytic  affection,  which  at  last  reduced 


As  he  never  married,  his  title  became 
extinct,  but  was  revived  in  1784  in  the 


him  to  a  state  of  imbecility.    He  died  on  ;  person  of  Sir  Charles  Cocks,  Bart.,  the 


April  20,  1710,  and  was  buried  at  Mimms 
in  Hertfordshire,  in  which  parish  his 
country  residence,  called  Brockman's,  was 
situate. 

As  the  leader  of  a  ffreat  party,  Lord 
Somers'scharacter  among  nis  contemporaries 


grandson  of  his  sister  Mary.  The  name 
still  graces  the  House  of  Liords,  with  the 
additional  title  of  an  earl,  granted  in  1821. 
He  left  a  fine  and  well-assorted  library, 
which  was  divided  between  Sir  Joseph 
Jekyll,  master  of  the  Rolls,  who  married  ma 


was  as  much  assailed  by  his  opponents  as  :  sister  Elizabeth,  and  his  nephew  Sir  Philii;^ 


624  SOREWELL  SOTHERTON 

Yorke  (afterwards  Earl  of  Ilardwicke),  the  city  Bridewell  now  stands.  (HaaUd^  ii. 
and  contained  a  valuable  collection  of  tracts  ;  322  :  Blomefieldx  Xoncich,  i.  277,  ii.  :J18.) 
and  manuscripts.  A  selection  of  the  former  SOTHERTOH,  No  well,  was  probably  of 
was  publishea  in  1795  under  the  name  of  j  the  same  family  as  the  above  John  Sotber- 
the  '  Somers  Tracts  *  in  sixteen  volumes,  i  ton,  by  whom  he  was  in  all  likelihood 
and  again  in  1809  in  twelve  volumes,  edited  i  introduced  into  the  Exchequer.  He  was 
by  Sir  Walter  Scott.  The  manuscripts,  ,  the  son  of  John  Sotherton,  sheriff  of  Nor- 
which  orijrinally  filled  sixty  quarto  volumes,  ,  wich  in  15C5,  and  Mary,  dauffhter  of 
were  unfortunately  destroyed  in  an  acci-  Augustin  Stevens.  He  is  called  of  Gray » 
dental  fire  in  Lincoln's  Inn  in  1752,  which  |  Inn,  but  never  was  a  reader  there,  nor  doe? 
consumed  the  chambers  of  the  Hon.  Charles  ■  bin  name  occur  in  any  of  the  Reports 
Yorke,  where  they  were  deposited.  A  few  I  either  as  an  advocate  or  a  judge.  Nearly 
fragments  were  preserved  from  the  flames,  nine  months  after  Baron  John  Sotherton** 
and  were  published  by  the  Earl  of  Hard-  death  he  was  made  a  baron  of  the  Exche- 
wickeinl/78.  {Life  of  Lord  Somers^  1710;  quer,  his  patent  beinpr  dated  July  8,  1006: 
aho  Lives  by  Cooksey^  Ma(I<Iock\  Boscoe^  but  as  there  were  at  that  time  already  f<»ur 
Lord  Campbell.^  in  Chalmers's  Jiioy.  Z>tc'(.,  banms  on  that  bench,  who  were  all  seijeante* 
and  in  Townsend's  House  of  Conwions.)  at-law  and  entirely  unaccustomed  to  the 

SOREWELL,  William*  de,  or  8H0BE-  i  fiscal  duties  attached  to  the  office,  the  pro- 
WELL,  was  united  with  Peter  de  Rupibus,  bability  is  that  he  was  the  first  extra  baron 
Bishop  of  Winchester,  in  the  slierilFalty  of  appointed  for  that  special  service,  under 
Hampshire  for  seven  years,  commencing-  2  '  the  title  of  cursitor  baron,  with  minor  pri- 
Henry  III. ;  and  with  Joscelin,  Bishop  of  '  vilegres  and  holding  a  lower  rank  than  the 
Bath,  in  the  sheritFalty  of  the  county  of  •  otlier  barons,  and  in  no  way  joining  with 
Somerset,  in  part  of  the  ninth  year  of  that '  them  in  their  judicial  functions.  He  be- 
reign.  In  10  Henry  III.  he  was  one  of  |  came  master  of  the  Merchant  Taylors' Com- 
tho{?e  employed  to  collect  the  quinzime  of  panv  in  London  in  1597. 
the  former  county ;  and  early  in  the  next  He  died  before  October  27,  1610,  a5  a 
year,  1227,  he  was  selected  as  a  justice  certificate  of  the  rest  of  the  barons  to  the 
itinerant  into  the  latter  count}-,  and  also  '  lord  hiprh  treasurer,  in  favour  of  ThoiD«» 
into  Dorsetshire  and  Wiltshire.  He  did  Ca?8ar,  bears  that  date,  and  was  buried  at 
not  long  survive  thi?*  appointment,  for  on  St.  Botolph's,  Aldersgate.  Ilis  wife  wa.'* « 
August  7,  1228,  his  orother  and  heir,  I  daughter  of  Anthony  Williams,  auditor  of 
Robert,  was  permitted  to  pay  a  sum  of  22/.  j  the  Alint.  {Blomefield' s  Norwich^  ii.  ^Xl,) 
due  from  him  for  the  time  he  was  sheritl'  of  ,  80THEBT0H,  John,  was  probably  the 
Hants,  in  three  instalments.  {Rot,  Claiis.  ii.  \  son  of  the  above-named  baron  John  So- 
23,  147,  205;  EacerpL  e  Rot.  Fin.  i.  17o.)    i  therton,  by  his  second  wife,  Maria,  daugfa- 

SOTEEBTOH,   John,   whose   name   was    ter  of  Edward  Woton,  M.D.      lie  was  ab 
probably  derived  from  a  village  so  called  ,  officer  of  the  Exchequer,  and  in  July  \(^ 
m  Suflolk,  was  of  a  family  long  settled  at  '  was    appointed    receiver-general    for    the 
Norwich,  to  which  city  it  had  provided    counties  of  Bedford  and  Buckingham.     On 
several  sheriffs  and  representatives  in  par-    October  29,  1010,  he  was  placed  as  a  baroa 
liament.     He  was  bom  there  about  1525,  '  of  the  Exchequer  (Cal.  St.  PkjjH*rs  [1608- 
and,  being  placed  in  the  Exchequer,  was  in  ,  10"|,   1.3o,  039),   and  wa.<<  allowed    ov  as 
1558   admitted    to   the    office   of  foreign  j  order  of  the  Inner  Temple   (to  whicJi  be 
apposer.      {Each,    Records.)      After    per-  i  had  been  admitted  in  1588)  to  '  have  hi^ 
forming  the   duties    belonging  to    it   for    place   at  the   bench   table   above  all  the 
above  twenty  years,  he  was  raised  to  the  '  readers  in  such  sort  as  Sir  Thomas  Ca&ar, 
bench  of  that  court  as  a  puisne  baron  on    knight,  late  puisne  baron  of   the  Eiche- 
June  16,  1570.     During  tne  remainder  of   quer,  had.*     {Dugdale's  Orig,   14i\)     This 
Elizabeth's  reign  he  continued  to  occupy    proves  that  he  had  not  been  a  reailer  to 
the   seat,  and   receiving  a  new  patent  on  '  the  society,  and  that  he  was  not  of  the 
the  accession  of  James  I.,  he  held  it  till    degree  of  the  coif,  because  if  be  ha«l  been, 
his  death  on  October  20,  1005.     His  re-    he  would  no  longer  have  been  a  member  nt 
mains  were  deposited  in  the  church  of  St.  I  that   house,   but  of  Serjeants'   Inn.      Ob 
Botolph,  Little  Britain,  Alderygate  Street,  i  December  5  he  was  one  of  the  commis- 
in  the  same  tomb  with  his  two  wives —    sioners  with   the   lord   mayor   who   tried 
IVances,  daughter  and  heir  of  .Tohn  Smith    Mackalley*s  case  at  the  Old  Bailey  (9  Coke* 
of  Cromer  in  Norfolk  :  and  ^laria,  daughter    Reports^  62 ),  and  was  so  employeil  on  other 
of  Edward  Woton,  M.D.     By  the  former    occasions;  but,  as  he  is  never  mentioned  a» 
he  had  a  son,  Christopher:  ami  by  the  latter  '  sitting   in    the  Exchequer  Court,  nor  «2> 
a  son,  John,  and  a  daughter,  Maria.  (*SVo26'V   joining  in   the   conferences   of  the  other 
London,  .3i^2.)  .lodges  during  the   remainder  of  James's 

Queen  Elizabeth  granted  him  the  manor  reign,  it  would  seem,  in  connection  with 
of  Wadenhall  in  Waltham,  Kent,  and  he  the  above  facts,  that  be  held  the  ulfice 
possessed  property  in  Norwich,  on  which    which  is  now  called  cursitor  baron.    This 


SOUTHAMPTON 

m  derives  greater  weight  from  the 
in  a  special  commission  to  enquire 
Kstive  titles,  issued  in  1622,  ne  is 
fter  the  attorney-general,  though 
)r  barons  of  the  &chequer,  Den- 

Bromlej,  are  inserted  previous  to 
er.  The  same  order  of  precedence 
ved  in  another  commission  in  the 
j;  jear  on  the  same  subject ;  and  in 
eion  relative  to  nuisances  in  London, 
several  knights  and  the  recorder  of 
ntervene  between  the  other  barons 

{Ryiner,  xvii.  388,  612,  640.) 
ame  remark  applies  also  to  the 
Charles,  in  whicn  he  lived  several 
The  Reports  never  mention  him 
3,  and  then  only  as  transacting 
which  was  ^  of  course '  (oursitor). 
year  1630,  the  plague  raging  m 
MichaelmAs  Term  was  adjourned 
)  return  to  another,  and  it  is  re- 
hat  the  essoigns  of  one  of  them 

by  Mr.  Baron  Sotherton  (2  Croke, 
)),  which  was  a  mere  formality, 
in  the  course  of  the  next  year,  his 
',  James  Pagitt,  being  appointed 
er  24,  1631. 

anied  Elizabeth,   widow  of   Sir 
rgan,  of  Chilworth,  Surrey.  (Man' 
Brays  Surrey ,  ii.  118.) 
[AHPTON,    Earl    op.      See    T. 

ESLEY. 

[COTE,  JoHif,  of  Southcote,  be- 
3  an  old  Devonshire  fSEtmily,  and 
eldest  son  of  William,  a  younger 
icholas  Southcote,  of  Ghudleigh  in 
nty.  He  was  bom  in  1611,  and 
it  to  the  Middle  Temple,  he  rose  to 
r  in  autumn  1556,  and  again  in 
the  occasion  of  his  being  called 
take  the  degree  of  the  coit.  Pre- 
:o  this,  however,  he  is  mentioned 
len  as  under-sheriff,  and  one  of  the 
•  the  SherifTs  Court  in  London,  in 
id  his  arguments  after  he  became 
are  reported  both  by  that  author 

He  was  nominated  as  a  judge 
Jueen's  Bench  on  February  10, 
id  performed  his  judicial  duties 
^h  reputation  for  the  space  of 
>ne  years,  when  he  retired  on  May 

He  died  on  April  18,  1585,  and 
ed  under  a  stately  monument  in 
h  church  of  Witham  in  Essex,  in 
unty  he  had  purchased  the  manors 
s  or  Abbotts,  and  Petworths. 
wife,  Elizabeth,  daughter  and  heir 
am  Robins  of  London,  he  had 
children.  His  son  John  succeeded 
I  one  of  his  descendants,  then  of 
ough  in  Lincolnshire,  was  raised 
ITT  1662  to  a  baronetcy,  which 
?xtinct  in  1691.  (DugdMs  Orig. 
?hyn*8  Diary,  373;  Morant,  ii.  110.) 
[WELL,  HoBEBT,  was  of  a  family 
)ok  its  name  from  the  town  of 


SOUTHWELL 


625 


Southwell  in  Nottinghamshire,  records  of 
which  exist  as  ancient  as  the  reign  of  Ed- 
ward I.  One  of  its  branches  was  esta- 
blished at  Felix  Hall  in  Essex ;  and  Robert 
was  the  second  son  of  Francis,  auditor  of 
the  Exchequer  to  Henry  VIII.,  and  his 
wife  Dorothy,  daughter  and  heir  of  William 
Tendring,  Esq.  Their  eldest  son  was  Sir 
Richard  Southwell,  privy  councillor  to 
Henry  VIIL,  and  ancestor  of  the  present 
Baroness  de  Clifford. 

Robert,  after  studying  at  the  Middle 
Temple,  became  reader  there  in  autunm 
1540.  (Dugdales  Orig,  216.)  His  con- 
nection with  the  court  at  this  time  is  evi- 
denced by  several  entries  in  the  books  of 
the  privy  council.  In  October  he  was 
employed  to  enquire  into  a  riot  in  the 
county  of  Surrey ;  in  January  1541  he  is 
mentioned  as  one  of  the  masters  of  the 
Court  of  Requests,  and  as  directed  to  search 
the  coffers  of  one  Mason,  aj)prehended  for 
some  offence,  and  to  provide  him  with 
bedding,  &c.,  in  the  Tower ;  and  in  AprU 
he  was  joined  with  the  president  and  coun- 
cil of  the  North  in  a  commission  of  Oyer 
and  Terminer.  On  July  1  in  that  year  he 
received  the  appointment  of  master  of  the 
Rolls,  and  was  tnereupon  knighted.  In  the 
following  November  he  was  engaged  as  one 
of  the  king*s  commissioners  at  Calais ;  and 
his  opinion  on  the  subject  of  his  mission 
was  read  to  the  council.  (Acts  Privy  Cfnm- 
cilf  vii.  74,  &c.) 

Beyond  commissions  granted  to  him  and 
other  masters  in  Chanceiy  in  aid  of  Lord 
Wriothesley  in  1544  and  1547,  and  of  Lord 
Rich  in  1550,  no  account  remains  of  the 
exercise  of  his  judicial  functions.  It  is 
known  that  he  benefited  larsrely  in  the  dis- 
tribution of  the  estates  belonging  to  tiie 
suppressed  monasteries,  among  which  he 
had  a  grant  of  Bermondsey  Abbey,  and 
erected  a  capital  mansion  on  its  site. 
(PhiUips's  Hid,  6.) 

In  December  1550  he  surrendered  his 
patent  of  master  of  the  Rolls,  and  retired 
to  his  estate  at  Jote's  Place  in  the  parish 
of  Mereworth  in  Kent,  which  he  acquired 
by  his  marriage  with  Margaret,  daughter 
and  heir  of  Thomas  Nevill,  a  younger  son 
of  George  Lord  Bergavenny.  "Rq  was 
sheriff  of  that  county  on  the  accession  of 
Queen  Mary,  and  signalised  himself  in  the 
suppression  of  Wyat*s  rebellion.  For  his 
good  services  on  this  occasion  he  was  re- 
warded with  the  manner  of  Aylesford,  for- 
feited by  this  foolish  adventurer.  (Hasted^ 
iv.  426,  V.  88.)  Burnet  and  Carte  have  con- 
founded him  with  his  brother  Sir  Richard. 

His  death  occurred  in  November  1550, 
and  the  heraldic  honoars  of  his  funeral  in 
Kent  are  recorded  in  Henry  Machyn's  Diary 
(p.  217).  His  portrait,  in  the  nossession  of 
Lord  Clifford,  is  said  to  have  oeen  drawn 
by  Hans  Holbein  at  one  slttu^. 


626 


SPAIGNE 


8FAI0HE,  Nicholas  de,  is  first  mentioned 
as  one  of  the  clerks  in  Chancery  in  45  Ed- 
ward III.,  when  he  was  the  last  of  ftmr  of 
them  appointed  to  hold  the  Great  Seal 
during  the  absence  of  Sir  Robert  de  Thorpe, 
the  chancellor,  on  March  18, 1371.  In  that 
and  the  two  following  years  he  was  one  of 
the  receivers  of  petitions  to  the  parliament, 
and  died  about  1374.  He  seems  to  have 
been  connected  with  the  county  of  York, 
(Rot.  Pari.  ii.  303,  309,  317 ;  Abb.  Hot, 
Orig.  ii.  304.) 

s'PALDEWICE,  William  de  (Abbot  of 
Colchester),  was  placed  at  the  head  of 
the  justices  itinerant  who  visited  Essex  and 
Hertfordshire  in  38  Henry  HI.,  1254,  ac- 
cording to  the  not  unusual  practice  of  so 
honouring  a  dignified  ecclesiastic  of  the 
neighbourhood.  He  was  elected  abbot  on 
April  22,  1245,  and  died  about  July  8, 1272. 
(Broume  Willis^  i.  CC.) 

8FALDIN0,  John  de,  prior  of  Spalding, 
was  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  into  Essex 
in  50  Henry  HI.,  1272.  He  was  eminent 
for  his  knowledge  of  the  laws,  and  had  been 
summoned  to  council  in  49  Henry  HI.  (Law 
and  Lotryers,  ii.  331.) 

8FELMAN,  John.  The  pedien^e  of  the 
Spelmans,  as  drawn  out  by  the  learned  an- 
tiquary Sir  Henry  Spelman,  commences 
three  generations  before  the  reign  of  Henry 
in.,  with  William  Spileman,  knight,  lord 
of  Brokenhurst  in  Hampshire.  The  family 
afterwards  removed  into  Suffolk,  and  in  the 
fifteenth  century  into  Norfolk,  where  they 
possessed  very  large  estates.  Henry  Spel- 
man, the  father  of  the  judge,  is  described 
in  this  pedigree  as  holding  no  less  than  eight 
manors.  He  was  himself  a  lawyer,  and  for 
many  years  recorder  of  Norwicli,  and  once 
its  representative  in  parliament.  He  died 
in  1496,  leaving  by  nis  second  wife,  Ela, 
daughter  and  heir  of  William  de  Narburgh 
of  Narburgh  in  Norfolk,  seven  children,  of 
whom  the  judge  was  the  youngest  son. 

John  Spelman  studied  the  law  at  Gray's 
Inn,  where  he  was  appointed  reader  in  1514, 
and  again  in  1519.  He  was  called  to  the 
deOTee  of  the  coif  in  Trinity  Term  1621, 
and  made  king's  serjeant  in  1528,  and  he  is 
introduced  among  the  judges  of  the  King's 
Bench  in  24  Henry  Vlll.,  1532 ;  and  Coke, 
in  3  Report  (44),  mentions  a  judgment  of  his 
in  Trimty  Term  of  that  year.  In  1535  he 
officiated  as  a  commissioner  on  the  trials  of 
Sir  Thomas  More  and  Bishop  Fisher ;  and 
in  the  following  year  he  was  no  doubt  pre- 
sent at  that  of  Queen  Anne  Boleyn,  since 
Burnet  says  that  he  had  seen  an  account  of 
it  written  in  the  judge's  own  hand.  {St^it^ 
Trials,  i.  387,  398,  412.)  He  died  on  Fe- 
bruary 26,  1544,  according  to  the  inscrip- 
tion on  his  tomb  in  Narburgh  Church,  his 
figure  on  which,  in  the  robe  and  coif  of  a 

i'udge,  is  engraved  in  Cotman's  *  Norfolk 
brasses.' 


SPELMAN 

He  married  Elizabeth,  the  daughter  and 
heir  of  Sir  Heniy  Frowyk,  of  Gunnersbury 
in  Middlesex,  the  elder  brother  of  Chief 
Justice  Sir  Thomas  Frowyk.  By  her  he 
had  a  family  of  twenty  children,  thirteen 
sons  and  seven  daughters.  His  fifth  son, 
Henry,  was  the  father  of  the  eminent  anti- 
quary Sir  Henry,  whose  second  son  wm 
tne  next- mentioned  Clement  Spelman. 
{Gibson^ 8  Life  of  Sir  H.  Spelmati  ;  Weeixr, 
820;  BlomefieUiB  Nortdch,  i.  171.) 

SFELXAH,  Clehext,  was  the  great- 
grandson  of  the  last-named  judge,  and  tk 
son  of  Sir  Henry  Spelman,  by  his  wife» 
Alienora,  the  eldest  daughter  and  coheir  of 
John  Le  Strange  of  Hunstanton  in  Norfolk. 
Sir  Henry  was  knighted  by  King  James  I. 
for  hb  public  services,  and  devoted  the  la*t 
thirty  years  of  his  life  to  those  studies,  acd 
the  production  of  those  works,  which  hare 
established  his  reputation  eis  one  of  the  most 
learned  antiquaries  this  country  ever  pro- 
duced. He  died  in  October  1641,  leavis; 
four  sons  and  four  daughters,  and  was  buiied 
in  Westminster  Abbey. 

Clement,  the  youngest  of  these  sons,  wm 
admitted  a  pensioner  of  Queens'  Colle|?e. 
Cambridge,  on  September  10,  1616.  He 
had  been  previously  entered  at  Gray's  Iim, 
the  school  in  which  his  ffreat-grand&ths 
had  studied,  so  early  as  March  1613,  bat 
was  not  called  to  the  bar  till  1624.  As  his 
name  never  occurs  in  the  Reports  of  the  time, 
he  probably  devoted  himself  to  literarv  par- 
suitA,  and  assisted  his  father  in  his*  anti- 
quarian enquiries ;  for  to  the  Oxford  editioa 
(1646)  of  Sir  Henry's  treatise  *De  ceo 
Temerandis  Ecclesiis,*  he  "wrote  a  large  pre- 
face containing  many  things  relating  to  im- 
propriations and  several  instances  of  ibe 
ludgments  of  God  upon  sacrilege.  In  1047 
ne  published  anonymously  *  Reasons  for  ad- 
mitting the  King  to  a  personal  treaty  in  IV* 
liament  and  not  by  Commissioners';*  andia 
the  next  year,  *  A  Letter  to  the  AssemNy 
of  Divines  concerning  Sacrilege.*  The* 
works,  and  the  active  assistance  he  gave  to 
the  king  in  1648,  are  evidences  suffideat 
that  he  was  a  decided  royalist. 

In  connection  with  the  law,  he  is  stated 
to  have  been  one  of  the  performers  in  1^ 
in  a  masque  called  the  *  Triumphs  of  PriBOi 
d' Amour,*  by  Sir  William  l>avenant,  ^ 
vided  for  the  entertainment  of  Charles,  tke 
Elector  Palatine,  at  the  Middle  Temple: 
but  it  is  not  clear  how  this  could  be^  umesB 
the  Middle  Temple  borrowed  aasistaoce 
from  Gray's  Inn.  Of  the  latter  inn  Spel- 
man was  made  an  ancient  in  16.H8  and  & 
bencher  at  the  Restoration.  At  that  time. 
A.  Wood  says,  on  the  authority  of  Dugdato^ 
that  Spelman  published  a  '  Character  of  the 
Oliverians,'  which  he  intimates  is  the  9Ksat 
as  <  The  Mystery  of  the  Good  Old  Cau« 
briefly  unfolded  in  a  Catalo^e  of  such 
Memoers  of  the  late  Long  Parliament,  wiu» 


SPIRGUBNEL 

8  both  civil  and  military,  &c./ 
I  be  found  at  the  end  of  the 
ne  of  Han8aid*8  '  Parliamentary 

1  services  were  rewarded  by  the 
it  of  cursitor  baron  of  the  Ex- 
March  9, 1663,  an  office  which 
i  till  March  1679.    He  died  in  j 
g  June,  and  was  buried  in  St.  \ 
Church  in  Fleet  Street.    (Athm.  I 

37,  iv.  8  ;  Notes  and  Queries.  3rd  , 

I 

WELy  Henry.  Spiffumel  was  the  | 
1  to  the  officer  wno  sealed  the  I 
chancery,  and  was  by  degrees  | 

the  surname  of  the  family,  by 
dMij  continued,  probably  during  I 
lessions,  to  be  executed.  The  | 
is  mentioned  is  Godfrey  Spi- 
o,  in  a  grant  in  9  John  of  live 
land  and  a  mill  in  Skeggeby  in 
nshire,  is  styled  '  serviens  noster 
nostra.  {Rot.  ChaH,  169.)  He 
at  of  three  *  oboli '  a  day  out  of 
f  the  town  of  Hertford,  and  is  last 

in  11  Henrv  III.     {Hot.  Claus, 

82.) 

3sion  came  Henry  Spigurnel,  who 

ands  in  Northamptonshire  above 

,  and  was  summoned  in  respect 

perfr)rni  military  service  in  25 
,  1297.  In  the  same  year  his 
lonpr  the  justices  and  members  of 
I  summoned  to  parliament,  and 

to  have  acted  in  a  judicial  cha- 
be  previous  year.     (Pari.  WritSj 

Abb.  Rot.  brig.  i.  97.) 
y  1301  he  and  William  de  Ormes- 
orded  as  holding  *  locum  regis' 

'  in  absencia  R.  de  Brabanzon ; ' 
ter  of  the  same  year,  on  the  Roll 
coram  domino  rege  '  at  Wor- 
•e  two  and  Gilbert  de  Roubury 
tied  as  holding  the  court  in  the 

the  chief  justice  {Abb.  Placit. 

and  further,  in  the  writ  direct- 
take  the  oaths  on  the  accession 
II.,  his  previous  seat  in  the  court 
to.  (Pari.  Writs,  ii.  p.  ii.  3.) 
is  appointment  till  19  Edward 
r.s  to  have  been  most  active  in 
lance  of  his  duties,  and  to  have 
ved  as  one  entrusted  with  affairs 
ce.  In  4  Edward  II.  he  was  one 
g's  nuncios  to  the  council,  and 
►  Rome  on  a  special  mission ;  and 
'nth  year  he  was  summoned  to 

with  the  Bishop  of  Worcester 
others,  an  embassy  beyond  the 
lough  returned  by  the  sheriff  of 
1  17  Edward  II.  as  a  knight 
ty  years  of  age  and  unfit  for  ser- 
ad  him  acting  in  the  following 
istice  itinerant  in  the  islands  of 
I  Guernsey.     His  last  recorded 

as  a  judge  is  in   the  parlia- 


STAFFOED 


627 


ment  of  November  1326,  19  Edward  IT., 
but  his  death  did  not  occur  till  three  years 
afterwards.  ' 

The  only  account  of  his  character  is  m  a 
political  song,  in  which,  when  spoken  of  as 
a  justice  of  trailbaston  in  33  Edward  I.,  he 
is  described  as  '  gent  de  cruelty ; '  but  too 
much  reliance  must  not  be  placed  on  so 
suspicious  an  authority. 

He  lived  at  Eenilworth,  and,  according 
to  his  own  return  in  1316,  was  lord  or 
joint-lord  of  various  townships  in  the  coun- 
ties of  Bedford,  Buckingham,  Oxford,  and 
Northampton.  He  had  also  property  in 
Essex  and  Leicestershire.  By  his  wife, 
Sarah,  he  had  issue,  and  his  sons  represented 
the  county  of  Bedford  in  1  and  14  Eaward  U. 
{Rot.  Pari.  i.  137-449 ;  Wiight's  Political 
Songs,  233.) 

8TAFF0SB,  Edmund  de  (Bishop  of 
Exeter),  was  the  grandson  of  Sir  Richard 
de  Stafford,  of  Clifton  in  Staffordshire,  who 
was  the  younger  brother  of  Ralph,  created 
Earl  of  Stafford  in  1351,  and  the  son  of 
another  Richard,  who  was  summoned  to 
parliament  as  a  baron  in  1371.  He  was 
born  about  the  ^ear  1345,  and,  being  edu- 
cated for  the  pnesthood,  he  was  appointed 
dean  of  York  m  August  1386.  {Le  Neve, 
314.)  He  became  keeper  of  the  privy  seal 
in  1391, 14  Richard  II.  {Rot.  Part.  iii.  264), 
and  was  raised  to  the  bishopric  of  Exeter 
on  January  15, 1395. 

The  Great  Seal  was  delivered  to  him  on 
November  23,  1396,  and  he  sat  as  chan- 
cellor in  the  parliament  of  the  following 
January  and  September,  and  in  the  latter 
swore,  to  observe  the  arbitrary  statutes 
which,  by  the  royal  influence,  were  then 
passed,  and  which  in  a  short  time  led  to  the 
king's  ruin.     {Rot.  Parl.iii.  337, 347,  355.) 

The  precise  date  of  his  retirement  from 
the  office  is  not  known,  but  he  certainly 
held  it  when  Henry  of  Bolingbroke  landed 
at  Ravensbum  on  July  4,  1399.  So  soon 
afterwards,  however,  as  August  13,  his  pre- 
decessor. Archbishop  Arundel,  having  re- 
turned with  Henry  from  his  banishment, 
was  again  in  possession  of  the  Great  Seal, 
and  exercising  the  duties  of  chancellor. 

Although  a  friend  of  King  Richard,  it  is 
evident  that  he  succeeded  in  disarming  the 
new  monarch  of  any  enmity  he  might  in- 
dulge against  him  on  that  account.  He 
attended  in  his  place  in  the  first  parliament 
of  Henry  TV.,  and  was  one  of  the  prelates 
who  assented  to  the  imprisonment  of  the 
deposed  king.  In  little  more  than  seven- 
teen months  after  the  commencement  of 
the  new  reign  he  was  reinstated  in  the 
office  of  chancellor.  The  Seal,  which  was 
delivered  to  him  by  the  kinff  on  March  9, 
1401,  remained  in  his  hands  about  two 
yecu*s — viz.^  till  the  end  of  February  1403. 
Mstory  is  silent  as  to  the  caufie  oC  ^^^e^- 
tirement ;  but  t\iat\ieTQXA^<^>i)DA^vs<^Mx  ^H. 


628 


STAFFORD 


the  king  18  manifeBt,  from  his  being  selected 
as  a  trier  of  petitions  in  several  subsequent 
parliaments,  and  also  as  one  of  the  king^s 
council     {Hot.  Pari  427, 645,  507, 572.) 

He  survived  Henry  IV.  more  than  six 
years,  and  died  on  September  4,  1419^ 
naving  presided  over  his  diocese  nearly  a 
quarter  of  a  century.  His  remains  were 
deposited  in  his  own  cathedral,  under  an 
alabaster  tomb;  with  a  rhyming  Latin  in- 
scription. 

It  may  be  presumed  that  he  was  educated 
at  the  university  of  Oxford,  in  the  college 
then  called  Stapledon  Hall,  as  he  added 
two  to  its  fellows,  providing  estates  for 
their  support,  and  as  the  name  of  Exeter 
College,  which  it  now  bears,  is  supposed  to 
have  been  given  from  him.    (Godtmn^  412.) 

8TAEF0BB,  John  (Archbishop  of 
Canterbtjky),  was  the  second  son  of  Sir 
Humphrey  Stafford,  surnamed  (whether 
from  iiis  generous  disposition,  or  from  hav- 
ing an  artificial  band,  does  not  appear)  Sir 
Humphrey  of  the  Silver  Hand,  ana  his 
wife  Elizabeth,  daughter  and  heir  of  — 
Dynham,  and  widow  of  Sir  John  Mal- 
travers.  His  brother,  Sir  Humphrey  Staf- 
ford, was  the  ancestor  to  another  Humphrey, 
who  was  created  Earl  of  Devon  in  9  Ed- 
ward IV.,  a  title  which  he  enjoyed  only  a 
few  months,  being  beheaded  in  the  same 
year.     (Baranagcy  i.  172.) 

Bom  at  Houke  in  the  parish  of  Abbots- 
burv,  Dorsetshire,  he  was  educated  at  Ox- 
ford, and,  takmg  his  degree  in  laws,  after- 
wards practised  as  an  advocate  in  the 
ecclesiastical  courts.  There  he  was  ad- 
vanced to  be  dean  of  the  Arches ;  and  in 
September  1419  he  was  collated  arch- 
deacon of  Salisbury,  and  was  made  chan- 
cellor of  that  diocese  in  1421.  In  May  in 
the  latter  year  he  was  in  possession  of  the 
place  of  keeper  of  the  privy  seal,  which  he 
retained  during  the  remainder  of  the  reign 
of  Henry  V.,  and  was  re-appointed  on  the 
accession  of  Henry  VI.,  his  salary  being 
twenty  shillin^rs  a  day.  {Rymer,  x.  117; 
.'Rot,  Pari.  iv.  171 ;  Acts  Privy  Cotmcil,  iii. 
8.)  In  December  1422  he  succeeded 
William  Kynwelmersh  both  as  dean  of  St. 
Martin's,  London,  and  in  the  high  office  of 
treasurer  of  England.  (Moiiasticony  vi. 
1324.)  The  former  he  probably  gave  up 
on  his  becoming  dean  of  Wells  on  Septem- 
ber 9  in  the  following  year ;  the  latter  he 
retained  till  March  13,  1426,  when  he  re- 
signed it.  Elected  Bishop  of  liath  and 
Wells  on  May  12,  1425,  he  was  named  as 
one  of  the  lords  of  the  council  during  the 
king's  minority,  and  was  most  regular  in 
his  attendance  at  its  meetings. 

By  a  MS.  letter  in  the  British  Museum, 

addressed  by  the  king  to  him  on  July  11, 

1428,  it  would  appear  that  he  had  resumed 

his   former  office  of  keeper  of  the  privy 

seal.     In  1430  he  accompanied  the  king  to 


STAGES 

France,  and  had  a  salary  as  one  of  his 
counsellors  there  {AcU  Privy  Council j  iii. 
310,  iv.  29)  ;  and  in  1432,  when  Archbishop 
Kempe  resigned  the  chancellorship,  the 
Great  Seal  was  transferred  to  his  hands  on 
March  4.  He  remained  in  this  high  office 
uninterruptedly  for  eighteen  years  wanting 
thirty-two  days.  He  is  the  first  poase^jsor 
of  tlie  office  who  is  known  to  have  been 
called    'lord  chancellor.'     {Rot.    Pari,  v. 

las.) 

He  was  elected  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury on  May  15,  1443 ;  ana  about  tiie 
same  time  lie  was  appointed  apostolir 
legate  in  England,  by  which  title  he  i« 
several  times  described.  That  of  cardinal 
which  is  frequently  attached  to  his  name 
in  the  list  of  the  bishops,  we  do  not  find 
that  he  ever  received ;  and  the  mistake  his 
probably  arisen  from  confounding  him  ^th 
Archbishop  Kempe,  who  bore  the  eaioe 
Christian  name,  and  certainly  was  a cardiml 

The  absurd  practice  of  opening  the  par- 
liament with  a  political  speech  introduced 
by  a  Scripture  text  was  still  continued: 
and  he  had  numerous  opportunities  of  di*- 
playing  his  eloquence,  which  occasionallT 
was  animated  and  impressive,  but  too 
often,  according  to  the  practice  of  the  time, 
far-fetched,  and  tasteless  in  its  application. 

Throughout  his  lengthened  possessioo  of 
the  Great  Seal  Archbishop  Stafford  wt* 
allowed  to  have  exhibitea  that  leainin? 
and  caution  and  intelligence  which  woe 
to  be  expected  from  lus  early  character  and 
his  long  experience.  But  it  was  his  mis- 
fortime  to  witness  during  the  same  period 
the  gradual  loss  of  all  those  dominions  in 
France  for  the  acquisition  of  which  Henrr 
V.  had  been  almost  worshipped  by  the 
English;  and  thus  to  share  in  the  ua- 
popularity  consequent  on  the  reveiw*. 
Fmler,  mistaking  his  parentage,  auaintlT 
sayd  of  him,  *  No  nrelate  (his  peer  m  biiti 
or  preferment)  hatn  either  less  good  or  k* 
evil  recorded  of  him.' 

Whether  induced  by  the  consciousDeii 
of  increasing  infirmities,  or  dreading  the 
storm  then  collecting  against  the  Duke  of 
Suffolk,  or  forced  by  the  dissatisfaction  of 
the  people  with  the  terms  of  the  peace 
with  France,  for  which  he  with  the  other 
ministers  would  be  deemed  responsible,  he 
resigned  the  office  of  chancellor  on  JaDoarr 
31,  1450,  or,  in  the  terms  of  the  record, 
*  exoneratus  fiiit.'  The  first  use  made  bv 
the  king  of  the  Great  Seal  was  to  attach  it 
to  a  patent  of  pardon  to  the  archbishop. 
He  lived  a  little  more  than  two  yean  nitk 
his  retirement,  and  dying  at  his  palace  at 
Maidstone  on  July  G,  1452,  was  interred  in 
Canterbury  Cathedral.  (  Godwi$ty  1 27, 379: 
Le  Neve :  Hasted,  xii.  422.) 

STAKES,  RicnABi)  be,  affords  another 
example  of  a  clerical  judge,  as  the  deognft- 
tion  'Magister/  always  placed  before  his 


STANLEY 

:fficientl^  {Hroves.  He  seems  to 
d  as  a  justice  itinerant  before  he 
justicier,  Tisiting  eleven  counties 
rmer  capacity  in  52  Henry  III., 
le  bis  appointment  as  a  justice  of 
's  Bencb  did  not  take  place  till 
eing  year.  From  July  1269  till 
f  the  reim  tbere  are  frequent  en- 
sizes  to  be  held  before  nim.  In 
lU.  he  is  specially  mentioned  as 
iarius  ad  placita  tenenda  coram 
1  in  the  last  month  of  the  reign, 
lad  a  salary  of  40/.  a  year  assigned 
(Excerpt,  e  Rot,  Fin,  ii.  490-586; 
.  203.) 

s  no  reason  to  suppose  that  be  did 
his  place  on  the  accession  of  Ed- 
but  if  he  did  so  he  must  have  been 
to  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  in 
;he  following  year,  inasmuch  as 
baelmas  in  the  latter  till  February 
gdcdes  Orig,  44)  fines  were  levied 
Q.  He  was  present  at  the  council 
le  following  Michaelmas.  (ParL 
J.) 

ET,  Thomas  de,  was  one  of  the 

;he  Chancery  from  11  Richard  II., 

3rst  appears  as  a  receiver  of  peti- 

^t.  Pari  iii.  228-455.)    He  held 

for  the  ten  following  years,  when 

instituted  master  of  the  Rolls,  on 

r  11,  1397,  21  Richard  II.    On 

hment  of  Henry  of  Lancaster  in 

year  he  was  selected  as  one  of  his 

during  his  absence  {Rynxer,  viii. 

therefore,  naturally  retained  his 

n  that  prince  usurped  the  govem- 

e  was  superseded  in  September 

i  it  would  seem  that  his  offence 

he  obtained  the  pope's  bulls  for 

'^nefices,  a   pardon  being  granted 

the  same  year  on  that  account. 

Pat.  245.)- 

STOH,  MiLO  D£,  was  the  son  and 
?  undernamed  Nicholas  de  Staple- 
served  Edward  I.  throughout  his 
rars.  When  the  first  conmiission 
ston  into  Lancashire  was  issued, 
12,  1305,  he  and  John  de  Byrun 
two  justices  appointed  under  it; 
he  following  month  they  were 
i  by  the  more  comprehensive  com- 
«rhich  were  then  issued.  {Pari. 
107,  ii.  67.) 

IS  seneschal  of  Knaresborough 
33  Edward  I.  (Ahh.  Rot.  Orig.  i. 
was  summoned  to  parliament  as 
6  and  7  Edward  II.,  in  the  latter 
years  he  obtained  a  pardon,  as  an 
3f  the  Earl  of  Lancaster,  for  his 
ion  in  the  murder  of  Gaveston. 
I  the  following  year.    (Cal.  Inguis, 

wife,  Sibilla,  a  daughter  of  John 
Aqua,  he  left  Nicholas,  his  son 
;  but  the  barony,  by  failure  of 


STABKEir 


629 


male  heirs  in  47  EdwaiA  m.,  became 
vested  in  the  representatives  of  Elizabeth, 
the  wife  of  Thomas  Metham,  the  sister  of 
Thomas,  the  last  lord.     {Baronage,  ii.  70.) 

STAPLETOH,  Nicholas  de,  was  either 
son  or  grandson  of  a  knight  of  the  same 
name,  who  was  governor  of  Middleham 
Castle  in  Yorkshire  in  the  reign  of  John. 
{Rot.  Clam,  i.  248.)  His  residence  was  at 
Hachilsay  (Weshacheslay)  in  that  county. 
He  is  first  mentioned  in  a  Liberate  Roll 
of  1  Edward  I.  as  a  judge  of  the  King's 
Bench ;  and  by  another  entry  in  6  Edward 
I.  it  appean  that  a  salary  of  fifty  marks 
yearly  was  assigned  to  him  in  that  charac- 
ter. Various  judicial  acts  are  recorded  of 
him  until  Trinity,  17  Edward  I.,  1289; 
and  he  was  summoned  to  parliament 
among  the  judges  up  to  the  previous  year. 
{Rot.  Pari.  L  349;  Pari,  Writs,  i.  846; 
Ahh.  Placit.  205-279.) 

He  died  in  1290  {Col,  Inquis,  p.  ul  L 
103),  leaving  the  above-named  Milo  his 
son  and  heir,  and  a  daughter,  Julian,  who 
married  Richard  de  Windsor.  {ColUns^B 
Peerage,  iii.  647^ 

8TAEKST,  HuMPHRBY,  was  descended 
from  the  Starkeys  of  Oulton  and  Wrenbury 
in  Cheshire,  a  branch  of  the  Starkeys  of 
Nether  Hall  in  Stretton  in  that  county,  a 
very  ancient  family.  Sir  Humphrey,  having 
purchased  the  manor  of  Littlehall  in  the 
parish  of  Woldham  in  Kent,  gave  it  his 
own  name,  and  built  tbere  a  good  house, 
still  standing,  and  a  handsome  chapel, 
very  little  of  which  remains. 

llhe  Inner  Temple  was  the  place  of  his 
legal  studies,  and  the  first  instance  of  his 
forensic  employment  recorded  in  the  Year 
Books  is  in  Hilary  Term,  32  Henry  VI., 
1454.  In  11  Henry  \^L,  1471,  he  was 
elected  recorder  of  London,  and  the  Year 
Books  notice  his  appearance  in  court  in 
that  character  as  late  aa  1483,  when  he 
resigned  the  office  on  being  raised  to  the 
bench  at  Westminster.  Before  that  event 
happened  he  was  called  Serjeant  in  Trinity 
Term  1478.  His  appointment  as  chief 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  is  dated  June  16, 
1483,  only  ten  days  before  the  dethrone- 
ment of  Edward  V.,  so  that  he  was  obliged 
to  have  a  new  patent  from  the  usurper, 
which  he  received  on  the  26th  of  the  same 
month,  having  previously  been  knighted. 
Although  Dugdale  does  not  introduce  him 
among  the  justices  of  the  Common  Pleas 
in  the  reini  of  Richard  HI.,  it  is  certain 
that  he  held  both  appointments,  as  several 
of  his  predecessors  had  done,  and  it  is  pro- 
bable that  his  patent  for  the  latter  oore 
even  date  with  that  for  the  former.  Two 
fines  levied  before  the  judges  of  the  Com- 
mon Pleas  in  the  first  and  second  years  of 
the  zeign  are  referred  to  in  the  KoUa  of 
Parliunent,  and  his  name  a^^oeMe^  m^AS^ 
of  them.    (Rot.  PtorU  ^  m,  ^A\:^    <^ 


630 


STATHAM 


the  accession  of  Henry  VII.  his  patents  for 
hoth  places  were  renewed  on  the  same  day. 
He  died  early  in  the  second  year  of  that 
reign  ;  his  last  fine  is  at  Midsummer  1486 
(IhigdMs  Oritj.  47),  and  William  Hody 
was  appointed  his  successor  as  chief  baron 
on  October  29.  He  was  buried  in  St. 
Leonard's,  Shoreditch,  with  his  wife,  whose 
name  was  Isabella.  They  left  no  male 
issue,  and  their  four  daughters  divided  the 
inheritance.  (Hasted,  iv.  404 ;  Movant ^  i. 
161.) 

STATHAX,  Nicholas,  was  elected  reader 
of  Lincoln's  Inn  in  Lent  1471, 11  Edward 
IV.  (Lugdale's  Orig.  249),  and  received  on 
Octooer  30,  1467,  a  patent  for  the  grant  of 
the  office  of  second  baron  of  the  Exchequer 
in  reversion  on  the  death  or  surrender  of 
John  Gierke.  As  the  date  of  John  Gierke's 
death  is  not  known,  and  as  Statham's 
name  is  never  mentioned  afterwards,  it  is 
uncertain  whether  he  ever  filled  the  office. 
All  we  know  is,  that  either  on  his  or  on 
Gierke's  death  Thomas  Whitington  was 
appointed  second  baron  on  February  3^ 
1481,  20  Edward  IV. 

Although  he  never  once  is  mentioned  in 
the  Year  Books,  an  abridgment  of  the 
cases  reported  in  them  to  Uie  end  of  the 
reign  of  Henry  VI.,  being  the  first  attempt 
at  a  work  of  that  nature,  go^  under  his 
name. 

8TAUHF0BD,  William,  was  grandson 
of  Robert  Staunford  of  Rowley  in  Stafford- 
shire, and  son  of  William  Staunford  of 
London,  mei'cer,  by  his  wife  Margaret,  the 
daughter  and  heir  of  —  Gedney  ot  London. 
His  oirth  took  place  in  his  father*s  house 
at  Hadley  in  Middlesex  on  August  22, 
1509.  After  receiving  a  classical  education 
.  at  Oxford,  he  pursued  his  legal  studies  at 
.  Gray's  Inn,  where  he  was  called  to  the  bar 
in  1536,  and  was  appointed  reader  in  1544, 
and  again  in  1551.  {Dugdale's  Orig.  293.) 
He  designates  himself  as  attomey-generid 
on  May  3,  1545,  in  his  surrender  to  King 
Henry  of  all  the  title  he  had  in  the  rector}' 
of  South  Mymes  in  Middlesex.  (Ef/tner, 
XV.  69.)  The  date  of  his  nomination  to 
that  office  does  not  appear,  and  it  is  certun 
that  he  did  not  hold  it  later  than  the  18th 
of  the  following  month,  when  Henry 
Bradshaw  received  the  appointment.  Ed- 
ward VI.  called  him  to  the  degree  of  the 
coif  on  May  19,  1552 ;  and  on  October  19, 
1553,  three  months  after  the  accession  of 
Mary,  whose  religion  he  professed,  he  was 
made  one  of  the  queen^  Serjeants.  He 
was  named  on  the  commission  under  Ed- 
ward which  deprived  Bishop  Tunstall,  a 
sentence  which  in  the  first  year  of  Queen 
Mary  was  set  aside  (Ibid,  346):  and  he 
conducted  on  the  part  of  the  crown  the 
prosecution  against  Sir  Nicholas  Throck- 
morton, in  which,  making  allowance  for 
the  difference  of  times,  he  does  not  seem  to 


STAUNTON 

have  pressed  the  prisoner  with  any  unfair 
harshness.     (State  Trials,  i.  800.) 

A  few  months  after  this  trial,  which 
took  j>lace  on  April  17,  1554,  Staunford 
was  raised  to  the  bench,  and  the  first  fine 
levied  before  him  was  in  the  month  after 
Michaelmas  1554.  (Dftgdale^s  Orig.  48.) 
He  was  knighted  bv  King  Philip  on  Janu- 
ary 27,  1555  (Machyn'8  Diary,  342),  and 
retained  his  seat  in  the  Common  F1m» 
during  the  rest  of  his  life,  which  terminated 
on  August  28,  1558,  three  months  before 
the  demise  of  Queen  Mary.  He  was  buried 
in  Hadley  Church. 

He  was  a  great  and  learned  lawyer,  aid 
distinguished  himself  not  only  by  encou- 
raging the  first  publication  of  Rsmulph  d» 
Glanville's  '  Tractatus  de  Legibus  et  C<»- 
suetudinibus  Anglite  *  (Cokeys  4  Inst,  345), 
but  also  as   the    autnor   of    two  highhr 
esteemed  works — viz.,  a  Treatise  on  the 
Pleas  of  the  Crown,  and  an  lilxposition  of 
the  King's  Prerogative,  the  former  of  idiich 
is  still  ojf  great  authority.    The  antithetictl 
David  Lloyd  (219)  desmbes  bis  charscte 
in  his  usual  encomiastic  manner,  and  sums 
it  up  thus :  ^  He  had  those  lower  virtue^ 
that  draw  praise  from  the  vulgar,  whidi 
he  neglected  (knowing  that  they  were  moR 
taken  with  appearances    than    realities); 
he  had  middle,  that  thev  admired  and  good 
men  observed ;  he  had  nis  highest  virtiw^i, 
which  they  received  and  great,  men  ho- 
noured.   In  a  word,  a  fragrant  fame  he 
had,  that  filled  all  round  about,  and  would 
not  easily  away.* 

His  wife,  Alice,  the  daughter  of  John 
Palmer,  Esq.,  survived  him,  and  took  v 
her  second  husband  Ko^er  Carew,  Esq.,  d 
Hadley.  By  her  he  had  issue  six  sons  and 
four  daughters.  The  name  is  irequeodT 
spelled  Stamford  by  Dyer,  Coke,  and  other 
reporters,  and  also  on  the  tomb  of  his  ynb 
in  Hadley  Church.  (Athen.  Oxom,  i  26S: 
Machgn,' SiQ2.) 

8TAUHT0V,  WiLiJAM  BE  (of  what 
family  is  not  known),  was  appointed,  wi^ 
three  others,  a  justice  itinerant,  to  nsi: 
Cornwall,  Devonshire,  Dorset,  and  Somenec 
in  46  and  47  Hemy  HI.,  1262-3. 

8TAUHT0V,  Hebysy  be  (sometime? 
called  Henry),  was  of  a  Nottinghanuhiie 
family  of  lar^  possessions  and  ancieBi 
lincnprc,  which  is  still  fiourishing  at  StaoD- 
ton  Hall  in  that  county.  He  was  the  sa 
of  Sir  William  de  Staunton,  by  AthelioL 
daughter  and  coheir  of  John  cle  Mnsten. 
lord  of  Bosingham  in  Lincolnshire.  (TV 
roton's  Notts,  i.  305.) 

He  was  an  ecclesiastic  as  weU  as  a  lawyer: 
and  on  one  occasion  he  is  described  as  ure- 
bendaiy  of  Hustwhait,  in  the  catiiedrsl  of 
York.  (Abb,  Ff^rcit.  259,  S^,)  As  a  Uwyer 
he  is  first  mentioned  in  30  Edwaid  L,  1^^ 
among  the  justices  itinerant  into  Com  wall 
and  in  the  next  year  m  holdkigtiis  8U0» 


STAVERTON 

character  in  Durham.  In  the  parliament 
held  at  Westminster  in  September  1305 
he  was  one  of  those  appointed  to  receive 
and  answer  the  petitions  from  Ireland  and 
the  isle  of  GuemseyX-^^'  ^^^'  i-  159j;  and 
on  April  20,  1300.' he  was  called  to  the 
bench  as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas. 

On  the  accession  of  Edward  U.  he  was 
re-appointed  in  the  same  court,  and  con- 
tinued to  perform  the  duties  of  the  office 
till  September  28, 1314, 8  Edward  II.,  when 
he  exchanged  his  seat  in  the  Common 
Pleas  for  that  of  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer. 
On  June  22,  1316,  he  became  chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer;  but  seems,  however,  to 
have  been  still  employed  in  a  judicial  cha- 
racter on  various  commissions,  and  to  have 
heen  regularly  simimoned  to  parliament 
with  the  other  judges.  (Pari  WntSf  ii. 
1457.) 

In  1323  he  was  raised  to  the  office  of 
chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench.  Dugdale 
(Orig.  38)  quotes  a  Close  Roll  commanding 
him  not  to  quit  the  office  of  chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer,  but  cause  it  to  be  executed  by 
some  other  fit  person  at  such  times  as  he 
should  be  necessitated  to  attend  the  hearing 
of  causes ;  and  Madox  (ii.  53,  e)  chives  a 
writ,  dated  September  17  or  27  m  that 
year,  by  which  the  seal  of  the  Exchequer 
was  temporarily  committed  to  the  custody 
of  the  treasurer.  Staunton  retained  the 
chief  justiceship  of  the  King's  Bench  for  a 
Tery  few  months,  being  superseded,  on  the 
Slst  of  March  following,  by  Geoffrey  le 
Scrope ;  but  he  was  five  days  afterwards 
re-appointed  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer. 
On  July  18,  1320,  20  Edward  IL,  he  was 
constituted  chief  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas,  and  gave  up  the  seals  of  the  Ex- 
chequer.    (Pari  llrits,  ii.  p.  ii.  1458.) 

Dugdale  cites  the  same  patent  as  ap- 

?ointing  him  not  only  chief  justice  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  but  chief  baron  o*f  the 
Exchequer  also.  This  is  a  manifest  blunder, 
as  the  patent  is  wholly  silent  on  the  subject. 
Half  a  year  after  this  the  king  was  de- 
posed, and  Hervev  de  Staunton  died  about 
the  same  time,  William  de  Herle  being 
immediately  made  chief  justice  in  his  place. 
(^Abf).  Hot.  Orig.  ii.  10.)  He  was  buried 
Id  St.  Michael's  Church,  Cambridge,  where 
lie  founded  the  house  of  that  name  (now 
incorporated  into  Trinity  College,  where  his 
name  is  introduced  into  the  grace  after 
dinner),  and  endowed  it  with  the  manor  of 
Harenton  and  the  advowson  of  the  church 
there.  {Holinshed,  ii.  574;  Cal.  Hot.  IkU. 
98.) 

STAYEBTOH,  JoHi7,  who  was  connected 
-with  the  county  of  Suffolk,  appears  among 
the  officers  of  the  Exchequer  m  15  lUchard 
II.  {KaL  Exch,  ii.  108),  and  on  the  acces- 
sion of  Henry  IV.  he  was  constituted  a 
baron  of  that  court.  He  acted  throughout 
the  reign,  and  waa  re-appointed  by  Henry  V • 


ST££LE 


631 


BTESLS,  William,  was  the  son  of 
Richard  Steele,  of  Giddy  Hall,  a  moated 
house  at  Sandbach  in  Cheshire  (Ormero^s 
Cheshire,  iii.  4^),  and  of  Finchley  in  Mid- 
dlesex. He  became  a  barrister  at  Gray's 
Inn  on  June  23, 1637,  and  was  one  of  the 
candidates  for  the  judgeship  of  the  Sheriff's 
Court  in  London  m  1643,  ont  was  unsup- 
ported either  by  the  Common  Council  or 
the  Court  of  Aldermen,  between  whom 
there  was  a  contest  as  to  the  right  of  elec- 
tion, and  John  Bradshaw,  afterwards  presi- 
dent of  the  High  Court  of  Justice,  was 
chosen.  In  1647  he  had  the  conduct  of 
the  prosecution  of  the  unfortunate  Captain 
Burley  for  his  loyal  but  fruitless  attempt  to 
rescue  the  king  in  the  Isle  of  Wight ;  and 
the  zeal  and  energy  he  displayed  so  ingra- 
tiated him  with  the  parliament,  that  wnen 
they  were  seeking  a  successor  for  MJr. 
Glynne  in  the  recordership  of  London  in 
January  1648,  they  recommended  him  to 
the  city  for  the  post.  The  vacancy  did  not 
then  Uke  place,  and  at  the  end  of  the 
year  the  Commons  found  more  active  em- 
ployment for  him  by  appointing  him  at- 
torney-general of  the  Commonwealth,  for 
the  purpose  of  conducting  the  charges 
against  the  king.  (  WMtelocke^  290,  368.) 
But  when  the  court  sat  on  January  18  to 
make  arrangements  for  the  trial,  Steele  waa 
or  pretended  to  be  ill,  and  in  sending  a 
message  announcing  that  he  was  ^  not  like 
as  yet  to  attend  the  service  of  the  court,' 
he  signified  that '  he  no  way  declined  the 
service  out  of  any  disaffection  to  it,  but 
professed  himself  to  be  so  clear  in  the 
Dusiness  that  if  it  should  |>leaBe  God  to 
restore  him  he  should  manifest  his  good 
affection  to  the  cause.'  He  thus  escaped 
the  odious  office  which  Solicitoi^eneral 
Cook  performed ;  but  within  ten  days>a$ter 
the  execution  he  was  well  enough  to  appear 
in  the  High  Court  of  Justice  on  the  pro- 
secution of  the  Earl  of  Cambridge  (Duke 
of  Hamilton),  against  whom  he  delivered  a 
long  and  laboured  speech.  So  also  against 
the  Earls  of  Holland  and  Norwich,  Lord 
Capel,  and  Sir  John  Owen,  who  were  tried 
about  the  same  time.  {State  Trials,  iv. 
1064, 1067,  1209.) 

Ho  was  elected  recorder  of  London  on 
August  25,  1649.  Having  been  in  the 
previous  April  superseded  in  his  teinnorary 
office  of  attorney-general  by  Mr.  Prideaux, 
the  Commons  were  glad  of  this  opportunity 
of  rewarding  his  services,  their  sense^  of 
which  they  still  further  marked  by  giving 
him  the  privilege  of  pleading  within  the 
bar,  and  ordering  that  ho  should  be  freed 
from  his  reading  at  his  inn  of  court. 
(  Whitdocke,  394,  420.) 

He  waa  one  of  the  committee  named  in 
January  1652  to  consider  of  the  delays^ 
the  charges,  and  the  irregularities  in  we 
proceedings  of  the  law,  and  in  May  1654 


632  8TEYK6RAVE  STILLINGTON 

-was  a  commisfiioner  to  try  the  Portuguese  <  judge  of  the  King's  Bench.  The  time  of 
amba8Midor*8  brother  for  nmixler.  In  the  his  death  or  removal  must  have  been  befim 
last  case  ho  is  called  Serjeant  Steele,  to  April  1347,  as  his  name  is  not  indudad  m 
which  degree  he  had  been  admitted  on  Ja-  :  the  order  for  the  judges*  robes  then  isBoed. 
nuarr  25.  {lind.  6*20,  olK);  Stjl/ts  Crom-  •  In  14  Edward  III.  he  was  one  of  the  coib- 
tcelL\,  4^36.)  mi^siuners  appointed  to  enquire  into  the 

Cromwell,  when  he  became  protector,  in  '  true  value  of  tne  bishoprics  north  of  Tient 
December  1053,  left  the  office  of  chief  (Haded,  iii.  182 ;  Hot,  ParL  iL  119.) 
baron  vacant  for  more  than  a  year,  when  8TIXE8WALD,  Roger  de,  piobablj  lo 
he  bestowed  it  on  Mr.  Serjeant  Steele,  i  called  from  belonging  to  a  place  of  thit 
who  was  sworn  in,  after  a  learned  speech  '  name  in  Lincolnshire,  where  there  wu  i 
from  Mr.  Commissioner  AVhitelocke,  on  May  Cistercian  nunnery,  was  the  last  named  of 
28, 1C55.  {Athen,  Oxon,  iii.  1045.)  Three  iive  justices  itinerant  who  fixed  the  tallip 
days  after  he  resigned  his  recordership.  for  that  county  in  8  Richard  I.,  1I9S-/. 
On  August  20,  1(55<S,  he  was  advanced  to  {Madox,  i.  704*.)  lie  was  alive  in  18  Job, 
the  lord  chancellorship  of  Ireland  {Smyth's  and  had  a  grant  during  pleasure  of  tk 
Law  Of,  Irdandy  33,  34 ) ;  and  on  Decem-  I  land  of  Osbert  de  Bobi,  '  qui  est  cum  im- 
ber  10,  1057,  he  was  nominated  one  of  micis  nostris.'  {Rot,  Clans,  i.  290.) 
Crom weirs  House  of  Lordei.  {Pari,  Jlist.  STILLIKOTOir,  Robert  (Bishop  or 
iii.  1518.)  He  was  continued  in  his  office  Bath  and  AVells),  was  the  son  of  Job 
on  the  accession  of  the  IVotoctor  Richard,  Stillington,  Esq.,  probably  of  the  place  d 
on  whose  deposition  and  the  second  ex-  that  name  in  Yorkshin/,  who  poswMd 
pulsion  of  the  Long  Parliament  he  was  property  at  Nether  Acaster,  a  snort  ^ 
named  by  Fleet  wo'jd,  in  October  1059,  as  tance  from  York,  of  which  city  one  of  Ui 
one  of  the  committee  of  safety.     AVith  this  ;  progenitors  war  baililT  in   13w.     (Dnkf 

.'J^J  I .)  He  became  a  student  of  the  colkp 
of  AH  Souls  in  the  university  of  Oxfun, 
where  he  took  the  degree  of  doctor  in  botk 


body,  however,  he  refused  to  act,  declaring 
his  opinion  to  be  that  the  ])arliament  were 

the  onlv  proper  judges  a<»  to  the  future  , ^ 

establishment.     (l,w//o?r,  ;J02,  ;J13.)  'laws.     His  lir?«t  ecclesiastical   prefermeu 

At  the  restoration  of  Charles  II.  he  of  \  was  a  canonry  in  the  cathedral  of  W'elb  ia 
course  lost  his  place,  but  is  said  to  have  !  1445 ;  which  was  quickly  followed  by  tb 


secured  his*  personal  safety  and  made  his 
pence  with  the  govommont  by  betraying 
the  secrets  of  Henn*  Cromwell  to  Clarendon 


treasurership  of  the  same  church  in  1447: 
the  rcctorv  of  St.  Michael,  Ouse  Bridire,  m 
York,  in  1448 ;  and  the  archdeaconnr  of 

casoQof 
8,  LoD- 
inl4ta. 
He  was  a  lawyer  of  ability  and  learning;    and  of  Wells  in  1 405 ;  and,  lastly,  Bi^fhop  of 
but  his  character  is  describei  by  the  writers    Bath   and   Wells    on   January   11,  1-lOd. 
on  one  side  as  proud,  crafty,  insincere,  and    Manv,  if  not  all,  of  these   preferments  b 
insolent   (Clarendon;  Duhiggv),  while   on    owed  to  the   patronage   of    the   house  of 
the  other  it  is  stated  that  he  was  genenii-  i  York,  to  which  he  was  strongly  attached. 
\y  esteemed  to  be  a  man   of  great  pru-  i  On  their  attaining  power  at  the  end  of  tb 
dence  and  uncorrupted  iutegritv  (ZMrf//>ic,    r«*ign  of  Henry  VI.  he  was  appointed  keeper 
•U3) ;  and  nothing  api>oars  in  his  recorded  ,  of  the  privy  seal  (Devon  s  Im^ue  Holly  -W); 
historj'  in  contradiction  to  this,  if  confined    and  in  the  acts  of  resumption  passed  in  tb 
to    pecuniar}'    transactions.    He    died    in    early  parliaments  of  Edward  I V.  the  gnuo 
Dublin  and  wns  ImritHl  in  St.  Werburgh's.    made  to  him  in  this  character,  and  dsun 
By  his  first  wife,  Elizabeth  Godfrey,  he  had    dean  of  St.  Martin's,  are  all  excepted  in  his 
a  son,  Richard,  who  wns  the  father  of  the    favour.     (Eot.  ParL  v.  470,  578.) 
distinguished  essayist  Sir  Richard  Steele.        He   was   appointed   lonl   chancellor  on 
His  second  wife  was  the  widow  of  Michael  |  June  20,  1407,  and  on  May  17  in  the  foi- 
Harvev,  younp'r  brother  to  the  celebrated 
Dr.  William  Harvev.     (yotcs  and  Queriitf, 
2nd  Sjdi.  72 ;  JW;/<',  i.  fiJMJ.) 

8TEYN0SAVE,  Adam  de,  no  doubt  be-  ever,  which  the  dissensions  at  home  m^ 
longed  to  the  knightly  family  settled  at  the  :  vented  the  king  from  attempting.  I\^ 
manor  of  that  name  in  the  parish  of  Eden-    bishop  was  still  "chancellor  when  vl'sr^J^ 


lowing  year  he  announced  to  the  parliament 
the  roval  intention  to  recover  the  ldDed\m 
of  France  {Ibid,  018,  022 ),  a  project.  W- 


0  Edward  HI.,  and  remained   there   till    tion  we  have  no  precise  account  of  A^^ 
January  20,  VMl,    He  was  not  included    duct,  with  the  exception  tt«^,^    flJJ 


m  the  new  patent  of  that  date ;    but  on  !  Seal  was  taken  out  of  his  hand* 
(Xstober  28  following  he  was  made  a  judge    into  those  of  Archbishop  ^exilL  ^ 
of  the  CommoTi  IHeas  •,  and  on  Januar}'  10,    was  not  offemdve  to  Edwd  I? 
1342,  he  became,  Y)^  owoWvet  <^«si^,  %l  ^^iravime  from  his  being  itiil  ^^ 


STILLINGTON 

of  chancellor  at  the  next  parliament  in 
October  1472,  although  absent  on  account 
of  illness  (Ilnd,  vi.  2);  but  that  he  had 
some  suspicion  that  it  might  be  questioned  i 
if  too  closely  investigated  may  be  collected  | 
from  his  obtaining  in  the  previous  February 
n  general  pardon  for  all  crimes  committed 
by  him  previous  to  the  day  of  the  grant. 
(Jtyiner,  xi.  736.)     His  illness   seems   to 
have  continued  throughout  the  first  half  of 
the  next  year,  during  which  temporary 
keepers  were  at   first   appointed ;  but  at 
last,  on  July  27,  1475,  Laurence  Booth, 
Bishop  of  Durham^  was  invested  with  the 
office,  which  Stillington   never  again  re- 
covered,   lie  was  stfll,  however,  emplo^-ed 
by  the  king ;  and  when  the  Earl  of  Itich- 
mond   (afterwards    Henry  VU.)    escaped 
from  England,  and  took  refuge  in  the  terri- 
tories of  the  Duke  of  Bretagne,  the  bishop  ' 
^flA  sent  to  that  prince  to  demand  that  the  I 
fugitive  should  be  given  up.    He  failed  in 
his  embassy,  and  we  hear  no  more  of  him  | 
during  the  remainder  of  the  reign  than 
tkat  he  was  a  trier  of  petitions  in  the  par-  , 
liament  of  the  seventeenth  year,  and  that 
in  the  eighteenth,  for   some  unexplained  ' 
cause,  he  received  a  new  patent  of  pardon,  i 
(^Ibid,  xii.  GO.)  j 

From  the  day  of  Edward's  death  Stil-  | 
lington  became  an  adherent  of  his  ambitious  ' 
brother,  Kichard  Duke  of  Gloucester ;  and,  I 
though  we  may  charitably  hope  that  he 
"was  not  a  party  to  or  a  believer  in  the 
usurper's  grosser  enormities,  there  is  no 
doubt  that  he  drew  up  the  act  by  which 
the  children  of  Edward  IV.  were  bastai'd- 
ised,  that  he  assisted  at  the  coronation  of 
Kichard,  and  that  he  gave  him  every  aid 
and  countenance  throughout  his  trouolous 
reign.  So  devoted  a  partie^an  of  the  York- 
ists was  not  likely  to  be  looked  upon  with 
much  favour  by  Ilenry  \iL  On  the  very 
day  of  the  battle  of  Bosworth,  August  2i,  ' 
14^o,  the  king  issued  a  warrant  for  his  i 
apprehension ;  and  on  August  27  he  was  ; 
already  in  prison  at  York, '  sore  erased  by 
reasf>n  of  his  trouble  and  carving.'  (Drake,  i 
122.)  He  succeeded,  however,  before  the  | 
end  of  the  year  in  obtaining  his  full  pardon 
from  the  king,  who,  when  the  act  of  bas- 
tardy was  repealed,  refused  on  that  account 
to  call  him  before  the  parliament  to  answer 
for  its  composition,  although  pressed  by  the 
LfOrds  to  do  so.  He  was^  however,  deprived 
of  the  deanery  of  St.  Martin's,  and  the  act 
that  ousted  him,  after  a  flourish  about  the  ' 
impropriety  of  benefices  being  held  in  aug-  ' 
mentation  of  bishoprics,  speaks  of  *the 
horrible  and  haneous  offences  ymagined 
and  doune  by '  him  against  the  king.  (Hot, 
Pari,  vL  292.) 

Ilia  escape  on  this  occasion  does  not 
seem  to  have  rendered  him  more  cautious 
in  his  future  conduct  He  became  impli- 
cated in  the  absurd  attempt  of  Lamoert 


STOKE 


633 


Simnel  in  1487,  was  discovered,  and  com- 
mitted to  the  castle  at  Windsor,  where  he 
remained  a  prisoner  for  nearly  four  years, 
and  died  there  in  May  1491,  without  that 
]^ity  which  is  usually  afforded  to  a  sufferer 
tor  political  crimes.  Whatever  merit  he 
might  claim  as  a  supporter  of  the  house  of 
Y'ork  he  forfeited  by  nis  abject  desertion  of 
the  children  of  his  patron. 

In  the  reign  of  Edward  IV.  he  founded 
the  collegiate  chapel  of  St  Andrew,  at 
Acaster,  or  Nether  Acaster,  for  a  provost 
and  fellows,  building  it  on  property  which 
had  belonged  to  his  uiUier,  and  m  1  Kichard 
III.  he  procured  a  confirmation  of  the  grant 
of  knd  he  had  made  to  it  {Oodwin,  382 ; 
AntfL  Sac,  i.  674 ;  Le  Neve,) 

STIECHELSTZ,  Walter  be,  was  ap- 
pointed sheriff  of  Gloucestershire  in  9  Ed- 
ward I.,  and  in  the  next  year  sheriff  of 
Lincolnshire,  holding  the  former  office  for 
four,  and  the  latter  for  three  years.  (Alh, 
Rot,  L  37,  43.)  He  is  the  last  named  of 
six  justices  itinerant  sent  into  Hertfordshire 
in  15  Edward  I.,  1287.  In  Michaelmas 
Term  of  that  year  there  was  a  suit  between 
Walter  the  son  and  heir  of  Walter  de 
Stircheleye,  and  Walter  the  son  of  Regi- 
nald de  Stireheleye  and  others,  relative  to 
a  considerable  property  in  Stireheleye  in 
Shropshire  {Am,  Placit.  210);  but  which 
of  the  three  Walters  was  the  justice  itine** 
rant  there  is  nothing  to  show. 

STIVEKEL,  JoscELLVE  de,  so  called 
probably  from  the  place  of  his  birth,  now 
Stukeley,  in  Huntingdonshire,  was  sheriff 
of  that  county  and  of  Cambridgeshire  in  8 
and  0  John,  and  in  the  latter  year  paid 
twenty  marks  to  be  released  from  the  em- 
ployment (Eat,  de  Fin.  382,  401.)  He 
was  probably  an  officer  connected  with  the 
Exchequer.  Several  fines  were  acknow- 
ledged at  Westminster  in  15  and  10  John, 
1213-14,  in  which  hb  name  appears  among 
the  justiciers  present,  but  in  no  other  year. 

He  soon  afterwards  went  over  to  the 
side  of  the  barons,  and  his  lands  were  given 
to  Simon  de  Campo  Remigii.  He  had  at 
the  same  time  letters  of  safe  conduct  to  go 
to  the  king;  but  he  does  not  appear  to 
have  used  them,  as  his  estates  were  not  re- 
stored till  eleven  months  after  the  accession 
of  Henr}'  III.,  when  the  sheriffs  of  Bedford, 
Hunts,  and  Lincoln  were  ordered  to  sAve 
him  possession.  (Bat,  Fat,  170 ;  Fot.  Clam, 
i.  251,  323.) 

STOKE,  Kalfh  be,  was  of  the  clerical 
profe£>sion.  Dugdale,  by  mistake,  calls  him 
archdeacon  of  Stafford  in  7  John,  Henry 
of  London,  already  noticed,  then  holding 
that  dignity.  From  2  to  8  John,  1200- 
1200,  the  fines  levied  at  Westminster,  and 
on  the  circuits,  contain  his  name  as  a  juB- 
ticier  present,  without  that  designation. 
(Madox,  i.  734.) 

He    had  the  church  of  Wodeford  in 


634 


STOKE 


STONORE 


Northamptonshire  in  4  John  (Abb.  Hacit.    and  13  Edward  11.,  to  carry  into  the  Ei- 
41),  and  in  the  next  year  he  was  presented    chequer  to  be  estreated. 


to  the  church  of  Alrewas  in  Staffordshire 
(Hot,  Pat.  40) ;  and  two  years  afterwards  he 
seems  to  have  got  into  some  dis^ace,  as  he 
was  fined  a  palfrey  for  tampenng  with  a 
jury  in  Yorkshire.     (Hot.  de  Fin.  S)9.) 

STOKE,  Richard  de,  seems  to  have  been 
implicated  in  the  barons*  war  against  King 
John,  as  he  returned  to  his  allegiance  in  2 
Henrv  III.,  when  his  lands  were  restored 
to  him.  They  were  situate  in  Buckingham- 
shire, in  which  county,  some  years  after- 
wards, he  held  the  office  of  coroner.  It 
was  probably  on  that  account  that  in  0  and 
11  Ilenry  III.,  1225-7,  he  was  selected  to 
act  there  as  one  of  the  justices  itinerant. 
{Hot.  Claus.  i.  340,  ii.  77, 147,  215.) 

8T0KE8,  John  de.  There  was  in  the 
reign  of  Edward  II.  a  Ralph  de  Stokes  who 
was  a  clerk  of  the  great  wardrobe,  and  in 
that  of  Richard  II.  an  Alan  de  Stokes  who 
held  the  same  ofiice ;  and  it  is  not  impro- 
bable that  this  John  de  Stokes  may  have 
been  the  son  of  one  and  the  father  of  the 
other.  He  was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the 
Exchequer  on  November  3,  1365,  39  Ed- 
ward III. ;  and  in  the  forty-fourth  year  he 
was  sent  into  Yorkshire  imd  Northumber- 
land, to  obtain  loans  for  the  king  from  the 
wealthy  of  those  counties,  and  to  survey 
the  alien  priories.  (Devon's  Imie  Roily  133, 
20t) ;  N.  Focdera,  iii.  778 ;  Issue  RoU,  256.) 


In  the  following  year,  on  October  16, 
1320,  he  was  constituted  a  justice  of  tha 
Common  Pleas ;  and  the  fines  levied  befoie 
him  continue  till  the  octave  of  Michaelmte, 
27  Edward  IIL,  1853 ;  and  yet  Bugdale 
introduces  him  into  his  list  of  j  ustices  of  the 
King's  Bench  from  17  Edward  II.,  132H 
till  the  end  of  that  reign.     As  the  autho- 
rity quoted  for  this  is  only  a  liberate,  no 
doubt  ordering  the  payment  of  a  salary,  m 
should  have  supposed  that  Dugdale  had 
mi/»taken  the  words  'justiciarius  domim 
regis,'  by  which  title  the  judges  of  bo& 
benches  were  then  often  caued,  as  denpa- 
ting  that  he  was  a  justice  of  the  Emgfs 
Bench,  but  that  we  find  that  John  de  Sto- 
nore,  on  May  3,  1324,  in  the  same  seven- 
teenth year,  was  again  constituted  a  judge 
of  the  Common  Pleas,  the  patent  containing 
no  special  words  of  explanation.    As  none 
of  the  commissions  upon  which  he  w 
placed,  and  none  of  his  summonses  to  ptf- 
liament  about  this  period^  in  the  slightest 
degree  distinguish  tne  court  to  whidi  h^ 
belonged,  we  are  unable  to  account  for  hi» 
re-appointment  to  the  Court  of  Common 
Pleas,  except  by  supposing  that,  thongk 
there  is  no  record  of  it,  he  was  for  a  shoit 
time  removed  from  that  court,  and  was  re- 
placed at  the  above  date.      However  this 
mav  have  been,  there  is  no  doubt  that  John 


STOKES,   HiCHARD,  was   constituted  a  |  deblonore  continued  from  that  time  a  judge 


of  the  Common  Pleas  till  the  end  of  the 
reign,  for  we  find  his  name  to  a  fine  in 
Trinity  Term  in  1320  (OHg.  94),  and  that 
he  was  re-appointed  by  Edward  IE.  a  few 
days  after  he  was  procfaimed  king. 

On  Februaiy  22, 1329,  3  Edward  IIL  he 
was  made  chief  baron  of  the  Excbeqaer. 
and  on  September  3  in  the  same  year  vu 
further  advanced  to  be  chief  justice  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  superseding  William  de 
Herle,  who,  however,  was  restored  two  veas 
afterwards,  on  March  2,  1331 ;  and  ^ohn 

{Ahh.  Piacit.  326.)      A   manor,  however,    de  Stonore,  on  April  1,  was  placed  in  the 

of  the  same  name  in  Oxfordshire  may  be 

thought  to  have  a  better  claim  to  his  nati- 


baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  October  9, 1377, 
1  Kichard  II.,  and  appointed  auditor  of  the 
accounts  of  the  king's  bailiwicks  in  Wales 
and  in  Cheshire.  He  retained  his  seat  on 
the  bench  till  the  twenty-first  year,  but  cer- 
tainly did  not  occupy  It  at  the  end  of  the 
reign.    (Cal.  Rot.  Pat.  196,  108,  217.) 

8T0H0BE,  John  de,  probably  was  bom 
at  Stonore,  not  far  from  Sandwich  in  Kent, 
as  we  find  him,  so  early  as  10  Edward  II., 
taking  a  release  of  all  the  lands  of  Robert 
de  Lumbleton,  in  Lesnes  in  that  coimty. 


second  seat  in  the  court.  From  this  hft 
seems  to  have  been  removed,  on  Julv  16. 
vity,  unless,  as  is  not  unlikely,  he  gave  his  !  1333,  by  Geoflrey  le  Scrope  ;  but  cm  Jv^'^ 
name  to  the  manor,  following  the  example  I  in  the  following  year,  on  the  resignation  of 
of  those  spoken  of  by  the  Psalmist,  who  '  William  de  Herle,  Stonore  was  reinsUted 
*call  the  lands  after  their  own  names.'    An  !  as  chief  justice. 

efligy  in  judges*  robes,  bearing  his  arms,  is  |      On  the  king's  return  from  Toumav,  »i 
in  the  church  of  Dorchester,  which  is  near  ;  the  end  oftheyear  1340,  both  he  and  several 


to  the  manor. 

He  is  frequently  mentioned  as  an  advo- 
cate in  the  Year  Books ;  and  he  was  so  far 
advanced  among  the  Serjeants  as  to  be  sum- 
moned to  assist  at  the  parliament  of  6  Ed- 
ward II.  In  the  ninth  year  he  had  a  grant 
of  20/.  per  annum  for  his  expenses  in  pro- 
secuting and  defending  suits  for  the  king ; 
and  on  several  occasions  he  was  employed 


other  judges,  for  some  alleged  miaoonduct, 
the  particulars  of  which  have  not  tianspiiei 
were  removed  from  their  places  and  impn* 
soned  (Barnes's  JEdw.  III.  273),  and  Bi^ 
Hillary  was  constituted  his  succesMC  • 
January  8,  1341.  No  record  remains  of  th» 
investigation  that  followed^  nor  dos«  8^ 
nore*s  name   occur  for  the  nsr^        * 


months;  but  we  may  pres** 
on  special  judidsl  comiinBis^oTA,\A&'^xQKi^^-  I  dbAxoes  against  him  were  ^ 
lugs  under  whidi  \ie  w«a  eoTSLm'Mv^"^,Ssi\^\  w  ^SmX  ^«5  ^^r^sk^  ^w^  fBO? 


STOPINDON 

much  as  he  was  restored  to  his  place  of  chief 
j  ustice  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  May  0^  1342, 
and  remained  undisturbed  in  it  till  1354, 
when  he  died,  leaving  large  possessions  in 
nine  counties,  to  which  his  son,  also  named 
John,  succeeded. 

8T0FIHD0H,  JonK,  received  the  appoint- 
ment of  archdeacon  of  Colchester  on  May 
19, 1433, 1 1  Henry  VI.,  as  one  of  the  masters 
in  Chancery,  in  which  character  we  find  him 
mentioned  in  the  previous  year,  and  as  keeper 
of  the  Hanaper  m  this.  {Rymer^  x.  523.) 
He  was  appointed  master  of  the  Rolls  on 
November  13,  14:38.  In  his  patent  on  that 
occasion  special  reference  is  made  to  his  ser- 
yices  to  the  last  two  kings  in  France  and 
Normandy,  the  nature  of  which  is  not  re- 
corded, but  may  be  inferred  from  his  being 
employed  in  December  1440  as  one  of  the 
commissioners  to  conclude  a  treaty  of  alli- 
ance with  the  ambassadors  of  the  Archbishop 
of  Cologne.  He  became  archdeacon  of 
Dorset  on  July  19,  1440,  and  died  between 
March  and  M'ay  1447.  (Le  Neve,  106, 281  -, 
Acts  Privy  Council ^  v.  120.) 

STOUFOBD,  John  be  (sometimes  spelled 
Stonford),  is  said  by  Prince,  in  his  *  Wor- 
thies of  Devon,'  to  have  been  bom  at  Stow- 
ford.  in  the  parish  of  West  Down,  about 
1290.  A  John  de  Stoford  was  a  manu- 
captor  in  1307  for  a  burgess  returned  to 
parliament  for  Plympton  (Pari,  Writs, 
li.  5),  in  the  neiglibourhood  of  his  native 
place.  A  John  de  Stoford  was  one  of  the 
custodes  of  the  *  terra  maritima '  of  Devon 
in  14  Edward  III.  (N.  Foedera,  ii.  1112) ; 
and  in  the  same  year  a  John  de  Stovord 
'was  made  one  of  the  king  s  serjeants-at-law. 
The  first  of  these  was  probably  the  father 
of  the  judge ;  and  in  the  two  latter,  with 
little  doubt,  we  have  the  judge  himself. 

He  was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Com- 
mon Pleas  on  April  23,  1342,  where  he 
remained  till  November  10,  1345,  when  he 
i^as  placed  for  about  a  month  in  the  ofiice 
of  chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  being 
superseded  on  December  8  by  Robert  de 
Saoington.  This  was  no  doubt  a  temporary 
Arrangement  for  the  accommodation  of  the 
latter,  who  had  lately  been  removed  from 
the  o&ce  of  chancellor,  as  John  de  Stouford 
certainly  resumed  his  place  in  the  Com- 
mon Pleas,  fines  acknowledged  before  him 
from  that  time  till  Midsummer  1372,  33 
£dward  III.,  being  still  extant.  {DugdaUfs 
Oriff,  45.)  There  is  no  evidence  of  his 
living  after  the  latter  date,  and  his  death  is 
stated  to  have  occurred  at  his  house  at 
Stouford,  his  remains  beincr  buried  in  the 
church  of  West  Down.  There  are  several 
entries  of  grants  made  by  him  for  pious  uses, 
and  he  is  reputed  to  have  built  the  bridge 
over  the  Taw,  near  Barnstaple,  besides 
another  between  that  town  and  Pilton, 
in  consequence  of  finding  a  poor  woman  and 
her  child  drowned  in  the  neighbourhood. 


STRANGE 


635 


He  married  Joan,  a  coheir  of  Tracy  of 
Wollocombe,  a  name  assumed  by  the  family 
in  the  reign  of  George  I. 

8T0WE,  William  de,  whose  name  first 
appears  as  a  witness  to  the  release  exe* 
cuted  to  King  Edward  III.  in  1327  by  the 
widow  of  Aylmer,  late  Earl  of  Pembroke^ 
{N,  Foedera^  ii.  608),  was  made  a  baron  of 
the  Exchequer  on  January  20,  1341,  14 
Edward  III.  He  continued  in  that  court 
till  the  twentieth  year,  when  we  find  him 
recorded  among  the  Judges  from  whom 
loans  were  required  (Pot,  Pari,  ii.  453), 
but  he  is  omitted  in  the  list  of  those  for 
whom  in  the  following  year  robes  were 
ordered.     {Ahh,  Pot,  Orig,  ii.  192.) 

We  know  not  whether  he  is  the  same 
William  de  Stow  who  is  mentioned  in  con- 
nection with  the  abbey  of  St.  Edmund's 
Bury  in  9  Edward  III.  {N,  Foedera^  ii. 
924) ;  but  he  was  parson  of  the  church  of 
Sabrithesworth,  and  it  does  not  seem  im- 
probable that  his  removal  from  the  Exche- 
quer was  occasioned  by  a  complaint  made 
against  him  under  that  description  in  the 
parliament  of  Hilary,  21  Edward  HE.,  for 
maintenance  and  menaces  against  the  peti- 
tioners. {Rot,  Pari,  ii.  179.)  He  was  st^ 
alive  in  the  twenty-sixth  year,  when  he 
endowed  that  church  with  a  house  in  the 
parish.     {Ahh,  Rot.  Orig,  ii.  224.) 

8TBAN0E,  Guy  le,  was  the  son  of  Guy 
le  Strange  (Extraneus,  L^ Estrange),  the  first 
of  the  family  so  called,  who  is  believed  to 
have  been  a  younger  son  of  the  Duke  de 
Bretagne  in  tlie  latter  part  of  the  Con- 
queror's reign. 

To  Guy  the  son  King  Henry  II.  pave 
the  lordships  of  Weston  and  Alvithele  in 
Shropshire,  and  appointed  him  sheriff  of 
that  county  at  two  periods.  It  was  in  this 
character  that  he  acted  in  20  Henry  II., 
1174,  as  justice  itinerant  for  setting  the 
assize  or  tallage  on  the  king's  demesnes 
there.     (Madox,  i.  124.) 

He  died  between  6  Richard  I.,  1194,  and 
1  John,  1199,  leaving  a  son,  named  Ralph, 
and  three  daughters,  who,  upon  their  bro- 
ther's death  without  issue,  became  heirs  of 
the  property.     {Dugdales  Baron,  i.  663.) 

8TBAH0E,  RoGEB  le.  Roger  le  Stranffe 
was  a  grandson  of  John  le  Strange,  the 
brother  of  the  above  Guy  le  Strange.  Hja 
father  was  also  named  John,  who,  by  hia 
wife  Amicia,  left  four  sons,  of  whom  this 
Roger  was  the  youngest. 

His  brother  Hamon  granted  to  him  the 
manor  of  Ellesmere,  to  which  Henr^  IIL 
added  several  others,  with  the  sheriffalty 
of  Yorkshire,  which  he  held  during  the  last 
two  years  of  that  reiffn  and  the  first  two  of 
Edward  I.  In  the  latter  of  these  he  waa 
proceeded  against  for  divers  extortions  he 
nad  committed  while  he  was  bailiff  of  the 
honor  of  Pec  in  Derbyshire.  He  does  not  an- 
pear  to  have  been  again  employed  till  8  Ea- 


636 


STRANGE 


dale's  list  of  justices  itinerant  in  1292. 
.(CaL  Rot.  Pat,  48,  50;  Abb.  Placit.  187.) 
Me  was  summoned  to  parliament  in  1295, 
120C,  and  1297,  in  the  last  of  which  years, 
25  Edward  I.,  he  surrendered  the  office  of 
justice  of  the  forest,  bein^  '  adeo  impotens ' 
that  he  could  not  conveniently  perK)rm  its 
duties.  {Year  Booky  pt.  i.  89.)  In  130:3 
he  obtained  a  licence  U)r  a  market  and  fair 
at  his  manor  of  Cheswor thine  in  Shrop- 
shire, and  died  in  5  Edward  U.  (Abb,  Rot. 
Orig.  i.  182),  without  leaving  issue  by  his 
wife,  Matilda,  widow  of  Koger  de  Moubraj. 

From  his  brothers,  John  and  Robert, 
sprang  the  baronies  of  Strange  of  Knockyn 
and  Strange  of  Brackmere,  both  of  which 
have  been  a  long  time  in  abeyance  among 
•daughters.     {Nicolas  $  SifnopsU,) 

STBAHOE,  John,  was  the  son  and  heir  of 
John  Strange,  of  Fleet  Street.  He  was  for 
aome  time  a  pupil  of  Mr.  Salkeld,  of  Brooke 
Street,  Ilolboru,  the  attorney  in  whose 
chambers  Lord  Ilardwickc  had  before  hod  a 
seat,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  Middle 
Temple  in  1718.  He  acted  as  jimior  counsel 
for  the  crown  in  1722  and  for  several  years 
after,  and  in  172o  he  was  engaged  for  the 
defence  in  the  impeachment  of  the  Earl  of 
Macclesfield,  the  result  of  which,  notwith- 
standing the  able  advocacy  of  himself  and 
his  colleagues,  was  so  disastrous  to  his  noble 
client. 

His  Reports,  which  were  not  pub- 
lished till  after  his  death,  were  commenced 
in  Trinity  Term  1729.  He  was  appointed 
king's  counsel  in  February  1736,  wnen  he 
was  called  to  the  bench  of  liis  inn,  and 
elected  autumn  reader  in  the  following 
year.  In  the  previous  Hilary  Term  he 
became  solicitor-general,  and  was  elected 
member  for  West  Looe,  commencing  his 


STBATFOBD 

ward  I.,  when  he  was  appointed  steward  of  the  afternoon  sittinga.  His  majesty,  when 
the  king^s  household  with  Hugh  Fitz-Otho.  at  a  private  audience  I  took  my  leave  of 
In  11  Edward  I.  he  became  justice  of  the  him,  expressed  himself  with  the  gietteit 
forests  south  of  the  Trent,  and  it  is  in  that  !  goodness  towards  me,  and  honoured  me 
character  that  he  is  introduced  into  Dug-    with  his  patent  to  take  place  for  life  next 

to    his    attorney-general.       Anno    statis 
mesB  47.' 

The  only  occasion  on  which  he  appetn 
not  to  have  persisted  in  bis  resolution  to 
confine  his  practice  to  the  Court  of  King's 
Bench  was  in  assisting  at  the  trials  b 
1746  at  St  Margaret's  Hill,  SoQthwari[, 
and  in  the  House  of  Lorda,  of  the  prisonen 
implicated  in  the  then  late  rebellion. 

His  last  promotion  was  on  Januaiy  11, 
1750,  when  he  was  selected  to  sup^dy  thB 
vacancy  in  the  office  of  master  of  the 
Rolls.  After  enjoying  it  for  about  hat 
years,  he  died  on  May  18,  1754,  and  wm 
buried  in  the  Rolls  ChapeL  Hecontinoed 
in  parliament  till  his  death,  representiog 
Totnes  since  1741.  Five  years  after  h» 
decease  his  son  published  liis  Reports  in 
all  the  four  courts,  extending  from  1139 
to  1748,  which  were  considered  of  so  modi 
value  as  to  require  three  subaequent  e£- 
tions.  He  enjoyed  the  esteem  and  friend- 
ship of  Lord  Ilardwicke ;  and  the  Duke  of 
Newcastle  on  his  deatli  speaks  of  him  w 
*  one  whom  he  honoured  and  loved  ex- 
treamly  for  his  many  exceUent  pabM 
qualities  and  most  amiable  private  ono.' 
He  adds,  ^1  scarce  know  any  man  with 
wJiom  I  had  so  little  acquaintance  thst  1 
should  more  regret.' 

He  married  Susan,  daughter  and  coheir 
of  Edward  Strong,  Esq.,  of  Greenwich,  bv 
whom  he  hod  two  sons  and  seven  daughteis 
His  eldest  son,  John,  became  British  resident 
at  Venice,  and  was  a  very  distinguished 
nutiquary  and  naturalist.  (SUxU  Trial*, 
xvi.-xviii. ;  Pari,  Hui,  x.  275 ;  Strmt^, 
10G8,  1133,  1170;  HarrU's  Hardtciche, 
iii.  11 ;  Notes  and  Queries^  3rd  S.  i.  35^1) 

8TBAH0EWAT8,  Ja^tes,  was  of  a  Yoik- 
shire  family,  and  one  of  the  lords  of  Whoii- 


senatorial  career  by  a  long  speech  against  ton  in  that  county.  In  2  Henry  TV,  he 
the  provost  and  city  of  Edmburgh  arising  was  sent  up  to  Loudon  with  letters  to  the 
out  of  the  murder  of  Captain  Porteous.  In  council  from  Sir  Henry  Percy,  who  called 
November  1739  he  was  elected  recorder  of  I  him  his  '  bien  bon  aine  amie.'    He  took 

the  degree  of  serjeant-at-law  on  Febnuuv 


London,  and  in  the  next  year  he  received 
the  honour  of  knighthood. 

To  the  surprise  of  Westminster  Hall,  he 
resigned  his  two  offices  in  December  1742, 
and  in  his  Reports  (p.  1170;  thus  ac- 
counts for  his  retirement :  — 

'  Memorandum.  —  Haviug  received  a 
considerable  addition  to  my  fortune,  and 
some  degree  of  ease  and  retirement  being 
judged  proper  for  my  health,  I  tins  term 
resigned  my  offices  of  solicitor-general, 
king's  counsel,  and  recorder  of  the  city  of 
London,  and  left  off  my  practice  at  the 
House  of  Lords,  Council  Table,  Delegates, 


3, 1411 :  and  in  1415  he  was  appointed  by 
Henry  V.  one  of  his  Serjeants.  Ota  Febru- 
ary 0,  1420,  4  Henry  VL,  he  was  raised  to 
the  bench  of  the  Common  Pleas,  fin^m 
which  time  fines  were  levied  before  him 
till  Michaelmas,  21  Henry  VI.,  soon  ifter 
which  he  probably  died. 

His  son  Sir  James  was  speaker  of  the 
House  of  Commons  in  the  first  parliameit 
of  Edward  IV.  (Acts  JVtey  CtnmcO,  I  ISl) 

8TSATF0BD,    JoHX    DB    (ABGHUOir 
OF  Caittbrbubt),  waa  bom  at         '  * 
on-Avon  in  Warwidnhire,  whav  1 


and  all  the  couxts  m^«iitoi\nB^«t  HslL ox-  I  nroperty.    (CaL  Infm$.  p.  nu  ii-< 
cept  the  King's  Benc\^  ttndi  >i)[i«E^  «3^»^  ^\.\W^^tt»G^]k^^»^>sk«8af  cncsi 


STRATFORD 

be  inferred  from  the  fact  that  he  was  edu- 
cated at  Merton  College,  Oxford,  in  which 
university  he  took  the  degree  of  Doctor  of 
Laws,  fie  is  believed  to  have  been  the 
nephew  of  Ralph  Hatton  de  Stratford, 
Bishop  of  London. 

That  he  occupied  some  official  position 
OS  early  an  the  year  1317,  10  Edward  XL, 
there  can  be  little  doubt,  as  he  was  sum- 
moned among  certain  judges  and  other 
legal  persons  to  advise  with  the  council  on 
Tarious  important  subjects.  In  like  manner 
he  was  summoned  to  parliament  in  the  four 
following  years;  and,  from  the  place  in 
which  his  name  occurs,  it  would  seem  that 
he  was  either  an  officer  of  the  Ezcheouer, 
.  or,  perhaps,  a  clerk  in  the  Chancery.  (Pari 
WritSf  ii.  p.  il  1471.) 

On  September  13,  1319,  he  was  admitted 
to  the  archdeaconry  of  Lincoln  (Le  Neve, 
150)  ;  and  in  December  1321  he  was  sent 
on  a  mission  to  the  pope  on  the  affairs  of 
Scotland.  Archbishop  Hubert  Walter  ap- 
pointed him  dean  or  chief  judge  of  his  Coi^ 
of  Arches,  in  which  office  he  exhibited, 
not  less  in  his  knowledge  of  law  than  in 
the  adjudication  of  the  cases  before  him, 
the  quickest  discernment  and  the  most  con- 
summate prudence.  From  1321  to  1323  he 
was  engaged  in  frequent  embassies  to  the 
papal  court  at  Avignon ;  and  being  there 
on  the  death  of  his  colleague,  Reginald  de 
Aflser,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  on  April  12 
iN,  Foedei-a,  ii.  462-516)  in  the  latter 
year,  he  succeeded,  notwithstanding  the 
Icing's  urgent  applications  in  favour  of 
liobert  de  Baldock,  in  obtaining  a  bull 
rom  Pope  John  XXII.,  dated  June  20, 
1«323,  conferring  upon  him  the  vacant 
bishopric 

The  king's  anger  was  excessive.  He 
remonstrated  with  the  pope,  issued  direc- 
tions to  the  bailiffs  of  the  different  ports  to 
arrest  any  messengers  coming  into  England 
with  letters  on  the  subject,  and  expressed 
the  bitterest  rancour  against  the  new-made 
prelate,  calling  him,  in  one  of  his  missives, 
*  peeudo  nuntium '  and  '  adversarium  nos- 
trum,' and  dismissing  him  from  his  am- 
bassadorial functions  in  terms  of  indigna- 
tion. On  his  arrival  in  England  proceedings 
'were  immediatelv  commenced  against  him 
in  the  Court  of  l^in^'s  Bench,  which  were 
removed  to  the  parliament  summoned  for 
February  1324 ;  in  thnm  he  was  addressed 
luerely  oy  his  name,  without  the  episcopal 
title,  an  omission  which  he^  in  his  answers, 
-was  most  careful  always  to  supply.  No 
further  record  of  the  process  appears ;  but, 
bj  the  intercession  or  the  pope,  Stratford 
■was  at  last  reluctantly  recognised,  and  had 
bis  temporalities  restored  by  a  patent  dated 
June  28, 1324.  (/^»iV/.  526-667.)  It  seems, 
bowever,  that  this  was  purchased  by  the 
bishop's  bond  to  pay  the  king  10,000/., 
8000/.  of  which  was  to  be  void  on  the  death 


STRATFORD 


63r 


of  the  king  or  the  bishop,  (Par/.  WritSj  iL 
p.  ii.  268.)  No  part  even  of  the  2000iL 
was  claimed  during  that  reign;  for  from 
that  time  he  enjoy^  the  fuU  confidence  of 
the  king,  by  whom  he  was  employed  in. 
his  negotiations  with  the  court  of  France, 
and  to  whom  he  faithfully  adhered  when, 
others  had  deserted  the  royal  cause.  After 
Edward's  retirement  he  joined  in  the  eleo* 
tion  of  the  prince  as  custos  of  the  kingdom. 
On  October  20,  1326,  and  on  November  % 
he  was  constituted  locum  tenens  of  the 
treasurer,  and  remained  so  for  a  short  time. 
It  is  some  credit  to  Queen  Isabella  that  she 
thus  showed  her  respect  for  the  bishop's- 
fidelity  to  her  husband,  and  that  she  Uien 
emploved  him  in  prosecuting  the  treaty 
witn  f'rancef  although  she  insisted  on  the 
payment  of  1000/.  of  his  bond.  It  was  not, 
nowever,  till  her  removal  from  power,  and 
the  assumption  of  the  kingly  oince  by  her 
son,  Edward  III.,  that  the  bishop  waa- 
called  to  a  prominent  position  in  the  royal 
councils.  He  was  then  constituted  chan- 
cellor on  November  28,  1330,  4  Edward 
III.,  and  immediately  was  released  fTOQft> 
all  arrears  of  his  old  obli^tion.  (Rot, 
Pari  ii.  60.)  He  accompanied  the  king  to- 
France  in  the  following  April,  both  of  them,, 
according  to  Barnes,  assuming  the  disg^uise 
of  merchants,  in  performance  of  a  certain, 
vow;  and  in  the  next  November  he  waa 
sent  abroad  on  a  mission  relative  to  the 
affairs  of  the  duchy  of  Acquitaine,  from 
which  he  returned  in  time  to  open  the 
parliament  at  Westminster  on  March  12, 
1332. 

He  was  translated  to  the  archbishopric 
of  Canterburv  November  8,  1333;  ana  on 
September  2^,  1334,  he  resigned  the  Ghreat 
Seal,  which  was  given  to  Richard  de  Bury, 
Bishop  of  Durham,  who  held  it  only  till 
June  6,  1336.  It  was  then  restored  to 
Stratford,  and  retained  by  him  for  nearly 
two  years— vis.,  till  March  24,  1337— hw 
brother,  Robert  de  Stratford,  Bishop  of 
Chichester,  being  appointed  his  successor. 
During  the  whole  of  this  time  he  was  con- 
tinually engaged  in  embassies  to  France  and 
other  powers,  and  was  actively  employed 
in  similar  duties  during  the  three  next 
years,  and  in  presiding  over  the  council 
while  the  king  was  absent  (N,  FcederiK 
ii.  88;W  116.) 

On  April  28,  1340,  14  Edward  UI.,  he^ 
was  a  third  time  constituted  chancellor; 
but  on  June  20  following,  on  account  of 
his  increasing  infirmities,  he  resigned  the 
Seal  to  the  king,  which  was  hereupon 
again  entrusted  to  his  brother,  Bisnop 
Robert 

From  the  commencement  of  his  first 
chancellorship  till  his  final  retirement  from 
the  office  the  archbishop  had  been  the 
chief  counsellor  of  the  king;  and  even  now, 
on  Edward^s  proceeding  to  Fiance,  he  waa 


«38 


STRATFORD 


left  as  president  of  his  council.  But  the 
French  wars  had  emptied  the  Exchequer  j 
the  king^s  arms  were  unsuccessful  hefore 
Toumay,  and  his  allies  were  pressing  in 
their  demands  for  money,  whicn  was  not 
forthcoming.  Irritated  hy  his  forlorn  con- 
dition, he  hstened  to  the  mtimations  of  his 
courtiers  that  his  officers  were  unfaithful 
and  treacherous ;  and  coming  suddenly  to 
England,  on  November  30,  1340,  he  re- 
moved the  chancellor,  confined  some  of  the 
judges,  and  hastily  sent  for  the  archbishop. 
The  primate,  however,  thought  it  prudent 
to  escape  to  Canterbury,  and  to  refuse  to 
answer  except  before  his  peers.  Edward 
issued  a  declaration  full  of  accusations,  to 
which  the  archbishop  replied,  justifying 
his  conduct,  and  successfully  reniting  the 
charges.  The  wordy  war  continuea  till 
the  parliament  met  in  A]^ril,  when,  though 
the  prelate  went  submissively  into  the  Ex- 
chequer to  hear  the  information  that  had 
been  tiled  against  him,  he  was  for  some 
time  refused  admittance  into  the  hall,  but 
was  at  last  allowed  to  take  his  seat.  The 
Lords  supported  his  appeal  to  their  jurisdic- 
tion, and  the  question  was  referred  to  a 
committee,  who  reported  in  his  favour. 
By  the  intercesfdon  of  both  houses,  how- 
ever, the  business  was  stifled;  and  the 
archbishop  having  humbled  himself,  and 
the  king  having  pardoned  him,  the  pro- 
ceedings were  annulled  in  the  next  parlia- 
ment in  Easter  134i3,  as  contrarj'  to  reason 
and  truth.     (Ibid.  ii.  1141-1154.) 

In  July  134o  he  was  appointed  th«  head 
of  the  council  left  as  advisers  of  the  king's 
son  Lionel,  to  whom  the  custody  of  the 
kingdom  had  been  entrusted,  and  a  similar 
confidence  reposed  in  him  in  the  following 
year  (Ibid.  iii.  60,  85)  is  the  last  record  of 
importance  in  his  career.  He  died  at 
Mayfield  in  Sussex  on  August  23,  1348, 
and  was  buried  in  Canterbury  Cathedral. 

His  liberality  to  his  church,  his  charity 
to  the  poor,  his  humble  and  pleasmg 
mjuiiiers,  and  his  natural  sense  and  general 
learning  are  acknowledged  by  all  his 
biographers.  That  his  reputation  was  high 
as  an  able  politician,  a  loyal  counsellor, 
and  a  man  ol  deep  legal  knowledge  for  the 
time,  is  evidenced  not  more  by  the  number 
of  years  during  which  he  was  engaged  in 
high  employments  than  by  firmness  in 
meeting  his  temporary  disgraces,  and  the 
alaci-ity  with  which  his  talents  were  again 
put  in  requisition.  He  is  said  to  have 
crossed  the  Channel  thirtj'-two  times  in  the 
public  service.  {Godicin,  106-224  ;  Barnes  8 
Edu\  III.  43-216 :  State  Trials,  i.  57.) 

STSATTOBB,  Egbert  de  (Bishop  of 
Cuicuestek),  brother  of  John,  was  also 
bom  at  Stratford-on-Avon,  and  was  parson 
of  the  church  there.  It  is  probable  that 
he,  like  his  \)Tot\ieT,  -^da  educated  at  Ox- 
ford, as  he  afterwAxda  \)«cbs£l<^  ^^;yui^^Q(t 


STRATFORD 

'.  of  that  university,  and  distinguished  him- 

I  self  by  his  firmness  and  prudence  in  settling 

i  the  violent  differences  that  had  aiisen 
between  the  northern  and  southern  schdLuv 
as  to  the  election  of  proctors. 

The  first  time  his  name  occurs  is  on 
April  1, 1381,  5  Edward  III.,  in  the  firei 
chancellorship  of  his  brother,  who,  being 
then  about  to  accompany  tlie  king  to 
France,  sent  the  Great  Seal  to  his  house  b 
Southwark,  in  charge  of  Robert,  under  the 
seal  of  the  master  of  the  Kolls,  after  whid 
they  both  continued  to  seal  with  it  till  the 
chancellor's  return  on  April  20.  In  the 
same  year  he  was  made  chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer.  {Cal  Rot.  Pat.  112.)  The 
Seal  was  again  left  in  the  hands  of  these 
two  on  November  21  following,  and  oo 
June  23,  1332,  Robert  de  Stratford  wm 

;  alone  appointed  by  his  brother  to  recdre 
it,  and  to  do  the  Dusiness  appertaining  to 
the  office.  During  the  time  it  now  re- 
mained in  his  possession  he  was  called  the 

!  chancellor*s  locutn  tenens,  and  he  was  one 
of  the  three  commissioners  named  to  opa 
the  parliament  in  the  following  Decembez. 
{N.  Fcedera,  ii.  848.)    He  was  a  third  time 

\  entrusted  by  his  brother  with  the  SesI  ob 
April  6,  1334,  to  be  kept  by  him  imder  tie 
seals  of  two  of  the  clerlvs  of  the  ChsnceiT. 
His  brother's  first  chancelloi^hip  tenni- 
nated  on  September  28  following,  on  idiicl 
occasion  Rotbert  is  for  the  first  time  ctUed 
archdeacon  of  Canterbury.     Ilewasaboi 
canon  in  St.  Paul's  and  Lincoln  Cathednk 
When  his  brother   the  archbishop  ma 
made  chancellor  a  second  time  on  June  6, 
1335,  the  Seal  was  again  given  to  Robert 
as  hcion  tetienSy  and  it  is  probable  that  hi 
continued  to  act  in  that  capacity  till  Maitl 
24,  1337,  when,  on  his  brother's  resigw- 
tion,  he  was  himself  constituted  chnncell* 
In  the  following  September  he  was  raiaed 
to  the  bishopric  of    Chichester,  «id  co 
July  6, 1338,  he  was  exonerated  fifom  tte 
chancellorship,  but  accepted  the  appoint- 
ment a  second  time  on  June  20,  1340.   ft 
accompanied  the  king  to  France  in  Sep- 
tember, and  was  with  him  before  TouniiT. 
When  he  qmtted  the  camp  he  left  enemitt 
behind  him,  who  whispered  in  the  king's 
ear  that  his  disappointment  in  receifiof 
supplies  was  attnbutable  to  his  ministen 
at  liome.    The  king  was  too  easily  po^ 
suaded,  and,  making   a   hurried  joaner, 
arrived  at  the  Tower  of  London  in  the 
middle  of  the  night  on  November  30,  and 
the  next  morning  not  only  took  the  Gretf 
Seal  away  from  the  bishop,  but  threatened 
him  with  imprisoument,  being  only  in- 
vented from  carrying  his  intentifnM  fli*. 
execution  by  the  Clementine  prohir^ 
against  such  an  indignity  on  ecdaMf^ 
that  rank. 
The  bishop  does  not  appear 

\\sv.dxx^^  m  the    sulisequei 


STRATTON 

against  his  brother ;  but  if  he  were,  he  no 
doubt  participated  in  the  pardon,  for  in 
May  1343  he  was  sent  on  a  mission  to  the 

fope,  and  was  left  one  of  the  council  when 
^nnce  Lionel  was  appointed  custos  of  the 
kingdom  in  July  1M6,  (N.  Feeder  a,  ii. 
1223,  iii.  60.) 

He  survived  his  brother  nearly  fourteen 
years,  and  died  at  Aldingbume  on  April  9, 
1302,  whence  his  body  was  removed  to  his 
own  cathedral  for  burial. 

He  was  a  prelate  of  great  resolution  and 
courage,  and,  notwithstanding  the  king's 
charges  against  him,  seems  to  have  been 
uncorrupt  and  faithful.  He  is  mentioned 
as  a  considerable  benefactor  both  to  the 
place  of  his  birth  and  the  city  of  his  cathe- 
dral. (Godicm,  5075  Barnes's  Ed%o,  III, 
213.) 

STSATTOV,  Adam  de,  was  a  clerk  in  the 
Exchequer,  49  Henry  III.,  when  the  office 
of  weigher  of  the  ilxche^uer  (ponderator 
de  Scaccario)  was  vested  m  him.  He  was 
fitill  called  clerk  in  56  Henry  III.,  and  in 
the  first  year  of  the  reign  of  Edward  I.  he 
-was  discharged,  in  virtue  of  his  clerkship, 
from  a  suit  before  another  jurisdiction.  In 
the  same  year  he  was  deputed  by  the 
Countess  of  Albemarle  to  act  in  her  office 
in  the  Exchequer  of  Receipt,  and  in  4 
li^ward  I.  that  lady  granted  to  him  the 
manor  of  Sevenhampton,  with  the  hamlets 
of    Worth,   Stratton,  and   Crikelade,  to- 

f  ether  with  the  chamberlainship  of  the 
Ixchequer,  to  hold  of  the  king  and  his 
beirs,  to  him  and  his  heirs,  doing  the  duties 
of  chamberlain  as  she  and  her  ancestors 
bad  done.  {MadoXy  ii.  23,  204,  290-8, 
i30S.)  Two  years  afterwards  the  offices  he 
beld  were  taken  into  the  king's  hands  *  ex 
certa  causa.'  (Ibid,  ii.  5.)  At  this  time 
be  seems  to  have  been  in  some  difficulties, 
for  in  the  same  year  he  was  charged  with 
destroying  a  charter  of  liberties  granted  by 
the  Countess  of  Albemarle  (for  whom  he 
appears  generally  to  have  acted)  to  the 
aoDey  of  Quarr,  in  the  Isle  of  Wi^ht,  of 
-whicn  ho  was  convicted  iu  the  following 
year,  and  was  committed  to  prison.  He, 
however,  was  n^stored  to  the  offices  he 
held.  In  10  Edward  I.  he  lent  the  Earl 
of  Surrey  300/.  upon  mortgage  of  the  manor 
of  Gnoston,  witn  a  condition  that  if  the 
money  was  not  repaid  in  four  years  the 
manor  should  be  Adam's  for  ever.  {Abb, 
Placit,  190,  280.) 

When  King  lid  ward,  in  1289,  discovered 
and  punished  several  of  the  judges  and 
others  for  corruption,  Adam  de  Stratton 
was  most  deeply  involved.  What  was  the 
precise  cause  of  his  dis^ace  is  nowhere 
clearly  stated :  corruption  is  charged  by  one, 
and  felony  by  another.  The  latter  is  ex- 
pressly mentioned  in  several  records,  but 
jts  nature  is  not  described.  It  must,  how- 
ever, have  been  some  serious  crime,  for  not 


STREET 


639 


only  was  he  dismissed  from  the  office  of 
chamberlain  on  January  17, 1290,  and  from 
the  moiety  of  that  of  usher  of  the  Exche- 

?uer,  which,  it  seems,  belonged  to  him 
Ibid,  223,  2a3 ;  Madox,  u.  299,  300),  but 
his  person  was  imprisoned,  and  the  whole 
of  his  property  forfeited,  besides  the  impo- 
sition of  a  fine.  The  amount  of  this  nne 
has  been  magnified  to  the  sum  of  35,000 
marks;  but  by  a  record  dated  June  12, 
1290,  it  appears  that  it  was  only  500  marks, 
on  the  payment  of  which  he  was  released 
from  prison,  and  his  transgression  pardoned. 
The  property  seized  by  the  king  at  the 
I  time  of  nis  arrest,  which  all  became  for- 
feited, was  no  doubt  considered  as  forming 
part  of  the  fine,  and  that,  independently  of 
the  manors,  may  be  estimated  at  the  value 
of  20,000/.,  according  to  his  petition  to  the 
parliament  held  at  the  following  Michael- 
mas for  restitution  of  some  part  of  it — a 
petition  which  appears  to  have  been  re- 
lused,  notwithstanding  the  previous  pardon. 
(i?crf.  Pari,  i.  57.)  The  word  *felo'  is 
attached  to  his  name  in  the  escheats  of  22 
and  33  Edward  I.  (Col.  Inq,  et  JEsch,  i. 
121,  201.) 

Dugdale  calls  him  a  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer at  the  time  of  this  disgrace,  and 
Weever,  Chauncy,  and  other  authors,  even 
style  him  chief  baron.  It  seems,  however, 
that  there  is  no  sufficient  ground  for  pi*e- 
suming  that  he  held  either  of  these  titles. 
The  office  of  chief  baron,  eo  notniney  did  not 
then  exist,  and  the  authority  quoted  by 
Dugdale  for  calling  him  a  baron  is  by  no 
means  satisfactory.  He  cites  Leland^s  *  Col- 
lectanea,' but  that  work  contains  two  con- 
tradictory passages.  In  the  one  quoted  he 
I  is  certainly  called  *  baro  de  Scaccario,*  but 
I  in  the  other  he  is,  in  relation  to  the  same 
I  event,  merely  designated  *  clericus  Thesau- 
j  rarii '  (Leland's  Coll.  i.  350, 443),  neither  of 
which  was  his  actual  title,  but  both  suffi- 
ciently near  to  account  for  the  error  of  the 
monastic  annalists  from  whom  they  are 
extracted ;  as,  being  chamberlain,  he  would 
sometimes  sit  with  the  barons,  and  might 
in  a  certain  degree  be  called  a  clerk  of  the 
Treasury. 

STEEET,  Thohas,  was  bom  in  1025  in 
the  city  of  Worcester,  where  his  family 
had  for  a  lonff  time  held  a  considerable 
.  position,  one  of  them  having  represented  it 
m  parliament  in  the  reign  of  Queen  Eliza- 
betn,  and  several  of  them  ha\'ing  ranked 
among  its  bailiff  and  mayors.  He  held 
for  some  years  the  office  of  town  clerk  to 
the  corporation,  and  was  in  such  esteem 
with  his  fellow-citizens  that  he  was  re- 
turned by  them  to  the  four  successive  par- 
liaments of  1059,  1000,  1001.  and  1079. 
He  was  also  sub-secretary  to  the  dean  and 
chapter  of  Worcester  from  1001  to  1087, 
and  from  1003  wa^  one  of  their 
siliarii.' 


con- 


640 


STREET 


He  was  partly  educated  at  Oxford,  but, 
in  consequence  of  the  death  of  bis  father, 
George  Street,  in  1643,  he  left  the  univer- 
nity  without  taking  a  degree,  being  called 
home  to  manage  the  paternal  estate.  A 
petition  against  his  return  to  Protector 
Richard's  parliament  was  presented,  charg- 
ing him  with  haying  borne  arms  for  the 
king  and  with  being  a  common  swearer, 
and  also  that  he  was  chosen  by  the  profane 
rabble  and  cavaliers.  In  the  Committee 
of  Privileges,  where  Mr.  Finch,  afterwards 
Lord  Nottingham,  defended  him,  evidence 
was  given  of  his  siding  with  the  rovalists 
in  164^,  of  his  being  t^en  prisoner  by  the 
parliament  army,  and  being  exchanged. 
This  was  met  by  a  denial  that  he  ever  used 
a  sword  against  the  parliament,  that  his 
capture  was  accidental,  and  that  he  refused 
the  exchange ;  and  the  charge  of  swearing 
dwindled  down  to  his  having  used  the 
words  *by  my  faith  and  troth.'  The  re- 
port was  repeatedly  adjourned  till  the  dis- 
solution, the  house  evidently  scouting  the 
complaint,  as  the  offence  of  a  youth  not  of 
age,  which  had  been  passed  over  unnoticed 
for  twelve  or  thirteen  vears.  {BurtoiCs 
Dianj,  iii.  70,  253,  425,  iv.  244.) 

He  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  Inner 
Temple  on  November  24,  1 053,' and  rose  to 
the  position  of  bencher  in  1069.    His  prac- 
tice till  the  Restoration  seems  to  have  oeen 
confined  to  the  countr}'.     In  July  1600  he 
obtained  a  grant  of  the  office  of  receiver  of 
the  fines  under  the    statutes    concerning 
sewers.     (CW.  iS«.  Pa/><r«  [1060],  144.)    In 
February  1677  he  was  appointed  a  judge 
of  assize  for  the  counties  of  Glamorgan, 
Brecon,   and    Radnor,   and    in    the    next 
Michaelmas  Term  he  was  honoured  with 
the  coif.     From  this  he  was  promoted  on 
October  25  in  the   following   year  to  be 
king's  Serjeant,  but  he  does  not  appear  to 
have  had  any  employment  in  the  courts 
of  Westminster.    On  April  23,  1681,  being 
then  the  chief  justice  on  his  Glamorgan 
Circuit,  he  was  constituted  a  baron  of  the 
Exchequer  and  knighted ;  and  in  the  same 
year  at  Derby  assizes  he  condemned  George 
l3usby  for  high  treason,  as  a  Romish  priest, 
but  reprieved  him.     In  1683  he  was  m  the 
commission  for  the  trials  at  the  Old  Bailey 
of  those  who  were   charged   with   being 
concerned  in  the  Rye  House  Plot,  but  did 
little  more  than  give  his  opinion  with  the 
rest  of  the  judges  against  the  validity  of 
Lord  Russelrs  challenge  of  a  juror  for  not 
having  a  freehold.     His   patent  as  baron 
was  revoked  on  October  29,  1084,  upon  his 
being  removed  into  the  Court  of  Common 
Pleas,  where  on  King  Charles's  death  in  the 
following  February  he  was  continu  ed  by  King 
James.   In  the  next  year  the  great  question 
was  agitated  in  the  Court  of  King's  Bench, 
in  the  case  of  Godden  v.  Sir  Edward  Hales, 
whether  the  king  could  legally  dispense 


STREET 

with  the  oaths  of  allegiance  mid  supTemacy 
required  by  the  Test  Act,  the  king  claim- 
ing to  do  so  by  his  royal  prerogatiye,  and 
ha\4ng  granted  an  office  to  the  defendant, 
a  Roman  Catholic,  with  a  patent  of  di^- 

Sensation.  Chief  Justice  Herbert,  thoogh 
ecidedly  in  favour  of  the  prerogative, 
thought  proper  to  obtain  the  opinions  of  the 
twelve  ludges  on  the  pointy  and  afterwards 
stated  that  all  of  them  concurred  with  him, 
except  Judge  Street.  (  T.  Haymond^  431 ; 
State  Trials^  viii.  ix.  xi.)  Luttrell  soon 
after  this  erent  (i.  382)  says,  *  There  is  a 
discourse  as  if  Judge  Street  were  turned 
out,  and  that  Mr.  Serjeant  Wild  is  ordered 
to  go  the  circuit' 

As  the  decision  was  of  course  most  uih 
popular  in  the  country,  the  dissenting  judj^ 
was  looked  up  to  at  the  time  with  grett 
admiration,  and  his  courage  and  honestr 
were  lauded  by  writers  for  more  than  a 
century  afterwards.     But  -within    the  last 
few  years  it  has  been  the  fashion  to  assume 
that"  this  dissent  from   his  brethren  was 
given  collusively,   and  prompted    by  the 
court,  "with  the  view  of  inducing  the  public 
to  believe  that  the  judgment  of  the  oench 
was  entirely  independent,   and  not  influ- 
enced in  any  degree  by  royal  dictatioo. 
This  suggestion  is  foimdeid  on  the  facts  that 
Street  was  the  only  judge  not  dismiss  bj 
James,  and  that  he  was  not  re-appointed  ix 
the  Revolution,  with   a   passage  in  Lord 
Clarendon's  Diary  (ii.  236)  explaining  the 
reason  why  his  lordship   did  not  present 
him  to  King  William    to    be    that  Lord 
Coote,  in  reporting    to    his    maje.«ty  the 
judge's  *■  true  character,'  had  described  him 
as  *a  very  ill  man.*     Xo  particulars  are 
stated  upon  which  Lord  Coote  founded  thi* 
condemnation,  and  it  is  remarkable  that  be 
gives  the  judge  credit  for  *  not  joining  ii 
the  judgment  for  the  dispensing  power.* 
without  ninting  a  doubt  of  its  sincerity.   It 
seems  more  than  probable  that  hislofd- 
ship's  prejudice  arose   firom   some  familT 
quarrel,  ho  himself  adding  that  the  jod^ 
had  married  one  of  his  relations.     Loid 
Clarendon  on  the  contrary  declares  that  he 
*  had  long  known  the  judge,  and  that  he 
took  him  to  be  a  very  honest  man,'  and  do 
other  recorded  incident  of  his  life  seems  ta 
justify  a  different  conclusion.     It  is  curi- 
ous that  the  writers  who  impate  coUusioQ 
are  all  whigs.      Sir  James  Mackintosh  tai 
^  suggests  the  painful  suspicion ; '  LordMatv 
aulay  reiterates  it  more  emphatically :  sod 
Ix)rd  Campbell,  without  a  scintilla  of  addi- 
tional evidence,  asserts  it  as  a  positive  &cC ; 
each  of  them  forgetting  that  in  the  toltl 
change  of  the  judges  at  the  R«Tolutiooit 
was  not  likely  that  one  should  be  excepted 
who  was  a  tory  in  principle,  and  notoriously 
a  friend  to  the  excludea  family.     Withoat 
supposing  therefore  that  Sir  Thomas  Street 
was  better  than  James's  other  judges,  theie 


STRINGER 

no  probability,  and  certainly  there  is 
no  proof^  of  his  beinff  guilty  of  the  base- 
nesB  which  these  authors  have  attributed 
to  him.  From  the  absence  of  the  slightest 
hint  of  such  an  imputation  when  the  judges 
were  questioned  on  the  subject  by  the  par- 
liament of  1689,  a  strong  inference  may  be 
dnwn  that  it  has  no  foundation. 

At  the  Revolution  he  retired  to  his  native 

citgTy  where  he  died  on  March  8, 1696,  and 

was  buried  in  the  cloisters  of  its  cathedral 

It  is  aome  evidence  that  collusion  in  giving 

Us  opinion  against  the  dispensing  power 

iras  not  suspected  by  his  family,  or  his 

^      neighbours,  or  his  contemporaries,  that  on 

the  handsome  monument  erected  to  his 

aiemoiy  the  fact  is  prominently  and  enco- 

'^^  Hiftstically  recorded. 

"^      He  married  Penelope,  daughter  of  Sir 

^r  Bowhmd  Berkeley,  of  Cotheridge  in  Wor^ 

^^  Caetershire,  his  colleague  in  the  parliament 

^  tf  1661.    By  this  lady,  who  it  seems  was  a 

^  nlation  of  liord Coote,  he  left  an  only  daugh- 

^    tar,  but  the  name  still  survives  in  descen- 

"^  dnnte  of  the  j  udge*s  brother.  {Nash,  ChanUfers, 

Z  Qrat^ger^  and  Ureen;  LuttreU,  i.  386.) 

flXBDIGES,  Thomas,  whose  father  was 
Oif  the  parish  of  St.  Sepulchre  in  London, 
•8  educated  at  Peterhouse,  Cambridge, 
here  he  took  his  two  degrees  in  arts.    He 
called  to  the  bar  at  Gray's  Inn  in  July 
1^5Sy  and  became  an  ancient  in  May  1667. 
~~    'what  family  of  Stringer  he  belonged  is 
rtain,  but  probably  to  that  settled  at 
leston  in  Yorkshire,  as  he  was  re- 
^  member    for  the  not   far  distant 

'^tfcough  of  Clitheroe  in  part  of  the  second 
ent  of  Charles  IL,  and  in  those  of 
and  October  1679  and  of  1681,  in 
of  which  did  he  take  -any  prominent 
The  date  or  occasion  of  his  knight- 
has  not  been  ascertained,  but  he  is 
with  the  title  when  summoned 
tdn  the  degree  of  the  coif  in  July  1677. 
1679  he  was  promoted  to  be  one  of  the 
^fl  Serjeants,  and  he  was  employed  m 
spiosecution  of  the  presumed  murderers 
fiir  Edmondbury  Godfrey  and  the  triab 
with    thQ  pretended  plot.    In 
1687  he  was  discharged  from  being 
_      Serjeant.    In  the  following  October 
eldest  son  married  the  daughter  of  Lord 
Oluuicellor  Jeffireys,  which  no  doubt  was 
o£  the  causes  which  led  to  Sir  Thomas's 
ion  in  October  1688  to  be  a  jud^ 
King's  Bench,  a  position  which  he 
enjoy  for  manv  months,  as  he  was 
pomted  by  fong  William.    He 
the  manor  of  Diuance  in  Enfield, 
in  September  1689.  {StaU  Trials, 
,  dSl,  viii.  604;  Ltdtrea,  i.  402, 

c&r.) 

B  not  appear  to  have  been  con- 
^th  another  Thomas  Stringer  who 
at  ibis  time  as  secretary  of  Lord 
Shaftesbury. 


STUTEVILLE 


641 


BTSODS,  John  db  le,  was  amonff  the 
justices  itinerant  appointed  in  62  Henry 
in.,  1268,  to  visit  Somersetshire  and  Dor- 
setshire, besides  eleven  other  counties ;  but 
little  more  can  be  said  of  him  than  that  he 
was  of  a  family  holding  large  estates  in 
them,  which  descended  6om  Warinus  de  la 
Strode,  a  companion  of  the  Conqueror. 

BTXJAST,  John,  is  the  senior  of  the  three 
present  vice-chancellors.  He  is  a  Scotch- 
man by  birth,  being  the  second  son  of 
Dupald  Stuart^  Esq.,  of  Bally chelish  in  the 
parish  of  Appm  in  Argyleshire.  He  was 
bom  in  1793,  and,  entering  Lincoln's  Lm, 
he  attained  the  degree  of  a  barrister  in 
1819.  He  practised  in  the  Court  of  Chan- 
cery for  twenty  years  before  he  was  made 
a  queen's  counsel,  in  1839,  and  held  that 
dignity  for  thirteen  years  more  with  a 
very  considerable  lead  in  the  court  For 
the  last  six  of  those  years  he  was  a  member 
of  parliament,  representing  Newark  for  the 
whole  time,  except  the  &st  two  months, 
when  he  was  returned  for  Bury  St.  Ed- 
munds. 

He  was  appointed  vice-chancellor  on 
September  14,  1862,  in  the  first  ministry  of 
Lord  Derby,  and  has  presided  in  his  court 
ever  since. 

In  1813  he  married  the  daughter  of 
Duncan  Stewart,  Esq. 

STUTEVILLE,  Robert  de.  A  Norman 
noble  of  this  name,  sumamed  Grandeboef, 
or  Fronteboef,  after  the  death  of  the  two 
Williams,  joined  the  fortunes  of  Robert, 
the  eldest  son  of  the  Conqueror,  against 
his  younger  brother  Henry,  and,  being 
captured  at  the  disastrous  battle  of  Tenche- 
bray,  in  1106,  shared  his  prince's  fate,  and 
was  imprisoned  for  life.  His  son  Robert 
de  Stuteville  was  one  of  the  valiant  northern 
barons  who  distinguished  themselves  in  the 
battle  of  the  Standard,  fought  against  the ' 
Scots  in  August  1138. 

Robert  de  Stuteville  was  employed  in 
16  and  17  Henry  H.,  1170-1,  as  justice 
itinerant  in  the  counties  of  Cumberland 
and  Northumberland.  {Madox,  i.  144, 
146.)  He  was  then  likewise  sheriff  of 
Yorkshire,  an  office  which  he  retained  for 
a  few  years  afterwards.  In  1176  he  had 
an  allowance  for  the  sums  he  had  expended 
for  the  knights  and  sergeants,  horse  and 
foot,  which  he  had  with  nim  in  the  king*s 
service  in  the  war  (Ibid,  370,  702,  ii. 
167,  200),  having  in  the  previous  year 
assisted  Ranulph  de  Glanville  at  tbo  battle 
near  Alnwick,  where  the  Scottish  army 
was  routed,  and  William,  their  king,  taken 
prisoner. 

Dugdale  attributes  these  facts  to  Robert 
the  son,  and  even  carries  him  down  to  23 
Henry  IL,  1177,  as  a  witness,  to  the  arbi- 
trament between  the  Kings .  of  Castile  and 
Navarre.  He  makes  him  the  father  of 
another  Robert,  hia  Bvicfi^HKSt)  oil  VteLQ\&.\v^ 


T  t 


642 


STUTEVILLE 


SUDBtJKY 

granted  him  charters  for  fun  and  mv 
on  several  of  hia  manors.  William 
obtained  a  grant  of  the  lordships  of  En 
borough  and  Boroughbridffe,  ^th  aTS 
of  other  privileges  and  advantages^  an 
which  he  no  doubt  considered  uie  ha 


of  entertaining  his  sovereign  on  one  ol 
nrogresses  at  nis  house  at  Cotingliii 
Voriuhire.    Royal  favours  in  thosstii 


relates  no  events,  but  that  he  gave  certain 
lands  to  the  monks  of  Rievamx,  and  that 
he  married  twice.  Now,  seeing  that  the 
first  Rob^  was  imprisoned  for  life  in 
1106 ;  Hiat  the  battle  in  which  the  next 
Robert  distinguished  himself  was  in  1138, 
when  he  may  be  supposed  to  have  been 
between  forty  and  fifty  years  of  age ;  that 
the  third  battle  was  in  1174,  when,  if  it 
were  the  same  person,  he  must  have  been 
between  eighty  and  ninety,  it  seems  not 
improbable  that  Ducdale  nas  confounded 
the  incidents  of  two  lives.  This  is  rendered 
more  likely  from  his  omission  of  all  dates 
with  regard  to  the  third  Robert,  and  from 
the  fact  that  he  places  William,  the  third 
Robert's  successor,  in  the  prominent  situa- 
tion of  governor  of  Topclive  Castle  in 
Yorkshire,  so  early  as  20  Henry  11.. 
1174,  a  date  previous  to  the  assignea 
termination  of  the  second  Robert's  career. 
For  these  reasons  it  seems  more  correct  to 
make  the  justice  itinerant  the  third,  and 
not  the  second  baron. 

The  second  baron  married  Emeburga, 
and,  besides  the  third  Robert,  had  another 
son,  named  Osmund.  The  third  Robert 
married  two  wives :  by  the  first,  Helewise, 
he  had  one  son,  the  next-mentioned  Wil- 
liam, and  two  daughters ;  by  the  second. 
SibiUa,  sister  of  Philip  de  Vaioines,  he  haa 
one  son,  named  Eustace.  One  or  other  of 
these  two  Roberts,  and  I  think  the  last, 
foimded  two  monasteries  for  nuns,  one  at 
Rossedale,  the  other  at  Keldholme,  in 
Yorkshire,  besides  making  several  rich 
benefactions  to  Rievaulx  Abbey,  and  to 
the  monks  of  St.  Mary's  in  York.  (2>t^ 
dM9  Baron,  i.  455.^ 

STUTEVILLE,  William  de,  the  son  and 
successor  of  the  above  Robert  de  Stuteville, 
was  in  1174,  20  Henry  11.,  made  governor 
of  Topclive  Castle  in  Yorkshire,  and  three 
years  afterwards  governor  of  Roxburgh 
Castle  in  Scotland. 

In  1  Richard  L  he  was  among  the  justices 
itinerant  in  Yorkshire  (Pipe  &oU,  34),  and 
in  the  next  year  he  was  sheriff  of  North- 
umberland. Although  during  the  king's 
absence  he  seems  to  have  sided  with  Prince 
John,  he  joined  Kinc;  Richard  after  his 
return  from  captivity  m  his  expedition  to 
Normandy,  ana  was  appointed  one  of  the 
commissioners  to  determine  the  controversy 
between  the  Archbishop  of  York  and  the 
canons  of  his  church,  and  also  one  of  the 
custodes  of  that  counly  over  the  archbishop, 
then  sheriff.    (Madox,  i.  83.) 

On  the  accession  of  John,  that  king 
rewarded  his  former  adherence  to  him 
with  many  favours,  not,  of  course,  forget- 
ting the  imposition  of  a  considerable  fine 
in  the  first  instance.  He  made  him  sheriff 
of  Yorkshire  Northumberland,  Comber- 
land,  and  'Weatomoit^lBndi,  ^'^^  Vim.  the      

coBtody  of   aHl  ^«  cm^^  ^Shsran,  «a^\\T&»3fi&;^  ^  ^gMda,  'ibr 


however,  were  seldom  granted  withoi 
pecuniary  equivalent,  and  we  aooordii 
find  on  the  rolls  large  fines  imposed 
rather,  perhaps,  considerable  paym 
made,  for  some  of  these  honours.  (Mai 
Ohlatis,  55,  68, 109 ;  Bat.  Chart,  12-ia 

He  died  in  5  John,  leaving  by  hii  i 
Berta,  the  niece  of  Ranulph  de  GlioiS 
the  chief  justiciary,  two  sons,  Rdwit  a 
Nicholas,  for  the  wardship  of  whoo  d 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  paid  no  Jeai 
sum  than  four  thousand  marics.  (Mi 
Liberate,  48.)  The  elder  of  these  Mh 
following  year  without  issue,  and  h 
younger  in  17  Henry  IIL,  leaniy  o^ 
daughters.  None  of  the  collstenb  Mf 
subsequently  summoned  to  parlismai^ii 
family  ceased  to  be  barons  of  tfae  w 
(Baronage^  i.  455.) 

SVDBVBY,  SncoN  DE  (ABCHBiratf' 
Canterbttbt),    whose  family  niiM  ^ 
Thebaud,  or  Tibbald,  was  the  sob  of  ^ 
and  Sarah  Thebaud,  who  resided  it  SJ 
bury  in  Suffolk  at  the  time  of  lis  i>*  |i 
Bemg  intended  for  the  clerical  pofc*^ 
he  assumed  the  name  of  his  nfttipe jM 
although  these  substitutions  weregnoif 
becoming  uncommon.    "While  yet  ij*| 
man  he  was  sent  abroad,  whew  iej 
tinguished  himself  in  several  foreignriiij 

and  took  the  degree  of  Doctor  of  the  Cj  ^^ 
Law  in  France.  He  was  receired  J 
favour  by  Pope  Innocent  VL,  who,>PP*? 
him  one  of  his  chaplains  and  anditva* 
palace,  an  office  of  considerable  v^  |^ 
oility,  by  which  he  is  designated  in  ijj 
date  of  King  Edward  HI.  on  July  7, » 
(N.  Fcedera,  iii.  402.')  By  the  pqg*' 
nuence  he  was  made  cnanceUor  of  SiBiJ 
in  1360,  and  Bisho]j  of  London  in  tbi» 
lowing  year.  Durmg  the  fourt«njJ" 
that  he  neld  this  see  his  service*  w«i>^ 
quently  required  by  the  king  in  the  nflij 
ment  of  truces  and  treaties  of  pei«>  • 
these  duties  he  continued  to  P^^  f 
the  rest  of  the  reign  after  he  becsneA'JJ 
bishop  of  Canterbury,  his  election  te» 
primacy  occurring  on  May  26, 1375. 

On  July  4, 1379, 3  Richard  n,  AjS 
Seal  was  placed  in  his  hands  as  ^ 
He  had  held  the  office  Ism  than  t«i 
when  the  populace  rose  in  fluij^ 
England,  instiffated  in  the  fit^' 
the  seditious  naningnes  of  * 
Kentish   priest,   named  ■ 
preached  the  oommon  ^ 


SUDBUBY 

lad  ben  thre  tymes  in  the  b  jsshon 
irie's  prison.*  (Froissart,  i.  640.) 
ition  of  the  people  was  further 
the  insolent  misconduct  of  one 
)ctors  of  the  capitation  tax  in 
ountjy  who,  professing  to  doubt 
I  joun^  girl^  made  an  indecent 
ascertam  it.  Her  father,  called 
yler,  from  his  trade,  took  sum- 
ance  for  the  insult  by  knocking 
ins  of  the  perpetrator ;  and  his 
joining  this  to  other  grievances, 
cied  as  real,  collected  together 
rpose  of  redressing  them,  and 
;  Tyler  at  their  head.  Similar 
ng  place  in  other  parts  of  the 

soon  found  himself  the  leader 
of  above  60,000  men.  Joining 
and  another  man  called  Jack 
le  command,  he  led  his  followers 
>ndon;  and  having,  in  his  way 
pped  at  Canterbury,  they  dis- 
le  palace  of  the  archbishop, 
om  it  was  natural  that  Bail 
ertain  hostile  feelings  as  the 
s  former  imprisonment,  and  to 
the  king's  chancellor  and  mi- 
^ople  would  not  fail  to  attribute 
Is  of  which  they  complained. 
8t  reached  Blackheath ;  and  on 
1  there,  on  June  12,  1381,  they 
ohn  Newton,  the  governor  of 
Dastle,  whom  they  had  forced  to 
them,  to  the  king,  then  in  the 
uondon,  to  represent  how  ill- 
he  kingdom  had  been,  'and 
Y  the  archebysshop  of  Caunter- 
haunceller,  wherof  they  wolde 
pt ; '  and  to  desire  that  he  him- 
come  and  hear  their  complaints. 
;  took  back  the  royal  promise 
uld  speak  to  them ;  and  we  can 
e  distress  and  difficulty  of  his 
what  course  they  should  advise 

master  to  adopt.  It  may  be 
hat  they  considered  the  removal 
)opular  minister  would  most 
tend  to  assuage  the  fury  of  the 
and  we  accordingly  find  that 
hop  on  that  day  resigned  the 

into  the  king's  hands,  the 
ng  that  he  did  so  '  for  certain 

r,  on  the  next  day,  though  he 
[own  the  river,  was  not  allowed 
hereupon  the  irritated  concourse 
ndon,  and  early  on  the  14th 
efore  the  Tower,  and  demanded 
e  kin^.  He  promised  to  meet 
le  End,  whither  the  greatest  part 
nbly  flocked.  The  leaders,  how- 
atisfied,  remained  with  a  large 
leir  followers;  and  when  the 
issed  out  of  the  gates  and  issued 
they  burst  into  me  Tower,  and, 
archbishop,  and  Robert  de  Hales, 


SUGDEN 


643^ 


the  master  of  the  Knights  of  St.  John,  who, 
being  treasurer,  was  pecnliarly  obnoxious 
to  them,  they  dragged  them  to  the  common 
place  of  execution  on  Tower  Hill,  and  there 
barbarously  murdered  them.  The  arch- 
bishop, after  quietly  remonstrating,  and 
giving  absolution  to  his  murderers,  calmly 
submitted  to  his  fate ;  and  with  such  care- 
lessness and  inhumanity  was  the  deed  per- 
formed, that  it  was  not  till  after  eight 
strokes  of  the  sword  that  his  head  was 
severed  from  his  body.  The  head,  after 
being  paraded  through  the  dty,  was  sus- 
pendea  on  London  Bridge,  and  the  body 
was  left  untouched  till  the  next  day,  when 
they  both  were  removed  for  interment  to 
Canterbury,  where  they  lie  in  the  south 
part  of  the  altar  of  St  Dunstan.  Wat 
Tyler  met  his  reward,  and  his  followers 
were  dispersed  through  the  intrepidity  of 
Edng  Richard,  from  whose  conduct  on  this 
occasion  his  subjects  nourished  hopes  which 
were  doomed  to  be  sadly  disappomted. 

As  in  most  scenes  of  violent  commotion 
the  innocent  suffer,  so  it  was  in  this  case. 
The  character  of  the  archbishop,  as  repre- 
sented by  the  historians,  was  such  as  to 
make  him  least  liable  to  popular  hatred. 
He  was  of  a  liberal,  free,  and  generous 
spirit,  admired  for  his  wonderful  parts,  for 
his  wisdom,  his  learning,  and  his  eloquence, 
and  revered  for  the  piety  of  his  life,  the 
charity  he  dispensed,  and  the  merciful  con- 
sideration he  universally  exhibited. 

While  Bishop  of  London  he  was  a  muni- 
ficent benefactor  to  his  native  town,  and 
during  the  short  period  that  he  held  the 
archbishopric  of  Canterbury  he  expended 
large  sums  on  the  cathedral.  (Oodwuiy  117; 
Barnes,  872.) 

8VDLEY,  Ralph  de,  was  of  a  noble  Eng- 
lish family,  older  than  the  Conquest,  whose 
chief  seat  was  at  Sudley  in  Gloucester^ 
shire.  {Baronagey  i.  42.)  In  24  Henry  HI., 
1240,  he  was  the  second  named  of  the  jus- 
tices before  whom  a  fine  was  acknowledged 
at  York;  after  which  date  there  is  no 
further  mention  of  him.  He  was  succeeded 
by  his  son  Bartholomew,  whose  grandson 
John  died  in  1867,  leaving  two  daughters, 
between  the  descendants  of  whom  the  barony 
remains  in  abeyance.     {Nicolas' s  ^/noMis,) 

SUFPOLX,  £arl  of.   <S^  M.  de  la  roLE. 

8VGDEN,  Edward  Bubienshaw  (Lord 
St.  Leonard's).  This  erudite  jurist  may 
boast  of  having  raised  himself  by  his  own 
industry  and  merits  from  an  inferior  rank 
in  the  estimation  of  the  world  to  the  highest 
grade  in  the  law,  and  to  an  honoured  place 
among  the  peers  of  the  realm.  Lord  St. 
Leonard's  and  Lord  Tenterden  are  splendid 
instances  of  the  excellence  of  the  British 
constitution,  which,  regardless  of  birth  or 
position,  freely  admits  the  most  deserving 
to  a  competition  for  the  honoux%  \t  Vsjn^  \ft 
dispense.    Eichax^  ^\k^«i  >3l«i  ^^«t  q'I 


644 


SUGDEN 


SULYARD 


the  chancellor  followed  the  Bame  burinesa  I  replaced  in  his  former  position  at  the  head 
in  London,  though  on  a  larger  scale,  that  of  the  High  Court  of  Insh  Chancery.  Up 
John  Abbott  the  father  of  the  chief  justice    to  this  time  he  was  an  active  member  of 

Practised  in  Canterbury:  and  each  may  well    parliament,  sitting  suocesmvely  for  Wey- 


feel  pride  in  reflecting  on  his  origin 

He  was  bom  in  1781,  and  was  placed  as 
a  member  of   Lincoln^s    Inn,    by  which 
society  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1807. 
For  ten  years  afterwards  he  practised  as  a 
conveyancing  counsel,  and  soon  became  the 
most  distinguished  follower  of  that  branch 
of  the  science.    His  early  success  was  pro- 
moted by  his  publication  of  a  ^  Practical 
Treatise  on  the  Law  of  Vendors  and  Pur- 
chasers of  Estates  *  (written  before  he  was 
twenty-one),  two  editions  of  which  were 
exhausted  before  his  call  to  the  bar.    This 
was  followed  in  1808  by  his   'Practical 
Treatise  on  Powers.^  Then  came  his '  Series 
of  Letters  to  a  Man  of  Property  on  buying, 
selling,  &c.^  Estates,'  of  which  he  issued  fif^ 
years  afterwards  a  seventh  edition  under 
the  new  title  of  ^  A  Handy  Book  on  Pro- 
perty Law.'     In  1811  he  published  a  most 
masterly  edition  of  ^  Gilbert's  Law  of  Uses 
and  Trusts.'  By  the  excellence  of  these  and 
other  works,  all  written  in  the  clearest  and 
most  vigorous  style,   and  combining  le^al 
research  with  practical  ability,  for  which 
frequent  editions  were  called,  and  always 
issued  with  valuable  additions  and  improve- 
ments, he  established  such  a  name  that  few 
felt  their  titles  good  unless  they  were  sub- 
mitted to  his  revision.     The  natural  conse- 
quence was  that  he  gained  a  larger  income 
tnan  any  competitor,  but  at  the  same  time 
was  so  overloaded  with  abstracts  to  inspect 
and  deeds  to  settie  that  at  length  he  felt  it 
necessary  to  withdraw  from  that  laborious 
pursuit  and  confine  himself  to  court  practice. 

He  went  in  1817  into  the  Court  of  Chan- 
cenr,  but  there  he  did  not  obtain  much 
rehef,  for  briefs  came  in  as  abstracts  had 
formerly,  and  he  soon  had  as  many  litigant 
parties  to  plead  for  as  he  before  had  pur- 
chasers to  advise.  He  received  a  silk  gown 
in  1822,  and  in  June  1829,  lust  a  year  be- 
fore the  death  of  George  IV.,  he  succeeded 
Sir  Nicolas  Tindal  as  solicitor-general,  and 
received  the  order  of  knighthood.* 

This  office  he  resigned  when  the  whigs 
came  into  power  in  November  1830,  and 
remained  out  of  office  for  more  than  four 
years ;  but  during  that  time  he  lost  little 
from  the  exclusion,  as  he  had  the  undis- 
puted lead  in  the  Court  of  Chancery.  When 
m  December  1834  the  conservatives  re- 
gained the  ascendency,  Sir  Edward  Sugden 
was  at  once  selected  to  fill  the  highest 
office  in  Ireland,  being  appointed  lord  chan- 
cellor of  that  country.  The  short  tenure  of 
the  conservative  power  obliged  him  to  re- 
sign in  April  1835,  but  such  judicial  capacity 
did  he  exhibit  that  on  the  exclusion  of  the 
whig  government  in  September  1841  he 
waa,  with  the  approbation  of  all  parties, 


mouth  and  Melcombe  Regis,  St.  Mawes, 
and  ultimately  for  Ripon. 

He  retained  his  seat  on  the  Irish  bendi 
with  the  highest  reputation  for  nearly  four 
years,  and  it  was  with  sincere  regret  thit 
the    practitioners   in   his   court   saw  him 
depart  on  another  change  of  ministry  ii 
July  1846.    He  had  then  above  five  veus 
more  of  comparative  idleness,  till  his  poli- 
tical friends  again  resiuning  power  avaiM 
themselves  of  the  opportuni^  of  showiaf 
their  estimation  of  his  brilliant  abilities  an^ 
useful  services,  by  raising  him  to  the  high«a 
office  in  the  law,  lord  bigb  chancellor  of 
Great  Britain,  to  which  he  wasj  appdnted 
on  February  27,  1862,  being  created  tk 
day  after  a  peer  of  England  by  the  title  d 
Baron  St  Leonard's  of  Slaugbam  in  Suaa 
The  inconvenient  system  of  changing  tk 
lord  chancellor  witn  the  ministry  ooM 
him  to  resign  at  the  end  of  ten  months,  oa 
December  28  in  the  same  year.    Exceedof 
at  that  time  the  age  of  seventy  yean,  ht 
has  refused  office  on  the  several  accesM 
of  the  conservatives  to  power ;  but  ia  te 
place  in  parliament  and   in   the  judic^ 
committee  of  the  privy  council  he  has  ea- 
tinued  to  affi^rd  nis  valuable    assistaie? 
Among  minor  honours,  he  was  nominste^ 
high  steward  of  Kingston-on-Thames  sod » 
deputy-lieutenant  for  Sussex,  and  in  1S$ 
received  the  degree  of  LL.D.  from  the  us- 
versity  of  Cambrid^. 

As  he  is  still  livmg,  it  would  be  indei- 
cate  to  enter  into  any  other  incidents  of  ^ 
life,  and  presumptuous  to  attempt  any  cs* 
ticism  of  his  powers ;  bat  no  one  will  relee 
to  endorse  the  .opinion  that  in  all  questkoi 
of  the  law  of  real  property  the  name  of 
Sugden  will  be  perpetually  quoted  as  0 
infallible  authority. 

By  his  marriage  with  the  daughter  <^ 
Mr.  John  Enapp  he  has  several  chudroi 

8VLYABD,  John,  of  Wetherden  in  S^ 
folk,  was  the  son  of  John  Sulvard,  Bi^ 
and  Alice  the  daughter  of  Sir  John  Baxiag' 
ton.  He  studied  the  law  at  Lincoln'?  Iob* 
where  the  name  of  Sulyard  (probably  to 
father)  appears  as  reader  in  1465,  and  u^ 
in  1470.  In  1477  John  Sulyaid  (probiUy 
the  son)  appears  again  as  reader,  and  f 
that  year  .received  the  degree  of  the  cdi 
{DugdMs  Orig,  249,  257.) 

In  May  1483,  during  the  short  rogn  ^ 
Edward  v.,  he  was  united  with  Chi^  J* 
tice  Bryan  to  go  the  Home  Ciicuit/9  lUfort 
Pub,  Hec.,  App.  ii.  1),  seijeants  beisg  tm 
as  well  as  now,  joined  in  the  commicsioi- 
In  the  second  year  of  the  reign  of  Richii^ 
ni.,  October  22, 1484,  he  was  ndaed  to  tbe 
office  of  justice  of  the  King's  Bench,  asi 
with  the  other  judges,  was  re-appoiDted  ^ 


SUMEBI 

the  accession  of  Henry  VII.  in  the  foUow- 
ing  year. 

That  king  named  him,  on  Novemher  10, 
1487,  as  one  of  the  commissioners  to  exe- 
cute the  office  of  steward  at  the  coronation 
of  Queen  Elizabeth  (Ifytner,  zii.  328),  a 
ceremony  which  he  did  not  surriye  above 
four  months.  He  died  on  March  18,  1488, 
-end  was  buried  in  Wetherden  Church. 
iProbate  of  Ms  WiU,) 

He  had  two  wives.  His  first  was  Anne, 
daughter  and  heir  of  —  Hungate ;  and  his 
second  was  Anne,  daughter  and  coheir  of 
John  Andrewes,  of  Baylam  in  Suffolk.  By 
both  marriages  he  had  several  children. 
.  Sir  William  Sulyard,  who  was  a  person  of 
great  repute  in  the  law  and  one  of  the  go- 
vernors of  Lincoln's  Inn  in  28  Henry  VIlI., 
^was  his  fifrandson. 

8VKEBI,  KoGEB  DE,  was  the  grandson 
of  John  de  Sumeri,  who  acquired  the 
barony  of  Dudley  in  Worcestershire,  and 
the  son  and  ultimately  the  heir  of  Ralph. 
In  17  Henry  III.  his  estates  were  seized 
because  he  came  not  to  be  bound  with  the 
belt  of  kni^rhthood,  and  he  was  compelled 
to  fine  for  their  restitution.  (Rrcerpt,  e  Hot. 
JPm.,  Introd,  xvii. )  He  married  Nichola, 
third  sister  and  coheir  of  Hugh  de  ^Ubini, 
£^1  of  Arundel,  on  the  partition  of  whose 
inheritance,  in  28  Henry  III.,  he  had  the 
manor  of  Bare  we  in  Leicestershire  assigned 
for  the  chief  seat. 

In  4«5  Henry  III.,  12G1,  he  was  selected 
AB  a  justice  itinerant  for  Cambridge  and 
Huntmgdon. 

He  was  a  loyal  and  a  valiant  knight,  and 
fought  under  the  king  at  the  battle  of 
Lewes,  sharing  in  his  defeat  and  his  subse- 
quent imprisonment.  He  wtis  afterwards 
one  of  those  appointed  to  carry  into  execu- 
tion the  dictum  of  Kenilworth.  He  died  in 
1272,  and  was  buried  at  the  priory  of 
Dudley.  Hy  his  first  wife  he  had  four 
daughters ;  but  marrying,  secondly,  Ama- 
bilia,  the  daughter  of  Robert  de  Chaucomb, 
And  widow  of  Gilbert  de  Segrave,  he  left 
by  her  two  sons  and  a  daughter.  The 
eldest  son,  Roger,  succeeded,  and  the  family 
is  now  represented  in  the  House  of  Lords, 
mrtly  through  females,  by  the  earldom  of 
I)udley.  (Jiarunagej  i.  f>13;  Xicolas^s 
Synopm.) 

8ITBBET,  Earl  op.  Si^e  J.  and  W.  de 
Warrenxe. 

BTTTHILL,  John  (Abbot  of  Hyde),  was 
one  of  the  justices  itinerant  in  Dorsetshire 
in  7  Richard  I.,  1195-^.  {Madox,  i.  602.) 
He  was  elected  to  the  abbey  situated  near 
Winchester  in  1181.  In  1185  he  v^ent  to 
liome  to  bring  the  pall  for  IWdwin,  the 
new  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Browne 
'Willis  (10)  states  that  he  died  m  1222,  6 
Henry  lU.     {Dugdnle's  Monad,  ii.  431.) 

BTTTTOTi,  Elias  de,  whose  father,  of  the 
name,  died  iu  1?02,  became  a  judge 


SUTTON 


645 


I  X' 


of  the  King's  Bench  in  18  Edward  L,  1285, 
and  he  is  further  mentioned  in  tiiat  charac- 
ter after  Easter,  15  Edward  I.  He  died  in 
1289.  CCaL  Inq.  p.  m.  i.  21 ;  Abb.  Eoi. 
Orig,  i.  276,  278.) 

SUTTOV,  Thokas  Maknebs  (Lobi> 
Maknebs),  was  the  grandson  of  John  Man- 
ners, third  Buke  of  Rutland,  and  the  son 
of  Lord  George  Manners,  his  mce's  third 
son,  who  assumed  the  name  of  Sutton  when 
he  succeeded  to  the  estate  of  his  mother's 
father.  Lord  Lexington.  Lord  Qeorge, 
by  his  first  wife,  Diana^  daughter  of  Thomas 
Chaplin,  of  Blankney  m  Lincolnshire,  Esq., 
had  a  family  of  seven  sons  and  six  dauffhters. 
The  fourth  of  these  sons  became  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  and  was  the  father  of  Charles 
Manners  Sutton,  who  after  presiding  over 
the  House  of  Commons  from  1817  to  1834 
was  created  Viscount  Canterbury. 

Lord  George's  fifth  son,  Thomas,  the 
subject  of  the  present  sketch,  was  bom  on 
February  24,  1756,  From  the  Charter- 
house he  went  to  Emmanuel  Collet 
Cambridge,  and  distinguished  himself 
being  placed  as  fifth  wrangler  in  1777.  ue 
was  called  to  the  bar  by  Lincoln's  Inn  in 
November  1780.  Well  read  in  the  law,  he 
obtained  a  considerable  practice  in  the 
Court  of  Chancery,  and  received  the  honour 
of  a  silk  gown  in  1800,  being  at  the  same 
time  appointed  solicitor-general  to  the 
Prince  of  Wales.  In  that  character  he 
brought  before  the  parliament  of  1802,  to 
which  he  was  returned  member  for  the 
family  borouffh  of  Newark,  the  claims  of 
his  royal  highness  to  the  revenue  of  the 
duchy  of  Cornwall,  and  urged  them  with 
so  much  grace  and  talent  tha1»  he  not  only 
excited  the  eulogy  of  both  Mr.  Pitt  and 
Mr.  Fox,  but  was  promoted  bjr  Mr.  Ad- 
dington,  then  prime  minister,  m  the  fol- 
lowing May,  to  the  office  of  solicitor-general 
to  the  king,  being  knighted  on  the  occasion. 
He  executed  the  dutv  which  soon  after  de- 
volved upon  him,  of  replying  to  the  evi- 
dence brought  forward  by  Colonel  Despard 
on  a  charge  of  high  treason,  with  great 
temperance  and  ability.  He  assisted  also 
in  tne  trial  of  M.  fNaltier  for  a  libel  on 
Napoleon  Bonaparte  during  the  short  peace 
with  France,  the  speedy  conclusion  of  which 
saved  the  defendant  uova  being  called  up 
for  judgment.  {Pari,  Hid,  xxxvi.  332, 
400,  1202;  State  Trials,  xxvii.  460,  r>;)0.) 
Ho  was  appointed  a  baron  of  the  Exche- 
quer on  February  4,  1805,  when  he  re- 
signed the  recordership  of  Grantham,  which 
ho  had  held  for  some  Vears. 

He  only  sat  as  an  English  judge  for  two 

J  rears,  when,  on  the  dissolution  of  the  shori- 
ived  ministry  of  ^  All  the  Talents,*  he  was 
selected  as  lord  chancellor  of  Ireland  in 
April  1807,  having  been  on  the  20th  of 
that  month  called  up  to  the  House  of  Peefs 
bv  the  title  of  Baron  Manners  of  Foston  in 


646 


SWEREFORD 


Lincolnshire.  He  presided  there  during 
the  remainder  of  the  reign  of  George  III. 
and  until  the  eighth  year  of  (George  IV., 
when  in  NovemDer  1827,  being  then  in  his 
Aeyenty-second  year,  he  resigned  the  Seal, 
haying  for  more  than  twenfy  years  exer- 
dsed  the  important  functions  of  his  high 
office  with  uniyersal  approbation.  His  de- 
cisions as  an  equity  jud^  were  held  in 
high  estimation  ;  and  so  httle  jealousy  had 
he  of  criticism  that  he  refusea  an  applica- 
tion for  an  attachment  against  an  attorney 
for  publishing  some  proceedings  in  his 
court,  expressing  his  opmion  that  the  pub- 
licity given  to  law  proceedings  not  only 
prevented  unjust  sentences,  but  answerea 
many  other  salutary  purposes.  I 

He  lived  nearly  nfteen  years  after  his 
retirement,  and  occasionally  joined  in  the 
debates  in  the  House  of  Peers.  At  the  age 
of  eighty-six  he  died  at  his  house  in  Brook 
Street,  on  May  31,  1842.  By  his  first  wife, 
Anne,  the  daughter  of  Sir  John  Copley, 
Bart,  of  SprotDorough,  he  left  no  issue; 
but  by  his  second  wife,  Jane,  daughter  of 
Lord  uaher  and  sister  of  the  Earl  of  Glen- 
gall,  he  left  an  only  son,  the  father  of  the 
present  peer. 

8WEEEP0BD,  Alexandeb  de,  is  de- 
scribed by  Madox  as  a  ^  most  excellent  man, 
whose  memory  is  yet  held  in  high  esteem 
among  antiquaries.  He  took  his  name  from 
a  parish  so  called  in  the  county  of  Oxford, 
of^  which  he  was  first  the  vicar,  and  after- 
wards the  rector.  He  was  a  clerk  in  the 
Exchequer,  and  was  appointed  domestic 
chaplain  by  William  de  Uomhill,  Bishop  of 
Coventry,  who  had  himself  been  an  otncer 
of  that  branch  of  the  court.  In  February, 
17  John,  he  had  letters  of  conduct  to  go 
abroad  with  the  bishop,  and  in  the  follow- 
ing April  the  troubled  state  of  the  coimtry 
rendered  it  necessary  for  him  to  apply  for 
them  for  the  purpose  of  travelling  tnrough- 
out  England  on  the  bishop's  affairs.  About 
1219  he  was  made  archdeacon  of  Salop  or 
Shrewsbury,  and  on  January  16,  1231,  is 
mentioned    as    treasurer    of   St.   Paul's, 


TALBOT 

havinff  been  preyiougiy  ^  canon  in  tliat 
cathedral*  i  a 

On  July  6, 1234,  Henry  IIL,  he  nu 
assigned  to  take  his  place  in  ttte  Excheqaer 
<  tanquam  baro,'  and  attested  wiits  in  con- 
nection with  that  office  as  late  as  October 
1246;  and  dying  on  November  14,  1246, 
was  buried  at  St  Cedda's  altar  in  St  Paul's, 
where  he  founded  a  chantry.  He  gave  all 
the  lands  and  rents  he  had  m  Hertfordshire 
to  St.  Bartholomew's  Hospital. 

He  is  chiefly  celebrated  as  the  compikr 
of  the  Red  Book  of  the  Exchequer,  inwudi 
he  collected  out  of  the  Great  BoUs  of  the 
Pipe  the  memorials  concemiDg  the  scutage^ 
assessed  in  the  reigns  of  Henry  XL,  Bichaid 
I.,  John,  and  the  first  fifteen  years  of  thft 
of  Henry  HI.,  with  many  other  curious  pir- 
ticulars  relative  to  the  officers  and  pradde^ 
of  the  department  of  the  revenue  in  tlie 
King's  Court,  and  in  which  he  preserved^ 
valuable  work  of  Richard  Fitz-Nifel,  Bi- 
shop of  London,  called  '  Dialogns  de  Sc»- 
cano.'  (iMadox,  i.  C24,  677,  iL  64,  835; 
Chatmcys  Hertfordshire,  237;  Df^ddet 
OHg.  21 ;   Rot,  Pat,  17  John,  166, 176.) 

STDEKHAX,  Richard,  belonged  to  thfr 
county  of  Somerset,  where  his  £i3ier,  Boger 
de  Sydenham,  was  possessed  of  Combe,  is 
the  parish  of  Monksilver.    (^Cai,  Itiq,^m, 
ii.  306.)    He  was  educated  as  a  lawyer^  aid 
was  raised  to  the  bench  as  a  judge  of  tk 
Com-t  of  Common  Pleas,  on  the  unpeach- 
ment  of  four  of  its  members  in  the  pariii- 
ment  of  Februarjr  1388,   11  Richard  tt: 
and  the  fines  levied  before  him  extend  to 
the  octaves  of  Trinity  1390,  19  Richard  E 
{Dugdale's  Ori^,  40.)     This  was  no  doubt 
the  period  of  his  death  ;  for  his  name  doe» 
not  occur  afterwards,  and  his  successor  w 
appointed  in  the  following  July. 

He  married  Joan,  daugnter  and  coheir  of 
Robert  Delnigrige,  of  Bromfield«  and  ms 
father  of  two  sons,  Henry  and  Simon,  tie 
latter  of  whom  became  Bishop  of  Chichesier. 
One  of  the  descendants  of  Henry,  the  eldeit, 
in  1G41  received  a  patent  of  baronetcr. 
which  became  extinct  in  1730. 


T 


TABUB,  Ralph,  appears  only  as  a  justice  j 
itinerant  in  3  Henry  III.,  1219,  m  the  i 
home  coimties.  In  some  of  the  fines  levied  i 
during  that  iter  he  is  called  Ralph  Tabbett 

TALBOT,  Chables  (LofiD  Talbot), 
traced  his  descent  £rom  illustrious  ancestors, 
ennobled  almost  firom  the  time  of  the  Con- 
quest. The  branch  to  which  he  directly 
belonged  was  that  of  Sir  Gilbert  Talbot, 
the  third  son  of  John,  second  Earl  of 
Shrewabury,  w\io  ^ouni^i^^  \!v  >i!^<&  ikA^  of  , 
Henry  YIlL    In  Uikft^  tsafic^Haisii  ^xdl 


Sir  Gilbert  came  William  Talbot,  ffishop 
successively  of  Oxford  (1690),  of  Sahsburr 
(1715),  and  of  Durham  (1722^,  who,  by 
his  second  wife,  Catherine,  oArx^Va  (£■ 
—  King,  an  alderman  of  London,  tni 
the  father  of  a  large  family  of  sods  ni 
daughters.  His  eldest  son  was  the  fstin 
lord  chancellor,  who  was  bom  in  tki  ifl* 
1684,  and  was  sent  in  1701  to  <* 
his  education  at  Oriel  CoUega.  * 
was  elected  fellow  of  All  ^ 


TALBOT 

clerical  profesaion.  But  by  the  recom- 
meodation  of  Lord  Chancellor  Cowper  he 
was  induced  reluctantly  to  forego  this  inten- 
tention,  and  to  enter  the  legal  arena,  as 
more  calculated  to  exhibit  and  turn  to 
useful  account  the  extraordinary  talents 
with  which  he  had  been  gifted. 

He  accordingly  entered  the  Lmer  Temple 
in  June  1707,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  in 
September  1711.  His  abilities  were  soon 
recofpised,  and  before  many  ;^ears  he  had 
acquired  the  leading  practice  in  the  equity 
courts.  He  was  appointed  in  May  1717 
solicitor-general  to  the  Prince  of  Wales, 
and  in  xVpril  1726  he  was  promoted  to  the 
same  office  in  the  service  of  the  king.  In 
that  year  he  was  elected  bencher,  treasurer, 
and  Lent  reader  to  his  original  inn  of  court, 
the  Inner  Temple;  and  also  bencher, 
treasurer,  and  master  of  the  library  to 
Lincoln's  Inn,  to  which  society  he  had 
been  also  admitted  in  1718,  for  the  purpose 
of  occupying  chambers  there.  He  oecame 
a  memoer  for  Tregony  in  1719  j  and  in 
1722  and  1727  he  was  returned  for  Durham, 
of  which  his  father  had  then  been  made 
biflhop. 

That  king  continued  him  in  his  office  of 
solicitor-general,  and  he  and  the  attorney- 
general,  Sir  Philip  Yorke,  exercised  an  al- 
most absolute  supremacy  in  the  practice  of 
the  Court  of  Chancery,  remedying,  it  is 
aaid,  even  when  engaged  on  opposite  sides, 
the  somnolency  of  Lord  Chancellor  Kin^, 
by  settling  the  minutes  in  the  causes  with 
justice  to  both  parties.  Mr.  Talbot's  pro- 
fessional income  at  this  time  must  nave 
been  very  large;  but  he  was  unworthily 
taxed  by  the  munificent  extravagance  of 
bis  father,  being  obliged  on  two  several 
occasions  to  pay  the  deots  which  the  bishop 
had  incuirea  in  excess  of  his  splendid 
revenue. 

So  meagre  are  the  accounts  of  forensic 
or  parliamentary  eloquence  at  this  time 
that  few  examples  remain  of  that  which 
Mr.  Talbot  displayed  either  as  an  advocate 
or  a  senator,  and  those  only  of  an  official 
character.  But  there  can  be  no  doubt,  not 
only  of  his  general  reputation  as  an  orator, 
but  of  the  esteem  and  respect  in  which  he 
was  held  both  as  a  lawyer  and  as  a  man. 
since  his  elevation  to  tne  highest  judidal 
dignity  in  the  state  met  with  universal 
approbation.  That  occurred  on  the  resigna- 
tion of  Lord  Kin^,  when  the  Great  Seal 
was  delivered  to  him  as  lord  chancellor  on 
November  29, 1733,  a  few  days  after  which 
he  was  ennobled  with  the  title  of  Baron 
Talbot  of  Hensol  in  Glamorganshire,  an 
estate  formerly  belonging  to  the  celebrated 
Welsh  judge  David  Jenkins,  which  he  had 
acquired  by  his  marriage  in  1711  with  the 
Judge's  descendant,  Cecil,  daughter  and 
heir  of  Charles  Matthews,  Es^.,  of  Castle 
Mjnach  in  that  county.    His  promotion 


TALBOT 


647 


was  celebrated  at  the  Inner  Temple  by  a 
splendid  entertainment,  noted  as  the  last  of 
the  ancient  revels,  in  the  performance  of 
which  the  inns  of  court  were  wont  to  take 
so  much  pride. 

No  man  ever  occupied  the  high  position 
he  had  attained  with  more  unmixed  admira- 
tion j  nor  did  the  death  of  any  great  judicial 
dignitary  ever  cause  so  much  general 
lamentation.  Living  too  short  a  tune  to 
excite  the  jealousy  of  his  colleagues  in  the 
ministry,  or  to  liecome  obnoxious  to  the 
opposition,  he  presided  long  enough  in  his 
court  to  prove  nimself  a  most  efficient  and 
impartial  judge.  His  patience  in  listening 
to  arguments,  his  discrimination  in  sifting 
facts,  his  readiness  in  applying  precedent^ 
and  the  reasons  upon  which  he  foimded  his 
judgments,  made  nis  decrees  acceptable  to 
the  legal  community,  and  prevented 
murmurs  even  among  the  unsuccessful 
litigants.  The  purity  of  his  life,  his  unble- 
mi&ed  inteflrity,  his  humanity  to  the  dis- 
tressed, his  liberality  to  all,  his  gentleneaa 
of  manners,  his  urbanity,  cheerfmness,  and 
wit,  gained  him  so  many  friends,  and  were 
so  universally  recognised,  that  he  not  only 
escaped  the  vituperation  of  political  writers 
during  his  life,  but  both  parties  after  his 
death  vied  with  each  other,  both  in  prose 
and  verse,  in  unqualified  encomiums  on  his 
character. 

A  story  is  told  of  him,  that  after  he  had 
promised  a  valuable  living  to  a  friend  of 
Sir  Robert  Walpole,  the  curate  of  the  late 
incumbent  callea  upon  him  with  a  petition 
from  the  parishioners,  testifying  to  his 
merits  and  his  povertv,  and  entreating  his 
lordship  to  use  his  innuence  with  the  new 
rector  to  continue  him  in  the  curacy.  After 
some  little  conversation  with  him  and  finding 
that  his  stipend  was  only  50/.  a  year,  his 
lordship  kindly  promised  not  onlv  to  comply 
with  the  request,  but  also  to  do  what  he 
could  to  get  the  salary  raised.  When  the 
rector-expectant  came  to  thank  him  for 
his  promise,  his  lordship  mentioned  the 
curate's  petition,  and  begged  it  might  be 
granted.  'I  should  be  happy  to  oblige 
your  lordship,'  replied  the  clergyman, '  but 
I  have  promised  my  curacy  to  a  particular 
friend.*  *  Promisea  jour  curacy  I  what, 
sir,  before  the  living  is  yours  P  '  '  Yes,  my 
loid.'  '  Then,  sir,*  exclaimed  the  chan- 
cellor, with  warmth^  '  1  will  afford  you  an 
admirable  opportunity  of  dismissing  your 
friend ;  I  wm  dispose  of  the  living  else- 
where ;*  and,  without  sufiering  a  reply,  dis- 
missed him.  On  the  curate's  waiting  upon 
him  to  know  the  result  of  his  application, 
he  told  him  that  he  was  sorry  to  say  tl  o  he 
could  not  get  him  the  curacy ;  but  c.  the 
poor  man  bowing  and  ofiering  to  retire,  the 
chancellor  stopped  him  and  said,  'Though 
1  cannot  give  you  the  curacy,  1  can  give 
you  the  living,  and  yours  it  is ;  so  you  may 


648 


TALEBOT 


write  to  your  family  and  tell  them  that, 
altiboagh  you  applied  only  for  the  curacy, 
your  merit  and  your  modesty  have  obtained 
for  you  the  living/  {Law  and  Lawyers, 
u.  147.) 

His  short  but  illustrious  career  was  ter- 
minated on  February  14, 1737,  bv  an  attack 
of  iuflammation  on  the  lungs,  itis  remains 
were  interred  in  the  churcli  of  Barrington 
m  Gloucestershire,  where  his  residence  was 
situated. 

By  his  lady  he  left  five  sons.  His  suc- 
cessor, William,  was  created  Earl  Talbot  in 
1761,  but  in  1782  the  earldom  became  ex- 
tinct, but  was  two  years  afterwards  granted 
to  his  cousin,  John  Talbot,  by  whose  de- 
scendant it  is  still  borne,  together  with  the 
earldom  of  Shrewsbury,  to  which  the  father 
of  the  present  peer  succeeded  in  1856. 
(WeUhy'8  Judges^  203 ;  BircKs  Lives,  148 ; 
Uollin.1^8  Peerage,  v.  234.) 

TALEBOT,  Gilbert  (TalbotV  was  the 
son  of  Kichard  Talebot,  lord  or  Linton  in 
Herefordshire,  by  Alina,  his  wife,  who  was 
the  daughter  of  Alan  Basset,  of  Wycombe, 
and  widow  of  Drogo  de  Montacute.  In  44 
Henry  III.,  1260,  he  was  made  governor  of 
the  castles  of  Grosmont,  Skenfrith,  and 
Blancminster,  which,  with  that  of  Mon- 
mouth, he  was  ordered  to  fortify  against 
the  disturbances  of  the  Welsh.  In  the  next 
year  he  was  appointed  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant  for  Herefordshire  and  five  other 
counties. 

He  married  Guenthlian,  the  daughter  and 
eventually  the  heir  of  Rhese  ap  Griffith, 
Prince  of  Wales,  whose  arms  he  thencefor- 
wai*d  adopted  instead  of  his  own.  By  her 
he  had  a  son,  Richard,  who  succeeded  him 
at  his  death  in  2  Edward  I.,  1274,  one  of 
whose  descendants  in  1384  became,  by  his 
marriage  with  the  heiress,  Baron  Strange. 
His  son,  John  Talbot,  acquired  the  barony 
of  Fumival  by  marriage  in  1409,  and  was 
created  Earl  ot  Shrewsbury  in  1442.  These 
titles,  after  falling  twice  into  abeyance,  ulti- 
mately devolved  in  1856  on  the  father  of 
the  present  Earl  Talbot.    {Baronage,  i.  325.) 

TALPOITED,  Thomas  Noon.  That  a  de- 
votion to  literature,  and  the  possession  of  a 
poetic  genius,  are  not  necessarily  incompa- 
tible with  abstruser  studies,  nor  absolute 
impediments  to  professional  success,  is  ex- 
emplified in  the  career  of  Sir  Thomas  Noon 
Talfourd,  who  from  the  beginning  to  the 
end  of  his  life  united  to  the  labours  of  the 
law  the  more  agreeable  avocations  of  an 
essayist,  a  poet,  and  a  dramatist.  The  union 
of  tnese  apparently  opposite  studies  did  not 
prevent  him  from  obtaining  a  considemble 
mastery  of  both ;  nor  did  the  general  repu- 
tation of  this  double  occupation  induce  the 
legal  world  to  suppose  that  he  would  neglect 
or  fail  in  his  exertions  for  them,  because  he 
employed  himself  occasionally  in  lighter 
pursuits.    It  is  not,  perhaps,  too  much  to 


TALFOURD 

say  that  he  owed  his  success  and  hia  pro- 
motion as  much  to  his  literary  as  to  his  fegsl 
character ;  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  in 
future  he  will  be  remembex^  more  as  tlie 
author  of  '  Ion'  and  as  the  friend  and  bio- 
grapher of  Charles  Lamb,  than  as  one  of 
thejudges  of  Westminster  Hall. 

He  was  the  son  of  Edward  Talfomfd,  t 
brewer  at  Reading,  not  in  Tery  prospezooi 
circumstances,  and  of  a  daughter  of  the 
Kev.  Thomas  Noon,  an  independent  xni- 
nister  there.  He  was  bom  at  Reading  on 
January  26,  1795.  His  education  com- 
mencea  at  the  dissenters'  school  at  Mill  W^ 
and  proceeded  at  the  grammar  school  at 
Keadme,  then  holding  a  high  charseter 
under  the  guidance  of  the  celebrated  Br. 
Valpy.  At  the  latter  were  atrengtheiied 
and  confirmed  those  poetic  and  dramatic  in- 
clinations which  he  had  shown  from  kit 
earliest  youth,  and  he  always  attributed  \^ 
future  more  matured  efforts  to  the  classical 
taste  which  he  imbibed  from  his  accom- 
plished preceptor. 

After  gaimng  many  of  the  prizes  az^ 
other  distinctions  of  the  school,  stem  neces- 
sity obliged  him  to  seek  the  means  of  sub- 
sistence in  London.  There,  to  supp(fft 
himself,  he  obtained  employment  as  a  new»- 
paper  reporter,  and  as  a  regular  contribator 
to  periodical  publications.  At  the  same 
time  he  sought  instruction  in  the  intricades 
of  law  from  the  eminent  special  pleader  3i(7. 
Joseph  Chitty. 

His  novitiate  being  completed,  he  wm 
called  to  the  bar  by  the  Middle  Temple  on 
February  9, 1821.  He  attended  the  Oif(»d 
Circuit,  whei*e  for  some  time  he  was  en- 
gaged in  reporting  the  assize  business  for 
the  ^  Times,  and  obtained  great  credit  for 
the  impartial  manner  in  which  he  detuled 
the  exertions  of  his  colleagues,  and  for  the 
modest  avoidance  of  his  own  name  when 
he  happened  to  be  engaged.  Th»is  gaining 
the  respect  of  his  associates,  his  genial  out- 
lities  soon  made  him  a  general  favounte: 
and  the  observance  of  his  industry  in  re- 
porting, and  the  competent  knowledge whid 
it  indicated,  brought  him  a  gradual  incx^aM 
of  business.  To  these  recommendations  wis 
added  a  powerful  and  attractive  style  of 
oratory,  which  greatly  availed  him  when 
taking  a  leading  part,  and  at  the  end  of 
twelve  years  the  position  he  had  secured 
justified  him  in  applying  for  the  distinctioo 
of  a  silk  gown.  He  took  the  degree  of  t 
Serjeant  in  1833 ;  and  when  the  Court  of 
Common  Pleas  was  soon  after  opened  to  sU 
barristers  he  received  a  patent  oi  precedence 
which  gave  him  rank  in  all  the  courts.  He 
had  two  years  before  been  selected  as  depotj 
recorder  of  the  town  of  Banbury. 

From  this  time  he  proceeded  with  distin- 
guished success,  and  eventually  became  the 
acknowledged  head  of  his  circuit  In  tbe 
metropolis  al^o  he  shareil  with  the  eminent 


TAM£TON£ 

counsel  who  then  graced  the  courts  the  con- 
duct of  the  more  important  conflicts  that 
engaged  them,  never  sacrificing  the  interests 
of  his  clients  to  a  We  of  display,  and  heing 
as  successful  in  their  management  and  Grain- 
ing as  man^  yerdicts  as  the  most  popuEeur  of 
his  competitors.    Two  events  occurring  in 
the  year  1886  tended  greatly  to  extend  his 
&me— his  entrance  into  parliament  as  the 
lepresentative  of  his  native  town,  and  the 
appearance  of  his  tragedy  of  '  Ion'  on  the 
stage.     In  the  former  he  soon  hecame  con- 
•picuous,  not  only  for  his  oratorical  powers, 
by  which  lawyers  do  not  generally  make 
themselves  acceptahle  to  the  house,  hut 
for  two  great  measures  which  he  advocated 
with  extraordinary  zeal  and  effect — one  se- 
enzing  to  the  mother  the  right  to  have  access 
to  her  children  as  long  as  her  character  is 
nnwtained ;  and  the  other  securing  to  the 
author  an  extended  period  during  which  he 
or  bis  family  may  enjoy  the  fruits  of  his 
labours.    To  the  next  parliament  of  1841 
Mr.  Serjeant  Talfourd  was  not  returned, 
Irat  in  that  of  1847  he  resumed  his  seat  for 
Reading  till  his  elevation  to  the  bench. 
His  dramatic  efforts  during  this  interval  did 
not  meet  with  the  brilliant  success  that  at- 
tended the  production  of '  Ion/    They  con- 
aiated  of  *  The  Athenian  Captive '  and  '  The 
Maasacre  of  Glencoe/  which  were  both 
acted,  and  *  The  Castilian/  which  was  pri- 
ratelj  circulated.     His  other  publications 
were  numerous,  amon^  the  most  important 
of  'which  were  'Vacation  Rambles/  a  'Life 
of  Charles  Lamb,'  and  an  *  Essay  on  the 
Greek  Drama,'  contributed  to  a  cyclopedia. 
In  July  1849  he  was  made  a  judge  of 
tbe  Common  Pleas,  when  he  received  the 
accustomed  honour  of  knighthood.  The  pe- 
riodical press  was  loud  m  the  expression 
of  the  universal  feeling  of  pleasure  which 
the  appointment  occasioned,  and  during  the 
five  years  that  he  administered  justice  on 
the  bench  he  did  not  disappoint  the  ge- 
jiexal  expectation.     Though  not  what  is 
called  a  black-letter  lawyer,  his  great  good 
aenae  and  extreme  desire  to  do  justice,  his 
vigorous  intellect  and  his  practical  experi- 
ence, his  personal  amiability  and  urbanity 
to^rards  all,  made  him  a  most  satisfactory 
judge.     His  career  was  closed  by  an  awful 
tamiination.     While  delivering  his  charge 
to  the  grand  jury  at  Stafford  on  March  13, 
lS54y  and  recommending  in  emphatic  terms 
4b  closer  connection  between  the  rich  and 
"ibB  poor,  he  was,  in  the  middle  of  an 
«flEectiye  passage,  suddenly  struck  with  apo- 
^plexj,  and  ere  a  few  moments  had  elapsed 
ILad  gone  to  his  great  account. 

He  married  in  1821  the  daughter  of  Mr. 
^ohn  Towell  Rutt,  a  merchant  of  London, 
ahebrought  to  him  a  numerous  family. 
TAUTOHB,  William  de,  was  a  man  of 
importance  in  Yorkshire.  In  4  Henry 
be  was  commissioned  with   Walter 


TANK 


649 


Mauclerk  and  others  to  enquire  by  twelve 
men  into  the  state  of  the  castle  of  Picker^ 
ing  in  that  counter,  after  the  peace  between 
the  king  and  Pnnce  Louis ;  and  there  are 
two  instances  in  which  he  was  one  of  those 
before  whom  an  assize  of  last  presentation, 
and  one  of  novel  disseisin,  were  directed  to 
be  heard.  In  the  general  appointment  of 
justices  itinerant  in  10  Henry  m.,  1226, 
he  was  selected  for  Northumberhmd.  (Itot, 
Clous,  i.  486,  ii.  188,  161.) 

TANFISLD,  Laubsnce,  was  the  son  of 
Francis  Tanfield,  of  Ga3rton  in  Northamp- 
tonshire. He  became  reader  at  the  Inner 
Temple  in  Lent  1595.  (DuffdMs  Orig, 
166.)  He  had  long  before  acquired  pro- 
fessional fame,  for  the  Keports  introauce 
his  name  as  an  advocate  as  early  as  1579. 
In  Easter  1608  he  received  the  degree  of 
the  coif.  He  was  member  of  the  first 
parliament  of  King  James's  rei^,  and  on  / 
January  18,  1606.  he  was  constituted  one/ 
of  the  judges  or  the  King's  Bench.  He 
did  not  long  remain  in  that  position,  being 
advanced  on  June  25,  1607,  to  the  office  of 
chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  over  which 
court  he  presided  with  much  credit  for 
integrity,  mdependence,  and  learning  dur- 
ing the  remainder  of  his  life.  In  the  public 
acts  of  his  time  in  which  he  was  engaged — 
viz..  in  the  case  of  the  post-nati,  the  pro- 
ceedings against  the  Countess  of  Shrews- 
bury for  contempt,  the  trial  of  the  Countess 
of  Somerset  for  the  murder  of  Sir  Thomas 
Overbury,  and  the  prosecution  of  Mr. 
Wraynham  for  slandering  Lord  Chancellor 
Bacon — no  record  is  preserved  of  the  part 
he  took,  except  with  regard  to  the  latter, 
in  which  the  judgment  he  pronounced  is 
distinct  and  impressive.  {State  Trials^  ii. 
96,  609,  770,  952,  1076.) 

That  he  was  a  favourite  with  his  con- 
temporaries may  be  inferred  from  the  name 
of  his  i-esidence  in  the  Temple^  theretofore 
called  Bradshaw's  Rents,  being  changed 
to  Tanfield  Court  in  compliment  to  him. 
{Dugdale's  Orig.  146.)  He  survived  King 
James  about  a  montn,  and  dying  on  AprU 
30,  1625,  was  buried  under  a  costly  monu-  * 
ment  in  Biirford  Church,  Oxfordshire,  where 
he  had  purchased  the  Priory  with  the  manor 
of  Great  Tew  and  other  lands.  By  his  wife, 
Elizabeth  Evans,  of  Loddington  in  North- 
amptonshire, he  left  an  only  daucfhter, 
Elizabeth,  who  married  Sir  Henry  Carey 
of  Aldenham,  first  Viscount  Falkland ;  and 
Burford  Priory  afterwards  became  the  pro- 
perty of  Sir  William  Lenthall,  who  mar- 
ried another  Elizabeth  Evans  of  Loddington. 
(Clarendon^ 8  Life^  i.  42  ;  Aihen.  Oxon.  iii. 
604;  Notes  and  Queries,  2nd S.  x.  209.) 

TAKX,  William,  was  constituted  chief 
baron  of  the  Excnequer  on  February  3, 
1874,  48  Edward  HI.    He  is  mentioned  as 
an  advocate  in  the  Yess  BoicAs^  tc^TE^ "^^ 
twentieth  yeai.    "Dxmii^  VJti^  hJsiqi^  ys^^=^ 


650 


TAUNTON 


that  he  presided  in  the  court  he  acted  as  a 
judge  of  asfdze,  and  there  are  two  instances 
of  giants  to  him  of  the  custody  of  lands 
pending  the  minority  of  the  heir,  both  of 
which  Deing  in  Sussex,  it  is  not  improbable 
that  he  was  settled  in  that  county.  He 
was  succeeded  as  chief  baron  on  November 
12,  1375.  (iV.  Fcedeia,  iu.  997;  Abb,  Bot. 
Orig.  ii.  331,  336.) 

TAUKTOir,  William  Elias,  whose  father, 
of  the  same  name  as  himself,  was  clerk  of 
the  peace  for  tbe  county  and  town-clerk  of 
the  city  of  Oxford,  and  had  received  the 
honour  of  knighthood,  and  whose  mother  | 
was  Frances,  daughter  of  Stephen  Gros- 
venor,  Esq.,  sub-treasurer  of  Christ  Church, 
was  the  eldest  of  a  large  family.  He  was 
bom  in  1773,  and  was  educated  first  at 
Westminster  and  then  at  Christ  Church, 
where  he  distinguished  himself  by  gaining 
the  chancellor's  prize  in  1703  for  the  best 
English  essay,  tne  subject  being  'Popu- 
larity.' In  the  next  year  he  entered  Lm- 
coln  s  Inn,  and  applied  himself  zealously 
to  the  study  of  the  law,  in  which,  when  he 
was  called  to  the  bar  in  Easter ^Term  1799, 
he  was  deeply  grounded.  He  joined  the 
Oxford  Circmt,  uniting  with  it,  according 
to  the  practice  of  the  time,  that  of  the  dis- 
trict of  South  Wales.  He  soon  acquired 
the  reputation  of  a  black-letter  lawyer,  and 
to  great  legal  knowledge  he  added  con- 
siderable abilities  as  a  speaker.  His  style 
of  eloquence  was  considered  rather  pon- 
derous, but  occasionally  he  burst  into 
vigorous  thought  and  beauty,  and  in  lan- 
guage pure  and  terse  exhibited  the  vast 
extent  of  his  acquirements. 

In  1805  he  was  elected  deputy  recorder 
of  Oxford  to  Mr.  Charles  Abbot,  afterwards 
Lord  Colchester,  upon  whose  resignation 
he  succeeded  as  recorder.  He  also  oecame 
one  of  the  Commissioners  of  Bankrupts, 
and  in  1822  received  a  silk  gown  as  king's 
counsel.  When,  eig^ht  years  after,  the 
addition  of  anotner  judge  was  required  in 
each  court,  he  was  selected  on  November 
18,  1830,  to  take  the  place  in  the  King's 
Bench,  and  proved  himself  a  most  accom- 
plished judge.  His  judgments  were  re- 
markable for  originality  of  thought  and 
felicity  of  expression,  proceeding  from  a 
thoroughly  independent  mind.  His  judicial 
career,  however,  was  a  very  limited  one; 
in  five  years  it  was  terminated  by  his  sud- 
den death,  on  January  11, 1835,  at  his  house 
in  Eussell  Square. 

In  1814  he  married  Maria,  daughter  of 
Henry  William  Atkinson,  Esq.,  provost  of 
the  Company  of  Moneyers,  Royal  Mint,  by 
whom  he  left  two  sons  and  three  daughters. 

TAYLOB,  John,  is  supposed  by  Anthony 
Wood  (Fasti  Oxon.  i.  62)  to  have  had  a 
tailor  for  his  father,  and  to  have  been  bom 
in  a  poor  cottage  at  Barton  in  the  parish  of 
Tatinhill  in  Staffordshire.    He  was  one  of 


TAYLOR 

three  produced  at  a  birth,  who.  being  pre- 
sented as  a  curiosity  to  the  idnff  while 
hunting  in  that  county,  ^were  by  the  rqril 
command  all  carefully  educated.  Whatever 
was  his  origin,  he  did  credit  to  his  in- 
structors by  Decoming  an  eminent  ctDonist 
of  his  day. 

^It  would  appeaTi  from  ^Wood's  descriptiflD 
of  him  as  '  a  doctor  of  decrees  and  of  the 
sacred  canons  beyond  the  eeaty  that  he  took 
his  degree  in  a  forei^  univeraitj ;  and  this 
seems  likely  from  his  being  incorporated  it 
Cambridge  in  1520,  and  at  Oxford  in  M^ 
1522.  He  was  ordained  sub-deacon  is 
1503,  being  then  rector  of  the  pariah  of 
Bishop's  Bitfield  in  the  diocese  ot  LincdSt 
and  afterwards  received  several  other  bene- 
fices. In  August  1504  he  was  united  widi 
Dr.  John  Yonge  and  others  in  neffotiatiog 
the  treaty  of  commerce  with  Phihn  Duh 
of  Burgundy,  and  in  the  first  year  ot  Heozr 
Yin.,  1509,  he  was  made  clerk  of  the  pff* 
liament,  and  inuuediately  afterwards  iw 
appointed  master  in  Chancery.     In  Jidk 

1513  he  accompanied  the  kinff  in  his  in- 
vasion of  France,  vntnessing  the  batde  d 
Spurs,  &c. ;  and  his  interesting  diarr  ^ 
the  events  of  the  expedition,  in  Lttin. 
is   now   in   the  State    Paper  OfBce.   Ib 

1514  he  was  chosen  prolocutor  df  the 
convocation,  having  just  previously  hee& 
collated  to  the  arcndeacomy  of  D^jt 
which  was  followed  in  the  next  year  bf 
that  of  Buckingham. 

At  this  time  he  was  an  attendant  on  the 
court,  and  was  sent  to  greet  the  Venetifl 
embassy  at  Deptford,  on  its  airival  in  Mij 
1515.  The  answer  which  he  made  bv  ^ 
king's  command  to  the  ambassador's  Litis 
oration  on  his  introduction  is  preserred 
among  the  Cotton  MSS.  in  the  Britisk 
Museum  (Nero,  b.  viL  fo.  12). 

In  1525  he  was  again  engaged  in  diplo- 
matic duties,  and  in  1526he  was  sent  t>) 
France  with  the  ostensible  object  of  con- 
gratulating Francis  on  his  release  froa 
captivity,  but  in  reality  to  induce  lii^ 
majesty  to  violate  the  treaty  he  had  ias^ 
concluded  with  the  emperor.  Dr.  T%jW 
success  in  this  negotiation  received  the 
reward  not  unusually  conferred  for  soch 
services.  On  June  26,  1627,  he  was  ap- 
pointed master  of  the  Rolls,  and  was  sooo 
after  sent  with  several  others  to  invest  tk 
French  king  with  the  order  ^of  the  Gtrto. 
He  was  also  named  as  one  of  Uie  coa- 
missioners  to  try  the  validity  of  King 
Henry*s  marriage  with  Queen'  Cathenne^ 
the  duty  of  examining  the  witnesses  de- 
volving upon  him.  After  being  seated  at 
the  Bolls  for  above  seven  years,  he  de* 
livered  up  his  patent  to  be  cancelled  oa 
October  u,  1534,  in  order  that  the  king 
might  invest  his  favourite,  Cromwell,  witi 
the  place.  His  death  foUowed  veiy  mcb 
after,  a  successor  in  the  archdeaconiy  beitf 


TENTERDEN 

collated  before  the  end  of  the  year.  (Le 
Neoe^  136, 168 ;  Rymery  xiii.  106,  xiv.  106 ; 
8UxU  Trials,  L  312;  Lmgard,  vi.  86;  CaL 
State  Pilfers  11616-18].) 

TEgTEBPEy,  Lord.    See  C.  Abbott. 

THB8I0EE,  Frederick  (Lord  Cheucs- 
jtobd),  whose  family  is  of  Uerman  origin,  is 
the  grandson  of  a  native  of  Dresden  in 
Saxony^  who,  on  coming  into  England,  was 
introduced  to  the  Marquis  of  Rockingnam, 
and  was  employed  as  nis  lordship's  confi- 
dential amanuensis  or  secretary.  One  among 
his  children  was  Sir  Frederick  Thesiger, 
'who  distinguished  himself  in  the  navy 
under  Lord  Nelson,  and  took  that  gallant 
admiral's  celehrated  flag  of  truce  on  shore 
at  Copenhagen  in  1801.  Another  was 
Charles  Thesiger,  who  went  with  Admiral 
Bentinck,  when  governor  of  St.  Vincent,  as 
secretary,  and  became  successively  comp- 
troller and  collector  of  customs  in  the 
ialand,  the  latter  oiiice  being  in  those  days 
highly  lucrative.  Besides  which  he  obtained 
a  grant  of  land  there  from  the  crown.  He 
had  seven  children,  of  whom  Frederick  the 
future  chancellor  was  the  youngest. 

Frederick  was  bom  in  London  on  April 
16, 1794,  and  received  the  early  part  of  his 
education  at  the  school  of  the  eminent 
Ghrecian  Dr.  Charles  Bumey,  of  Green- 
wich. But  his  inclinations  turning  towards 
the  sea,  he  left  the  Grecian,  and  entered 
Into  a  naval  academy  at  Gosport,  kept  by 
another  Dr.  Bumey,  equally  eminent  in 
producing  good  ofHcers  as  his  namesake  in 
producing  good  scholars.  After  a  year's 
reparation,  he,  like  his  great  predecessor 
JjOfrd  Chancellor  Erskine,  commenced  bis 
actiye  life  as  a  midshipman,  joining  in  1807 
the  Cambrian  frigate,  commanded  by  the 
Hon.  Charles  Paget,  and  beinff  present  in 
that  year  at  the  second  bombardment  of 
Copenhagen,  as  his  uncle  had  been  at  the 
first.  Soon  afterwards,  when  by  the  death 
of  his  last  surviving  brother  he  became 
the  heir  of  his  father's  West  India  estate, 
his  life  was  considered  too  valuable  to  be 
xisked  in  the  naval  service,  and  to  his  great 
regret  his  name  was  removed  from  the 
Nayy  List.  After  two  years  spent  at  an 
indifierent  private  school,  he  went  at  seven- 
teen to  St.  Vincent,  as  he  had  been  heard 
to  say,  *  to  make  his  father^s  ac(]^uaintance.' 
There,  after  due  considei-ation,  it  was  de- 
termined that  the  young  man  should  qualify 
huneelf  for  the  biur  of  St.  Vincent,  and  for 
that  purpose  should  enter  one  of  the  inns 
of  court  in  England,  and  on  his  retum 
ihould  with  his  practice  aa  a  barrister 
unite  the  superintendence  of  the  property. 

The  latter  part  of  this  plan  was  soon 
after  defeated,  by  the  eruption  of  a  volcano 
of  the  Soufirieie  mountain,  at  the  foot  of 
which  the  estate  was  situate.  This  event, 
which  happened  on  April  SO,  1812,  totally 
^muhilated  the  whole  property^  burying  it 


THESIGER 


651 


under  a  mass  of  stones  and  ashes ;  but, 
though  it  diminished  the  youn^  man's 
prospects,  it  did  not  change  his  legal 
destination. 

Returning  to  England,  he  entered  into 
the  society  of  Gray*s  Inn  on  November  6, 
1813.  With  the  purposed  object  of  event- 
ually joining  the  West  Indian  bar,  his  pre- 
paration was  devoted  to  every  branch  of 
the  law,  and  the  knowledge  that  he  thus 
acquired  was  of  eminent  use  in  his  future 
career.  He  went  first  to  a  convevancer, 
then  to  an  eouity  draughtsman,  and  finished 
his  course  by  becoming  a  pupil  of  Mr. 
Godfrey  Sykes,  the  eminent  special  pleader. 
To  that  gentleman's  remonstrances  young 
Thesiger  owes  his  establishment  at  the 
English  bar.  His  master  thought  so  well 
of  his  pupil  that  he  said  it  was  a  *  shame  ^ 
to  go  back  to  the  West  Indies  without 
trying  his  fortune  in  this  country.  Not 
having  the  slightest  connection  with  any 
one  likely  to  contribute  to  his  advancement, 
he  hesitated,  but,  though  hopeless  of  suc- 
cess, decided  as  his  kind  instructor  wished 
him. 

He  was  called  to  the  bar  on  November 
18, 1818,  and  travelled  the  Home  Circuit, 

i'oining  the  Surrey  sessions.  In  the  latter 
le  was  fortunate  in  getting  into  early  busi- 
ness, and  in  two  or  three  years  became 
leader.  By  the  purchase  of  the  place  of 
one  of  the  four  counsel  of  the  Palace  Court, 
instituted  in  the  reign  of  Charles  H.  for 
the  trial  of  causes  of  small  amount  within 
twelve  miles  of  the  Palace  of  Westminster, 
which  sat  on  every  Friday  throughout  the 
yeai*,  he  acquired  those  habits  of  business, 
and  that  experience  in  conducting  causes, 
that  few  counsel  have  an  opportunity  of 
gaining  so  early  in  the  superior  courts. 

One  of  the  cases  on  the  circuit  in  which 
he  highly  distinguished  himself  was  as 
counsel  for  Hunt,  an  accessory  with  Thur- 
tell  in  the  murder  of  Mr.  Weare,  tried  in 
January  1824 ;  but  the  case  in  which  he 
obtained  the  greatest  ^dat  while  in  a  stuff 
fi^own.  and  to  whiph  he  mainly  attributed 
nis  luture  advance,  was  an  ejectment 
against  his  client  tne  lord  of  a  manor, 
tned  at  Chelmsford  in  1832,  as  to  the  right 
to  some  unenclosed  strips  of  land  by  the 
side  of  the  highway,  in  which,  after  three 
trials,  he  succeedea  in  establishing  his 
client's  title.  Mr.  Thesiger  afterwards 
chose  his  own  title  of  Lord  Chelmsford 
in  memory  of  this  triumph.  During  this 
time  he  was  obtaining  very  considerable 
employment  in  Westminster  Hall,  and  evi- 
dently commanding  the  ear  of  the  iudges. 
The  author  of  these  pages  was  hiniself 
present  on  two  occasions  when  Chief  Jus- 
tice Abbott  highly  complimented  him  to 
the  iujT  on  his  management  of  cases  which 
he  had  been  allied  upon  to  le«d  \a^  '^^ 
abaenoe  o£  Yn&  Mscioi. 


•652 


THESIGER 


In  1884  he  was  made  king's  counsel, 
and  for  the  next  ten  years  he  remained 
the  leader  of  his  circuit. 

In  1840  he  entered  into  the  political 
«rena  as  member  for  Woodstock ;  and  on 
April  15,  1844,  he  was,  after  twenty-six 
years  of  continued  labour,  selected  by  Sir 
Itobert  Peel's  government  to  be  the  soli- 
Kjitor-general,  in  the  place  of  Sir  William 
Follett,  who  became  attorney-general. 
With  this  eminent  man  and  extraordinary 
advocate,  who  was  as  remarkable  for  his 
legal  acquirements  and  his  effective  elo- 
-quence  as  for  the  charm  of  his  manner  and 
tne  music  of  his  voice,  Mr.  Thesiger  (who 
was  knighted  soon  alter  his  promotion) 
would  have  been  delighted  to  act  as  a 
subordinate.  But  the  health  of  his  leader, 
broken  down  by  too  intense  exertions  in 
his  profession,  soon  after  obliged  him  to 
quit  England,  and  to  leave  the  solicitor- 
general,  quite  a  novice  in  the  duties  of  his 
own  office,  to  encounter  the  work  of  both. 
This  he  successfully  performed  for  above 
ten  months,  and  it  is  pleasing  to  record  the 

generous  and  ready  assistance  be  received 
om  his  old  political  opponent  Sir  Thomas 
Wilde,  who  voluntarily  offered  and  kindly 
g^ve  the  aid  of  his  experience,  when  he 
saw  the  difficult  position  in  which  Sir 
Frederick  was  placed.  On  Sir  William 
Follett's  death,  Sir  Frederick  was  appointed 
attorney-general,  on  June  20,  1845,  and  re- 
tained the  office  till  July  3,  184(3,  when  he 
retired  with  the  ministry  of  Sir  Robert 
Peel,  on  the  occasion  of  the  repeal  of  the 
corn  laws. 

Two  days  after  his  resignation  Lord 
Chief  Justice  Tindal  died,  and  thus  Sir 
Frederick  lost  the  succession  to  the  vacant 
seat,  which  would  have  fallen  to  him  as  of 
course  had  the  death  occurred  a  few  days 
before.  It  was  naturally  given  by  the  new 
ministry  to  their  attomev-general.  Sir 
Thomas  Wilde.  That  ministry  remained 
in  power  for  nearly  six  years,  during  which 
Sir  Frederick  resumed  his  former  leading 
position  at  the  bar  'W'ithout  office.  When 
they  were  in  turn  defeated,  Sir  Frederick 
was  restored  to  his  previous  office  on  Fe- 
bruary 27,  1852,  but  onlv  held  it  till 
December  28  in  that  year,  nis  party  being 
again  obliged  to  retire,  and  then  again  he 
returned  into  the  ranks  as  a  private  bar- 
rister, for  the  next  six  years  employed  in 
All  tne  great  cases  wliich  occupied  the 
attention  of  the  public. 

Among  the  '  causes  cdJbhres '  in  which  he 
was  engaged  during  the  last  decade  of  his 
forensic  career  was  the  famous  attempt  of 
a  Miss  Smith  to  charge  the  Earl  of  Ferrers 
with  breach  of  promise  of  marriage,  in 
which  Sir  Frederick's  speech  in  defence  of 
the  earl,  exposing  the  fraud  and  forgery  by 
which  the  charge  was  supported,  was  con- 
sidered so  eloquent  and  effective  that  one 


[THESiailR 

of  his  most  distinguished  colleaffaes,  eanoe 
a  chief  justice,  is  said  to  have  declared  to 
him  that  he  would  rather  have  made  that 
speech  than  any  he  had  ever  heard  at  the 
bar.  Another  remarkable  case  in  which 
Sir  Frederick  was  equally  suoceesfUl  was 
in  exposing  a  man  who  pretended  to  be 
the  son  of  Sir  Hugh  Smyth,  and  to  be 
entitled  to  vast  estates  in  Glouoestershire 
and  other  counties.  There  the  benefit  d 
the  electric  telegraph  was  full j  exempli- 
fied, as  well  as  the  advantage  o/the  puoli- 
cation  of  legal  proceedings,  for  in  tbe 
interval  between  the  two  days  of  trial  a 
full  confirmation  of  the  plaintifiTs  viliainj 
was  communicated  to  the  defendant's 
counsel,  and  the  ])erjured  claimant,  instead 
of  gaining  possession  of  the  covetea  estates, 
ended  his  hfe  in  prison. 

Sir  Frederick  was  not  only  ingeniom 
and  eloquent  in  the  conduct  of  his  cases: 
he  enlivened  them   also    with    his  wittr 

_  m 

repartees.  Of  these  it  is  difficult  to  giw 
specimens,  because  they  applied  mostly  to 
local  circumstances,  or  were  conveyed  in 
professional  diction.  One,  however,  mi? 
be  recorded  as  an  apt  example  He  wis 
opposed  by  a  learned  seijeant,  who  in  hi* 
examination  of  his  witnesses  was  ver 
irregular  in  putting  leading  questions.  ^ 
Frederick,  remonstrating,  appealed  to  the 
judge,  on  which  the  learned  seijeant  said, 
'  I  have  a  right  to  deal  with  my  witneases 
as  I  please.'  'Yes,'  said  Sir  Frederiek. 
*  he  may  dealy  my  lord,  but  he  must  not  kod^ 

In  his  parliamentary  career  he  was  t 
firm  supporter  of  the  conservative  ptrtr. 
In  1844  he  exchanged  \Vood8tocK  fcr 
Abingdon,  and  in  1852  he  was  returned 
for  Stamford,  for  which  he  sat  till  he  wis 
raised  to  the  peerasre.  His  friendship  with 
Sir  Robert  Peel  continued  till  the  death  o^ 
that  distinguished  statesman,  by  whoee 
side  he  was  seated  when  he  made  his  Ust 
speech.  Sir  Frederick,  on  some  occaaofc? 
after  the  repeal  of  the  com  laws,  found 
himself  obliged  to  oppose  Sir  Kobert  when 
giving  support  to  some  of  the  measures  d 
the  whig  ministry,  and  joined  what  is 
called  the  Protectionist  party,  from  which 
the  Peelites  became  after  the  death  of  th«r 
leader  more  and  more  widely  separated. 

On  Lord  Derby  cominfi-  into  office  tor 
the  second  time,  Sir  Frederick  was  raised 
from  the  rank  of  a  barrister  to  the  head  of 
the  law.  The  Great  Seal  was  delivered 
to  him  as  lord  chancellor  on  February  3ti 
1858,  and  on  the  next  day  he  was  called  to 
the  House  of  Lords  as  fiaron  Chelnifif<»d. 
His  qualifications  for  and  his  merits  in  the 

Performance  of  the  duties  of  that  high  ofBcf 
have  bound  myself  not  to  notice.  He 
held  it  for  only  sixteen  months,  and  resigned 
it  on  June  18,  1859,  on  the  break-up  d 
Lord  Derby's  ministry.  For  the  next  seven 
years  he  kept  his  habits  of  bosineas  in  fall 


THIBNIKa 

^practice  by  devotio^  himself  most  assidtt- 
ouflly  to  the  heann^  of  appeals  in  the 
House  of  Lords  and  the  privy  coondL 

At  the  end  of  that  time  Lord  Derby 
again  came  into  power,  and  re|)laced  Lor^ 
Chelmsford  in  his  former  position  as  lord 
ehancelloT  on  July  6,  1866;  but  on  the 
resignation  of  the  prime  minister,  Mr. 
Disraeli,  his  successor,  for  political  reasons, 
remoTsd  Lord  Chelmsford,  who  gave  up 
the  Great  Seal  on  February  20,  1868,  to 
Lord  Oaims,  who  was  himself  obliged  to 
retire  with  the  conser\'ative  party  oefore 
the  end  of  the  year.  True  to  his  party, 
Lord  Chelmsford  still  pursues  the  same 
course  and  performs  the  same  duties  as  de- 
TOtedly  as  m  his  former  recess  from  office. 

Among  the  congratulations  which  he 
xeceiyed  on  his  first  promotion,  the  address 
of  the  Licorporated  Law  Society,  whose 
standing  counsel  he  had  been  for  the  last 
thirteen  years,  must  have  given  him  pecu- 
liar pleasure,  as  proving  that  the  esteem  in 
^which  he  was  held  was  not  confined  to 
his  brethren  of  the  bar,  but  was  extended 
over  both  branches  of  the  profession.  It 
oontained  the  following  passage :  '  The 
council,  and  they  believe  the  profession  at 
large,  rejoice  to*  perceive  in  tne  elevation 
of  your  lordship  to  the  highest  official 
dignity  in  the  power  of  the  crown  to 
bestow,  the  appropriate  termination  of  a 
long  and  distinguished  career,  in  which — 
unaided  by  the  accidents  of  fortime — bril- 
liant abilities,  united  to  unwearied  industry, 
unsullied  honour  and  spotless  integri^, 
the  firm,  fearless,  and  aignified  mainte- 
nance of  the  rights,  the  honour,  and  the 
independence  of  the  profession,  joined  to  a 
courtesy  which  never  failed,  and  which 
knew  no  distinction  of  rank  or  station, 
have  at  length  achieved  their  just  and 
fitting  rewara.'  To  this  afiectionate  testi- 
monial Lord  Chelmsford  returned  a  most 
graceful  and  feeling  reply. 

Li  1822  he  married  the  daughter  of 
^William  Tinling,  Esq.,  and  niece  of  Major 
Peirson,  who  lost  his  life  in  defending  the 
ialand  of  Jersey.  Of  his  issue  by  her  he 
has  seven  surviving  children,  four  sons  and 
three  daughters.  The  eldest  son  is  a  colonel 
in  the  army,  and  distinguished  himself  at 
Sebastoporand  in  India,  where  he  is  now 
adjutant- general ;  and  one  of  his  daughters 
ia  the  widow  of  Major-General  Sir  John 
£ardley  Wilmot  Inghs,  K.C.B.,  celebrated 
for  his  gallant  defence  of  the  Residence  at 
JLucknow,  who  died  from  the  consequences 
of  his  exertions  there. 

THIBinaiO,  William,  was  of  a  family 
probably  settled  at  Thiming  in  Hunting- 
oooshire,  as  he  is  mentioned  in  a  grant 
of  certain  land^  houses,  and  rents  of  the 
manor  of  Heminfi^ford  Grey  in  that  county 
to  the  prior  and  convent  of  Harwolde. 
iCoL  Inq.  ^.  m,  m.  21S.) 


THIRNI5G 


65$ 


His  name  first  appears  in  the  Tear  Books 
in  44  Edward  III.,  1370 ;  but  it  was  not  till 
April  11,  1888,  11  Richard  IL,  that  he 
was  appointed  a  judge  of  the  Commoa 
Pleas,  ^ithin  eight  years  he  was  raised 
to  the  chief  seat  in  that  court,  on  January 
16,  1396,  19  Richard  U.  (CaL  RU,  Pai. 
216,229.) 

Hitherto  he  seems  to  have  confined  him- 
self to  the  performance  of  his  judicial 
functions,  with  no  other  variation  than 
arose  from  acting  as  a  trier  of  petitions  in 
parliament.  But  he  was  soon  called  upon 
to  take  part  in  the  political  scenes  which 
then  affitated  the  country.  When  King 
Richard  had  resumed  his  royal  power,  an! 
had  contrived  in  his  twenty-first  year  to 
summon  a  narliament  ready  to  do  his 
bidding,  the  legality  of  the  attainder  of  the 
judges  ten  years  l>efore  was  discussed  by 
both  houses,  and  the  legal  and  judicial 
ofiicers  were  called  upon  to  state  what 
they  thought  of  the  answers  of  their  pre- 
decessors for  which  they  had  been  con- 
demned. Chief  Justice  Thiming  replied, 
somewhat  evasively,  that  *  the  declaration 
of  treason  not  yet  declared  belonged  to  the 
parliament,  but  that  had  he  been  a  lord  of 
parliament,  if  he  had  been  asked,  he  should 
have  answered  in  the  same  manner.'  {Rot, 
Pari  iii.  358.)  All  the  proceedings  of  the 
eleventh  year  were  thereupon  of  course 
repealed,  and  the  surviving  sufferers  re- 
called from  banishment 

Recollecting  that  these  enactments  of  21 
Richard  IL  were  aU  annulled  within  two 
years  in  the  first  parliament  of  Henry  IV., 
it  seems  somewhat  extraordinary  that  Sir 
William  Thiming  (for  he  was  then  a 
knight),  after  giving  such  an  opinion,  should 
have  been  selected  as  one  of  the  ceiumis- 
sioners  to  receive  Richard's  resignation  of 
the  crown,  and  should  have  been  put 
forward  so  prominentiy  as  the  spokesman 
of  the  parliament  in  pronouncing  his  depo- 
sition. But  Henry  was  a  politic  prince, 
and  probably  deemed  it  wiser  to  overlook 
what  might  be  considered  as  an  act  of 
political  necessity  than  to  make  enemies  of 
the  lawyers.  lie  no  doubt  also  thought 
that  it  would  give  a  judicial  weight  to  the 
solemn  proceeding  if  it  was  conducted 
under  the  auspices  of  the  oldest  and  most 
respected  judge  upon  the  bench.  Thiming 
also  may  be  supposed  to  have  undertaken 
the  office,  not  from  any  strong  dissatisfac- 
tion with  Richard's  govemment,  nor  any 
positive  approval  of  Henry's  titie,  but 
because  a  change  having  already  been  made 
inevitable  by  Henry's  proceedings  he  con- 
sidered it  his  duty  so  to  act  tnat  such 
change  should  be  efiected  as  peaceably  as 
possible. 

Thimiuff  accordingly,  with  his  coadju- 
tors, attended  on  Richard  in  the  To^^x  ^\^. 


€54 


THOMAS 


renunciation  of  the  throne.  On  the  next  day 
it  was  presented  to  the  parliament,  which 
thought  fit,  in  addition,  to  allege  thirty- 
three  articles  of  misgovemment  against 
iim,  and  to  depute  seven  commissioners,  of 
whom  Thiming  was  one,  to  pronounce  a 
sentence  of  deposition.  This  oeing  done, 
the  same  commissioners  were  directed,  as 
procurators  of  the  people,  to  communicate 
the  proceedings  to  the  fallen  king,  and  to 
resign  and  give  back  to  him  the  homage 
and  fealty  of  his  former  subjects.  The  deli- 
cate duty  fell  upon  Sir  William  Thiming, 
who  spoke  in  the  name  of  them  all ;  and  it 
is  but  just  to  say  that  he  confined  himself 
to  the  words  of  the  sentence,  not  aggravat- 
ing it  by  any  harsher  language  than  that 
in  which  it  was  expressed.  (Hot,  Pari.  iii. 
416-24.) 

His  last  duty  in  that  parliament  was  to 
pronounce  its  sentence  on  the  lords  who 
had  appealed  tiie  Buke  of  Gloucester  and 
his  fhends  in  21  Richard  II. ;  and  in  the 
following  parliament  the  objects  for  which 
it  was  called  were  declared  in  a  speech 
delivered  by  him.  (J^icf.  461,  454.)  After 
this  his  name  does  not  appear  in  any  poli- 
tical transactions,  but  his  judgments  are 
regularly  recorded  throughout  tne  reign  in 
numerous  reports  in  the  Year  Books. 

On  the  accession  of  Henry  V.  he  received 
his  new  patent  on  Mav  2,  1413 ;  but  he 
must  have  died  very  shortly  afterwards, 
for  his  widow  Joan  brought  an  action  of 
debt  in  the  next  Trini^ Term  (Y,  B,  p.  6), 
and  his  successor,  Sir  Kichard  Norton,  was 
appointed  chief  justice  in  his  place  on  June 
2o,  1418. 

THOXAB  was  elected  abbot  of  Winche- 
<nimb  in  Gloucestershire  in  1220,  and  was 
at  the  head  of  the  commission  issued  in 
May  1226,  10  Henry  III.,  to  the  justices 
itinerant  for  Worcestershire,  according  to  a 
then  common  practice  of  placing  an  eccle- 
siastic in  that  position.  He  died  on  October 
3,  1232.      (Broione  Willis,) 

THOMSOH^  AxEXAiTDEB,  was  bom  in 
1744.  Practising  in  the  courts  of  equity, 
be  was  promoted  on  May  11,  1782,  to  a 
mastership  in  Chancery,  and  continued  to 
act  in  that  character  for  nearly  four  years, 
when  on  January  4,  1786,  he  became  ac- 
countant-general of  that  court.  In  another 
year  he  was  raised  to  the  bench,  being 
sworn  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  Fe- 
bruary d,  1787,  and  knighted.  After  re- 
maining in  that  seat  for  twenty-seven  years, 
he  was  appointed  the  head  of  his  court  in 
Hilary  Vacation  1814,  a  position  which  he 
fully  merited  by  his  legal  knowledge  and 
the  excellence  of  his  ju£cial  decisions.  He 
presided  for  little  more  than  three  years, 
and  died  at  Bath  at  the  age  of  seventy- 
three  on  April  16,  1817,  being  then  oy 
many  years  the  father  of  tiie  bench. 

His  reputation  as  a  lawyer  and  as  a  judge 


THOMSON 

was  of  the  highest  order,  his  acqniremeniB 
in  scholastic  hterature  were  very  great,  sod 
his  disposition  as  a  man  was  eminenth 
social  and  kind.  To  his  deep  leaming  isd 
comprehensive  understanding  was  united 
a  great  love  of  jocularity.  The  joken 
of  Westminster  Hall  nicknamed  him '  T^ 
Staymaker,'  from  a  habit  he  had  of  check- 
ing witnesses  who  were  going  too  tuL  (1 
Tennltep.  661;  6  Taunto9iy  4lS;  1 3foorv,9a) 

THOMSOir,  William,  whose  life  presenti 
both  an  uncommon  succession  of  offices  and 
an  extraordinary  combination  of  tliem,  vu 
first  recorder  of  London,  and  then  solicitCB^ 
general — a  legitimate  advance;  next,  oa 
beinj2f  dismissed  from  the  latter,  he  acoqited 
the  insiffnificant  office  of  cursitor  baion  d 
the  Exchequer,  and,  lastly,  he  was  raiasd 
to  the  bench  of  that  court  as  an  actaal 
judicial  baron.  But  what  was  most  zs» 
markable  was  that  he  retained  the  place 
of  city  recorder  after  his  appointment  to 
his  three  other  posts,  and  held  it  till  hu 
death — a  plurality  which  was  either  fbned 
upon  him  Dv  the  general  impression  of  las 
superior  abilities,  of  which  tnere  is  no  eii- 
dence,  or  was  the  effect  of  a  greedinea  of 
gain,  which  blinded  him  to  the  improprietr 
of  filling  positions  in  some  measure  is- 
compatible  with  each  other,  and  oerteinlf 
with  respect  to  his  last  promotion  difieiiBg 
greatly  in  their  dignity  and  decrree. 

He  was  the  second  son  of  a  barrister  sad 
bencher  of  the  Middle  Temple  of  the  aaae 
names,  and,  with  his  elder  brother  Stephen, 
was  admitted  into  that  society  in  1688,  but 
not  called  to  the  bar  till  1698.  In  170? 
he  was  returned  to  parliament  as  member 
for  Orford  in  Suffolk,  and  to  him  the  wlik 
party  entrusted  the  enforcement  of  the 
third  charge  in  their  suicidal  impeachmsiit 
of  Dr.  Sacheverell.  He  performed  thisdntr 
with  sufficient  point,  and  so  satisfactonk 
to  the  promoters  of  the  prosecution  that  ht 
was  employed  as  junior  counsel  in  the  pro- 
ceedings against  the  rioters,  whom  tk« 
popular  disgust  had  inflamed  to  the  cob- 
mission  of  unjustifiable  outrages.  The  ooe- 
sequence  was  that  he  lost  his  seat  in  tk 
new  parliament  of  1710 ;  hut  in  the  follow- 
ing parliament  of  February  1714,  called 
withm  a  few  months  before  the  death  of 
Queen  Anne,  he  was  elected  for  Ipswidi, 
which  he  continued  to  represent  till  he  wv 
raised  to  the  bench :  and  on  March  3  of 
that  year  he  was  chosen  recorder  of  the 
city  of  London,  but  so  nearly  were  p•^ 
ties  divided  that  it  was  only  ly  the  casting 
vote  of  the  lord  mayor  that  he  succeeded. 
In  this  character  it  was  his  fbrtnne  to 
read  the  addresses  of  congratulation  to  botk 
Geor^  I.  and  Oeorge  U.  On  the  fbnnff 
occasion  probably  he  was  kniflhted,  as  he 
is  designated  with  the  title  s&ortly  aftsr, 
when  acting  as  one  of  the  managen  oa  tbe 
trial  of  the  Earl  of  TVintoun  for  the  piit 


THORESBY 

takesa.  by  him  in  the  rebellion  of  1715. 
iaude  Trials,  xv.  167-869.) 

In  February  1717  he  succeeded  aa  solici- 
tor-general ;  but  by  his  jealous  and  grasp- 
ing disposition  he  lost  it  in  three  years, 
and  was  expelled  from  the  office  with  dis- 
grace. In  the  numerous  charters  of  incor- 
poration granted  to  the  joint-stock  com- 
panies by  which  the  public  were  then 
tempted  and  tricked,  the  Attorney-General 
Lecnmere  had  benefited  by  the  fees  more 
laively  than  himself.  Sir  William,  envious 
of  his  colleague's  advantages,  had  the  folly 
to  denounce  him  as  guilty  of  corruption 
before  the  committee  appointed  to  enquire 
into  all  those  companies,  alle^ng  that  he 
had  not  only  pocketed  large  bnbeus,  but  had 
permitted  public  biddings  for  charters  at 
his  chambers  as  at  an  auction.  Lechmere 
of  course  could  not  allow  such  an  imputa- 
tion to  remain  upon  him ;  a  searching  in- 
Teatigation  was  made  into  its  truth,  and 
the  result  was  a  imanimous  vote  that  the 
charges  were  malicious,  false,  scandalous, 
and  utterly  groundless.  For  this  disgrace- 
fiil  slander  Sb  William  was  dismissed  on 
March  17, 1720.  Sir  William,  in  no  ways 
abashed,  still  kept  his  seat  in  parliament 
and  his  place  as  recorder,  and  m  1724  so 
fiir  recovered  his  position  as  to  obtam  the 
grant  of  an  annuity  of  1200/.,  and  a  patent 
of  precedence  in  all  courts  after  the  attor- 
ney and  solicitor  general.  {Townsemfs 
Mo.  of  Com.  i.  451.") 

Not  yet  content,  ne  accepted  on  June  27, 
1726,  the  inferior  place  of  cursitor  baron 
of  the  Exchequer,  and  occupied  it  for  the 
remainder  of  the  reign  of  George  I.,  and 
for  two  years  in  that  of  George  II.,  still 
acting  as  recorder  by  himself  or  his  depu- 
ties, Seneants  Raby  and  Urling.  On  No- 
Tember  27, 1729,  he  was,  by  a  very  unusual 
step,  advanced  from  the  executive  office  of 
condtor  baron  to  that  of  a  judicial  baron, 
liaving  been  on  the  previous  day  made  a 
aeijeant  for  the  purpose,  and  his  present 
patent  differing  m)m  the  former  by  desig- 
nating his  new  appointment  as  that  of  baron 
'  of  the  coife.'  Even  with  this  honourable 
c^Sce  of  one  of  the  twelve  judges  of  Eng- 
land, he  would  not  deprive  himself  of  the 
profits  of  the  inconsistent  place  of  recorder ; 
Dut,  after  sitting  in  the  Exchequer  for  nearly 
ten  years,  he  died  in  the  possession  of  both, 
on  October  27,  1739,  at  Bath.  {Gent.  Mag. 
be  554.)  By  his  will  he  left  a  ring  to  sJl 
ihe  aldermen  of.  London,  and  his  portrait 
to  the  corporation.  He  married  Julia, 
daughter  of  Sir  Christopher  Conyers,  of 
S^rden  in  Durham,  and  widow  of  Sir 
"^PVllliam  Blackett,  of  Wallington  in  North- 
umberland, Bart  

TH0BB8BT,  John  de,  or  TUUB8BY 
(Abohbishop  OFToBx)/wa8bom  at  a  manor 
<i  that  name  in  Wensleydale  in  Yorkshire, 
idiich  had  been  long  in  the  family,  and 


THORESBY 


655 


was  the  second  son  of  Hugh  de  Thoresby, 
who  was  lord  of  it  in  9  Edward  XL  {Pari. 
Writs,  ii.  p.  ii.  410.)  He  greatly  distin- 
guished himself  while  at  Oxford  by  his 
attainments  in  the  study  of  divinity,  taking 
a  hiffh  degree  in  both  laws.  So  early  as 
1  Edward  HI.  he  was  the  last  named  in  a 
mission  to  the  pope  to  procure  the  canon- 
isation of  Thomas  Duke  of  Lancaster.  At 
that  time,  he  probably  was  a  clerk  in  the 
Chancery,  where  he  continued  to  act  for 
several  years ;  and  having  in  10  Edward 
III.  been  served  in  open  court  with  a  moni- 
tion to  appear  before  the  pope  on  some  ap- 
peal, the  papal  messengers  were  straightway 
committed  to  prison  as  guilty  of  a  contempt, 
and  were  only  released  by  the  intercession 
of  Queen  Philippa.  {Pfyrme  on  4th  Inst. 
16.)  This,  however,  did  not  prevent  his 
being  again  sent  to  the  pope,  four  years 
afterwards,  to  obtain  a  dispensation  for  the 
proposed  marriage  between  Hu^h  le  De- 
roencer  and  the  daughter  of  toe  Earl  of 
Salisbury. 

In  the  following  year,  on  February  21, 
1341,  he  received  the  appointment  of 
master  of  the  Rolls ;  and  dunng  the  illness 
and  at  the  death  of  Chancellor  Paming,  in 
1343,  he  did  the  duties  of  the  Seal,  and, 
with  two  of  the  clerks  of  the  Chancery, 
held  it  till  Robert  de  Sadington  was  in- 
vested with  the  ofiice. 

He  continued  master  of  the  Rolls  cer- 
tainly as  late  as  May  20, 1346,  being  about 
that  time  made  keeper  of  the  privy  seal. 
(iV.  FoBdera,  ii.  897, 1119,  iiL  39,  53.) 

In  the  previous  year  he  obtained  a 
canonry  in  Lincoln  Cathedral,  and  again 
visited  the  papal  court  as  one  of  the  king's 
ambassadors,  performing  the  same  duty  in 
France  in  1346.     {Ibid.ul  26,  64,  92.) 

On  September  3,  1347,  he  was  con- 
secrated Bishop  of  St.  David's;  and  on 
June  16,  ]  349,  ne  was  appointed  chancellor. 
On  the  4th  of  the  following  November  he 
was  translated  to  ithe  bishopric  of  Wor- 
cester, and  was  raised  to  the  archbishopric 
of  York  on  October  22,  1362.  He  was 
left  one  of  the  custodes  of  the  kingdom 
when  King  Edward  renewed  his  invasion  of 
France  in  1366  {Ibid,  306);  but  on  his 
sovereign's  return  after  the  battie  of  Poic- 
tiers  in  the  ensuing  year,  his  advancing  age 

Erompted  him  to  apply  for  liberty  to  retire 
:om  the  chancellorsnip,  which  he  had  held 
with  credit  and  honour  longer  than  any 
other  chancellor  of  this  reign,  though  for 
little  more  than  seven  years  in  all,  during 
four  of  which  he  had  been  archbishop.  He 
was  accordingly,  'benevolo  et  gratanter,* 
exonerated  nom  his  duties  on  November 
27, 1366. 

His  political  duties  during  the  seventeen 
remaining  years  of  his  life  were  confined 
to  conducting  various   treaties  -^in^  N2i^^ 
Scottish  Idng  *,  \>\i\.  lot  ^^^  TSi<^\.  ^^vsX.  V<i^ 


656 


THORNTON 


devoted  himself  to  his  episcopal  functions, 
and  to  the  renovation  of  nis  cathedral  He 
laid  the  first  stone  of  the  new  choir  on 
July  29,  1362;  and,  besides  exciting  the 
nobles  and  clergy  of  his  province  to  aid  his 
endeavours,  he  expended  large  sums  in 
carrying  on  that  splendid  work,  and  also  in 
restoring  and  ornamenting  the  chapel  of 
St.  Manr,  where  his  remains  were  after- 
wards deposited.  The  question  of  prece- 
dence between  the  two  archbishops,  which 
had  for  many  years  occasioned  unseemly 
contests,  was  settled  by  agreement  between 
him  and  Archbishop  Islip ;  and  Pope 
Innocent  IV.,  in  his  confirmation  of  the 
arrangement,  introduced  the  nice  distinction 
of  pnmate  of  England,  and  primate  of  all 
England.  He  is  said  by  some  to  have 
been  created  a  cardinal  by  Pope  Urban  V., 
but  his  name  does  not  appear  in  the  most 
authentic  lists,  nor  is  he  ever  so  called  in 
the  English  records. 

He  died  at  his  manor  of  Thorpe  on  No- 
vember 6,  1373,  having  been  engaged  in 
the  public  service  for  uearlv  forty-eight 
vears  of  Edward's  reign,  with  a  character 
honourably  described  as  '  contentionum  et 
litium  hostis,  et  pacis  et  concordite  amicus.' 
Besides  several  other  religious  works,  he 
wrote  a  commentary  in  the  English  tongue 
on  the  Lord's  l^yer,  the  Decalogue,  and 
the  Articles  of  Faith,  for  the  use  of  the 
people  of  his  province.  That  on  the  Ten 
Commandments  is  printed  by  Thoresby  in 
the  appendix  to  his  *  Vicaria  Leodensis.' 
(Godwvi,  464,  581, 687 ;  Drake's  Eboracunij 
434.) 

THOKNTOF,  GiLBEBT  DS,  or  DE  TOBEF- 
TOF,  is  mentioned  as  the  king's  attomev 
from  8  to  14  Edward  I.,  1280-6 ;  but  it  is 
uncertain  whether  this  office  was  similar  to 
that  of  the  attorney-general  of  the  present 
dav,  or  anything  more  than  a  special  ap- 
pointment to  act  on  the  part  of  tne  king  m 
a  particular  proceeding.  There  were  evi- 
dently at  these  times  two  or  three  so  acting 
in  difl'erent  counties  under  the  designation 
of  ^  narratores  pro  rege.'  (Abb,  Placit.  274.) 
On  the  disgrace  of  Ralph  de  Hengham 
he  was  constituted  chief  justice  of  the 
King's  Bench,  1289,  with  a  salary  of  40/. 
per  annum ;  and  there  is  evidence  of  his 
acting  as  late  as  August  1295  (JRot.  Pari, 
i.  134),  soon  ^ter  wnich  Roger  le  Braba- 
zon  was  raised  to  the  same  post.  But 
whether  the  vacancy  occurred  oy  Gilbert 
de  Thornton's  death  or  resignation  does  not 
appear ;  and  there  is  no  trace  of  his  private 
history,  except  the  fact  that  a  messuage 
and  two  carucates  of  land  at  Cabiim  in 
Lincolnshire  were  conveyed  to  him  in  17 
Edward  I.  by  John  Priorell.  (Abb.  Placit. 
218.) 

During  his  presidency  of  the  court  he 
composed  a  Compendium  of  the  Law, 
which  was  in  the  nature  of  an  abridgment 


THORPE 

of  Bracton's  work,  bat  whicli  hts  nev«r 
been  printed.  The  manuscript,  which  Sel- 
den  found  in  Lord  Burleigh's  library,  states 
that  Gilbert  de  Thornton  '  tempore  iUa 
scientia,  bonitate,  et  mansuetudine,  floruit 
eleganter.'  (Legal  BibUog.  836 ;  Ihtgdd£$ 
Ong.  57.) 

ISOEPE,  Robert  db,  was  appointed  t 
judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  'when  Edward 
I.,  in  1289,  punished  nearly  all  the  judra 
for  corrupt  practices  in  their  office ;  and  Uie 
fines  levied  before  him  commence' on  the 
octaves  of  the  Purification,  18  Edward  L, 
1200,  and  continue  for  no  more  than  a  year. 
(Dtigdale^s  Orig.  44.)  He  probably  died 
shortly  after,  as  his  name  does  not  astis 
occur.  His  wife  was  named  Aveline. 
(Rot.  Pari  i.  18,  31,  33,  198.) 

THORPE,  JoH>'  DE,  the  son  of  Robert  de 
Thorpe  and  Maud  his  wife,  of  a  considei- 
able  family,  possessing  Rolands,  Combof, 
Uphall,  and  other  manors  in  Norfolk  tad 
Suffolk,  was  returned  as  knight  of  the 
shire  for  Norfolk  in  33  Edward  L,  and 
acted  in  the  same  year  as  assessor  and 
collector  of  the  aid  to  the  kin^  in  that  coun- 
ty. (Pari  WriU,  i.  863.)  In  35  Ed^iid 
I.,  1307,  he  held  the  second  place  amow 
the  justices  of  trailbaston  then  appointM 
for  those  two  counties.  (Hat.  Pan,  i.  21S, 
301.)  He  *"  and  his  companions  '  are  meo- 
tioned  as  justices  in  Norfolk  in  8  Edward 
II.,  and  various  judicial  duties  wme 
assigned  to  him  up  to  the  aeventeentk 
year.  In  13  Edward  II.  he  was  made 
sheriff*  of  the  county.  (Pari.  Wrii$j  ii. 
1503-^ ;  Abb.  Rot.  Orig.  L  262,  278.) 

He  married  Alice  Mortimer ;  and  at  hii 
death,  on  May  16,  1324,  17  Edwaid  E, 
his  son  Robert  succeeded  him,  but  doet 
not  appear  to  have  been  suntmioned  as  > 
baron.  (Cal  Inq.  p.  m.  i.  310  ;  Rat.  Pari 
i.  169,  419,  420 ;  BlonieJUlds  Norfolk,  L 
187,  611,  &c.) 

THOBPE,  Robert  db,  who  was  a  jnsfitt 
itinerant  into  Derbyshire  in  4  Edwaid  IIL, 
1330,  was  clearly  a  different  pereon  froa 
the  chief  justice  and  chancellor  in  a  lattf 
period  of  tne  reign ;  but  the  Thoipes  vera 
so  numerous  that  it  would  be  mere^  g^«^ 
work  to  attempt  to  fix  the  family  to  whick 
he  belonged.  He  may  have  been  the  mo 
of  John  and  Alicia  de  Thome,  of  Creek  is 
Norfolk,  and  Combes  in  Suffolk :  and  if  so, 
he  died  in  the  same  year  he  acted  as  yat' 
tice  itinerant,  and  was  succeeded  br  hii 
son  John.  (Cal.  Inq.  p.  m.  L  310,  u.  ^ 
139.) 

THOBPE,  Robert  de,  of  Thorpe,  neir 
Norwich,  was  educated  at  Camfaridise. 
in  which  university  he  laid  the  foundatii* 
of  the  divinity  schools,  with  the  chapel 
over  them,  in  1366,  and  was  afterwards 
master  of  Pembroke  College.  He  com* 
menced  his  career  as  an  advocate  as  earij 
as  14  Edward  UL,   1340,  attaining  the 


THORPE 

rank  of  king's  seijeant  in  1345.  Coke  calls 
him  *  a  man  of  singular  judgment  in  the 
laws  of  this  realm.  He  was  appointed 
one  of  the  justices  to  try  felonies  in  the 
county  of  Oxford  in  1355,  and  was 
frequently  employed  as  a  justice  of  assize, 
but  held  no  seat  on  the  judicial  bench  at 
Westminster  until  he  was  appointed  chief 
iustice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  on  June  27, 
1356,  30  Edward  III.  Nine  years  after- 
wards he  had  an  extended  grant  of  40/.  a 
^ear  to  support  the  dignity  of  knighthood 
which  the  King  had  conferred  upon  him ; 
and  he  continued  to  preside  in  tnat  court 
for  nearly  fifteen  years.  So  high  a  character 
did  he  acquire  that  when  the  Commons 
petitioned  the  kin^  that  none  but  laymen 
should  be  placed  m  the  higher  offices  of 
the  state,  he  was  deemed  the  fittest  man  to 
mpersede  William  of  Wykeham,  Bishop  of 
Winchester,  as  chancellor ;  and  the  Great 
Seal  was  accordingly  delivered  to  him  on 
Bfarch  26,  1371. 

He  enjoyed  this  dignity  little  more  than 
a  year,  nis  death  occurring  on  June  29, 
1872. 

He  married  Margaret,  the  daughter  of 
William  Deyncourt,  but  left  no  children. 
(Abb.  Mot.  Orig,  ii.  337 ;  Cal.  Inq.  p.  m.  322 ; 
Mader's  CC.C.  Cambridge,  28.) 

THOEPS,  WiLLiAH  DB,  appears  in  the 
Tear  Books  as  an  advocate  as  early  as  7 
Edward  IIL  In  15  Edward  III.,  1341,  he 
was  made  one  of  the  king^s  Serjeants,  and 
is  called  the  king^s  attorney  in  the  following 
Tear.  In  that  year,  on  April  23,  1342,  he 
was  raised  to  the  bench.  The  words  used 
are  '  unus  justiciariorum  ad  placita  in 
Banco.'  {CaL  Rot,  Pat.  142.)  Dugdale 
thereupon  inserts  him  among  the  justices  of 
the  Common  Pleas ;  but,  as  he  does  not 
mention  any  fines  levied  before  him,  snd 
introduces  nis  name  as  a  justice  of  the 
King*8  Bench  in  the  nineteenth  year,  on 
the  authority  of  the  Liberate  Roll,  without 
mentioning  the  date  of  his  removal  from 
the  Common  Pleas,  it  may  he  doubtful 
whether  his  first  appointment  was  not  to 
the  King's  Bench,  especially  as  he  became 
the  chief  of  it  on  November  26,  1346.  In 
that  character  he  opened  the  parliaments  of 
the  two  following  years.  (Rot,  Pari,  ii. 
164,  200.) 

Towards  the  end  of  1350  charges  were 
made  against  him  of  malversation  in  his 
office ;  and  the  king  issued  his  writ,  on  No- 
Tember  3,  to  five  commissioners  to  have 
him  before  them,  and  to  do  justice  accord- 
ing to  his  demerits.  They  immediately 
fnoeeded  on  their  commission,  when  he 
confeeaed  that  he  had  received  bribes  from 
lidiard  de  Salteby,  of  10/. ;  from  Hilde- 
kuid  Bereswerd,  of  20/. ;  from  Gilbert 
Blliland,  of  40/. ;  from  Thomas  de  Derby,  of 
8t  Bartholomew,  of  20/. ;  and  from  Robert 
4i  Dialderby,  of  lOiL ;  all  of  whom  had  been 


THOBPB 


657 


indicted  before  him  at  Lincoln ;  and  that  he 
had  therefore  caused  the  writ  of  exigent 
against  them  to  be  stayed  ,*  whereupon  he 
was  committed  prisoner  to  the  Tower  of 
London,  and  all  nis  lands  and  goods  were 
ordered  to  be  seized  into  the  king's  hands, 
until  the  royal  will  and  pleasure  should  be 
known. 

With  this  legal  and  reasonable  judgment, 
however,  the  king  was  not  satisfied ;  ana 
accordingly  issued  another  writ  on  Novem- 
ber 19,  commanding  the  same  parties  im- 
mediately to  pronounce  judgment  that  he 
should  be  degraded  and  hanged.  This  was 
accordingly  done,  and  thereupon,  on  tlie 
same  day,  the  king,  by  writ  of  pri\T  seal, 
signified  that  he  *  gave  and  forgave  him  hia 
life,*  but  ordered  his  body  to  be  remitted  to 
prison.  The  record  and  process  were  after- 
wards laid  before  the  parliament,  which 
confirmed  the  judgment  (N,  Foedera,  iii. 
208 ;  Rot,  Pari.  ii.  227.)  Coke  says  (3 
Ind.  145)  that  Sir  William  Thorpe  was 
pardoned  and  restored  to  all  his  lands,  *  as 
by  the  record  appeareth  ; '  but  the  record, 
as  published,  only  says  that  the  execution 
of  the  judgment  of  hanging  was  pardoned 
to  him,  and  that  he  was  remitted  to  prison 
to  await  the  king's  favour.  The  remainder 
of  the  judgment,  'that  all  his  land  and 
goods  should  be  forfeited  to  the  king,'  is 
left  unnoticed,  and  consequently  unpar- 
doned ;  and  by  entries  on  the  records  of 
that  year  {Abb.  Rot,  Ong.  ii.  211.  212),  it 
appears  that  the  sheriffs  of  Lincoln  and 
other  counties  were  directed  to  take  his 
lands,  &c.,  into  the  king's  hands,  as  con- 
victed of  certain  crimes ;  and  that  four  of 
his  horses, '  cum  sellis,  frenis,  et  garconibus, 
were  seized  bv  one  of  the  sheriffs  of  London. 

In  the  following  year,  however,  he  re- 
ceived the  king's  pardon,  with  the  restora- 
tion of  part  of  his  lands— viz.,  the  manor  of 
Changton  in  Sussex.  {Cal,  Rot.  Pat.  160.) 
He  was  not  restored  to  his  office  of  chief 
justice ;  but  after  an  interval  of  eighteen 
months  he  was  made  second  baron  of  the 
Exchequer,  on  May  24,  1362,  unless  the 
William  de  Thorpe  who  then  received  that 
appointment  was  a  different  person.  In  the 
absence  of  any  evidence  to  the  contrary, 
there  is  good  reason  to  believe  that  he  was 
the  same  person;  the  more  especially  as 
there  are  instances,  ten  years  before,  of  the 
king's  reinstating  judges  against  whom 
charges  had  been  made,  and  as  it  was 
extremely  improbable  that  a  person,  of 
whom  no  previous  notice  exists  of  his 
being  connected  with  the  court,  should 
be  at  once  raised  to  the  office  of  second 
baron,  above  the  other  occupants  of  that 
bench. 

From  a  passage  in  the  '  Liber  Assisarum' 
of  28  Edward  III.  (p.  145),  where  Thorpe  is 
said  to  have  been  '  then  made  cbv^^  YaaNassfeJ 
it  might  be  iniened  t\iai\i!^^^  T^\nt^  ^i^ 

TJTJ 


658 


THORPE 


THORPE 


,hi8  former  place ;  bat  attention  to  the  con- 
text clearly  proves  that  the  expression 
merely  means  that  he  was  made  chief  jus- 
tice in  the  commission  of  assizes  in  Sussex, 
in  the  place  of  H.  Green,  who  had  been 
sent  on  some  other  service;  as  we  should 
now  say,  the  senior  judge  of  assiEe. 

Whether  the  baron  of  the  Exchequer 
were  the  same  or  a  different  person,  he  was 
present  among  the  judges  in  the  parliament 
of  28  and  29  Edward  III.  {Rot.  FdrL  ii. 
254,  207),  but  not  later. 

Within  a  few  years  three  William  de 
Thorpes  are  mentioned — in  Nottingham, 
Northampton,  and  Sussex  (K  Fadera,  221, 
457, 4(H)  ;  but  we  cannot  satisfactorily  iden- 
tify either  with  the  judge. 

THOBPE,  Thomas,  of  what  family  is  un- 
certain, was  an  officer  of  the  Exchequer  in 

20  Henry  VI.,  1442,  when  he  was  comniis-    on  February  14,  1454. 
aioned  to  receive  the  *  great  good'  which  the        ''"*»«  nnmmnna  fVi^n 


Thomaa  Thorp,  one  of  the  baitxia  of  tibi 
Exchequer,  and  speaker  of  tlie  parliimeoi' 
(IFecwsr,  391.) 

The  parliament  was  prorogaed  on  Jnlvi, 

and  Baron  Thorpe  was  present  at  no  ice 

than  five  meetings  of  the  kiiig*8  comicil  ii 

that  and  the  following  months.    (AcUy  1S3- 

33 1 .)    It  was  probably  during  those  si ttio^ 

that  he  was  directed  to  seize  *  certeine  bah 

nesse  and  other  habiliments  of  wane '  whiel 

the  Duke  of  York  had  collected  at  th«  Bh 

shop  of  Durham's.     For  this  act  the  dok 

brought  an  action  against  him  in  the  Goat 

of  Exchequer,  *  for  somuche  that  the  stm 

Thomas  was  oon  of  the  court,'  and  obtaiaei 

a  verdict  against  him  for  1000^  daraa^ 

and  10/.  costs.    On  this  judgment  hew 

cast  into  the  Fleet  Prison,  and  remained  it 

custody  when  the  parliament  reassembU 


king  expected  would  accrue  from  the  general 
pardon  he  had  granted  to  his  subjects,  and 
to  apply  it  to  the  defence  of  Calais.  (Acts 
Priiy  Council^  v.  180.)  Dugdale  does  not 
introduce  him  among  the  banms  of  the  Ex- 
chequer till  November  1458;  but  he  had 
clearly  then  held  the  office  between  five 
and  SIX  years ;  and  we  have  a  curious  exhi- 
bition of  the  mode  of  his  obtaining  it  in  a 
p<)tition  to  the  parliament  of  33  Henry  VI., 
1456.    (Rot,  IhirL  v.  342.) 

Thorpe  was  remembrancer  of  the  Ex- 
chequer when  the  Earl  of  Worcester  was 
appointed  treasurer  in  Af)ril  1452.  That 
nooleman,  who  was  a  partisan  of  the  Duke 
of  York,  immediately  turned  Thorpe  out  of 
the  office,  and  gave  it  to  Richard  Forde,  the 
clerk  of  the  Pipe.  Thorpe  was  not  a  man 
to  submit,  and  therefore  obtained  letters 
patent  for  his  restoration  from  the  king, 
who  no  doubt  listened  readily  to  the  com- 
.  plaint  of  his  own  adherent  against  the  en- 
croachment of  one  whom  he  looked  upon 
,  as  little  less  than  a  rehel.  Thorpe  accord- 
ingly retook  possession  of  the  ^lace,  and 
would  not  give  it  up,  as  the  petition  with 
simplicitv  avers, '  onlesse  thenne  he  myght 
bene  preferred  to  be  third  baron  of  the  seid 
Eschequier.'  The  dismissed  remembrancer 
thereupon  negotiated  with  William  Fallan, 
then  toe  third  baron,  whom  he  induced  to 
resign  by  giving  him  a  bond  undertaking  to 
pay  him  forty  marks  yearly  for  his  life  or 
till  otherwise  provided  for. 

The  king  ot  course  made  no  difficulty  in 

flving  Thorpe  his  patent,  and  the  date  of 
is  appointment  may  be  fixed  in  the  early 
part  of  14^.  There  is  little  doubt  that  he 
neld  it  when  he  was  elected  speaker  of  the 
House  of  Commons  on  March  8  of  that  year 
(R<d.  Pari.  v.  227) ;  and  it  is  certain  that  he 
did  so  in  the  following  June,  for  his  wife, 
who  died  on  the  23rd  of  that  month,  is  de- 
scribed on  her  tombstone  in  St.  John  Za- 
chary^s,  in  Londoni  as  *  Joanna^  the  wife  of 


The  Commons  then  claimed  their  tnra^ 
privileges,  and  that  in  accordance  withtkea 
their  speaker  should  be  liberated.  Bat  ^ 
duke,  oy  his  counsel,  stating  the  fact  d^ 
seizure  of  the  goods — omitting,  howeict 
to  mention  what  those  goods  were,— tki 
Ijords  referred  the  question  of  the  spedsffs 
liberation  to  the  judges.  These  IttmBt 
persons,  although  they  stated  that  tkv 
ought  not  to  answer  it,' for  the  justioee  w 
never  been  used  to  determine  the  pririkri 
of  the  high  court  of  parliament — addift 
with  humorous  evasion,  '  for  it  is  so  W 
and  mighty  in  his  nature  that  it  mar  mki 
la  we,  and  that  that  is  la  we  it  may  makeaf 
lawe,  and  the  determination  and  Imowledif 
of  that  privilege  belongeth  to  the  lordeifif 
the  parliament  and  not  to  the  justioM,*-;' 
yet  honestly  concluded  by  declaring  thili* 
any  member  were  arrested  except  for  tretM 
or  felony,  or  for  surety  of  the  peace,  or  ftt 
a  condemnation  had  before  the  parliaaMA 
*  it  is  used  that  all  such  persons  oe  nloMA 
of  such  arrests  and  make  an  attorney  vtktf 
they  may  have  their  freedom  and'libeitr, 
freely  to  intend  upon  the  parliament*  Fo^ 
tescue  was  then  the  chief  justice,  bat  ^ 
merely  spoke  as  the  organ  of  his  brethiu. 
The  first  part  of  this  answer  is  preei«Iv 
of  the  same  character  as  that  whidi  tlif 
judges  gave  seven  years  afterwards,  «Im* 
they  were  called  upon  for  their  o[nnioB  « 
the  claim  of  the  DuKe  of  York  to  the  nov>- 
They  then  stated  that  they  had  to  determiiB 
such  matters  as  came  before  them  in  tkt 
law  between  party  and  party,  and  that  tk» 
matter  in  question  was  so  high  and  abon 
the  law  that  it  passed  their  learning,  0^ 
that  it  pertained  to  the  lords  of  the  kor^ 
blood  and  the  appanage  of  his  land  to  mc^ 
in  such  matters.  (Rot.  P»L  y.  239,  37d) 
In  both  cases  it  is  evident  that  their  anf«<0 
were  dictated  by  their  fears  and  not  by  th«ff 
conviction ;  and  in  the  former  it  is  cuiioi* 
that,  while  they  disclaim  the  right  to  iod^ 
they  do  actually  determine  the  case  Woif 


THOBFE 

niig[  the  custom  which  had  been 
>gDi8ed. 

Sy  notwithstanding  the  opinion 

given,  decided  in  direct  oppo- 

ind,  no  doubt  influenced  by  the 

irky  who  was  upon  the  eve  of 

dted  protector,  adjudged  that 

lid  still  remain  in  prison, '  the 

parliament,  or  that  the  same 

the  speaker  of  the  parliament, 

ling;'  and  they  cnarged  the 

0  proceed  to  a  new  election. 
)n8  quietly  submitted  to  this 
ncroachment  on  a  privilege 
the  justest  principle — the  free- 
'  own  members. 

recovered  before  the  end  of 
^hen  no  doubt  Thorpe  was 
liberty,  since  he  received  his 
►aron  on  April  16, 1455.  (2>«- 
?o//,  479.)  He  was  also  present 
battle  of  St  Albans,  on  May 
%  and  he  is  said  to  have  *  fled 
harness  behind  him  cowardly.' 
V.  62G.)  We  must  recollect, 
at  the  encounter  was  rather  a 

1  a  battle,  and  that  many  others 
he  flight.  In  the  parliament 
July  he  was  charged,  with  the 
Dmerset  and  William  Joseph, 
issing  two  letters  sent  by  the 
•rk  and  the  Earls  of  Warwick 
ry  to  the  chancellor  and  the 
ly  before  the  battle,  whereby 
conflict  was  occasioned;  and 
king  was  compelled  to  accept 

then  made  by  the  duke  and 
d  to  approve  them  as  true  and 
smen,  he  refused  his  assent  to 
aed  against  Thorpe — the  one  to 

of  all  oflices,  and  to  condenm 
imprisonment  of  twelve  years 
1000/. ;  and  the  other  to  restore 
ire  of  the  Exchequer  who  had 
;d  except  Thorpe.  {Hot,  Pari, 
:339.) 

•rpe  was  replaced  in  his  seat 
«  no  doubt,  as  he  was  advanced 
.  baron  on  November  30,  1458  ; 

after  received  a  grant  of  the 
f  the  office  of  chancellor  of 
uer  on  the  death  of  Thomas 
lich  was  excepted  in  the  act  of 

passed  in  the  parliament  of 
38  Henry  VI.  (Ibid,  366.) 
ity,  however,  was  not  to  last 

Earl  of  Warwick's  invasion 
ing  again  into  the  field.  The 
)n  was  by  his  side  and  shared 
^he  battle  of  Northampton  on 
0.  He  was  at  first  confined  in 
d  then  in  the  Marshalsea ;  and 
^  17,  1401,  the  very  day  on 
iieen  gained  the  second  battle  of 
he  was  beheaded  in  Haringey 
dlesex.    {Ibid.  vi.  294.) 


THOBFB 


659 


In  his  continued  perseentioo  by  the 
Yorkists  we  not  only  see  the  inveteracy  to 
which  party  spirit  was  then  carried,  but 
an  evidence  also  that  the  baron  was  en- 
dowed with  talents  and  courage  which 
they  felt  it  their  interest  to  subdue ;  and  we 
cannot  but  admire  a  man  whose  devotion 
and  loyalty  prompted  him  to  quit  a  peace- 
ful occupation  to  fight  by  his  sovereign'9 
side  and  to  suffer  in  his  cause.  His  history 
also  afibrds  a  proof  that  a  baron  of  the 
Exchequer  was  not  then  considered  in  the 
same  light  as  the  judges  of  the  other 
courts,  inasmuch  as  he  was  eligible  to  be  a 
member  of  parliament.  His  son  Roger  was 
another  victim  of  the  same  party.    {Ibid.) 

THORPE,  Francis  (descended  from  the 
Yorkshire  family  of  Thorpe,  of  Thorpe  in 
Holdemess^,  was  the  eldest  son  of  Roger 
Thorpe  of  Birdshall,  by  Elizabeth,  daughter 
of  William  Danyell  of  Beswick.  {Marl. 
MSS.  1437,  206,  603 ;  1394, 122.)  He  was 
bom  in  1696,  and  being  admitted  a  member 
of  Gray's  Inn,  where  his  father  had  studied 
before  him.  he  was,  on  May  11,  1621, 
called  to  the  bar^  axid  became  reader  in 
1641.  He  held  the  post  of  recorder  of 
Beverley  from  1623  till  he  was  ndsed  to 
the  bench  in  1649,  and  was  one  of  the 
witnesses  examined  against  the  Eurl  of 
Strafford,  who  had  taken  offence  against 
him  in  Yorkshire  for  moving  for  prohibi- 
tions. {Hushworthf  iv.  116.)  He  obtained 
a  seat  in  the  Long  Parliament  in  September 
1646  for  the  borough  of  Richmond,  and 
was  made  a  seijeant  on  October  12,  1648, 
when  the  vacancies  in  the  law  were  filled 
up.  (Pari,  Hid.  ii.  626.)  After  the  king 
was  beheaded  (for  the  trial  of  whom 
Thorpe  was  named  a  commissioner,  but 
never  attended)  (State  Trials,  iv.  1061),  he 
was  raised  to  a  seat  in  the  Exchequer  on 
June  1,  1649,  being  no  doubt  selected  on 
account  of  the  '  good  service  *  done  by  him 
in  the  last  Northern  Circuit,  on  which,  as  . 
was  common  with  the  Serjeants,  he  rode  as 
judge  of  assize.  (Whitdocke,  406,  409.) 
In  an  elaborate  charge  to  the  grand  jury  at 
York  (afterwards  printed)  he  endeavoured 
to  justify  the  murder  of  the  king,  and  to 
vindicate  the  parliament  in  their  proceed- 
ings, raking  up  all  the  invidious  and  scan- 
dalous invectives  against  kings  and  mo- 
narchy which  the  most  celebrated  republi- 
cans up  to  his  time  had  ever  written. 
(Drakes  Ycrk,  171.)  He  was  therefore 
again  sent  on  that  circuit  for  the  summer 
assize,  and  was  presented  with  200/.  for  his 
zeal  in  the  former.  (Com,  Journals^  vL 
144.)  He  fully  confirmed  the  opinion 
which  the  ruling  powers  had  formed  of 
him  by  his  condemnation  of  Lieut -Colonel 
Morrice  at  York,  though  his  conduct  at  the 
trial  was  more  merciful  than  that  of  Judge 
Puleston.    (State  TrialSy  iv.  124fl.^ 

Li  the  patUameiit  ciiXlkn^^s^  ^jrtmK«^\& 


660 


THORPE 


September  1664,  and  dissolved  in  the  fol- 
lowing January,  Thorpe,  though  a  judge, 
was  returned  for  Beverley.    He  became 
disgusted  with  the  protector's  proceedings, 
and,   excusing   himself   from    trying    the 
prisoners  in  the  north  as  contrary  to  his 
conscience,  he  and  Judge  Newdigate,  who 
had  the  same  scruples,  received  their  writs 
of  ease  on  May  3,  1655.     His  disgrace  at 
court  made  him  so  popular  in  his  native 
county  that   in   the    next  parliament,   in 
1056,  he  was  elected  for  the  xVest  Hiding ; 
but  not  obtaining  the  council's,  or  rather 
Cromwell's,  certificate  of  approbation,  he 
and  above  ninety   others  were    excluded 
from   its  sittings.     They  thereupon  pub- 
lished a  spirited  remonstrance,  so  violent  in 
its  language  that  it  is  surprising  that  the 
powers  which  had  stirred  up  this  resistance 
took  no  means  to  punish  it.     (^Godwin,  iv. 
181 ;  niiitelocke.ii'h,  653.)     He  afterwards 
took  his  seat,  and  several  of  his  speeches 
are  reported  in  Burton's  Diary. 

Thorpe  was  not  returned  to  Protector 
Ilichard's  parliament  in  Jonuaiy  1659,  but 
when  the  Long  Parliament  was  restored  he 
took  his  seat  as  a  member.  On  Januarv  17, 
1660,  he  was  replaced  on  the  bench  as  a 
banm  of  Exchequer  (Ibid.  G03),  and  was 
appointed  to  go  the  Northern  Circuit.  His 
judicial  career  was  of  course  closed  by  the 
return  of  Charles  II. 

In  *  The  Mystery  of  the  Good  Old  Cause  * 
he  is  described  as  a  bitter  enemy  to  his 
prince,  and  as  *  receiver  of  the  money  in 
Yorkshire,  charged  by  some  of  the  country 
for  detaining  25,000/.'  (Pari.  Hist.  iii. 
1608.)  This  charge  was  probably  alluded 
to  when  a  motion  was  made  that  his  name 
should  be  excepted  from  the  bill  of  in- 
demnity, which  was  seconded  by  Prynne, 
'who  mentioned  one  Thoi-pe,  a  judge  in 
Edward  the  Il.nd's  time,  who  for  taking 
bribes  and  other  misdemeanors  was 
punished,  and  therefore  desired  that  this 
Judge  Thorpe  might  also  suffer  the  same.' 
He  had  a  narrow  escape,  but  several  mem- 
bers speaking  in  his  behalf,  he  was  acquit- 
ted.    (Ibid.  V.  75.) 

He  married  the  daughter  of  —  Ogle- 
thorpe, widow  of  —  Denton,  but  it  does 
not  appear  that  he  left  any  children. 

THOBPE,  Simon  de.     See  S.  de  Tbop. 

THUBKILBT,  KooER  de,  of  whose  line- 
age and  early  life  history  is  silent,  first 
appears  in  24  Henry  IH.,  1240,  as  one  of 
the  four  justices  itinerant  appointed  for  the 
southern  district  Less  tnan  two  years 
afterwards  fines  were  levied  before  him,  and 
so  continued  to  be  till  just  before  his  death 
— viz.,  from  Michaelmas  1241  to  Michael- 
mas 1259.     (Bugdale's  Grit/.  43.) 

In  the  circuits  from  1245  to  1256  he  was 
invariably  placed  at  the  head  of  the  com- 
mission for  the  counties  he  visited,  except 
when  a  bishop  or  abbot  was  joined  to  them ; 


THUBLAND 

but  it  does  not  appear  that  lie  was  as  vet 
the  chief  justice  of  either  court.     On  Octo- 
ber 3,  1258,  he  was  the  first  named  of  tbe 
three  who  were   assigned   'ad   tenendum 
Bancum  Regis '  at  Westminster,  until  the 
king  more  fully  regulated  that  bench  ;  aD<i 
on  December  z9,  1258,  he  had  a  grant  of 
one  hundred  marks,  as  'residens  ad  Ban- 
cum : '  but  whether  the  bench   alluded  to 
was  the  Bancum  Regis,  to  which  he  was 
appointed  the  previous  year,  or  the  Com- 
mon  Bench    or    Common    Pleas,     seems 
doubtful.     It  is  difficult   to   decide,  also, 
what  position  he  held   in  the  court;  bot. 
considering  that  the    salary   of   Henrv  d« 
Bathonia  was  100/.,  and  his  ouly  one  iiun- 
dred  marks,  it  would  seem  that  ho  occupied 
the  second  place.     Nevertheleiw,  there  an 
some  royal  letters  and  commissions  among 
the  public  records  apparently  addreawd  I© 
him  as  the  head  (5  Meport  Pub.  Rec.,  Aff. 
ii.  6:3,  64),  and  an  auonymous  writer,  ia 
mentioning  his  sudden  death  in  the  follow- 
ing year,  describes  him  as  *  Ju.'^tici&rii  Aa- 
gliie  gerens  officium.'      (Lelanffs  CoUteL  i 
245.)     He  is  represented  as  being  secood  to 
none  in  his  knowledge   of  the   laws,  and 
with  the  higher  credit  of  opposing,  thoogi 
vainly,  the  iniquitous  introauction  of  tfc« 
non-obstante   clause   in    the    royal  wriii 
(Pryime   on    Cokes   4    Inst.   132;  iZapn, 
iii.  iOl.) 

THTJBLAHD,  Edward,  was  descended 
from  the  ancient  family  of  Thurland  d 
Thurland  Castle  in  Nottinghamshire.  He 
was  son  of  Edward  Thurland,  who,  by  kis 
marriage  with  Elizabeth,  daught>>r  and  coe 
of  the  coheirs  of  Richard  Elyot  of  fteipaJf, 
became  a  resident  in  that  town,  and  irai 
*  vice  comes,'  or  undersheriff,  of  Surref  in 
1623.  (Harl.  MSS.  1433,  p.  40:  AiM. 
MSS.  12,478,  n.  2 ;  4963,  p.  40.)  He  wn 
bom  there  in  1606,  and  was  called  to  tk« 
bar  by  the  Inner  Temple  on  October  2. 
1634.  He  was  returned  member  for  to 
native  town  to  the  short  parliament  tbit 
met  in  April  1640;  but,  luckilv  perbao* 
for  him,  was  not  re-elected  for  tbat  wbia 
was  summoned  in  the  following  Xovembefi 
so  notorious  in  the  annals  of  the  kingdoo. 
That  he  had  made  good  use  of  his  time,  aad 
was  a  proficient  in  the  law,  is  shown  br  to 
being  made  steward  of  the  manor  of  R^ 
gate,  his  charge  to  the  jury  of  which  ia 
August  1644  is  preserved  in  Manning  and 
Bray's  *  Surrey  \\,  295).  Plis  intimate  witi 
Jeremy  Taylor  and  John  Evelyn  \»  a  «if- 
cient  evidence  of  his  pious  and  exemplfij 
life,  the  correspondence  between  them  ex- 
hibiting the  fnendly  and  confidential  teiv* 
in  which  they  lived,  and  the  latter  entrust- 
ing him  with  the  stewardship  of  his  conrtt* 
He  composed  a  work  on  prayer,  which  he 
sent  to  Eveljm,  who  strongly  Veconmiended 
its  publication ;  but  it  does  not  appear 
whether  it  was  ever  issued  from  the  pre* 


THURLOW 

In  the  Healing  Parliament  of  IGOO  be  was 
again  chosen  representative  for  Reigate, 
and  also  in  1601 ;  but  be  did  not  take  an 
active  part  in  either.  {EvebjUy  iL  302,  410, 
iv.  o,  &c.) 

Soon  after  the  Restoration  he  was  elected 
recorder  of  both  Reigate  and  Guildford,  and 
was  selected  bj  James  Duke  of  York  as 
Lis  solicitor,  being  thereupon  knighted.  In 
1662  he  became  autumn  reader  of  his  inn 
of  court,  having  been  called  to  the  bench 
of  that  society  on  November  24,  1052. 
Prom  this  time  his  name  appears  very  fre- 
quently in  the  Reports,  till  he  was  elevated 
to  the  bench  on  January  24,  167.%  when  he 
was  appointed  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer. 
After  sitting  six  years  he  arrived  at  that 
a^e  when  his  ^wing  infirmities  warned 
liim  to  prepare  in  quiet  for  meeting  his  last 
moments.  He  therefore  tendered  his  re- 
signation, and  received  his  discharge  on 
April  29,  1679.  ( T,  Joneit's  Hep,  34 ;  Ha- 
letyh  HedivivtUy  80.)  He  retired  to  his 
mansion  at  Reip:ate,  where  he  died  on  De- 
cember 19,  1682,  aged  seventy-six. 

By  his  wife,  Elizabetli,  daughter  of  — 
"Wright  of  Ruckland  in  Surrey,  he  left  an 
only  son,  Edward,  also  brought  up  to  the 
law,  who  died  five  years  after  his  father, 
"without  issue.  A  nephew,  another  Ed- 
ward, who  died  in  1731,  is  described  on  his 
monument  at  Reigate  as  '  ultimus  antiques 
•tirpis  masculus.'  (//nW.  MSS.  1480,  p  37  ; 
Jldanmng  mid  Bray* 8  Surrey ^L  326,  ii.  408.) 

THUBLOW,  Edward  (Lord  Tdurlow), 
has  been  as  much  praised  and  as  much 
abused  as  any  man  who  ever  held  the  Great 
Seal,  and  for  his  different  qualities  equally 
deserved  both  the  approbation  and  censure 
he  received.  To  a  coarseness,  partly  natural 
nnd  partly  assumed,  to  a  prcj^umptuous 
haughtiness  of  demeanour,  to  a  pretended 
disregard  for  the  opinion  of  manidnd,  and 
to  (gross  looseness  of  morals,  were  added 
undoubted  talents,  courage  under  diilicul- 
ties,  love  of  literature,  and  natural  good- 
nature. With  an  affected  singularity,  he 
refused  to  enlighten  an  enquirer  who  asked 
him  whether  h(3  was  connected  with  the 
family  of  Secretary  Thurloe,  by  saying  that 
h«  could  claim  no  relationship  with  'lliurloe 
the  statesman,  being  only  descended  from 
Thurlow  the  carrier.  In  Suckling's  '  His- 
tory of  Suffolk'  (ii.  33),  however,  the 
iiamilv  is  traced  as  |)08ses8iijg  an  estate  at 
Sumnam  Ulph  in  >iorfo]k  from  the  reign 
of  Henry  VlIL,  which  was  sold  just  before 
the  chancellor's  birth.  His  father  was  the 
Rev.  Thomas  Thurlow,  rector  of  Ashfield 
in  Suffolk,  and  afterwards  of  Stratton  St 
Mary's  in  Norfolk.  His  mother  was  Eliza- 
betli,  daughter  of  Robert  Smith,  Esq.,  of 
the  former  place,  and  he  was  the  eldest  of 
three  sons.  The  second  son  was  succes- 
■iTely  advanced  in  the  Church  during  his 
hrother's  chancellorship  to  the  deanery  of 


THURLOW 


661 


Rochester  and  the  bishoprics  of  Lincoln 
and  Durham.  The  third  son  was  a  mer- 
chant at  Norwich,  of  which  city  he  even- 
tually became  an  alderman  and  mayor. 

Edward  Thurlow  was  bom  at  Ashfield 
about  1732.  From  his  earl^  childhood  he 
showed  a  contumacious  spirit  and  an  over- 
bearing disposition,  which  he  displayed 
not  only  at  iiome,  at  Seaming  School,  and 
at  the  King*s  School  at  Canterbury,  but 
also  at  Caius  College,  Cambridge ;  and  nu- 
merous stories  are  told  of  his  insolence  and 
insubordination.  But  there  was  always 
some  humour  mixed  with  his  escapades, 
and  amidst  his  irregularities  he  did  not 
neglect  his  studies,  but  succeeded  in  laying 
up  no  inconsiderable  store  of  classical  leam- 
ing.  His  career  at  Cambridge  began  in 
October  1748,  and  was  terminated  in  1751, 
by  what  was  not  far  short  of  expulsion ;  for 
having  been  punished  for  one  of  his  breaches 
of  discipline  ov  an  imposition  to  translate  a 
paper  of  the  *  Spectator'  into  Greek,  instead 
of  taking  it  up,  as  was  his  duty,  to  the  dean 
who  indicted  the  penalty,  he  left  it  with 
the  tutor ;  and  on  being  called  before  the 
authorities  of  the  college  to  explain  his 
conduct,  he  made  the  matter  worse  by 
coolly  saying  that  he  had  done  so  from  no 
motive  ot  disrespect  to  the  dean,  but  simply 
from  a  compasfionate  vdah  not  to  puzzle 
him.  Rustication  being  too  small  and 
expulsion  too  great  a  retribution  for  this 
insult,  Thurlow  was  recommended  to  with- 
draw his  name  from  the  books,  a  hint 
which  he  was  obliged  to  take.  Before 
this  dean,  who  is  an  elective  and  temporary 
ofiicer  of  the  college,  he  had  been  frequently 
summoned  to  appear  for  various  on'ences, 
and  having  answered  on  one  occasion  with 
some  disrespect,  was  sharplv  asked  ^whether 
he  knew  that  he  was  talking  to  the  dean.' 
Thurlow  of  course  answered,  'Yes,  Mr. 
Dean,'  and  ever  after  when  they  met  ad- 
drcFsed  him  as  'Mr.  Dean,'  and  so  fre- 
quently reiterated  the  title  that  the  dean 
felt  himself  insulted  by  the  banter.  If  this 
story  be  tme,  there  is  a  graceful  pendant 
to  it,  for  on  the  impudent  youth  becoming 
chancellor  he  sent  for  his  old  enemy,  and 
on  his  entering  the  room  addressed  him  aa 
usual.  *  How  d'ye  do,  Mr.  Dean  ? '  *  My 
lord,'  replied  the  other  sullenly, '  I  am  not 
now  a  dean,  and  do  not  deserve  the  title.' 
'But  you  are  a  dean,'  said  his  lordship, 
giving  him  a  paper  of  nomination  ; '  and  so 
convinced  am  I  that  you  will  do  honour  to 
the  appointment  that  I  am  sorry  any  part 
of  my  conduct  should  have  given  offence  to 
so  good  a  man.'  (Law  and  Lairyers,  i.  94 ; 
X(tUn  and  Quen'eB,  2nd  S.  iii.  283.) 

It  has  been  said  that  Thurlow  was  at 
first  articled  to  an  attorney,  but  there  it 
no  other  authority  for  this  statement  than 
Uiat  he  attended  for  some  time  the  office 
of  Mr.  Chapman,  a  solicitor,  with /WiUianL 


662 


THURLOW 


Cowper  the  poet  Thia  was  a  practice 
then;  and  it  is  now  frequently  adopted  by 
younff  students  for  the  bar,  to  give  them  an 
insight  into  the  practical  working  of  the 
profession.  Having  been  entered  at  the 
inner  Temple,  thouffh  he  had  the  character 
of  beinj?  an  idle  and  dissipated  man  during 
his  novitiate,  it  is  abundantly  clear  that  he 
employed  a  sufficient  portion  of  his  time  in 
laymg  a  solid  foundation  for  those  legal 
acquirements  of  which  his  subsequent 
career  proved  him  to  be  master. 

He  was  called  to  the  bar  in  November 
1754,  and  went  the  Home  Circuit.  He 
obtained  great  credit  in  one  of  his  earliest 
causes,  Luke  Robinson  v.  The  Earl  of  Win- 
chilsea,  for  the  courage  with  which  he 
resented  the  accustomed  rudeness  and  arro- 
gance of  Sir  Fletcher  Norton,  the  opposing 
counsel  As  Sir  Fletcher  was  hated  oy  the 
profession,  this  caetigation  made  Thurlow 
popular  among  the  attorneys,  and  procured 
nim  some  briefs.  His  business,  however, 
was  still  so  small  in  amount  that  he  ex- 
cited considerable  surprise  bv  accepting  a 
silk  gown  in  Hilary  Term  lV62,  when  he 
had  been  little  more  than  seven  years  at 
the  bar.  The  occasion  of  his  promotion  is 
variously  stated,  in  various  improbable 
stories;  but  the  most  natural  inducement 
operating  upon  Thurlow  to  seek  and  to 
accept  a  promotion  accompanied  with  so 
much  risk,  was  that  confidence  he  had  in 
his  own  powers,  which  future  events  proved 
was  not  misplaced.  He  was  at  the  same 
time  elected  a  bencher  of  his  inn  of  court. 

In  proceeding  on  his  ambitious  career  he 
took  his  seat  in  parliament  for  Tamworth 
at  the  general  election  of  1768,  during  the 
sittings  of  which  he  was  obliged  to  undergo 
two  re-elections — one  in  March  1770,  when 
he  was  made  solicitor-general  on  the  acces- 
sion of  Lord  North's  ministry;  and  the 
other  in  January  1771,  when  he  succeeded 
as  attorney-general.  He  represented  the 
same  place  till  he  was  raised  to  the  peerage. 
During  the  whole  time  he  was  in  tne 
House  of  Commons  he  gave  an  unflinching 
support  to  the  ministry,  and  by  the  bold- 
ness of  his  assertions  and  the  audacity  of  his 
lan^ua^re,  more  than  by  the  force  of  his 
reasouiiig,  he  was  considered  Lord  North's 
ablest  coadjutor.  On  the  questions  rela- 
tive to  the  administration  of  criminal  jus- 
tice and  the  law  of  libel,  which  then 
agitated  the  public  mind,  he  was  a  strenu- 
ous advocate  for  leaving  things  as  they 
were,  and  treated  contemptuously  those  by 
whom  alterations  were  pressed ;  and  in  all 
the  debates  relative  to  America  he  asserted 
the  right  of  England  to  tax  it,  and  stigma- 
tised those  who  resisted  as  traitors  and 
rebels. 

In  his  official  capacity  as  solicitor-ge- 
neral he  assisted  in  the  conduct  of  tiie 
ieyeial  pEONcatioiu  of  John  Almon,  H.  S. 


THXJBLOW 

Woodfidly  and  John  Miller  for  publishing 
Junius's  letter  to  the  king,  and  as  attonev- 
general  he  prosecuted  John  Home  Toole 
for  a  seditious  libel.  In  all  of  these  he 
appears  to  have  confined  himself  strictly  to 
his  duty  as  advocate  for  the  crown,  and  to 
have  argued  the  cases  according  to  the  in- 
terpretation of  the  law  as  it  then  existed, 
though  in  the  last  he  had  to  submit  to  ths 
pertinacious  vituperation  of  the  defeodint 
He  also  conducted  the  extraordinary  pro- 
secution of  the  Duchess  of  Kingston  kt 
bigamy. 

On  Lord  Bathurst's  resignation  in  177B 
he  was  appointed  lord  chancellor  on  Jim* 
3,  being  at  the  same  time  ennobled  bv  the 
titie  of  Baron  Thurlow  of  Ashfield  is 
Suffolk.  He  lived  at  that  time  in  Graft 
Ormond  Street  He  held  the  Seal  fiv 
twelve  years,  except  a  short  interral  d 
seven  months  during  which  it  was  put  into 
commission. 

He  maintained  in  the  House  of  Loidi 
the  same  energy,  not  to  say  effiontaT, 
which  he  had  exhibited  in  the  House  a 
Commons.  He  perpetually  was  riong  h 
his  |>lace,  speaking  on  every  subject,  and 
treating  tiie  arguments  of  the  other  peen 
with  coarse  sarcasm  and  indignity,  ssifbi 
were  the  schoolmaster  of  a  set  of  bor^ 
instead  of  the  speaker  of  an  august  aaeiD- 
bly.  By  this  course  he  not  only  was  cn- 
sidered  a  bore  by  all  his  brother  peen^  bit 
excited  the  indignation  of  those  who  irere 
the  objects  of  his  attacks.  All  indinsooB, 
however,  to  call  his  conduct  in  quesw 
was  subdued  within  a  year  after  his  entnsrt 
into  the  house  by  an  incident  which  i»  R- 
lated  by  Mr.  Butler  in  his  '  ReminiscenoEi^' 
though  no  notice  is  taken  of  it  in  the  'F^ 
liamentary  History.'  The  Duke  of  Onfita, 
stung  by  something  he  had  said,  most  oo- 
advisedfy  reproached  him  for  his  pkbfltn 
extraction  and  his  recent  admiaston  iott 
the  peerage.  'His  lordship,*  says  }b. 
Butler,  '  rose  from  the  woolsack,  and  id- 
vanced  slowly  to  the  place  from  which  tht 
chancellor  generally  addresses  the  hffsx; 
then,  fixing  on  the  duke  a  look  of  loweriof 
indififnation,  *'I  am  amazed,"  he  said, a* 
level  tone  of  voice,  '*  at  the  attack  whidi 
the  noble  duke  has  made  upon  me.  Yei^ 
m}'  lords,"  considerably  raising  his  Toioe, 
'  1  am  amazed  at  his  grace*s  speech.  T^ 
noble  duke  cannot  look  before  him,  behiod 
him,  or  on  either  side  of  him,  without  see- 
ing some  noble  peer  who  owes  hissestin 
this  house  to  his  successful  exertions  in  tht 
profession  to  which  I  belong.  Does  he  aoC 
feel  that  it  as  honourable  to  owe  it  to 
these  as  to  being  the  accident  of  aBM- 
dent  P  To  all  these  noble  loids  1^  ^^ 
guage  of  the  noble  duke  is  at 
and  as  insoltang  aa  it  is  to  nnr 
don't  fear  to  Bttud  nagls  ip 
one  Taneiatea  the  pecofa  ■ 


THURLOW 

ly  my  lords,  I  must  say  that  the  peerage 
Lcited  me,  not  I  the  peerage.  Nay, 
»re — I  can  say,  and  will  say,  that,  as  a 
)r  of  parliament— as  speaker  of  this  right 
Qourabie  house — as  keeper  of  the  Great 
fd — as  guardian  of  his  majesty's  con- 
snce — as  lord  high  chancellor  of  England 
lay,  even  in  toat  character  alone  in 
lien  the  noble  duke  would  think  it  an 
ront  to  be  considered — ^but  which  charac- 

none  can  deny  me — as  a  han — I  am  at 
8  moment  as  respectable,  I  beg  leave  to 
i  I  am  at  this  time  as  much  respected, 
the  proudest  peer  I  now  look  down 
>n."  The  effect  of  this  speech,'  Mr. 
tier  adds,  *  both  within  the  walls  of 
•liament  and  out  of  them,  was  prodi- 
lus.  It  gave  Lord  Thurlow  an  ascen- 
icy  in  the  house  which  no  chancellor  had 
tr  possessed ;  it  invested  him  in  public 
nion  with  a  character  of  independency 
1  honour.' 

Saving  thus  silenced  his  opponents,  the 
quency  of  his  own  speecnes  was  not 
oinished,  though  perhaps  they  were  more 
Ltious  and  less  vituperative.  During  the 
aainder  of  Lord  North's  ministry  he  was 
hearty  and  effective  justiiier  of  all  his 
lasures,  and  when  at  last  the  adminis- 
tion  was  driven  from  the  field  in  March 
62  it  was  expected  that  he  would  retire 
th  Ms  colleagues.    But  to  the  surprise 

every  one  he  still  kept  the  Seal.  The 
QfiT,  in  whose  presence  alone  he  dropped 
§  Dearish  demeanour,  forbad  the  mention 

any  other  chancellor.    The  consequence 
submitting  to  such  an  intrusion  among 
on  who  and  whose  opinions  had  been  the 
trpetual  subject  of  his  abuse  was  soon 
Lt.     Before  the  session  was  concluded  in 
bich  the  new  ministers  had  taken  office 
Old  Thurlow  had  openly  but  ineffectually 
yposed  two  measures  introduced  by  them, 
owaids  the  close  of  that  session  the  Mar- 
lis  of  Rockingham  died,  and,  notwith- 
anding  the  division  between  the  surviving 
.embers  of  the  administration,  Lord  Thur- 
(W  still  retained  the  Seal  under  Lord 
helbume,  till  that  nobleman  was  expelled 
r  the  Coalition  Ministry,  when  it  was 
laced  in  the  hands  of  three  commissioner 
1  April  9,  1763.   In  less  than  nine  months 
lat  administration  was  excluded  in  its 
im,   and  that  ministry  was  commenced 
oder  Mr.  Pitt  which  defied  all  opposition 
»r  nearly  eighteen  years.     Lord  Thurlow, 
'bo  claimed  the  title,  and  was  generally 
K>ked  upon  as  the  king's  friend,  and  who 
ad  been  all  along  the  private  adviser  of 
is  majesty  and  the  chief  instigator  of  the 
Bccessful  opposition  to  Fox's  India  Bill  in 
tie  House  of  Lords,  of  course  resumed  his 
iMoe,  and  continued  to  preside  for  the 
•oond  time  in  Chancery  for  more  than 
ine  years — ^from  December  23,  1783,  to 
one  15|  179(2,     The  aspendency  which 


THURLOW 


663 


Mr.  Pitt  obtained  and  preserved  in  the 
royal  counsels  during  the  whole  of  this 
time  excited  the  jealousv  of  the  chancellor, 
who,  conceiving  that  he  had  a  stronger 
hold  on  the  king's  confidence  and  regard, 
made  various  attempts,  at  first  guardedly, 
but  at  last  oj^enly,  to  destroy  the  infiuence 
of  the  prenuer.    Mr.  Pitt,  who  was  well 
aware  that    Lord    Thurlow,    during    the 
agitation  of  the  reg^icy  question  on  the 
insanity  of  the  king  in   1788.  had  been 
privately  negotiating    with    the    prince's 
friends,  soon  felt  that  he  had  not  only  a 
lukewarm,  intractable,  and  inefficient,  but 
a  treacherous  counsellor  in  his  cabinet; 
but  for  a  time  submitted  to  the  infliction 
rather  than  distress  the  king  by  an  exposure. 
George  III.  and  the  public  in  general,  who 
were  i^orant  of  Thurlow's  private  deal- 
ings with  the  opposition,  believed  in  the 
solemn  professions  of  afiection  and  gratitude 
that  he  made  as  soon  as  the  king's  recovery 
put  an  end  to  the  hopes  of  the  whigs. 
Dut  on  his  attempting  the  same  course  he 
had    pursued    towards    the    Rockingham 
administration  by  openly  opposing  some 
measures  of  the  government,  and  charging 
them  with  attacking  the  prerogative,  Mr. 
Pitt  found  it  absolutely  necessary  to  bring 
the  question  to  an  issue.    He  therefore  re- 
presented to  the  king  that  it  was  impossible 
that  he  could  conduct  the  affairs  of  the 
kingdom  if  Lord  Thurlow  continued  chan- 
cellor.     George  III.,  who  probably  had 
gained  an  insight  into  the  true  state  of 
affairs,  at  once  sacrificed  the  chancellor, 
and  removed  him  from  his  office  on  June 
16, 1792.   As  a  mark  of  royal  favour,  how- 
ever, Lord  Thurlow,  having  no  children, 
received  a  new  patent  of  peerage,  with  a 
remainder  to  his  brothers  and  their  male 
issue.    This  dismissal  excited  the  indigna- 
tion of  the  excluded  lord,  but  no  complaints 
or  regrets  in  any  other  quarter.    The  whigs 
were  especially  aware  of  his  hypocrisy ;  and 
Burke,  a  few  days  after  one  of  Lord  Thur- 
low's lachrymose  effusions  of  affection  for 
king,  declared  that  ^  the  iron  tears  which 
flowed  down  Pluto's  cheeks    rather   re- 
sembled the  dismal  bubbling  of  the  Styx 
than  the  gentle    murmuring    streams    of 
Aganippe.' 

Xiord  Thurlow  lived  fourteen  years  after 
his  retirement  from  office,  but  never  gained 
his  former  ascendency.  The  inconsistency 
of  his  political  conduct  prevented  his  being 
received  into  intimate  relations  with  whig 
or  tory,  or  rather  with  Foxites  or  Pittites ; 
and,  though  he  occasionally  spoke  in  the 
House  of  Lords,  and  at  one  time  sided  with 
the  opposition,  he  at  length  fell  into  the 
class  of  those  who  are  cidled  independent 
members.  He  was  a  great  sufferer  from 
the  gout,  and  as  his  age  advanced  his  in- 
creasing infirmities  obliged  him  frequently 
to  betaike  himself  to  the  Bath  waters.    He 


664 


TINDAL 


died  at  Brighton  on  September  12,  1806, 
and  was  buried  at  the  Temple  Church  in 
London. 

With  great  natural  abilities,  with  a  con- 
Biderable  knowledge  of  law,  and  with  un- 
doubted rhetorical  powers,  he  could  scarcely 
be  considered  in  any  other  light  than  as  a 
political  chancellor ;  and  having  failed  in  that 
character,  his  reputation  as  a  judge  does  not 
at  the  present  day  stand  very  high.  Though 
some  of  his  judgments  exhibit  great  learn- 
ing and  research,  their  excellence  was  at- 
triouted  to  the  care  and  erudition  of  that 
eminent  lawyer  Mr.  Hargprave,  whose  able 
assistance  the  chancellor  notoriously  used. 
The  roughness  with  which  he  treated  those 
who  practised  in  his  court  tended  no  doubt 
to  deprive  him  of  such  credit  as  he  de- 
servea;  for  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  a 
private  prompter  could  always  be  at  hand 
to  advise  him  in  the  daily  calls  for  his  deci- 
sions. Mr.  Butler,  a  great  contemporary 
authority,  speaks  of  his  decrees  as  ^strongly 
marked  by  depth  of  legal  knowledge  and 
force  of  expression,  and  by  the  overwhelm- 
ing power  with  which  he  propounded  the 
results  ;  *  but  he  adds  that  *  they  were  often 
involved  in  obscurity,  and  sometimes  reason 
was  rather  silenced  than  convinced.'  This 
last  chtiracteristic  may  be  also  given  of  his 
orations  in  parliament.  The  effect  of  his 
speeches  was  greatly  enhanced  by  this 
authoritative  bearing  and  the  terrors  of  his 
countenance,  which,  by  its  dark  complexion, 
its  stern  and  rugged  features,  and  his 
bushy  eyebrows,  mode  him,  as  Mr.  Fox 
said,  '  look  wiser  than  any  man  ever  was.' 

That  the  retention  of  power  and  the  ac- 
quisition of  wealth  influenced  him  on  two 
occasions  to  desert  his  party  will  ever  be  a 
blot  on  his  character.  On  the  other  hand, 
though  not  aifecting  to  be  a  ^ood  church- 
man, the  disposition  of  his  clerical  patronage 
has  not  been  complained  of;  and  there  are 
many  instances  of  his  encouragement  of  the 
men  of  art  and  literature  of  the  time,  and 
of  his  great  liberality  towards  them  in  his 
peculiar  rough  way.  Among  those  who  en- 
joyed his  patronage  were  Shepherd,  Potter, 
llorsley  and  Johnson,  Ilayley,  Romneyand 
Crabbe.  The  affection  with  which  the 
amiable  poet  Cowper  regarded  him  goes  far 
to  prove  that  he  was  not  so  great  a  bear  as 
he  tried  to  make  the  world  believe,  and 
many  anecdotes  told  of  him  show  the  na- 
tural kindness  of  his  heart. 

He  was  never  married  ;  but  his  title  de- 
volved, under  his  second  patent,  on  his 
nephew,  the  son  of  the  Bishop  of  Durham, 
who  with  his  own  poems  published  some 
translations  from  Homer  and  other  classics 
into  verse,  by  which  the  chancellor  had 
amused  his  retirement'  (Lives  by  Jtoscoe, 
Biarke.and  Lord  Campbell.) 

TIVBAL,  NicoLis  CoimroHAM,  could 
trace  his  relationship  to  two  distinguished 


TINDAL 

men,  the  ReT.  Dr.  Matthew  Tindal,  and  the 
Kev.  Nicholas  Tindal,  who  both  made  them- 
selves names  in  the  literary  world  by  the 
works  they  produced,  to  the  latter  of  whom 
he  was  ^at-grandson.  Ilia  father  wu 
Robert  Tmdal,  an  attomey-at^law  living  at 
Coval  Hall,  near  Chelmsiford,  who  by  hii 
wife  Sarah,  only  daughter  of  John  Pocock 
of  Greenwich  Hospital,  had  three  sons,  of 
whom  he  was  the  eldest.  By  Tarious  in- 
termarriages of  the  family  the  chief  justice 
might  claim  connection  and  descent  from 
many  legal  celebrities,  as  well  as  from  other 
eminent  men ;  among  them  are  the  follow- 
ing iudges:  John  Ilall,  Lewis  Forteacoe, 
and  Koger  Manwood. 

Nicolas  Conyngham  Tindal  was  bon  it 
Coval  Hall  on  December  12,  1776.  The 
first  part  of  his  education  he  received  tt» 
school  at  Chelmsford,  from  whence  he  was 
removed  in  1795  to  Trinity  College.  Can- 
bridge.  His  career  at  the  university  wu 
most  creditable,  terminating  with  the  ho- 
nourable place  of  eighth  wrangler  on  takiB; 
his  bachelor's  degree  in  1790,  to  which  w« 
added  the  distinction  of  obtaining  the  seniff 
chancellor's  medal.  He  proceeded  MA  ii 
1802,  and  was  elected  fellow  of  his  colkge. 
Having  entered  Lincoln's  Inn,  he  beoune  t 
punil  of  Mr.  (afterwards  Judge)  RichaidMo, 
ana  soon  after  commenced  the  practice  oft 
special  pleader.  In  this  branch  ne  exhiluied 
an  extraordinary  capacity,  and  acquired  fsoA 
a  character  that  business  flowed  in  apoa 
him  to  a  considerable  extent.  He  was  so 
successful  that  in  1809  he  felt  himself  sUe 
not  only  to  be  called  to  the  bar,  but  to 
give  up  his  fellowship  by  entering  into  the 
marriage  state.  His  bnde  was  Mereliflir 
youngest  daughter  of  Thomas  Symoodj, 
Esq.,  captain  in  the  royal  navy,  and  oftxr 
of  Admiral  Sir  William  Symonda,  C.E,iQ> 
veyor  of  the  navy. 

He  selected  the  Northern  Circuit,  whefe, 
and  in  Westminster  Hall,  the  reputatioo  he 
had  already  gained  below  the  bar  in  no  loaf 
time  secured  him  a  sufficiency  of  emploj- 
meut.  His  chambers  were  resorted  to  br 
many  pupils,  among  whom  were  Loni» 
Brougham  and  Wensleydale.  His  know- 
ledge of  law  and  his  reasoning  talent  sooa 
had  abundant  exercise  in  the  most  difficult 
questions  submitted  to  him;  and  thoasi 
not  gifted  with  great  rhetorical  poweR-lw 
was  remarkable  for  the  logical  skill  with 
which  he  argued  them.  Among  the  impo^ 
tant  cases  entrusted  to  him  was  that  of 
Ashford  against  Thornton  (BamewaSni 
AldersoHf  405),  which  was  an  i^pesl  o^ 
murder,  when  on  the  part  of  the  appellee 
he  claimed  the  wager  of  battle,  and  n^* 
ceeded  by  his  recondite  arKumeot  m  tkB 
most  abstruse  law  in  saying  his  dkr^  *^ 
discussion  arising  from  thia 
happy  effect  of  produciiig  an  v 
59  deo.  UL  c  46)  fdbolidiiiir 


i 


TINDAL 

VTOoeeding  of  appeal  for  murder,  treason,  or 
felony,  and  the  absurd  method  of  proving 
innocence  by  a  trial  by  battle.  He  was  se- 
lected in  1820,  by  the  recommendation  of 
his  former  pupil  Lord  Brougham,  as  one  of 
the  counsel  for  Queen  Caroline,  in  the  con- 
duct of  whose  defence,  his  learning,  caution, 
and  sagacity  were  of  most  material  assistance. 
Though  he  shared  in  the  popularity  that 
attended  the  queen*s  advisers  on  her  tem- 
porary triumph,  he  did  not  lose  the  interest 
felt  for  him  by  the  prime  minister,  Lord 
Liyerpool,  who  indeed  had  endeavoured, 
but  had  been  too  late,  to  retain  him  for 
the  crown.  That  nobleman  took  an  early 
opportunity  of  appointing  him,  though  he 
had  not  yet  had  the  precedence  of  a  silk 

Sown,  solicitor-general  on  September  20, 
B26,  when  he  received  the  usual  honour  of 
knighthood. 

Sir  Nicolas  had  already  entered  the  poli- 
tical arena  two  years  before  as  member  for 
Wigton,  which  in  1820  he  exchanged  for 
Harwich ;  but  in  the  following  year  he  vsr 
Gated  that  seat  to  become  a  candidate  for 
the  representation  of  his  university,  and 
Having  succeeded,  he  continued  its  member 
till  he  was  raised  to  the  bench.     In  parlia- 
ment he  exhibited  all  those  solid  qualities 
for  which  as  a  barrister  he  was  distin- 
guished, never  pushing  himself  forward  in 
party  contests,  but  always  assisting  the  de- 
Dates  by  his  legal  and  historical  acquirements. 
He   held  the  office  of  solicitor-general 
from  September  1820  to  June  1820,  during 
which  time  there  were  two  vacancies  in 
the  post  of  attorney-  general.    The  first  was 
occasioned  by  the  retirement  of  Sir  Charles 
Wetherell  in  1827,  on  his  opposition  to  the 
Homan  Catholic  claims,  when  Sir  Nicolas 
with  characteristic  modesty  gave  way  to 
Sir  James  Scarlett ;  and  the  other  was  when 
8ir  Charles  Wetherell  resumed  his  place 
under  the  administration  of  the  Duke  of 
Wellington  in   1828.    In  the  next  year, 
However,  he  received  his  reward  in  being 
appointed  chief  justice  of   the   Common 
Pleas ;  and  from  June  U,  1820,  he  presided 
orer  the  court  for  seventeen  years,  with 
that  grave  urbanity,  calm  dignity,  and  in- 
Tariaole    good  temper  which  completely 
lepressed  the  indecent  ebullitions  which 
liaid  too  often  been  exhibited;   and  with 
that  legal  erudition  and  sound  exposition 
of  the  principles  on  which  his  aecisions 
were  founded  which  commanded  the  ap- 
proval and  acquiescence  of  both  his  learned 
and  unlearned  auditory. 

In  the  ordinary  and  vulgar  sense  of  popu- 
larity he  was  certainly  not  a  popular  judge, 
tat  he  sided  with  no  party,  and  professed 
none  of  the  opinions  which  attract  the 
million.  But  no  judge  was  ever  looked  up 
to  or  respected  more  than  he  was.  There 
waa  an  mdescribable  something  about  his 
aumner  that  induced  not  merely  the  agree- 


TIRWHIT 


665 


ment  hut  the  perfect  confidence,  that  en- 
gaged not  merely  the  admiration  but  the 
afiection  of  those  with  whom  he  associated 
or  conversed,  while  his  courteous  and  ami- 
able afiability  invited  friendship,  the  habi- 
tual gravity  of  his  deportment  prevented 
undue  familiarity,  and  few  could  approach 
him  without  feeling  a  sort  of  filial  respect 
and  regard.  Yet  beneath  this  exterior  he 
greatly  enjoyed  a  joke,  and  many  examples 
of  a  quiet  dry  wit  are  related  of  him.  His 
professional  jokes  were  the  best.  One  of 
the  learned  Serjeants  coming  too  late  for 
dinner  at  Seijeants'  Inn  Hall  found  no 
place  left  for  him.  While  waiting  for  a 
seat,  'How  now,*  said  the  chief  justice, 
'  what's  the  matter,  brother  ?  You  look 
like  an  outstanding  term  that's  unsatisfied.' 
Of  another  Serjeant  he  was  asked  whether 
he  thought  him  a  sound  lawyer.  *  Well, 
sir,'  said  he,  '  you  raise  a  doubtful  point, 
whether  roaring  is  unsoundness.'  When 
another  stormy  leader  was  addressing  a 
jury  in  the  civil  court  at  Buckingham,  he 
spoke  so  loud  that  the  chief  justice,  who 
was  delivering  his  charge  in  the  criminal 
court,  enquired  what  that  noise  was.    On 


was 


bein^  informed    that    Serjeant 

opening  a  case,  '  Very  well,'  said  he,  *  since 

Brother is  openingy  I  must  shut  up,* 

and  immediately  ordered  the  doors  between 
the  two  courts  to  be  closed.  The  follow- 
ing, though  not  strictly  professional,  will 
perhaps  be  deemed  quite  as  good.  When 
Lady  Kolle,on  her  husband's  death,  refused 
to  let  the  hounds  go  out,  a  learned  Serjeant 
asked  the  chief  justice  whether  there  would 
be  any  harm  if  they  were  allowed  to  do  so 
with  a  piece  of  crape  round  their  necks. 
'  I  can  hardly  think,'  said  Sir  Nicolas,  *  that 
even  the  crape  is  necessary ;  it  ought  surely 
to  have  been  sufficient  that  they  were  in 
JuU  cry,^ 

His  useful  life  was  terminated  on  July 
6,  1846,  after  a  short  illness,  leaving  three 
sons  and  one  daughter. 

TIBWHIT,  Robert,  whose  family  (now 
called  Tyrwhitt)  is  a  very  ancient  one, 
long  seated  at  Kettleby  in  the  county  of 
Lincoln,  was  the  son  of  Sir  William  Tir- 
whit  of  that  place  by  the  daughter  and 
heir  of  —  Groval,  and  is  mentioned  as 
an  advocate  in  Richard  Bellew's  Reports 
in  the  reign  of  Richard  II.  He  was  made 
one  of  the  kind's  Serjeants  in  the  first  year 
of  the  foUowmg  reign,  and  he  is  among 
those  seijeants  who  in  the  fourth  year  were 
called  on  for  loans  to  enable  the  king  to 
resist  the  Welsh  and  the  Scotch,  with  100/. 
set  against  his  name.  {Acts  Privy  Council^ 
i.  203.) 

In  9  Henry  IV.,  1409,  he  was  ndsed  to 
the  bench.  Ducpdale,  by  mistaking  the 
reading  of  the  Liberate  Roll,  places  him  in 
the  Common  Pleas;  but  that  this  is  an 
error  may  be  seen  in  the  first  place  by  a 


666 


TIRWHIT 


letter  from  the  king  to  the  chancellor, 
dated  May  9, 1409,  in  which  he  names  a 
aerjeant  to  supply  the  place  of  Robert  Tir- 
whity  who  he  says  is  made  one  of  the  jus- 
tices '  de  nostre  Bank.'  (Eytnerj  viii.  684.) 
It  is  positively  shown  also  in  the  patents 
above  referred  to,  and  in  the  Year  Books 
of  Easter,  12  Henry  IV.,  and  Michaelmas, 
13  Henry  IV. 

A  petition  to  parliament  ]^re8ented  in 
the  latter  year,  la  which  he  is  distinctly 
odled  a  justice  of  the  'Bank  le  roy,'  con- 
tains a  curious  illustration  of  the  manners 
of  the  times,  and  shows  somewhat  of  a 
violent  disposition  on  the  part  of  our  judge. 
It  appears  that  a  suit  had  been  instituted 
by  him  relative  to  the  right  of  common  of 
{Misture,  turbary,  and  estovers  at  Wraweby, 
to  which  the  tenants  of  Lord  William  de 
Boos*8  manor  of  Melton  Roos  laid  claim ; 
that  the  decision  of  the  question  had  been 
referred  to  Chief  Justice  Gascoigne,  who 
had  appointed  the  parties  to  meet  on  the 
spot  with  their  evidences  on  a  certain  day, 
which  in  the  record  is  called  a  '  loveday  ; ' 
and  that  instead  of  coming  as  agreed  with 
a  limited  number  of  friends  according  to 
this  decree,  Tirwhit  had  assembled  five 
hundred  men   'armed  and  arrayed  ageyn 
the  pees,  to  lygge  in  awayte  for  the  same 
Lord  de  Roos,  and  there  hym  to  harme  and 
dishonure.*    On  the  reading  of  this  petition 
the  dismayed  judge  was  obliged  to  bumble 
himself  before  the  king,  and,  acknowledging 
that  '  he  ne  hath  noght  bom  hym  as  he 
•holde  have  doon,'  to  offer  to  submit  him- 
self to  the  ordinance  of  any  two  lords  the 
Lord  of  Roos  would  name  of  his  kin.    The 
matter  by  the  king's  desire  was  submitted 
to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  Lord 
de  Grey  the  chamberlain,  who  awarded  that 
the  question  of  right  of  common  should  be 
decided  by  Chief  Justice  Gascoigne  in  the 
manner  he  had  before  prescribed ;  and  that 
as  to  the  offence  complained  of,  Robert 
Tirwhit  should  send  two  tuns  of  Gascony 
wine  to  Melton  Roos,  and  at  a  time  ap- 
pointed by  Lord  de  Roos  should  '  brynge 
to  the  same  place  two  fatte  oxen,  and  twelf 
fatte  shepe,  to  be  dispended  on  a  dyner  to 
hem  that  there  scbal  be,'  and  should  then 
attend  with  '  all  the  knightes,  and  esquiers, 
and  jomen  that  had  ledynge  of  men  on  his 
partie  atte  forsaid  loveday,'  and  should 
there  rehearse  a  speech  of  apology,  which 
is  fully  set  forth,  and  concludes  with  these 
words :  'Zet,  for  as  myche  I  am  a  justice, 
that  more  than  a  comun  man  scholde  have 
had  me    more  discretly  and  peesfuUy,  I 
knowe  wele  that  I  have  failled  and  offende 
yow,  my  Lord  the  Roos,  whereof  I  beseke 
yow  of  grace  and  mercy,  and  ofire  you  y  c. 
mark  to  ben  paied  at  youre  will.'    This 
tempting  offer,  however,  the  Lord  of  Roos 
Sa  to  refuse,  and  '  nothing  take  of  the  for- 
aayd  Robert  but  the  forsayd  wyn,  ozeoi 


TOCLIFFE 

and  shepe,  for  the  dyner  of  them  that  been 
there  present ; '  ana  then  he  is  to  foi^^ve 
the  humiliated  Robert  and  aU  his  party. 
{Bot,  I^trl.  iii.  649.) 

Tirwhit  does  not  seem  to  have  soffered 
from  this  disgrace,  for  we  find  him  regu- 
larly pursuing  his  duties  through  ^e  wbfiU 
of  the  reign  of  Henry  V.,  and  up  to  Fe* 
bruary  1428,  6  Henry  YL.  when  his  death 
is  noted  in  an  order  of  counciL  (Aett 
iVtiy  Council,  iii.  283.) 

Ills  wife  was  a  daughter  of  —  Kelke,  of 
Eelke  in  Yorkshire,  Dy  whom  he  left  a 
son,  Sir  William,  almost  all  of  who» 
descendants  were  of  knightly  degree.  Ods 
of  them,  Sir  Philip,  yyaa  among  the  first 
who  were  honoured  by  James  I.,  in  ICU, 
with  the  dignity  of  baronet.  That  title 
became  extinct  in  1760;  but  a  aecond 
baronetcy  was  conferred  in  1808  on  another 
descendant,  which  still  auxriyea.  (  WoUtm, 
i.  178.) 

TOCLIFFE,  Richard  (Bishop  of  Wnr- 
chkstbr),  called  by  some  Richard  More, 
and  by  others  Richard  of  Uchester,  waa, 
accordmg  to  Ralph  de  Biceto,  bom  at  Soe 
in  the  diocese  of  Bath.  Brought  up  to  tbe 
clerical  profession,  he  at  an  early  period  of 
his  life  obtained  an  inferior  situation  is 
the  King's  Court,  where  it  waa  his  duty  to 
make  copies  of  all  the  summonses  issued 
from  it,  and  to  ynrite  the  writs  and  the 
entries  on  the  rolls.  In  this  office  he  showed 
so  much  diligence  and  care,  and  his  ability 
and  industry  were  so  prominent,  that  bi 
was  graduall;^  advanced,  until  at  last  s 
place  was  assigned  to  him  in  the  Exche- 
quer on  the  ri^t  himd  of  the  chief  justider, 
in  order  that  he  might  he  next  to  tlM 
treasurer,  assist  in  the  accounts,  and  cu«- 
fully  superintend  the  writer  of  the  roQ. 
(Dial  de  Scacc, ;  Madox,  ii.  362.)  Thus  be 
was  regularly  present  in  the  court  at  iti 
sittings,  and  at  length,  assisting  in  its  deli- 
berations, became  one  of  the  justidei& 
Under  this  character  he  is  named  witk 
several  others  as  sitting  in  the  Exchcqaer 
in  11  and  12  Henry  II.,  11(55-6.  He  ii 
then  called  archdeacon  of  Poictiers,  to 
which  preferment  he  had  been  advanced. 
That  tne  position  he  held  in  the  Cum 
Regis  was  a  very  high  one  ia  evident  &oia 
his  always  being  named  first  in  the  plets  d 
the  several  counties  in  which  he  acted  u  s 
justice  itinerant,  from  14  Henry  II.  nntil 
the  20th  year  of  that  reign,  1174.  Tbt 
roll  of  23  Henry  IL  also  mentions  pleii 
before  him  imder  the  name  of  Richtfd, 
archdeacon  of  Poictiers  {Madax,  L  4« 
123,  129,  143-9X  but  it  has  xefexence  t3 
arrears  due  on  pleas  of  former  years.  Ob 
October  6,  1174,  20  Henry  IL,  he  ▼« 
consecrated  Bishop  of  Wincbeeter.  Of  thii 
see,  as  well  as  that  of  Lincoln  and  also  of 
the  abbey  of  Glastonbury,  he  had  been  thf 
custos  while  they  w«ce  in  the  kjiig'tiiaiidls* 


TOMLmS 

In  1176  he  was  appointed  chief  justiciary 
of  NormandVi  and  on  the  retirement  of 
Bichard  de  Luci  in  1179,  the  same  hi^h 
ofBce  in  England  was  entrusted  to  hmi 
with    the   Bishops    of  Ely   and 


_  for wich,  and  they  were  respectively  placed 
«t  the  head  of  three  of  the  four  circuits 
into  which  Ens^and  was  then  divided  by 
the  council  of  Windsor.  (Dugdale's  Orig, 
20.)  Ranulph  de  QJanville  succeeded  them 
in  the  following  year,  in  consequence,  as 
aome  state,  of  a  remonstrance  from  the 
pope  disapproving  of  ecclesiastics  being  so 
employed.  That  he  acted,  however,  after 
this  in  the  judicial  business  of  the  court  is 
eyident  from  his  name  appearing  as  one  of 
the  ju.<*ticiers  before  whom  fines  were  levied 
in  28  Henry  II.,  1182.   (Hunter's  Preface.) 

To  his  see  he  gave  the  manors  of  Iiamm 
and  Groel,  and  after  presiding  over  it 
above  fourteen  years,  he  died  in  December 
1188,  and  was  buried  in  his  cathedral. 
(Godwin,  21(5^  Lord  LytteUon,  ii.  416, 434, 
UL138.) 

TOMLDTS,  RiCHABi),  was  the  son  and 
lieir  of  Edward  Tomlins,  of  Todinton  in  the 
eounty  of  Gloucester,  and  was  admitted  at 
the  Inner  Temple  in  May  1606,  after  which 
no  more  is  recorded  of  him  till  he  was 
■Migned  as  counsel  to  assist  Bastwick  and 
Burton  in  their  complaint  of  the  cruel 
sentence  pronounced  against  them  in  the 
Star  Chamber.  {State  Triais,  iii.  701, 709.) 
He  was  not  long  in  being  rewarded  for  his 
exertions.  In  consequence  of  the  illness 
of  Baron  Trevor,  the  only  judge  of  the 
Court  of  Exchequer  who  adhered  to  the 
parliament,  and  Cursitor  Baron  Leeke 
naving  joined  the  other  barons  at  Oxford, 
a  difficulty  arose  in  September  1645  as  to 
who  was  to  receive  the  customary  presen- 
tation of  the  sheriffs  of  London,  and  to 
attend  the  other  ceremonies  usually  ner- 
Ibrmed  on  the  SOth  of  that  month.  The 
Ijords,  therefore,  on  the  day  previous 
secommended  Mr.  Christopher  Vernon  as 
Iieeke*8  successor;  but  upon  sending  to  the 
Commons  for  their  concurrence,  they  unani- 
mously substituted  the  name  of  Kichard 
Tomlins,  who  was  thereupon  sworn  into 
the  place  of  cursitor  baron  quamdiu  bene 
geaaerit.  He  was  resworn  on  the  death  of 
the  king,  and  kept  his  place  through  all 
the  succeeding  changes,  his  name  being 
lecOTded  in  the  Exchequer  Books  of  Hilary 
Term  1653-4,  on  the  assumption  of  the 

Eotectorate  by  Oliver  Cromwell,  and  of 
ichaelmas  Term  1658,  on  the  succession 
of  Protector  Richard.  {Lords'  JoumalSf 
>iL  606;  Commons,  iv.  292;  Whitelocke, 
17^  175,  383.) 

He  must  have  been  a  garrulous  humorist, 
%0  judge  from  a  speech  printed  as  having 
teen  addressed  by  him  to  the  sheriffs  of 
lioodon  in  1659,  on  their  coming  to  the 
ZBiohjequer  to  m  awom.    Its  absurdity  is 


TOTINGTON 


667 


I  too  great  to  be  supposed  to  be  a  faithful 
transcript  of  his  words ;  but  it  is  doubtless 
a  true  representation  of  his  style  and 
manner,  talcen  by  some  auditor  who  was 
amused  with  the  address,  and  who  describes 
him  as  '  Baron  Tomlinson.*  He  was  then, 
as  he  says,  a  very  old  man,  and  he  either 
died  or  was  displaced  at  the  Restoration^ 
when  Thomas  Leeke,  who  was  cursitor 
baron  before  him,  resumed  his  office. 

TOBELL,  WiLLiAH,  held  some  office  in 
the  court  so  early  as  4  Henry  II.,  1158. 
(i^tf  jRo^,  144.;  His  name  occurs  in 
fines  of  28  Henry  II.,  1182,  as  one  of  the 

f persons  before  whom  they  were  acknow- 
ed^ed  in  the  Curia  Regis  at  Westminster. 
(j£mter's  Preface.)  He  is  not,  however, 
named  on  any  other  occasion  with  a  judicial 
character.  It  may  be  possible,  therefore, 
that  he  was  not  a  justicier,  as  in  this  early 
period  of  the  adoption  of  fines  it  is  not 
unlikely  that  the  officer  who  filled  up  the 
instrument  may  have  thought  it  necessary 
to  insert  the  names  of  all  who  were  pre- 
sent, whether  attending  judicially  or  offi- 
cially. 

His  position  was  certainly  a  prominent 
one,  since  the  sheriffalty  of  the  two  counties 
of  Gloucester  and  Hereford  was  entrusted 
to  him  in  29  and  30  Henry  II. 

Yeovil  and  Odecumb  in  Somersetshire 
belonged  to  him,  and  by  the  Great  Roll  of 
1  Richard  I.  it  appears  that  he  died  about 
that  time.     (Pipe  Holism  147,  &c.) 

TOBHOUEA,  Adah  de,  was  one  of  four 
justices  itinerant  who,  in  3  Richard  I., 
1191-2,  imposed  a  fine  of  forty  shillings  on 
the  hundred  of  Edelmeton  (Edmonton)  for 
a  murder,  and  for  not  appearing  on  the  first 
summons.     (Madox,  i.  544.) 

TOTIHOTOF,  Sahson  de  (Abbot  of  St. 
Edmund's  Bury),  though  introduced  neither 
by  Dugdale  nor  Madox  into  their  lists  of 
justices  itinerant,  is  expressly  stated  to 
have  filled  that  office  by  Joceline  de  Brake- 
londa,  who  was  his  chaplain,  and  may  be 
called  his  biographer.  The  precise  date  is 
not  mentioned,  but  in  the  arrangement  of 
the  chronicle  the  fact  occurs  between  1182 
and  1 187.  In  the '  Monasticon '  it  is  asserted 
that  he  was  made  one  of  the  kingfs  justi- 
ciaries in  6  Richard  I.,  but  no  authonty  is 
cited,  nor  is  there  any  other  evidence  of 
the  fact. 

Samson  de  Totington  was  so  called  from 
a  place  of  that  name  in  the  hundred  of 
Weyland  in  Norfolk,  of  which  he  was  a 
native.  He  became  a  monk  in  the  abbey 
of  St.  Edmunds  in  1166,  and  in  process  of 
time  was  appointed  master  of  the  novices, 
and  afterwards  sub-tocrist.  At  the  death 
of  Abbot  Hugo  the  king  adopted  a  curious 
mode  of  electing  his  successor,  the  result 
of  which  was  the  appointment  of  Samson. 
The  wisdom  of  the  choice  was  soon  appa- 
rent   By  his  prudence  and  energy  Um 


668 


TOUTHEBY 


afifairs  of  the  conyent  were  extricated  in  a 
Bhort  time  from  the  disorder  into  which  the 
weakness  and  indolence  of  his  predecessor 
had  plunged  them. 

He  repaired  the  dilapidated  huildings, 
visited  his  manors,  and  cleared  off  the 
deht  which  pressed  on  the  revenue.  He 
repressed  the  irregularities  of  the  monks, 
Buccessfully  resisted  the  encroachments  of 
the  knights  and  townspeople,  stood  up  in 
every  way  for  the  rights  of  his  house, 
whether  against  prince  or  peer,  and  yet 
found  favour  in  the  sight  of  nis  sovereign. 
In  a  short  time  after  his  election  the  pope 
appointed  him  a  judge  ^de  cautU  cogno- 
9cendiSf  and  not  long  afterwards  he  was 
constituted  hy  the  king  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant.  Joceline  dwells  with  piide  on 
the  admiration  which  his  judicial  powers 
excited,  and  relates  that  one  of  the  suitors 
cursed  his  court,  where,  he  complained, 
neither  gold  nor  silver  would  avail  to  con- 
found his  adversary.  Oshert  Fitz-Hervey 
(himself  a  judge)  said,  '  That  abbot  is  a 
shrewd  fellow ;  if  he  go  on  as  he  begins, 
he  will  cut  out  every  lawyer  of  us.* 

In  J 188  he  was  desirous  of  joining  those 
who  had  assumed  the  crosi*,  but  King 
Henry  found  him  so  useful  in  the  kingdom 
that  he  would  not  permit  his  departure. 
The  fall  of  Jerusalem  afflicted  him  so 
heavily  that  he  put  on  hair  garments  and 
abstained  from  nesh  during  the  rest  of  his 
life.  In  the  year  1100  he  procured  the 
banishment  of  the  Jews  from  Dt  Edmund*s 
Bury. 

During  King  Richard's  absence  he  sup- 

Jorted  the  royal  authority  against  Prince 
ohn,  and  when  Kichard  was  detained  in 
Germany  he  offered  to  go  in  search  of  him, 
and  actually,  when  his  prison  was  dis- 
covered, went  to  him  with  rich  gifts. 

He  obtained  many  privileges  for  his 
house  from  Popes  Lucius  III.,  Urban  III., 
and  Clement  111.,  and  illustrated  his  rule 
by  founding  the  hospital  of  Babwell,  or  St. 
I^viour's,  repurchasing  from  the  crown 
the  manor  of  Mildenhall  for  a  thousand 
marks,  and  building  the  schools  of  St.  Ed- 
mund's Bury.  Little  is  mentioned  of  his 
proceedings  in  the  reign  of  King  John,  ex- 
cept that  he  received  that  monarch  at  the 
aboey  soon  after  his  coronation,  and  again 
in  1203.  His  death  occurred  on  December 
SO,  1211.  {Chron,  Joed,  de  Brakelondaj 
[Camden  Soc] ;  Dugdale^s  Monast,  iii.  104.) 
TOUTHEBT,  GiLBEBT  DE,  WAS  an  advo- 
cate of  considerable  eminence.  His  name 
frequently  appears  in  the  Year  Books 
dunng  the  reign  of  Edward  II.,  and  in  the 
first  two  years  of  Edward  IH.,  often  ab- 
breviated '  Toud.*  In  0  Edward  II.  he 
was  employed  in  prosecuting  and  defending 
the  king's  suits,  losing  at  that  time  a  king^s 
aeijeant-at-law.  The  next  year  he  was 
summoned  among  the  legal  afisifitants  to 


TRACY 

parliament ;  and  so  continued  to  be  during 
the  remainder  of  the  reign.  He  is  fizst 
mentioned  in  a  judicial  capacity  as  one  of 
the  justices  appointed  in  Lincolnshire  in 
March  1318,  and  most  of  bia  future  com- 
missions were  in  that  county.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  these  occasional  employmratB  si 
a  judge  did  not  prevent  his  pursuing  ha 
profession  as  an  aavocate ;  for  we  not  ohIt 
find  him  engaged  in  cases  as  a  aeijeant-tt- 
law  in  14  Eaward  II.,  but  on  the  accesaioa 
of  Edward  lU.  his  stipend  for  prosecutiDg 
and  defending  the  king*a  causes  was  n^ 
newe4  to  him.  He  certainly  acted  as  i 
justice  of  assize  under  the  latter  king;  but 
there  is  no  mention  of  hiin  later  than  the 
third  year.  (Rot,  Pari.  i.  352,  370, 433,  il 
402 ;  Pari  Writs,  ii.  p.  ii.  1618.) 

T0WK8HEHD,  Roger,  whose  family  wm 
established  at  Rainham  in  Norfolk  so'eiil? 
as  the  reign  of  the  first  Henry,  was  tbs 
only  son  of  John  Townahend  of  that  pbc^ 
by  Joan,  daughter  and  heir  of  Sir  Robert 
Lunsford,  of  Rumford   in   Sssex,  and  d 
Battle  in  Sussex.    He  studied  the  law  it 
Lincoln's  Inn,  and  waa  elected  a  govenor 
in  1  Edward  IV.,  1461,  and  reader  in  146^ 
and  in   1474.     His  name   occurs  in  the 
Year  Books  from  Hilary   1405 ;    and  in 
1472,  the  year  after  the  final  exclusion  ^f 
Henry  VI.  from  the  throne,  he  represented 
the  borough  of  Calne  in  parliament:  bat, 
notwithstanding  his  eminence  as  a  lawrvr. 
he  was  not  called  to  the  degree  of  the  coif 
till  October  1477.     In  the  last  week  of  the 
short  reign  of  Edward  V.,  June  1483,  be 
was  appointed  one  of  the  king's  serjeantL 
(Pymtr,  xii.   186.)      His  patent  was  of 
course  renewed  in  the  foUowing  weekbt 
Richard  IIL,  by  whom  he  was  made  i 
judge  of  the  Common  Pleas  about  Janutir 
i4&l.    Althoufi^h  he   was  thus  evidentljr 
patronised  by  the  usurper,  it  was  the  policT 
of  Henry  VIl.,  on  his  accession,  to  make  no 
changes  in  the  administration  of  justice,  so 
that  he  was  not  only  retained  on  the  bencb, 
but  received  the  order  of  knighthood  pre- 
vious to  the  coronation. 

According  to  Dugdale  (Ori^.  47),  tbe 
last  fine  acknowledged  before  him  is  dated 
at  Midsummer  1493,  and  the  genealogi^ 
have  generally  placed  his  death  in  tbat 
year  (probably  on  that  account) ;  bat  tbe 
Year  liooks  contain  ample  evidence  that  be 
continued  to  sit  in  the  court  for  every  tuib- 
sequent  year  till  Michaelmas  1500,  after 
which  his  name  disappears. 

He  married  Anne,  daughter  and  ci>heirof 
Sir  William  de  Biewse,  of  Wenham  Hall  in 
Suffolk ;  and  their  lineal  descendants  are 
now  represented  in  the  House  of  Lnrdi 
by  the  Alarquis  Townshend  and  Viscoont 
Sydney. 

TRACY,  Hknbt  db,  possessed  the  baroar 
of  Barnstaple  in  Devonshira,  indoding 
Tayistock  and  yarious  other  manon^  sue- 


TRACY 

oeeding  to  it  on  the  death  of  his  father, 
Oliver  de  Tracy,  in  12  John. 

In  17  HeniT  III.,  1282,  he  was  placed 
at  the  head  oi;  the  justices  itinerant  into 
Cornwall,  no  douht  as  a  resident  nohleman 
only,  as  no  other  instance  occurs  of  his  ap- 

S ointment  to  that  office.  An  assize  of  novel 
iflseisin,  &c.,  was,  however,  directed  to  be 
taken  before  him  in  Devonshire  in  41 
Henry  III.  (Excerpt,  e  JRU,  Fin,  ii.  253) ; 
and  in  45  Henry  III.  his  name  appears 
among  the  barons  of  the  Exchequer. 
(^Madox,  iL  319.)  In  the  former  year  he 
"was  made  governor  of  the  castle  of  Exeter. 
He  died  at  a  (^>od  old  age,  about  2  Edward 
I.,  1273.  (Baronage,  i.  622;  JHot,  Pat. 
John,  101 ;  Bot,  Claus,  i.  137,  283,  405.) 

TRACT,  Robert,  was  the  eldest  son  of 
Robert,  second  Viscount  Tracy  in  Ireland 
(descended  from  the  above  Henry  de 
Tracy),  by  his  second  wife,  Dorothy, 
daughter  of  Thomas  Cocks,  Esq.,  of  Castle- 
ditch  in  Herefordshire.  He  was  bom  in 
1€U55.  and  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the 
Middle  Temple  in  1680. 

In  July  1690  King  William  made  him  a 
judge  of  the  King's  Bench  in  Ireland,  but 
aeon  translated  him,  on  November  14, 1700, 
from  that  country  to  be  a  boron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer in  England.  In  less  than  two  years 
he  had  a  second  removal  to  the  Common 
Fleas,  in  Trinity  Term  1702,  soon  after  the 
accession  of  Queen  Anne.  Here  he  re- 
mained for  four-and-twenty  years,  during 
which  period  he  was  selected  both  by  that 
queen  and  by  George  I.  to  be  one  of  the 
oomnusfcioners  of  the  Great  Seal  on  vacancies 
in  the  office  of  lord  chancellor — viz.,  from 
September  14  to  October  19,  1710;  and  the 
aecond  from  April  16  to  May  12, 1718.  He 
nsugned  his  place  on  the  bench  on  October 
26,  1726,  on  the  plea  of  ill  healthy  but  he 
lived  nine  years  afterwards  in  the  enjoyment 
of  a  pension  of  1500^  a  year.  lie  died  on 
September  11,  1735,  aged  eighty,  at  his 
aeat  at  Coscomb  in  the  parish  of  Didbrooke, 
Gloucestershire. 

He  is  described  as '  a  complete  gentleman 
and  a  good  lawyer,  of  a  clear  head  and  honest 
heart,  and  as  delivering  his  opinion  with 
that  genteel  affability  and  integnty  that  even 
thoae  who  lost  a  cause  were  charmed  with 
his  behaviour.'  This  character,  as  it  was 
written  at  the  time  of  his  death,  may  be  re- 
garded, with  some  allowance  for  its  affected 
phraseologT,  as  substantially  true,  especially* 
when  the  Duke  of  Wharton  in  one  of  his 
Mtiree  declares  that  he  will  be  constant  to 
hia  mistress  until  the  time 

When  Tracy*8  generoas  soul  shall  swell  with 
pride. 

(ehnuth's  Law  Off,  Ireland,  100 ;  Lord  Ray- 
mond,  606,  769,  1420 ;  LuUreU,  iv.  707,  v. 
184,  yL  633.) 
He  married  Anne,  daughter  of  William 


TREBY 


669 


Dowdeswell,  of  Pool  Court  in  Worcester- 
shire, and  had,  besides  two  daughters,  three 
sons— Robert,  liichard,  and  William.  An 
aUeged  descendant  of  the  latter  claimed  the 
title  of  Viscount  Tracy  in  1843 ;  but  the 
House  of  Lords,  after  various  hearings,  which 
extended  to  1849,  were  not  satistied  with 
the  evidence  in  support  of  his  claim. 

T&AYSB8,  JoHX,  was  of  a  Lancashire 
family,  and  member  for  that  county  in  33 
Edward  I.  Under  Edward  II.  he  was  fre- 
quently employed  in  it  as  commissioner  of 
array,  assessor  of  the  aids,  and  custos  of  the 
lands  forfeited  by  Thomas  Earl  of  Lan- 
caster. In  2  Edward  IIL  he  was  engaged 
with  the  seneschal  of  Gascony  and  the  con- 
stable of  Bordeaux  in  treating  with  certain 
German  princes;  and  on  March  2,  1329,  he 
was  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas.  He  is 
mentioned  in  the  Year  Book  of  the  reign  as 
late  as  Michaelmas  1833.  About  that  time 
he  was  appointed  constable  of  Bordeaux, 
and  died  within  four  years  after.  (Pari. 
Writs,  i.  868,  ii.  p.  ii.  1620,  Col.  jRot,  Pat. 
103,  106,  118;  Dugdalea  OHg,  46,  143, 
271.)  ' 

TKEBT,  George,  was  the  son  of  Peter 
Treby,  a  respectable  gentleman  of  Plvmpton 
in  Devonshire,  by  his  wife  Joan,  daughter 
of  John  Snellings,  of  Chaddlewood,  Esq. 
He  was  bom  in  J  644,  was  placed  at  Exeter 
College,  Oxford,  in  1661,  and  was  entered 
of  the  Middle  Temple.  Having  been  called 
to  the  bar  in  1071,  he  was  soon  regarded  as 
a  rising  man,  and  was  chosen  as  representa- 
tive for  his  native  town  in  both  the  parlia- 
ments of  1679,  in  the  latter  of  which  he 
acted  as  chairman  of  the  committee  of  se- 
crecy relative  to  the  Popish  Plot,  and  was 
selected  as  one  of  the  managers  to  conduct 
the  impeachment  of  Lord  Stafford  as  a 
participator  in  it.  In  December  1680  he 
was  elected  recorder  of  London,  and  was 
knighted,  and  was  also  made  a  bencher  of 
his  inn.  When  the  city  charters  were  at- 
tacked by  the  quo  warranto  two  years  after- 
wards, he  stood  up  boldly  and  ably  in  their 
defence,  and  of  course  was  removed  from 
his  place  when  judgment  was  given  against 
them,  to  make  way  for  the  court  favourite, 
Sir  Thomas  Jenner.  (^State  Trials,  vii.  1  :{08, 
viii.  1099.)  He  sat  in  the  last  pariiament 
of  Charles  IL,  which,  meeting  at  Oxford, 
was  allowed  to  continue  its  deliberations 
for  no  more  than  a  week  in  March  1081 ; 
and  from  the  smgle  parliament  called  by 
James  II.  he  was  excluded. 

Refusing  to  give  countenance  to  that 
king*s  claim  to  di«pense  with  the  penal  laws, 
he  declined  to  plead  for  the  plaintiff'  in  the 
sham  action  brought  by  Sir  Edward  Hale's 
coachman  against  his  master,  and  was  natu- 
rally, both  for  his  legal  abilitvand  his  known 
liberality,  selected  as  one  of  the  counsel  to 
defend  the  seven  bishops.  When  the  king, 
alarmed  by  the  threatened  approach  of  the 


670 


TREBY 


prince  of  Orange,  deemed  it  prudent  to  re- 
Btore  the  city's  charters,  Sir  George  was 
requested  to  resume  his  office  of  recorder, 
but  for  two  months  declined  to  do  so,  until 
on  the  prince's  arrival  he  was  induced  to 
consent  He  took  his  seat  on  December  10, 
1688,  and  four  days  after  delivered  an  ad- 
dress of  congratulation  to  the  prince,  which 
was  the  subject  of  general  admiration. 
(LuUreU,  I  380,  446.)  To  the  Convention 
Parliament  in  the  following  month  he  was 
returned  by  his  old  constituency  of  Ply mpton. 

In  the  early  discussions  of  that  parlia- 
ment he  took  a  leading  part  in  proposing, 
and  in  the  conference  with  the  Peers  m  sup- 
porting, the  resolution  declaring  the  abai- 
cation  of  the  king.  On  some  symptoms  of 
mutiny  in  the  army,  he  advised  the  house 
not  to  waste  their  time  in  discussions,  but 
at  once  to  oppose  force  with  force.  When 
Sir  Henry  Pollexfen  was  appointed  attor- 
ney-general in  February  1689,  Treby  was 
made  solicitor,  but  succeeded  to  the  former 
post  in  May.  The  town  of  Plympton  re- 
turned him  again  to  William's  second  par- 
liament of  March  1690 ;  and  he  was  still  a 
member  of  it  when  he  was  constituted  on 
May  3, 1692,  lord  chief  justice  of  the  Com- 
mon Pleas.  At  this  time  he  resigned  the 
recordership  of  London,  which  he  had,  con- 
trary to  the  usual  practice,  continued  to 
hold  notwithstanding  his  official  position ; 
and  he  was  complimented  by  the  common 
council  with  a  present  of  one  hundred 
guineas.  {Ibid.  606,  622 ;  Pari,  Hist.  iv. 
40,  &c.)  In  1700  he  held  the  Great  Seal 
with  his  two  brother  chiefs  from  May  6  to 
21,  and  seven  months  afterwards  his  career 
was  terminated  by  his  death  on  December 
13,  at  his  house  in  Kensington  Gravel  Pits. 
He  was  buried  in  the  Temple  Church. 
(LuUreU,  iv.  446 ;  Lord  Raymond,  666,  627.) 

His  excellence  as  a  lawyer  is  universally 
admitted ;  and  his  various  arguments  on  the 
question  of  monopolies,  in  defence  of  the 
city  charters,  and  in  the  bankers'  case  (in 
which  he  differed  from  his  colleagues),  suf- 
ficiently attest  the  extent  of  his  learning. 
His  high  character  as  a  judge,  besides  being 
lauded  by  Evelyn  (iii.  386),  receives  the 
best  confirmation  from  the  following  lines 
in  an  ode  on  his  death  {State  Poems,  iv. 
366):— 

Great  without  pride»  and  without  wrinkles  wise. 
Obliging  without  art,  and  just  without  disguise. 
Wise  in  his  counsels,  humble  in  discourse, 
Good  without  noise,  and  pleasant  without  force, 
Easy  of  access,  willinjc  to  bestow, 
Regarded  virtue,  and  forgot  his  foe. 

He  wrote  the  annotations  in  the  margin  of 
Dyer's  Reports,  and  was  the  author  of  seve- 
ral occasional  pamphlets. 

His  first  wife  was  Dorothy  Westcott ;  his 
second,  Dorothy,  daughter  of  Ralph  Grange, 
Esq.,  of  the  Temple :  and  his  third,  Mrs. 
Brindley,  who  brought  him  a  fortune  of 


TRESnJAH 

10,000/L  His  eldest  son  bj  bia  fint 
became  secretary  at  war,  and  hia  grandson 
master  of  the  household  to  George  IL  and 
a  lord  of  the  Treasury.  The  family  still 
survives,  and  resides  at  Plympton  Hoiw, 
built  by  the  chief  justice's  aon.  {Atkm. 
Oxon.  IV.  499;  AoUe's  Grander,  iL  166; 
LuftreU,  iii.  11.) 

TBEXATLE,  Thomas,  was  descended 
from  a  family  seated  at  Sand,  in  Sidboij 
in  Devonshire.  He  was  a  member  of  the 
Middle  Temple,  and  the  Year  Book  daxcs 
his  appearance  in  court  from  Easter,  12 
Edward  IV.,  1472 ;  he  took  the  degree  of 
the  coif  in  Trinity  Term  1478,  and  wm 
made  king's  Serjeant  in  Noyember  148L 
During  the  short  reign  of  Edward  V.  he 
was  united  with  Judge  William  Jennev  ia 
the  commission  of  assize  on  the  Oxford  6u«- 
cuit.  His  promotion  as  a  justice  of  the 
King's  Bench  took  place  on  July  16, 1488^ 
3  Henry  VII.;  and  there  is  evidence,  b 
Keilwey*s  Reports,  of  his  acting  as  lite 
as  Hilary  Term  1507,  {Hdsdon's  Dem, 
34;  9  Report  Pub.  Rec.,  App.  ii.  2.) 

TBE8ILIAH,  Robert,  was  in  all  proht- 
bility  a  Comishman.  He  possessed  sevoil 
manors  and  extensive  lands  there  (CK 
Inq.  p.  m.  iii.  106),  and  was  an  advocate  at 
the  assizes  of  the  county  in  43  EdwaidllL, 
1369.  {Liber  Assisaruni,  278.  279.)  Be 
was  educated  at  Oxford,  and  was  elected 
fellow  of  Exeter  College  about  the  year  13M. 

He  appears  to  have  been  a  king  s  seijcsat 
in  the  first  year  of  Richard  XL,  at  the  end 
of  which,  ^Iay  6,  1378,  he  was  constituted 
a  justice  of  the  Court  of  King's  Beadi, 
where  he  sat  as  the  only  puisne  judge  for 
four  years. 

He  was  promoted  to  the  office  of  chief 
justice  on  June  22,  1381,  a  week  after  the 
murder  of  John  de  Cavendish,  and  the  firet 
duty  to  which  he    was  called   was  the 
punishment  of  the  insurgents.    Some  of 
the  worst  were  those   who  had  risen  ia 
Hertfordshire,  and  forcibly  compelled  the 
abbot  of  St  Alban's  to  grant  them  vnitw 
immunities.   To  that  town  he  accompanied 
the  king,  and  the  mode  of  trial  he  aoMed 
was  somewhat  novel.     He  forced  one  juiy 
of  twelve  to  present  the  ringl»ulers,  acoofd- 
ing  to  a  list  previously  prepared ;  a  secood 
jury  was  next  emnanelled,  who  confimed 
the  finding  of  the  nrst ;  and  then  the  same 
course  was  adopted  with  a  third  jury.    >*o 
witnesses  appear  to  have  been  examined, 
but  every  party  charged  was  condemned 
on  the  personal  knowledge  of  these  thirt?- 
sLx  men.  {Newcomes  St.  Albangy  263.)  A 
executions  here  and  in  other  counties  sie 
described  as  being  most  numerous,  and  Tre^ 
silian's  cruelty  as  haying  had  no  parallel 
till  the  campaign  of  Judge  Jeffieys  three 
centuries  afterwards.    Knighton,  a  contest 
porary  chronicler,  states  that  whoever  wM 
accused   before   him,  whether  guilty  or 


TRESniAN 

.innocent,  was  sore  to  be  condemned ;  and 
other  writers  have  extended  the  number  of 
the  sufferers  to  fifteen  hundred.  (Linfford, 
iy.  182 ;  Bapin,  iv.  25.) 

The  excited  state  of  the  country  might 
perhaps  justify  some  stringent  proceedings ; 
but  both  he  and  others,  engaged  in  putting 
down  the  rebellion,  seem  to  have  been  coq- 
acious  that  they  had  j^reatly  exceeded  auy 
warrantable  licence;  masmuch  as,  in  the 
parliament  of  the  following  November,  an 
act  of  pardon  and  indemnity  was  deemed 
expedient  for  those  who  had  acted  *  with- 
out due  process  of  the  law.' 

No  complaint  appears  to  have  been  made 
against  his  judicial  conduct  in  civil  matters, 
but  in  his  political  career  he  was  not  so 
fortunate.  Instead  of  using  the  influence  of 
his  position  to  check  the  ro3ral  extravagance 
and  folly,  he  became,  by  countenancing 
^rhatever  was  agreeable  to  the  king,  a  fa- 
Tourite  at  court,  and  a  partisan  of  Kobert 
de  Vere,  Duke  of  Ireland.  The  effect  of 
this  misplaced  confidence  was  soon  visible 
in  the  disordered  state  of  the  revenue,  and 
the  adoption  of  unpopular  taxes  to  supply 
its  deficiencies.  Not  only  did  the  people 
murmur,  but  the  houses  of  parliament  found 
it  necessary  to  put  a  stop  to  the  maladmi- 
nistration of  de  Vere  and  his  associates. 

One  of  these,  the  Chancellor  de  la  Pole, 
was  impeached  in  the  first  instance,  and 
bis  conviction  was  followed  by  a  statute 
placing  the  management  of  the  state  and  the 
control  of  the  revenue  in  the  hands  of  eleven 
permanent  commissioners,  at  the  head  of 
whom  were  the  king*s  uncles,  the  Dukes  of 
"York  and  Gloucester.  Although  this  com- 
mission was  solemnly  confirmed  by  the 
king's  letters  patent,  dated  November  19, 
1386,  the  parliament  was  no  sooner  dis- 
aolved  than  de  Vere  and  the  rest  of  the 
king's  friends,  representing  to  him  his  de- 
pendent state,  urged  him  to  take  active 
measures  to  release  himself  from  the  thral- 
dom in  which  the  obnoxious  ordinance  had 
placed  him.  The  king's  chief  advisers, 
Desides  de  Vere  and  Tresilian,  were  Alex- 
ander Neville,  Archbishop  of  York ;  Michael 
de  la  Pole,  the  late  coancellor;  and  Sir 
Nicholas  Brambre,  an  alderman  of  London. 
After  endeavouring  in  vain  to  tamper  with 
the  sheriffs  of  the  several  counties  to  insure 
the  election  of  subservient  members  for  the 
next  parliament,  they  summoned  all  the 
judges  to  a  council  at  Nottingham  on  Au- 
gust 25, 1387,  and  by  violent  threats  com- 
pelled them  to  attach  their  signatures  to  a 
series  of  questions  and  answers,  which  had 
been  already  prepared  by  Chief  Justice 
Tresilian,  the  purport  of  which  was  to  de- 
clare the  '  new  statute,  ordinance,  and  com- 
mission to  be  derogatory  to  the  royalty 
and  prerogative  of  the  km^ ; '  that  aU  the 
penwns  concerned  in  procurmg  and  making 
It  were  tiaitors,  and  ought  to  be  punished 


TRESILIAN 


671 


with  death ;  and  that  the  judgment  against 
Michael  de  la  Pole  was  erroneous  and 
revocable. 

So  awkwardly,  however,  had  they  con- 
certed their  plans  that  the  whole  plot  came 
speedily  to  the  knowledge  of  the  lords 
commissioners,  who  forthwith  appealed  the 
archbishop,  de  Vere,  de  la  Pole,  Tresilian, 
and  Bramnre  of  high  treason.  This  occurred 
on  November  17, 1387,  when  the  king  pro- 
mised to  summon  a  parliament  in  the  fol- 
lowing February,  that  justice  might  be 
done.  During  the  interval  the  archbishop, 
de  Vere,  and  de  la  Pole  found  safety  m 
flight;  not,  however,  without  some  futile 
attempts  on  the  part  of  de  Vere  to  resist 
the  commissioners  by  force  of  arms.  Tre- 
silian also  in  the  first  instance  fled,  and 
might  have  escaped  but  for  his  own  infatu- 
ation. His  place  as  chief  justice  was  filled 
up  on  January  31,  1388,  by  the  appoint- 
ment of  Walter  de  Clopton;  and  on  Fe- 
bruary 3,  the  parliament  having  met,  the 
five  lords  who  acted  as  appellants — viz.,  the 
Duke  of  Gloucester,  and  the  Earls  of  Arun- 
del, Nottingham,  Derby,  and  Warwick — de- 
livered in  no  less  than  thirty-nine  articles 
of  impeachment,  charging  the  accused  with 
encroaching  to  themselves  royal  power  by 
enslaving  tne  king  and  blemishing  his  pre- 
rogative, and  detailing  various  acts  in  proof 
of  their  guilt.  Not  the  least  promment 
among  these  was  the  constraint  they  had 
put  upon  the  justices  to  set  their  hands  to 
the  answers  to  the  unconstitutional  ques- 
tions which  had  been  propounded  to  them, 
and  their  endeavours  oy  virtue  thereof  to 
get  the  lords  and  others,  who  had  agreed 
to  make  the  ordinance  in  the  last  parlia- 
ment, attainted  as  traitors.  All  of  the  appel- 
lees, except  Brambre^  who  was  in  custody, 
were  pronounced  guilty  for  default  of  ap- 
pearance; and  the  duke,  the  earl,  and 
Tresilian  were  sentenced  to  the  death  of 
traitors,  and  to  forfeit  their  property  to  the 
king,  the  archbishop*s  temporalities  being 
also  taken  into  the  king's  hands.  (Hot, 
Pari,  iii.  229-237  ) 

Nicholas  Brambre  was  next  brought  for- 
ward to  undergo  his  trial,  and  while  it  was 
proceeding  Tresilian  was  taken  and  brought 
before  the  parliament.  The  circumstances 
of  his  capture  are  related  with  some  slight 
variations.  The  king  had  joined  the  Duke 
of  Ireland  at  Bristol,  and  being  desirous  of 
knowing  what  proceedinffs  were  contem- 
plated by  his  uncles  at  Westminster,  Tre- 
silian had  volunteered  to  undertake  the 
perilous  journey.  He  reached  London  with- 
out discovery,  and  taking  up  his  lod^^ing 
in  an  alehouse,  or,  according  to  another 
account,  at  an  apothecary's,  opposite  the 
palace  gate,  he  had  ensconced  bimt»elf  in  a 
window  so  that  he  could  observe  every  one 
who  passed.  His  disguise,  however,  though 
sufficient  to  mislead  ordinary  observers. 


672 


TREVAIGNON    . 


could  not  deceive  a  squire  of  the  Duke  of 
Gloucester's  who  had  been  often  in  his  com- 
pany. Thinking  that  he  recognised  the 
chief  justice,  he  went  in  and  had  an  inter- 
view which  satisfied  him  that  he  was  not 
mistaken,  although  Tresilian  represented 
himself  as  a  farmer  on  Sir  John  Holland's 
estate  in  Kent,  come  up  to  town  in  order 
to  obtwn  redress  for  some  wrongs  done  to 
him  by  the  men  of  the  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury. The  squire,  pretending  to  believe 
him,  went  directly  to  the  duke,  his  master, 
by  whose  orders  he  returned  with  a  sutii- 
cient  guard,  and  brought  the  unfortunate 
judge  oefore  the  counciL  His  fate  was  not 
long  delaved,  for,  after  a  short  colloquy 
with  the  duke,  he  was  asked  what  he  oad 
to  say  why  execution  should  not  be  done 
according  to  the  judgment  pronounced; 
and  becoming  as  one  struck  dumb,  so  that 
he  could  not  answer,  he  was  led  away  to 
undergo  his  sentence.  Froissart  (ii.  285) 
says  he  was  beheaded,  and  after  hanjred 
upon  a  gibbet;  but  the  Parliament  lloll 
states  that  he  was  taken  to  the  Tower,  and 
thence  drawn  through  the  city,  and  hanged 
at  Tyburn.  (Holinshedj  ii.  794. )  His  body 
was  Duried  in  the  church  of  the  Drey  Friars. 

These  events,  it  is  agreed  by  all,  occurred 
on  February  10,  1388 ;  and  the  attainder 
against  him  and  the  others  was  confinned 
in  the  same  parliament.  Although  all 
these  proceedings  were  reversed  by  the 
parliament  of  2l  Richard  II.,  when  the 
Icing  regained  his  power  in  the  state,  they 
were  again  revived  and  confirmed  on  the 
accession  of  Henry  IV. 

The  confiscation  of  Tresilian's  property 
was  not  delayed  for  an  instant.  No  less 
than  eleven  manors  in  Cornwall  are  men- 
tioned as  belonging  to  him,  besides  other 
extensive  possessions  in  that  county  and  in 
Oxfordshire.   (CW.  /wy.  p.  m.  iii.  106,  120.) 

By  his  wife,  Emeline,  the  daughter  of 
William  Hiwishe,  of  Stowford  in  Devon- 
shire, he  loft  one  son,  named  John  ;  and  a 
daugliter,  who  married  John  Hauley,  of 
Dartmouth. 

TBEVAIOKOK,  John  de,  was  of  a  Cornish 
family,  the  descendants  of  which  still 
flourish  in  that  county.  His  name  appears 
in  the  reign  of  Edward  II.  as  an  advocate ; 
and  in  4  Edward  III.  he  had  the  degree  of 
the  coif,  and  was  afterwards  one  of  the 
king's  seriennts.  On  September  24,  1384, 
8  Edward  III.,  he  was  constituted  a  judge 
of  the  Common  Pleas,  and  probably  died 
within  the  next  year,  as  no  fines  were 
acknowledged  before  him  subsequent  to 
Michaelmas  Term.  9  Edward  III.  | 

TBSYETT,  Thomas,  was  the  father  of 
Nicholas  Trevet,  the  author  of  numerous 
works,  one  of  which,  entitled  *  Annales  sex 
Kegum  Anglias,  qui  a  comitibus  Ande- 
.yavensibus  originem  traxerunt,'  has  been 
published  (1845)  by  the  English  Historical 


TREVOR 

Society.  The  editor,  in  bis  preface  (p.  i.\ 
says  t&at  *  the  judge,  according  to  Ijelind, 
was  descended  nrom  a  family  of  some  note 
in  Norfolk ;  a  statement  which  is  cimfirmed 
by  a  descent  preserved  in  Sir  Richard  St 
George's  Heraldic  Collections ;  though  the 
d'Kuments  from  which  this  has  been  com- 
piled refer  exclusively  to  certain  lands  ii 
the  coimty  of  Somerset.'  Thomas  Trevet 
was  appointed,  in  49  Edward  III.,  to  u»m 
the  tallage  on  the  '  Villam  de  Shaftonia.' 
in  Dorsetshire.  (Madox,  i.  742.)  Ht 
acted  as  a  justice  itinerant  for  that  and  tht 
neighbouring  counties  from  52  to  55  Uenir 
III. 

In  August  1272,  66  Henry  HI.,  tbe 
priory  and  cathednd  of  Norwich  harinf 
t>een  maliciously  burnt  by  the  citixens,  be 
was  sent  there,  according  to  the  statement 
of  his  son  in  the  'Annales '  (279),  to  tzy 
the  malefactors.  He  calls  his  father 
Musticiarium  militem  quendam,  ThomiBi 
Ireveth  dictum,  qui  et  justiciarius  itintdi 
fuerat  de  corona.'  The  first  clause  of  tiw 
description  seems  to  warrant  the  idea  thit 
he  was  something  more  than  a  jostiei 
itinerant  He  died  in  11  Eklward  I.  (Aik 
Rot,  Orig.  i.  3(5,  37.)  His  son  became  i 
Dominican  friar,  and  is  stated  to  have  bees 
prior  of  their  monastery  in  London,  and  t» 
have  died  in  1328.  {PrefaceyVii.'y  HnUkmit 
Dornetsh.  ii.  441.) 

TBEVOB,  Thomas,  was  the  youngest  d 
^\e  sons  of  John  Trevor,  Esq.,  of  TpbtsUti 
in  Denbighshire,  of  an  ancient  and  noiih 
Welsh  family,  by  Marv,  daughter  of  Sr 
George  Bruges  o^  I^ondon,  and  was  bon 
July  6, 1580.  He  was  admitted  a  memkr 
of  the  Inner  Temple,  and  became  reader 
there  in  autumn  lu20.  He  was  soon  aftff 
knighted,  and  made  solicitor  to  Prince 
Charles,  who,  when  he  ascended  the  throw, 
called  him  to  the  degree  of  the  coif,  tod 
nominated  him  one  of  his  eeijeants  od 
April  8,  1626.  On  the  12th  of  the  follow- 
ing month  he  was  advanced  to  a  seat  of  the 
Exchequer.     {Rymer,  xviii.  637.) 

Nothing  is  told  of  him  for  the  first  tes 
years  of  his  judicial  life,  except  that  at  tbe 
Bury  assizes,  trying  a  cause  about  wiote^ 
ing  of  cattle,  and  thinking  the  charge  im- 
moderate, he  said,  *  Why.  friend,  thi*  i« 
most  unreasonable ;  I  wonder  thou  art  not 
ashamed,  for  I  myself  have  known  a  bMOt 
wintered  one  whole  summer  for  a  noUe.* 
'  That  was  a  huU,  my  lord,  I  beUeve,*  is- 
torted  the  man,  to  the  infinite  amuMtneot 
of  the  auditory.  (Anecdote*  wtd  Traditim 
[Camden  Soc."],  79.) 

But  more  serious  matters  soon  occupied 
him.  The  imposition  of  ship-money  wm 
attempted,  and  Baron  Trevor  iuit4d  intb 
the  rest  of  the  jud^s  in  1036  in  subscrib- 
ing a  joint  opinion  in  favour  of  its  legality, 
which  he  afterwards  supported  in  a  most 
foolish  inconclusiye  speecn  in  the  ease  d 


TREVOR 

Hampden.  (SMe  Trials,  iii.  1152.)  On 
the  meeting  of  the  Long  Parliament  in 
1640  proceedings  were  commenced  against 
him  and  fi^e  of  the  other  judges,  who  were 
eventually  impeached  for  the  judgment 
they  had  delivered.  Trevor  was  sentenced 
to  imprisonment  and  a  fine  of  6000/.,  hut 
upon  payment  he  was  discharged  and  per- 
mittea  to  resume  his  duties.  In  1643  the 
king  had  issued  proclamations  to  adjourn  the 
term  from  Westminster  to  Oxford ;  hut,  as 
these  had  heen  hitherto  fruitless,  *  for  want 
of  the  necessary  legal  form  of  having  the 
ipmta  read  in  court,  the  judges  at  Oxford 
could  not  proceed  to  husiness  there  till 
that  formahty  had  heen  ohserved.  The 
parliament,  having  then  assumed  the 
aorereign  power,  had  puhlished  orders  to 
the  contrary;  yet  the  King,  thinking  that 
the  judges  remaining  in  I^ondon  would 
obey  him  rather  than  the  parliament,  sent 
messengers  in  Michaelmas  Term  with 
directions  to  deliver  them  the  writs.  There 
leere  only  three  judges  then  sitting  in 
London— Justice  Bacon  in  the  King's 
Bench,  Justice  Reeve  in  the  Common 
Pleas,  and  Baron  Trevor  in  the  Exchequer. 
The  two  latter  were  served,  hut  im- 
mediately ordered  the  apprehen^)ion  of  the 
messengers,  who,  heing  tried  hy  a  council 
of  war,  were  condemned  as  spies,  and  one 
of  them  was  actually  executed  as  an  ex- 
ample. The  fears  that  then  influenced 
Trevor  seem  to  have  heen  dispersed  hy  the 
trtgic  termination  of  the  king  s  life.  Chi 
February  8,  1040,  he  was  one  of  the  six 
judges  who  boldly  refused  to  accept  the  new 
oonunission  offered  them  by  the  tnen  ruling 
powers.  (Claretiflony  iY,2S7,U2;  White- 
lochi,  47,  70,  378.) 

He  lived  nearlv  eight  years  after  his  re- 
tirement, and  dying  on  l)ecember  21, 16o6, 
SIS  huried  at  limington-Ha^tang  in  War- 
rickshire,  the  manor  of  which  belonged  to 


TREVOR 


673 


Be  was  twice  married— first  to   Vm- 
»jjce,  daughter  of  Henry   Butler,   Esq.; 
i<3    seconiily   to  Frances,   daughter  and 
^^MT    of    Daniel    Blennerhasfiet,    Esq.,  of 
^ij'ozfolk.    An  only  son  he  had  by  the  for- 
^Ty  named  Thomas,  was  created  a  baronet 
_^G41,  but  the  title  became  extinct  in 
(Stoic's    Landau.    876  j     WottotCs 
Cm.  143.) 

>,  John,  may  claim  a  descent 
an  elder  branch  of  the  old  Welsh 
fyc*^x\y  from  which  the  above  Thomas 
'"^OT  spnmg,  his  ancestor  being  seated  at 
r**l«yiialt  m  Denbighshire  at  his  death 
^■^W.  He  was  second  but  eldest  sur- 
'^^*t2^  son  of  John  Trevor  of  that  place, 
y  -l^^T^y  daughter  of  John  Jeffreys,  of 
^*^*^xi  in  the  same  county,  the  aunt  of  the 
_  **er^  Jeffreys  of  infamous  memory.  At 
p^  *5ine  of  his  admission  to  the  Inner 
««»ple,  in  November  1664,  his  father  is 


described  of  Ross-Trevor  in  Ireland, 
whither  he  had  probably  retired  in  reduced 
circumstances,  ii  Roger  North *s  statement 
(218)  be  true,  that  the  son  'was  bred  a 
sort  of  clerk  in  the  chambers  of  old  Arthur 
Trevor,  an  eminent  and  worthy  professor  of 
the  law  in  the  Inner  Temple.*  *  A  gentle- 
man^'  he  adds,  Hhat  observed  a  strange- 
lookmg  boy  in  his  c1erk*s  seat  (for  no  per- 
son ever  bad  a  worse  sort  of  squint  than  he 
had),  asked  who  that  gentleman  was  :  *'  A 
kinsman  of  mine,"  said  Arthur  Trevor, 
*^  that  I  have  allowed  to  sit  here  to  learn 
the  knavish  part  of  the  law."  '  That  he 
was  bettered  by  the  instruction  may  be 
doubted ;  but  tnat  he  became  an  able  pro- 
ficient there  is  evidence  in  the  reputation 
he  gained  of  being  the  best  judge  in  all 
pimbling  transactions,  of  the  tncks  and 
intricacies  of  which  he  had  personal 
experience. 

lie  was  called  to  the  bar  in  May  1661, 
became  treasurer  of  his  inn  in  1674,  and 
reader  in  1676.  He  was  knighted  in  1671, 
and  there  is  no  doubt  that  he  was  indebted 
to  his  cousin,  George  Jeffreys,  for  some  of 
his  future  preferments.  In  the  parliament 
of  March  1670  he  was  elected  for  Beer- 
alston,  which  returned  him  again  for  that 
called  in  October  of  the  same  year.  In  the 
Oxford  parliament  of  March  '1681  he  re- 
presented his  native  county  of  Denbigh; 
and  Sir  John  Bramston  (208)  records  that 
he  was  the  only  man  who  spoke  in  favour 
of  Jeflreys  when  the  complaint  against  him 
as  i-ecorder  of  London  was  discussed  in 
the  house. 

On  the  accession  of  James  II.,  his  cousin, 
who  was  then  chief  justice,  had  an  oppor- 
tunity of  showing  his  gratitude.  Trevor 
having  obtained  a  seat  in  that  king*s  only 
parliament  for  the  town  of  Denbigh,  Jef- 
freys, in  opposition  to  I^ord  Keeper  North, 
succeeded  in  recommending  him  to  be 
the  speaker.  So  inefficient  was  he  in  the 
requirements  of  the  office  that  he  was  even 
obliged  to  read  from  a  paper  the  few  for- 
mal words  in  which  he  announced  to  the 
house  the  king's  approbation,  and  was 
jfuilty  of  some  other  irregularities  that  were 
inexcusable  in  one  who  had  had  so  long  a 
senatorial  experience.  He  showed  more 
boldness  and  self-possession  on  the  occasion 
of  presenting  the  revenue  bill  on  May  80, 
when  he  assured  the  king  that  the  Com- 
mons entirely  relied  on  his  majesty's  sacred 
word  to  support  and  defend  the  religion  of 
the  Church  of  England.  Of  this  reminder 
of  the  royal  promise  the  king  took  not  the 
slightest  notice,  nor  apparently  any  offence, 
as  on  the  20th  of  the  Allowing  October  he 
promoted  Sir  .lohn  to  the  office  of  master 
of  the  Rolls,  then  vacant.  (Bramston,  197, 
207 ;  ParL  Hid,  iv.  li^>0.) 

This  elevation  occurred  at  the  period 
when  his  relative  and  patron  had  returned 

X   X 


674 


TRBVOB 


front  liis  bloody  campaign  and  been  re- 
warded witk  the  Great  Seal.  The  Court 
of  Chancery  was  then  presided  over  by  two 
judges  of  kindred  spirit,  and  it  might  be  a 
question  which  of  the  two  exceeded  the 
other  in  want  of  principle,  or  in  the  use  of 
coarse  vituperation.  Yet  they  both  dei^erve 
praise  in  the  exercise  of  their  judicial 
mnctions;  and  the  decrees  they  pronounced 
in  private  causes  were  able  and  just.  A 
eort  of  rivalry,  however,  soon  rose  up  be- 
tween them.  Jeffreys  sometimes  reversed 
his  coadjutor*s  decrees  and  adopted  other 
irritating  measures  against  him.  Trevor, 
who  could  on  occasion  imitate  not  un- 
successfully the  objur^atorv  style  of  his 
Satron,  now  feeling  himself  no  longer  a 
ependent,  assumea  a  dictatorial  manner, 
found  fault  with  the  chancellor's  proceed- 
ings, and  very  early  after  his  appointment 
told  him  that  if  he  pursued  Alderman 
Cornish  to  execution,  it  would  be  no  better 
than  murder.  Indeed,  Iloger  North  tells 
us,  ^  like  a  true  gamester,  he  fell  to  the 
good  work  of  supplanting  his  patron 
and  friend,  and  had  certainly  done  it  if 
King  James's  affairs  had  stood  right  much 
longer,  for  he  was  advanced  so  far  with  him 
as  to  vilify  and  scold  with  him  publicly 
at  Whitehall.' 

He  was  not  admitted  to  the  privy  council 
till  July  0,  1688 ;  and  on  August  2*4  he  was 
«ent  for  in  a  hurry  from  *  the  Wells '  to  be 
present  at  that  meeting  when  the  king  re- 
aolved  to  have  another  parliament.  He  was 
again  present  in  OctolAir,  when  proof  was 

fiven  of  the  genuineness  of  the  birth  of  the 
rince  of  Wales ;  and  after  the  king's  first 
oscape  he  was  one  of  the  faithful  councillors 
who  attended  at  his  levee  on  his  return 
from  Rochester.  (BratnstvHf  311;  State 
Ti-ials,  xii.  123.) 

At  the  I{e\'olutiom  he,  with  all  the  other 
judges,  lost  his  place.  But  he  managed  by 
bis  open  professions  of  adherence  to  the 
extreme  doctrines  of  the  Church  of  England 
to  keep  up  some  degree  of  popularity  with 
that  party  which  was  graduallv  superseding 
the  ministers,  who,  though  they  had  been 
chiefly  instrumental  in  effecting  the  great 
change  in  the  government  of  the  kingdom, 
floon  disgusted  the  king  bv  assuming  too 
great  a  control  over  him.  I'o  the  Conven- 
tion I'arliament  he  did  not  venture  to  offer 
himself;  but  the  borougli  of  Beeralston 
returned  him  again  on  a  vacancy.  Before 
the  end  of  the  year  he  entered  into  the 
•debates  as  boldly  as  if  he  had  never  been 
connected  with  Kin?  James's  court.  In  the 
next  parliament  of  March  1(390  he  was  re- 
turned for  Yarmouth,  and  was  selected  by 
the  minister  Carmarthen  to  be  the  speaker 
of  it,  as  the  most  fit  instrument  in  the 
practice,  too  openly  encouraged  and  too  long 
continued,  of  buying  off  those  members  who 
opposed  the  govemmeiit     (JBarnet,  iv.  74.) 


TRKVOK 

A  Tery  graphic  description  of  him  ib  given 
by  Lord  Macaulay  (iii-  547). 

Being  *  a  bold  and  dexterous  man/  Trevor 
soon  after  had  a  renewal  of  his  legal  honnor^ 
On  January  13  he  was  replaced  in  his  old 
position  as  master  of  the  Rolls :  and  on 
May  14  he  was  made   one    of   the  hnis 
commissioners  of  the  Great  Seal,  an  office 
which  he  enjoyed  for  nearly  three  years,  till 
the  nomination  of  Somers  aa  lord  Ikeeper  oo 
March  23,  1693.    Not   satisfied  with  aU 
these  honours  and   ike   emoluments  tliAt 
flowed  from  them,  Trevor  "with  unblushing: 
rapacity  participated  largely  in  the  corrupt 
tion   that  then   too   universally  prevail?^ 
In  the  investigation  instituted  bv  tue  parlia- 
ment it  was  found  that   he   Lad,  nmMS 
other  bribes  suspected  but  not  proved,  n- 
ceived  a  present  from  the  city  of  I^oikIcd 
for  getting  the  orphans'  bill  passed,  whirk 
had   several   times   before     been    broQirLt 
into  the  house  without  success.     lie  wti 
condemned   to  sit  for   six    hours   hearinj 
himself  abused,  and  at  last  was  obliged  to 
put  the  question   and  to    declare  hinuclf 
guilty  of  '  a  high  crime  and  misdemeaDonr.' 
A  new  speaker  was  immediately  appoiDtt^ 
and  he  was  expelled  the  hoiLse  on  Mard 
10,   1095,  having  only  a  fortnight  beftirs 
attended  in  all  state  the  queen's  funeral  in 
Westminster  Abbey.     (Pari.  JIU.  v.  Wl- 
10  ;  JBranuttoH,  380.)     No   further  punish- 
ment being  awarded,   the    wits  lemarkt^ 
Hhat  justice  was  blind,  but  bribery  onk 
s<juinted.'    lie    never    afterwards    offend 
himself  as  a  member ;  but  so  little  was  be 
abashed  by  his  expulsion  that  soon  after,  oa 
meeting  Archbishop  Tillotson,  he  muttervd 
loud  enough  to  be  heard,  *  I  hate  a  (tnaoc 
in  lawn  sleeves.'   The  archbishop  answered. 
'  And  I  hate  a  knave  in  any  sleeves.' 

This  disgrace  did  not  deprive  him  of  tfc* 
mastership  of  the  Rolls,  that  office  havinff 
been  conferred  upon  him  for  life.  Thonai 
Lord  Raymond  (n.  566)  names  him  ai 
jcined  with  the  tnree  chiefs  as  commit 
flioner  of  the  Great  Seal  on  the  dismissal  «i 
Lord  Somers  in  1700,  the  'Crown  CHfice 
Minute-book'  (p.  141)  proves  that  the a^ 
nointment^  was  to  the  three  chiefs  nkoe, 
nis  commission  being  solely  to  hear  cbu«« 
till  a  new  lord  keeper  was  appointed,  ilf 
continued  master  of  the  Rolls  for  tw^stj- 
two  years  after  his  expulsion,  possessing  «> 
high*  a  reputation  as  a  lawyer  that  he  ir« 
frequently  appealed  to  as  authoritv  in 
doubtful  points  by  Ix)rd  Chancellor  ^Ha^ 
court,  but  with  the  character  of  being  dnd 
to  every  sense  of  shame,  and  of  treating  the 
counsel  who  attended  his  court  with  cnar» 
and  unfeeling  brutality.  So  rough  vnc 
his  public  reproaches  to  a  nephew  of  hii 
that  it  is  sud  the  sensitive  young  b«rn«t<r 
sunk  under  them  and  neverrecovered.  The 
only  honour  he  received  in  the  reign  <i 
Queen  Anne  was  that  of  constable  of  Hiot 


TREVOB 

Castle  in  1705,  in  the  place  of  his  father- 
in-law,  Sir  Ro^r  Moetyn.  He  died  on  May 
20,  1717,  at  his  house  in  Clement's  Lane, 
and  was  buried  in  the  Rolls  Chapel. 
(^LuttreU,  iv.  041,  v.  640.) 

The  avarice  for  which  he  was  notorious 
was  not  redeemed,  as  it  often  is,  by  occa* 
sional  fits  of  generosity.  Various  stories 
are  told  of  his  meanness.  One  of  them  is 
that  on  a  relation  calling  upon  him  while 
lie  was  drinkin(2r  his  wine,  he  exclaimed  to 
the  servant,  *  You  rascal,  you  have  brought 
my  cousin  Roderick  Lloyd,  Esq.,  protho- 
notary  of  North  Wales,  marshal  to  Baron 
Vnce,  and  so  forth,  up  my  back  stairs. 
Take  him  down  again  immediately,  and 
bring  him  up  my  front  stairs.*  During  the 
operation  the  bottle  was  removed,  and  Sir 
John  saved  his  wine.  {Yorke's  Royal 
Tribes  of  Wales,  100.) 

He  married  Jane,  the  daughter  of  Sir 
Roger  Mostyn,  Bart.,  and  the  widow  of 
Ro^er  Puliston,  of  Emeral  in  Flintshire, 
and  had  by  her  four  sons  and  a  daughter, 
who  by  her  marriage  with  Michael  Hill,  of 
Hillsborough  in  Ireland,  was  the  mother  of 
Arthur,  first  Viscount  Dungannon,  who, 
succeeding  to  his  grandfather  s  estates,  took 
the  name  of  Trevor.  Anne,  the  daughter 
of  Arthur,  was  the  mother  of  the  great 
I  )uke  of  Wellington.  ( Towtuetid's  llo.  of 
Com  mans,  i  i.  5;i ;  WoolrycKt  Judge  Jeffreys,) 

TBEYOB,  Thomas  (Lord  Trevor),  was 
the  grandson  of  Sir  John  Trevor,  of  Tre- 
Tallyn  in  Flintshire,  an  elder  brother  of  the 
above  Sir  Thomas  Trevor.  His  father, 
also  Sir  John,  became  secretary  of  state  to 
Charles  II.  and  died  in  1072,  leaving  by  his 
wife,  Ruth,  a  daughter  of  the  celebrated  John 
Hampden,  four  sons,  of  whom  this  Thomas 
was  tne  second.  Bom  about  1 650,  he  entered 
the  Inner  Temple  in  1072  (just  before  the 
death  of  his  father,  who  had  ocen  a  bencher 
of  the  inn),  and  was  called  to  the  bar  on 
November  28, 1080.  So  early  did  he  di»- 
tioguish  himself  in  the  courts  that  he  was 
elected  a  bencher  in  1080,  and  was  ele- 
vated to  the  post  of  solicitor-general  on 
May  3,  1002,  and  thereupon  knighted.  He 
refused  the  attorney-generalship  in  1093, 
but  on  June  8,  l((0/>,  accepted  the  ofiice. 
{Ltdirell,  iii.  08;  Lord  Jlaymond,  57.) 

During  the  six  years  that  he  filled  that 
Tesponsible  place  he  had  to  conduct  the 
trials  of  the  persons  implicated  in  the 
Assassination  Plot,  in  all  of  which  he  acted 
with  a  fairness  and  candour  that  formed  a 
remarkable  contrast  to  the  criminal  pro- 
ceedings in  the  late  reigns.  In  the  pro^ss 
of  those  trials  the  act  of  parliament  (St.  7 
Will  IH.  c.  3)  for  regulating  trials  for 
treason,  which  gave  to  the  prisoners  so 
charged  the  pri^lege  of  having  counsel, 
came  into  operation,  and  Sir  Thomas  met 
the  multiplied  objections  that  were  conse- 
quently urged  by  the  defending  advocates 


TBEVOB 


675 


with  temper,  ability,  and  learning.  On  the 
removal  of  Lord  Somers  in  May  17(X)  he 
declined  the  ofier  to  be  made  Icnfd  keeper ; 
but  on  June  28, 1701,  he  accepted  the  more 
permanent  place  of  chief  justice  of  the 
Common  Pleas.  He  was  member  of  one 
parliament  only,  that  of  1695,  in  which  he 
represented  Plympton,  and  according  to 
Speaker  Onslow  he  divided  against  Sir 
John  Fenwick's  attainder,  although  he  was 
an  officer  of  the  government.  (State  TriaU^ 
vols.  xii.  xiiL ;  Luttreil,  iv.  645 :  Burnet, 
iv.  234.) 

On  the  accession  of  Queen  Anne  he  was 
re-awointed  chief  justice,  and  presided  in 
the  Court  of  Common  Fleas  during  the 
whole  of  her  reign.  In  the  short  interval 
between  the  chancellorships  of  Lords  Oow- 

S)r  and  Harcourt,  from  September  26  to 
ctober  19,  1710,  he  was  entrusted  with 
the  Great  Seal  as  first  commissioner ;  and 
on  December  31,  1711,  he  was  called  to 
the  peerage  by  the  title  of  Baron  Trevor  of 
Bromham  in  Bedfordshire,  being  one  of  the 
twelve  peers  whom  Queen  Anne  by  an  un- 
usual exercise  of  her  prerogative  created  at 
once,  to  secure  a  majority  for  the  proposed 
peace  in  the  House  of  Lords.  He  was  the 
first  chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas 
who  was  ennobled  while  holding  that 
office.  Though  commencing  his  profes- 
sional career  as  a  whig,  and  being  united 
in  office  with  Somers,  he  gradualbr  joined 
the  tory  party,  and  attached  himself  to  it 
while  Queen  Anne  reigned.  He  is  thus 
described  in  the  account  of  the  judges  of 
the  different  courts  given  by  Lord  Cowper 
to  George  I.  on  his  accession  :— 

*  The  first  [the  chief  justice]  is  an  able 
man,  but  made  one  of  the  twelve  lords. 
w**»  the  late  ministry  procured  to  be  created 
at  once  (in  such  haste,  y'  few,  if  any,  of 
their  patents  had  any  preamble,  or  reasons 
of  their  creation),  onlv  to  support  their 
peacef  w^^  the  House  of  Lords,  they  found, 
would  not  without  that  addition.  From 
that  time,  at  least,  he  went  violently  into 
all  the  measures  of  that  ministry,  and  was 
much  trusted  by  them;  and  when  they 
divided,  a  little  before  the  queen^s  death, 
he  sided  w***  L**  Bolingbr. ;  and  for  so  doimr, 
'tis  credibly  said,  was  to  have  been  nokaae 
1*  president  Man^  of  y^  lords  think  his 
being  a  peer  an  obj»  to  his  being  a  judge ; 
because,  oy  j*  constitution,  y«  judges  ought 
to  be  asaistarUs  to  the  House  of  I^rds,  w*^ 
they  can't  be,  if  a  part  of  that  body.  Ther 
is  but  one  example  known  of  the  uke ;  w*^ 
is  that  of  L**  Jefferys,  ch.  just,  of  the  King's 
Bench,  and  after  chanceUor  to  K.  Ja.  y* 
2°^.  Tis  natural  to  think,  y  other  judges 
stomach  y*  distinction,  while  he  is  among 
them :  and  tis  said  y'  y*  suitors  dislike  y* 
difl^erence  they  find  in  his  behaviour  to 
them  since  he  had  this  distinction.  He  is 
grown  very  wealthy.    If  it  be  tiiought  fit 

zx2 


676 


TREVOR 


to  remove  him,  S'  Peter  Kinflr,  record'  of 
the  City  of  London,  I  should  humbly  pro- 
pone as  fit  to  succeed  him.'  (Lord  Camp- 
heWa  Chanc.  iv.  349.) 

Upon  the  hint  thus  pven  Lord  Trevor 
■was  removed  on  October  14,  1714.  As  his 
appointment  was  *  quamdiu  se  bene  gesse- 
nt,*  he  said  he  would  have  tried  the  (jues- 
tion  as  to  the  king's  power  to  eject  him  if 
Chief  Justice  Holt  had  not,  by  taking  out 
A  new  commission  when  Queen  Anne  came 
to  the  throne,  decided  that  in  his  opinion 
hb  former  commission  had  expired  on  the 
demise  of  the  crown.  (Lord  Rayfnond, 
1318 ;  Bumety  v.  12  n.)  Lord  Trevor  lived 
sixteen  years  afterwanis,  and,  changing  his 
party  again,  became  in  1726  lord  privy 
aeal,  and  in  the  next  year  was  one  of  the 
lords  justices  during  the  last  absence  of 
George  I.  He  retained  the  privy  seal 
under  George  II.,  by  whom  he  was  raised, 
•  on  May  8, 1730,  to  the  high  office  of  lord 
president  of  the  council,  an  honour  which 
ne  did  not  enjoy  for  more  than  six  weeks, 
as  he  died  on  tfie  19th  of  the  next  month 
at  his  seat  at  Bromham,  where  he  was 
buried  under  a  monument  with  an  elegant 
Latin  inscription. 

Ho  was  generally  admitted  to  have  been 
an  able  and  uprigkt  judge,  though  Chief 
Justice  Holt  is  said  to  have  disparaged  his 
law.  But  the  facility  with  which  he 
deserted  one  party  to  side  with  the  other, 
and  returned  again  to  the  party  he  had  left, 
could  not  but  be  detrimental  to  his  charac- 
ter. Yet  Speaker  Onslow  says  (Burnet^  iv. 
344,  n.),  *  Pie  was  the  only  man  almost  that 
I  ever  knew  that  changed  his  party  as  he 
had  done,  that  preserved  so  general  an 
esteem  with  all  parties  as  he  did.  When 
he  came  back  to  the  whigs  he  was  made 
lord  privy  seal  and  afterwards  president  of 
the  council,  and  had  much  joy  in  both. 
He  liked  being  at  court,  and  was  much 
there  after  he  had  these  offices,  but  was 
very  awkward  in  it,  by  having  been  the 
most  reserved,  grave,  and  austere  judge  I 
ever  saw  in  Westminster  Hall.'  Lord 
Her\'ey  (i.  114)  describes  him  as  being  'by 
principle  (if  he  had  any  principle)  a  Ja- 
cobite. However,  from  interest  and  policy 
he  became,  like  his  brother  convert  and 
brother  lawyer  Ix>rd  Harcourt,  as  zealous 
a  servant  to  the  Hanover  family  as  any  of 
those  who  had  never  been  otherwise ;  for  as 
these  two  men  were  too  knowing  in  their 
trade  to  swerve  from  the  established  prin- 
ciples of  their  profession,  they  acted  like 
most  lawyers,  who  generally  look  on 
princes  like  other  clients,  and  without  any 
regard  to  right  or  wrong — the  equity  or 
injustice  of  the  cause — think  themselves 
obliged  to  maintain  whoever  fees  them  last 
and  pays  them  best.' 

This  is  a  very  prejudiced  portrait  and  a 
tnoet  unfair  judgment  of  lawyers.    Trevor^ 


TROP 

like  most  sensible  men,  did  not  approve  of 
the  extreme  views  of  either  party,  and,  see- 
ing the  impoenbility  of  restoring  the  ex- 
iled family,  and  that  any  attempt  to  do  sn 
would  inevitably  be  accompanied  by  all 
the  horrors  of  a  civil  war,  "wiaely  lent  hia 
aid  in  supporting  the  Hanoverian  princes 
in  the  peaceful  possession  of  the  throne  to 
which  they  had  oeen  called. 

He  married  twice.  By  his  first  wife, 
Elizabeth,  daughter  and  coheir  of  John 
Searle,  Esq.,  of  Finchley,  he  had  two  sou 
and  three  daughters;  and  by  his  second 
wife,  Anne,  daughter  of  Robert  Weldon. 
Esq.,  and  widow  of  Sir  Robert  Bernard, 
Bsrt.,  he  had  three  sons.  The  fourth  of 
these  five  sons  became  Bishop  of  Durham 
in  1752,  and  the  three  elder  brothers  held 
the  title  of  Lord  Trevor  successively.  The 
last  of  them,  Robert,  fourth  Lord  Trevor, 
adopted  the  name  of  Hampden  in  1754,  in 
compliance  with  the  will  of  his  relative 
John  Hampden,  and  in  1770  -was  advanced 
to  the  dignity  of  Viscount  Hampden,  h.tth 
titles  becoming  extinct  in  1824.  (CoiiiM$» 
Peerage  J  vi.  802 ;  Nicolas*  s  Synopsis  ;  Ld- 
<retf,v.  421.408.) 

TBIXIKOHAII,  Lambert  dr,  whose  legil 
and  judicial  life  extended  from  the  reign  of 
Edward  I.  to  that  of  Edward  III.,  belong 
to  a  family  so  called  from  a  place  of  thst 
name  in  Lincolnshire;  and  Alexander  de 
Trikingham,  who  acted  in  the  assessments 
of  that  county  in  the  early  part  of  the 
reign  of  Edward  I.,  waa  probably  tb^ 
judge's  father.  {Pari  Writs,  i.  b71,  iL 
1324.) 

The  first  mention  of  Lambert  occantia 
27  Edward  I.,  1299,  as  a  justice  itinerut 
into  Kent    In  the  next  jear  he  was  raised 
to  the  bench  at  Westminster  as  a  justice 
of  the  Common  Pleas,  and  the  fines  levied 
before  him  continued  till  Midsummer  1316, 
9  Edward  II.     On  August  6  in  the  latter 
year  he  was  removed  to  the  King's  Bench, 
where  he  remained  exactly  four  years,  re- 
tiring from  that  court  on' August  6, 1*^» 
and  being  immediately  made  a  baron  of  tbe 
Exchequer.    We  do  not  find  him  acting  m 
a    baron,  nor    summoned    to    parliameot 
among  the  judges,  later  than  Uie  seven- 
teenth year  of  that  reign,  and  it  is  mo«K 
probable   that   he   left   the    bench  aboai 
that  time,  as  a  new  baron  was  named  tt 
the  close  of  the   year,  apparently  in  hi^ 
place.    He  still,  however,  was  employed  as 
a  justice  itinerant,  and  he  is  placed  next  to 
the  chief  justice  in  the  commission  into 
Northamptonshire  as  late  as  1329,  3  Ed- 
ward III.    (Dugdales  Orig.  44 ;  BoL  iVHL 
161-380.) 

In  1317  he  recdved  the  mastership  of 
Sherboura  Hospital  in  Durham.     {Smitts 
Ihtrhatny  i.  138.) 

TBOP,  or  THOBPS,  Sncoir  be,  took  htf 
name  from  the  place  in  Xorthampton»liii«y 


TRUMPINGTON 

which  was  in  those  times  as  often  spelled 
Thorpe  as  Trop.  His  father,  Kalph,  met 
with  a  violent  death  in  6  Henrj  III.,  and 
three  persons  were  charged  with  being 
concerned  in  it.  One  of  them,  bein^  a 
clergyman,  was  delivered  over  to  ecclesias- 
tical jurisdiction,  where  he  purged  himself 
of  the  accusation.  {Hot,  Claw,  i.  454, 464, 
486,  611.)  Simon,  there  can  be  very  little 
doubt,  was  brought  up  to  the  law,  for  he 
WAS  appointed  no  less  than  four  times, 
from  1252  to  1256,  to  act  as  a  justice 
.  itinerant,  not  in  his  own  county  alone,  but 
in  Aeveral  others. 

He  died  in  January  1259,  43  Henry  HI., 
leaving,  by  his  wife,  Maria,  sister  and  co- 
heir of  Robert  de  Salceto,  a  son  named 
Ralph,  who  did  homage  for  his  lands  in 
Northamptonshire.  (Excerpt,  e  Rot,  Fin, 
L  206.  ii.  293.) 

TBirXPIKOTOK,  WiLLiAH  de,  so  called 
from  a  place  of  that  name  in  Cambridge- 
shire, forfeited  his  lands  by  joining  the 
barons  against  King  John.  6n  his  sub- 
mission at  the  beginning  of  the  next  reign 
they  were  restored  to  him,  after  which  he 
made  his  loyalty  sufficiently  apparent  to  be 
appointed  in  3  Henry  111.  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  into  his  own  county  and 
the  neighbouring  shirea.  {Rot,  Pat.  176  j 
Boi,  Claw,  \,  272,  273,  326.) 

TBTTKO,  Lord.    See  T.  Wilde. 

TBTTSSEL,  William,  seems  to  have 
belonged  to  a  Warwickshire  family,  as 
there  was  a  suit  relative  to  property  in  that 
county  in  which  he  was  concerned  in  26 
Henry  111.  He  was  constituted  a  justicier, 
Dugdale  says  of  the  Common  I'leaa,  on 
September  3, 1252,  and  fines  were  acknow- 
ledged before  him  till  November  1254 
(Dugdale's  Oru/,  43),  in  which  year  he 
went  as  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  into 
the  counties  of  Gloucester  and  Stafford. 
That  he  continued  to  act  as  a  judge  till 
September  1257  is  evidenced  by  the  pay- 
ments made  for  assizes  before  him  recorded 
in  the  Rot.  de  Finibus  (ii.  162-262).  He 
and  his  wife  claimed  the  advowson  of  the 
church  of  Sbameford  in  Staffordshire  against 
the  prior  of  Kirkeby,  who  in  63  Henry  111. 
substantiated  his  right  of  possession.  {Abb, 
Ftacit,  178.) 

TBTTSSEL,  WiLLiAH,  is  usually  described 
by  historians  as  a  justiciary,  but  he  cer- 
tainly was  not  a  judge  of  either  of  the 
courts  of  Westminster,  nor  a  regular  justice 
of  assize.  His  judicial  functions  seem  to 
have  been  confined  to  the  special  trials 
with  which  his  name  is  connected.  He 
was  apparently  descended  from  the  above 
William  Trussel,  and  was  second  son  of 
William  Trussel,  of  Cublesdone  (Kibbles- 
done)  in  Staffordshire,  and  of  other  manors 
in  Northamptonshire,  by  Maud,  daughter 
and  heir  of  Warin  de  Manwariu. 

After  his  father's  death  he  was  returned 


TRUSSEL 


677 


member  for  the  county  of  Northampton  in 
12  Edward  II.,  and  is  named  among  the 
knights  of  that  county  and  the  county  of 
Stafford  in  the  seventeenth  year,  1324.    In 
the  interim  he  had  been  in  arms  against 
the  government,  and  was  with  the  Earl  of 
Lancaster  in  the  defeat  at  Borou^hbridge. 
He  was  there  taken  prisoner,  and  appears 
to  have  been  in  custody  on  July  20,  1322, 
but  a  writ  for  his  pursuit  and  capture  on 
August  2  proves  that  he   had  made  his 
escape.     In  the  next  year  he  was  at  the 
head  of  those  who  ravaged  the  estates  of 
the  Despencers.      (Pari,    WritSy  ii.  p.  ii. 
1528.)     Joining  the  queen  in  France,  he 
accompanied  her  on  her  landing  in  England 
in  September  1326,  and  was  present  at  the 
fall  of  Bristol  and  the  seizure  of  the  elder 
Despencer.     Some  writers    say  that    tho 
a^d  earl  was  executed  without  hearing  or 
tnal,  while  others  state  that  he  was  accused 
before  Sir  William  de  Trussel,  but  there 
are  no  remains  of  any  regular  proceedings 
against  him.     The  younger  D<  spencer,  on 
hifl  capture,  was  arraigned  before  Trussel 
in  an  equally  informal  manner,  his  speech, 
in  pronouncing  the  horrible  sentence,  seem- 
ing to   have   been    the    onlv  indictment. 
That  speech  recapitulated  all  the  popular 
charges  against  the  prisoner  and  his  father, 
and,    after    minutely    particularising    the 
punishment  awarded,   concluded   by   dis- 
missing the  fallen  favourite  witli  coarse 
vituperation.     Trussel  is  neither  before  nor 
after  described  as  a  judge,  and  the  actor  in 
so  summary  a    process,   which    has    the 
appearance    of   martial    law,  is    scarcely 
entitled  to  be  so  designated. 

Although  there  is  no  record  that  Trussel 
was  returned  as  a  knight  or  burgess  to  the 
parliament  that  assembled  at  Westminster 
on  January  7,  1327,  there  is  no  doubt  that 
he  was  present  in  some  character,  as  he 
was  appointed  procurator  for  the  whole 
parliament,  and  deputed  to  proceed,  with 
certain  prelates  and  peers,  to  Kenilworth 
Castle,  where  the  king  was  confined,  and 
to  pronounce  the  renunciation  of  their 
homage  and  fealty  to  him. 

This  formality  completed,  Edward  IH. 
was  proclaimed,  and  Trussel  received  the 
reward  of  his  devotion  by  being  immedi- 
ately constituted  the  king's  escheator  south 
of  Trent.  He  was,  however,  removed  from 
this  ofilce  in  the  following  year,  having 
made  himself  an  enemy  in  Koger  de  Mor- 
timer, the  queen's  favourite,  on  whose 
death  he  was  reinstated  in  the  fourth  year. 
In  7  Edward  HI.  some  change  took  place 
in  the  ofiice,  and  he  had  a  grant  of  certain 
lands  in  the  Isle  of  Anglesey,  of  which  he 
was  soon  after  made  sheriff,  and  constable 
of  the  castle  of  Beaumaris.  From  the 
ninth  to  the  fourteenth  year  we  find  him 
again  king's  escheator,  sometimes  on  ono 
and  aometioi^  on  XVi^  Q»\Xi<^x  ^\^^  ^^  '^^ 


678 


TUNSTALL 


Trent.    (Abb.  Rot.  Grig.  ii.  4-14,  42-71, 
78,  82,  103-136.) 

After  this  time  it  is  difficult  to  trace 
distinctly  whether  the  entries  apply  to  his 
son  William  or  to  him ;  but  it  seems  most 
probable  that  it  was  the  son  who  was  the 
admiral  of  the  fleet  in  13  and  16  Edward 
m.,  and  who  is  stated  by  Dugdale  (Ba- 
rcnage,  ii.  143)  to  have  been  summoned  as 
A  baron  to  parliament  in  the  latter  year. 
If  so,  however,  it  is  difficult  to  understand 
how  '  Monsr.  William  Trussel '  answers  as 
the  representative  of  the  Commons — that ;  the  mastership  of  the  Rolls. 


TUNSTALL 

to  his  nomination  on  May  12  in  the  follow- 
ing year  to  the  office  of  master  of  the  Rolls. 
In  1519  he  was  made  archdeacon  of  Chester, 
and  soon  afterwards  was  en^ra^ed  with  Sir 
Thomas  More  in  settling  the  pruvisiooi 
under  the  commercial  treaty  with  Charlee, 
now  emperor.  While  at  Brussels  on  this 
embassy  his  friendship  commenced  with 
Erasmus,  in  whose  house  he  lodged.  In 
May  1521  he  became  dean  of  Salisbury, 
and  was  elected  Bishop  of  London  in  Ja- 
nuary 1522,  soon  after  which  he  resigned 


is  to  say,  their  speaker — in  the  parliament 
held  at  Westmmster  in  May,  17  Edward 
III.  (Rot.  ParL  ii.  136) ;  but  the  question 
is  of  little  importance,  because  it  is  allowed 
that  neither  he  nor  any  one  of  his  posterity 
was  ever  afterwards  summoned  as  a  baron. 

TTTKBTALL,  Cuthbert  (Bishop  of  Dur- 
ham), was  grandson  of  Sir  Thomas  Tun- 
stall  of  Thurland  Castle  in  Lancashire, 
whose  two  sons,  Richard  and  Thomas,  have 
each  at  different  times  been  described  as 
the  father  of  Cuthbert;  but  the  evidence 
adduced  by  Surtees  {Durham^  i.  Ixvi.^  tends 
strongly  to  fix  the  parentage  on  Tnomas. 
His  birth  is  said  to  have  been  illegitimate ; 
and  a  curious  story  told  by  Qeorge  Holland 
in  the  genealogical  table  of  his  fjEunily,  com- 
piled in  1563,  may  be  supposed  to  give 
some  grounds  not  only  for  this  belief  but 
also  for  the  report  that  Bichard,  ana  not 
Thomas,  was  his  father.  He  says,  <  Cuth- 
bert Tunstall,  late  Bishop  of  Durham,  in 
his  youth  near  two  years  was  brought  up 
in  my  great-grandfather  Sir  Thomas  Hol- 
land's kitchen  unknown,  Hill  being  known, 
he  was  sent  home  to  Sir  Bichard  Tunstall 
his  father,  and  so  kept  at  school,  as  he  him- 
self declared  m  manner  the  name  to  me,* 
(Blomefiem  Norfolk^  i.  232.) 

He  was  bom  m  1474  or  1475,  at  Hatch- 
ford  in  Bichmondshire,  and  was  entered  at 
Balliol  College  in  Oxford  in  1401,  but,  on 
account  of  the  plague  then  raging  there, 
was  removed  to  the  sister  university  as  a 
member  of  King's  Hall,  now  part  of  Trinity 
College.  He  then  completed  his  studies  at 
the  university  of  Padua,  where  he  took  the 
degree  of  Doctor  of  Laws,  and  on  his  return 
to  England  entered  into  holy  orders,  being 
only  sub-deacon  in  1508. 

At  this  date  he  received  the  rectory  of 
Htanhope  in  Durham,  which  was  followed 
by  that  of  Harrow-on-the-Hill  in  Middle- 
sex, by  prebends  in  the  churches  of  Lincoln 
and  York,  and  by  the  appointment  of  vicar- 
ffeneral  from  Archbishop  Warham.  Intro- 
duced by  that  prelate  to  King  Henry,  the 
talents  and  learning  for  which  he  had  been 
recommended  were  soon  employed  in  diplo- 


Surtoes  says  that  just  previous  to  thii^  he 
was  made  keeper  of  the  Great  Seal;  ami 
Parry  in  his  *  Parliaments  and  Councils' 
mentionshim  as  chancellor  at  the  parliament 
of  April  1523.  But  both  authors  are  mani- 
festly mistaken,  for  Cardinal  Wolsey  vas 
then  in  the  plenitude  of  his  power.  Tun- 
stall was,  however,  appointed  keeper  of  the 
privy  seal  on  July  12,  1523 ;  and  in  No- 
vember he  had  the  ^rant  of  a  pardon  for 
the  escape  from  his  custody  as  bishop  ^i 
John  Tompson,  an  attainted  clenmuui. 
{Ibid.  xiv.  1,  10.) 

Before  his  next  advance  in  the  Church 
he  rendered  further  service  in  various  em- 
bassies— soliciting  the  release  of  Franrii)  I. 
when  a  prisoner  after  the  battle  of  Pana, 
accompanying  Cardinal  Wolsey  in  his  osten- 
tatious visit  to  that  monarch  in  1527,  and 
concludiog,  with  Sir  Thomas  More  in  \hit\ 
the  treaty  of  Cambray.  On  March  25,  \^^\ 
he  received  restitution  of  the  temporalities 
;  of  Durham,  to  which  see  he  had  been  tnm^ 
lated  on  the  resignation  of  Cardinal  WoI^t. 
(Le  Neve.) 

In  the  changes  which  Henry  VIH.  sub- 
sequently introduced,  Bishop  Tunstall  dis- 
played some  weakness  and  irresolution;  and 
on  the  king's  assumption  of  the  title  (.i 
supreme  head  of  the  English  Church,  h< 
'hesitated,  argued,  and  submitted.*  Bt 
thus  temporising  he  preserved  the  penxmal 
favour  of  the  king,  who  made  him  president 
of  the  North,  and  appointed  him  one  of  the 
executors  of  his  vdll,  with  a  legacy  of  3uCi^ 
(Tett^m.  Vetiust.  41.) 

Under  the  reign  of  Edward  VI.,  whfa 
Protestantism  was  more  strictly  enfoircd, 
though  in  parliament  he  protested  against 
the  changes  in  religion,  yet  when  they  wcw 
adopted  he  obeyed  the  law. 

lie  would  have  continued  safe  in  his  quiet 
retirement,  but  that  Dudley  the  new  l>uke 
of  Northumberland  had  a'  craving  i<a  hu 
episcopal  possessions.  A  fal^e  charge  wa$ 
accordingly  concocted  against  him,  on  whirli 
a  bill  for  his  attainder  was  introduced  iDto 
parliament ;  but,  though  it  passed  the  Hoiu^ 
of  Lords,  the  Commons  were  not  satiffied. 


matic  services.  In  October  1515  he  was  and  would  not  sanction  it.  The  pen«cuti?d 
sent  as  ambassador  to  negotiate  a  treaty  of  ,  bishop  was  not  allowed  thus  to  escape.  A 
peace  with  the  \ic\xd\i\LQ  C\i&i\^%  (^Runier^  i  commission  was  issued  to  the  dukes  own 
xiiL  537))  hiis  aucceaAva^^^^^  tio  ^o\&\.\<^\  csraXmo^^V^  ^^^^rived  him  of  his  bishop- 


TURNER 

lie,  and  sent  him  to  the  Tower  on  August 
14, 1652. 

Mary,  immediately  on  her  accession,  re- 
leased him  from  prison,  and  restored  him 
to  his  see.  He  assisted  at  her  coronation 
and  at  her  marriage  (Q,  Jane  and  Q.  Mary 
[Camden  Soc.],  31, 142),  hut  kept  aloof  from 
the  cruel  persecutions  that  disgraced  her 
xeign.  Though  named  in  neveral  commis- 
sions, he  devoted  himself  to  his  pastoral 
duties ;  and  hj  his  lenity  and  toleration  his 
diocese  enjoyed  an  iminterrupted  peace,  in 
happy  contrast  with  the  rest  of  the  kingdom. 
He  discouraged  too  severe  an  investigation 
into  men*s  opinions,  saying  to  his  chancellor, 
when  desirous  of  examming  a  preacher 
supposed  to  entertain  heretical  opinions, 
*  Hitherto  we  hate  had  a  good  report  among 
our  neighhours :  I  prav  you  hring  not  this 
man^s  blood  upon  my  bead.* 

When  Elizabeth,  whose  godfather  he  had 
been,  ascended  the  throne,  he  was  near 
eigh^-four  years  old — an  age  not  likely  to 
give  up  preconceived  opinions,  nor  to  be 
swayed  by  worldly  considerations.  The 
queen,  influenced  by  the  moderation  he  had 
exhibited,  regarded' him  at  first  with  favour, 
and  employed  him  in  the  consecration  of 
seyeral  bishops ;  but  at  length,  on  his  per- 
sisting in  his  refusal  to  take  the  oath  of 
supremacy,  she  was  compelled  after  a  yearns  i 
trial  to  deprive  him.  Instead,  however,  of 
sending  the  aged  man  to  prison,  she  com- 
mitted him  in  July  1559  to  the  custody  of 
Archbishop  Parker,  in  whom  he  found  a 
kind  and  considerate  host  for  the  few  re- 
maining months  of  his  life.  lie  survived 
till  November  18,  and  was  buried  in  the 
chancel  of  Ijimbeth  Church,  at  the  expense 
of  the  archbishop. 

In  addition  to  his  professional  works,  be 

gublished  a  treatise  on  arithmetic,  *  De  Arte 
upputandi,'  in  1522,  the  year  of  his  eleva- 
tion to  the  episcopal  bench.  (Godwin:  Sur- 
tee$:  Brit,  li ivy.) 

TURKEB,  George  James,  was  one  of 
those  modest  and  retiring  persons  who 
owe  their  prosperity  to  no  extraordinary 
incident  in  their  lives,  nor  to  any  political 
or  extraneous  interest,  but  simply  to  their 
honest  efforts  to  do  their  duty  in  that 
state  of  life  to  which  it  has  pleased  God 
to  call  them.  Little  therefore  can  be 
recorded  to  render  liis  biogmphy  interest- 
ing, beyond  the  important  lesson  that  a 
steady  reliance  on  Providence  will  bless 
all  human  exertions,  when  accompanied 
by  integrity  of  purpose  and  persistent 
and  intellectual  industry.  He  was  one 
of  a  large  family,  and  was  bom  in  1798 
at  Great  Y'armouth,  where  his  father,  the 
Rev.  Richard  Turner,  B.I).,  was  for  thirty 
years  the  minister. 

His  education  was  commenced  at  the 
Charterhouse  (where  he  became  a  go- 
vemor);  and  finished  at  Pembroke  College, 


TURNHAM  675 

)  Cambridge,  of  which  his  uncle.  Dr.  Joseph 
j  Turner,  dean  of  Norwich,  was  then  master, 
I  by  obtaining  the  distinction  of  a  wrangler's 
.  place  in  1810,  and  soon  after  being  elected 
,  to  a  fellowship  there.     He  had  previously 
entered  the  society  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  and 
I  was  called  to  the  bar  in  July  1821,  first 
•  preparing  himself  by  becoming  a  pupil  to 
I  Mr.  Pepys  (afterwards  Lord  Cottennam). 
I  Attaching  himself  to  the  Court  of  Chancery, 
he  worked  diligently  and  successfully  for 
nineteen  years  as  a  junior,  when  in  1840  ho 
was  honoured  with  a  silk  gown.    During 
the  next  eleven  years  his  energies  were 
brought  more  into  play  as  well  in  his  legi- 
timate court  of  the  Rolls,  and  in  eases  of 
;  appeal,  as  in  the  House  of  Lords  and  in 
,  the  judicial  committee  of  the  privy  council. 
j  In  the  latter  he  had  particularly  distin- 
I  guished  himself  by  his  elaborate  and  tri- 
umphant argument  for  the  Rev.  Mr.  Gorham, 
the  appellant  against  a  decision  of  the 
Bishop  of  Exeter. 

From  1847  to  1861  he  sat  in  the  House 
of  Commons  as  member  for  the  city  of 
Coventry.  So  conspicuous  were  his  legal 
attainments,  and  so  peculiarly  qualified  was 
he  allowed  to  be  for  a  judicial  position,  that 
on  April  2,  1851,  he  was  selected  as  one  of 
the  vice-chancellors,  and  was  then  knighted, 
and  placed  on  the  privy  council.  Two 
years  afterwards,  when  Lord  Cranworth 
oecame  lord  chancellor,  Sir  George  was 
promoted  to  his  place  of  lord  justice  of  the 
Court  of  Appeal  in  Chancery,  on  January 
10,  1853,  as  the  colleague  of  Sir  James 
Lewis  Knight-Bruce.  By  their  united 
administi*ation  of  justice,  in  the  necessarily 
difficult  cases  they  had  to  decide,  so  much 
satisfaction  was  given,  both  to  the  suitors 
and  to  the  bai*,  that  when  a  change  took 
place  by  the  removal  of  one  of  them 
the  deepest  regret  was  felt  by  aU.  This 
regret  was  doubled  by  the  death  of  both 
within  eight  months  of  each  other,  his  col- 
league dying  in  November  1800^  and  ho 
following  on  July  0,  18()7. 

By  his  marriage  with  Louisa,  one  of  the 
daughters  of  Edward  Jones,  Esq.,  of  Brack- 
ley  in  Northamptonshire,  Sir  George  had  a 
family  of  six  sons  and  three  daughters. 
One  of  his  sons  was  made  Bishop  of  Grafton, 
and  Armidale,  in  Australia,  in  February 
1861). 

TiniNHAX,  Stuphen  de,  who  is  called 
by  different  writers  Stephen  of  Tours,  or 
de  Turonis,  de  Turnham,  or  de  Mazzai,  was 
the  younger  son  of  Robert  de  Tumhaiii^ 
who  founded  the  priory  of  Cunibwell  in 
Kent.  He  was  seneschal  of  Anjou  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Henry  II.,  with 
whom  he  was  a  great  favourite,  and  over 
whom  he  exercised  considerable  influence. 
He  assisted  that  king  in  \m  last  fatal  wars, 
and  was  with  him  at  Mans  when  it  was 
besieged  by  Philip  of  France  j  and  intending 


680 


TUBNHAM 


to  destroy  the  suburbs  by  fire^  the  flames 
Qufortunately  extended  to  the  dty  itself, 
and  obliged  llenry  to  fly. 

On  Henry's  death,  he  was  taken  by  King 
Bichardy  and  loaded  with  chains ;  nor  was 
he  released  until  he  had  delivered  up  all 
the  castles  and  treasures  which  the  late 
king  had  entrusted  to  him,  nor,  as  Richard 
of  Devizes  asserts,  without  the  payment  of 
an  enormous  fine.  He  was,  however,  soon 
restored  to  favour,  and,  accompanving 
Richard  on  his  expedition  to  Jerusalem, 
was,  with  Richard  de  Camville,  entrusted 
with  the  government  of  Cyprus,  and  after- 
wards is  enumerated  among  tnose  noted 
'  for  their  high  valiance  '  in  the  holy  war. 
In  1 103  he  was  appointed  to  conduct  l^ueen 
Berengaria  into  Poictou,  and  after  the  king's 
return  he  was  employed  in  the  Curia  Regis 
as  one  of  the  justiciers.  His  name  appears 
on  several  fines  levied  there  in  the  last  two 
years  of  Richard's  reiffn,  and  as  acting  as  a 
justice  itinerant  in  the  counties  of  Essex, 
Hertford,  and  Surrey.  During  the  first 
four  years  of  John's  reign  also  he  was  en- 
gaged in  the  same  duties.  {Madojc,  i.  505, 
733-7,  743.) 

He  then  appears  to  have  retired  from 
active  employment,  inasmuch  as  in  5  John 
he  fined  one  thousand  marks  to  be  dis- 
charged from  all  accounts,  fines,  &c.  (Rot, 
Pat  41.)  That  this  was  intended  to  be 
a  favourable  close  of  his  account,  and  that 
he  still  enjoyed  the  confidence  of  his  sove- 
reign, appears  from  the  close  of  the  entry, 
whereby  the  kingexcuses  him  three  hundred 
marks,  and  orders  that  out  of  the  residue 
he  should  be  allowed  one  mark  a  day  for 
the  custody  of  the  king's  niece,  the  sister 
of  the  unfortunate  Prince  Arthur. 

In  7  John  he  received  se\eral  payments 
of  one  mark  each  for  the  use  of  tne  queen 
(HoL  de  Pradito,  273-4),  and  in  11  John 
a  gift  from  the  king  of  one  hundred  marks. 
(Itot.  Misa^  154.)  The  Rotuli  Misse  of  the 
latter  year  and  of  14  John  contain  entries 
of  freauent  payments  to  messengers  to  and 
from  Winchester  conveying  the  corre- 
spondence between  the  king  and  him»  and 
in  14  John  he  was  commanded  not  to  allow 
any  one  to  see  the  king's  son  Henry  with- 
out special  order.     (Hot.  Clave.  121, 123.) 

His  property  was  considerably  increasea 
by  his  marriage  with  Edelin,  the  daughter 
and  one  of  the  heirs  of  Ranulph  de  Broc. 
He  held  one  of  the  estates  so  acquired  by 
the  service  of  *Ostiarius  Camene  Regis,' 
and  by  another  which  he  held  in  wardship 
he  was  maishal  of  the  king's  household. 

He  died  in  16  John,  in  which  vear  his 
widow  paid  sixty  marks  and  a  palfrey  for 
liberty  to  marry  with  whom  she  pleased, 
and  his  lands  were  divided  among  his  five 
daughters.  (Ibid.  i.  168 ;  Excerpt,  e  Hot. 
jF)u.  i.  25 ;  R.  de  Wendocer^  ii.  459,  iii. 
I ;  Rk.  Dewsei,  6,  7  •,  HaiiwKed,  \u  "l^'i., 


TURNOUR 

222,  232 ;  Manmni^  and  Bray't  Smrtif,  I 

15.  83.) 

TUBHOB,  Chbibtopheb,  was  the  eldest 
son  of  Christopher  Tumor,  £«q.,  of  Miltoo- 
Emevs  in  Bedfordshire,  bj  Helen,  daiuhter 
of  Thomas  Sam,  Esq.,  of  Piinton,  Hert- 
fordshire. He  was  bom  on  December  % 
1607,  and  was  educated  at  Emmaimri 
College,  Cambridge,  to  wMch  in  after  life 
he  contributed  a  liberal  donation  towaidi 
rebuildmg  its  chapel.  He  took  the  degrees 
of  B.A.  and  M.A.  in  1630  and  1633,  iDd, 
having  been  admitted  a  'student  at  the 
Middle  Temple,  was  called  to  the  bar  ia 
November  1638,  and  became  bencher  is 
1654.  His  name  does  not  frequently  ap- 
pear in  the  Reports,  and  he  is  not  mentioDM 
as  taking  any  prominent  part  in  the  troaUea. 
But  that  he  had  a  fair  leural  reputation  m 
manifest  from  his  being  selected  at  the  Ke- 
storatiou  &}  third  baron  of  the  £xcheqo«r 
on  July  7,  1660.  lie  was  thereinwi 
knighted.  On  his  first  circuit  he  refudea  to 
try  three  persons  indicted  for  murder  ii 
Gloucestersoire,  for  the  very  sufficient  reasoi 
that  the  body  had  not  l>een  found  liii 
successor  on  that  circuit  at  the  next  aauze, 
Sir  Robert  Hyde,  not  influenced  by  tlw 
same  consideration,  condemned  and  hanged 
the  prisoners,  whose  innocence  was  toon 
years  afterwards  established  by  the  re- 
appearance of  the  man  supposed  to  hsTe 
been  murdered. 

A  gossiping  letter  preserved  in  the  State 
Paper  Oflice  (Cal  [1(560],  539),  dated  in 
March  1661,  relates  that  <  Jud^  Atkioi 
and  Turner,  who  went  on  the  Midland  Cli- 
cuit,  are  taken  ill,  the  latter  struck  blind 
and  deaf.'  It  adds  that  ^  it  is  thou^t  t 
judgment  for  their  severe  conduct  to  poor 
honest  men.'  As  no  other  record  of  the 
severitv  of  the  two  judges  appears,  we  majr 
hope  that  it  existed  only  in  the  writer* 
imagination.  The  visitation  on  Sir  Chii^ 
tbpher,  if  at  all  true,  was  only  temporuy. 
for  he  continued  to  perform  the  duties  of 
his  office  during  fourteen  subsequent  vetn^ 
His  death  occurred  in  1075,  and  his  ft- 
mains  were  deposited  at  Milton-Emevf. 

By  his  wife,  Joice,  sister  of  Sir  Williim 
Warwick,  secretary  of  the  Treasury,  he  left 
several  children,  the  descendants  of  whi<oi 
still  flourish  at  Stoke- Hochford  in  Lincob- 
shire.  ( Gent.  Mag.  Iii.  60 ;  1  Sider/m,  3 ; 
State  Trials,  xiv.  1318.) 

TUSKOXTB,  Edward,  was  of  a  familT 
which  is  said  to  be  derived  from  a  NonntB 
who  was  one  of  the  rewarded  warriors  of 
William  the  Conqueror,  and  whose  deseeo- 
dauts  were  long  seated  at  Haverhill  is 
Suffolk,  where  Edward  Tumour  his  gitnd- 
father  resided,  and  was  a  bencher  of  tbe 
Middle  Temple  in  the  time  of  James  L 
Arthur,  the  judge's  father,  was  a  serjeaot 
in  the  next  reign,  and  was  seated  at  Little 
V^vcvw^^M  lu  Essex.     By  his  wife,  Aim, 


TUBNOUR 

iter  of  John  Jermy,  of  Gunton  in  Nor- 
he  had  seveial  children,  the  eldest 

the  future  chief  baron,  who  was 
in  1617  in  ThreadDeedle  Street,  at  the 

of  his  uncle  Sir  Thomas  Moulson, 
mayor  of  London.      Educated  first 

Dr.  Goodwin,  author  of  the  'An- 
ies  of  Rome,'  at  the  free  school  at 
^on,  and  next  at  Queen*s  College, 
d,  he  was  on  October  30,  1633,'  ad- 
i  to  the  Middle  Temple;  and  being 
.  to  the  bar  on  June  19,  1640.  became 
er  on  June  29,  1660,  and  afterwards 
irer.  He  was  elected  steward  of 
ard  in  1648.     (Athen,  Oxon,  1060.) 

represented  Essex  in  CromwelFs 
1  and  third  parliaments,  and  in  that 
58,  called  by  the  Protector  Kichard ; 
lat  he  was  but  a  moderate  republican, 
eered  at  last  to  the  side  of  monarchy, 
tarent  from  his  being  returned  mem- 
r  the  same  county  to  the  Convention 
iment  of  April  1660,  and  from  his 

knighted  immediately  on  the  Re- 
ion  ;  and  that  he  was  well  reputed  as 
yer  may  be  concluded  from  his  being 
ed  as  counsel  for  the  king  in  the 
of  the  regicides,  particularly  in  those 
rrison  and  Cook,  and  from  bis  being 
solicitor,  and  afterwards  attorney,  to 
uke  of  York.    Being  again  returned 

parliament  of  May  1661,  as  member 
lertford,  he  was  elected  speaker 
muff's  SpeakerSy  354) ;  and  his  speeches 
is  and  subsequent  occa^^ions,  though 
ithout  some  touch  of  eloquence,  are 
kable  for  their  excessive  adulation 
leir  amusing  reference  to  sacred  and 
le  history.      {State   Trials,  v.   1016, 

Pari,  Uist,  vols.  iii.  iv. ;  Burton^  iv. 

December  1663  he  had  a  grant  of 

as  a  free  gift,  and  another  of  5000/. 
y  1664.     This  parliament  lasted  for 

eighteen  years,  during  which  there 
DO  less  than  four  speakers — Sir  Ed- 

Turnour  for  twelve  years.  Sir  Job 
ton  for  little  more  than  twelve  days, 
Idward  Seymour  for  five  years,  and 
tobert  Sawyer  for  the  remaining 
IS.  The  speakers  at  that  time  were 
9  attended  by  the  mace,  even  during 
joumment  of  the  house,  and,  being 
rs,  forbore  to  practise.  In  1668,  the 
ia\ing  adjourned  the  parliament  for  a 
■  time  than  usual  (they  did  not  meet 
ghteen  months),  Sir  Edward  was 
klly  anxious  to  be  freed  from  that 
iity  and  interference  with  his  profes- 

pursuits;  but  on  his  application  to 
3ased  from  it  the  Commons  declared 
e  ought  to  be  attended  by  the  mace 
time  of  shorter  adjournments.  But 
I  on  May  11,  1670,  during  a  six 
18*  adioumment  of  the  ninth  session, 
ed    the    appointment    of    solicitor- 


TURRI 


681 


general  to  the  king,  it  must  be  presumed 
that  the  above  vote  did  not  forbid  his  prac- 
tising. When  the  parliament  met  in  Octo- 
ber he  resumed  the  chair,  but,  according  to 
Roger  North  (p.  52),  he  had  lost  much  of 
his  former  credit  and  authority  in  conse- 
quence of  having  received  a  small  present, 
in  other  words  a  bribe,  from  the  East  India 
Company. 

The  session  was  terminated  by  a  proroga- 
tion in  April  1671 ;  and  on  the  23rd  of  the 
next  month  Sir  Edward  was  removed  from 
the  chair  of  the  House  of  Commons  to  the 
seat  of  chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  an 
elevation  somewhat  extraordinary  for  a  man 
sufiering  under  such  an  imputation.  No 
complaint,  however,  has  been  made  of  his 
presidency,  which  lasted  only  four  years. 
He  died  while  on  circuit  at  Bedford  on 
March  4,  1676,  and  was  buried  in  the 
chancel  of  Little  Parinffdon  Church. 

He  seems  to  have  been  prouder  of  his 
oratory  than  his  law,  for  his  publications 
were  confined  to  his  speeches.  Of  his  two 
wives,  the  first  was  Sarah,  daughter  and 
heir  of  Gerard  Cole,  alderman  of  London ; 
the  second,  Mary,  daughter  and  heir  of 
Henry  Ewer,  of  South  Alimms,  Middlesex. 
By  the  first  he  had  several  children,  the 
eldest  of  whom  was  Sir  Edward,  M.P.  for 
Orford  in  Suffolk,  whose  daughter  Sarah 
was  the  grandmother  of  Edward  Garth, 
who,  succeeding  to  the  estates,  assumed 
the  name  of  Tumour,  and  was  in  1761 
created  baron,  and  in  1765  Earl  of  Winter- 
ton  in  Ireland.  {Manning  and  Bray's 
Surrey y  ii.  7 ;  Biog,  Peerage^  iv.  8o.) 

TTTBSI,  Jordan  de,  was  an  officer  of  the 
Exchequer  in  1  Richard  I.,  the  Great  Roll 
of  that  year  recording  that  the  sheriffs  of 
London  and  Middlesex  accounted  for  cer- 
tain expenditure,  ^per  visum  Jordani  de 
Turri  et  per  testimonium  Willelmi  de  S. 
Marias  Ecclesia.'  {Madox,  i.  370.)  In  4 
John,  1202,  he  was  among  the  justiciers  at 
Westminster  before  whom  tines  were  levied, 

S resent,  perhaps,  only  as  an  officer.  He 
ied  about  6  John,  in  which  year  certain 
houses  he  held  in  London  were  ordered  to 
be  given  to  Hugh  de  Wells.  {Rot,  Clous, 
i.  18,  35.) 

TTTBSI,  Nicholas  de,  was  a  justicier  as 
early  as  35  Henry  III.,   1251,  payments 
being  made  from  March  in  that  year  for 
assizes  to  be  held  before  him.     These  con- 
tinue uninterruptedly  till  May   1270,  54 
Henry  lU.     (JEacerpt.  e  Hot,  Pin,  ii.  100- 
613.)    DugdaJe,  however,  doe»  not  men- 
tion him  till  44  Henry  HI.,  1260,  and  then 
only  as  a  justice  itinerant.    In  the  iters  of 
46  and  47  Henry  HI.  he  stands  at  the 
head  of  all  the  commissions  on  which  he  is 
named.    In  the  former  of  these  years  Dug.- 
dale  introduces  him  among  the  justices  or 
the  Common  Pleas,  with  a  grant  of  40^^ 
a  year^  and  tb^d  oiA^  ^<^  V<^  "^^i^^ql^kx^  ^ 


682 


TURTON 


TWISDKN 

rage  and  malice  of  the  enemies  of  that  glo- 
rious prince  [King  William]  at  the  veiy 
beginning  of  the  succeeding  reign,  ud 
that  his  disgrace  "was  occasioned  by  his 
honest  and  firm  adherence  to  the  KeVola- 
tion  interest.' 

lie  survived  his  discharge  for  six  jean, 
and  died  suddenly  on  March  12,  1706.  Jli* 
wife  was  Anne,  daughter  of  Samuel  More^ 
of  More  and  Linley  in  Staffordshire.  Hi 
portrait  is  in  Gray's  Inn.  {^£rdewick't  Suf- 
fordsh.  234;  Lutireil,  v.  181,  vi.  278;'* 
^ Lord  Raynimid,  768  ;  State  Trials,  iiii.4ol, 
48o.  xiv.  221,  228.) 

TTTBYILL,  Maurice  de,  was  in  the  §»- 
vice  of  King  John,  by  whom  in  121o  k 
was  sent  with  three  associates  to  the  eark 
barons,  and  others  of  the  county  of  Ilants, 
to  convey  the  royal  commands  and  to  ex- 
plain the  affairs  of  the  kingdom.  Id  tb 
same  vear  he  and  William  de  Faleise  wse 
custodes  of  the  castle  of  Winchester.  {Bd, 
Pat.  128,  136.)  His  only  appearance  in  t 
judicial  capacity  was  in  1219,  as  one  of  ihe 
justices  itinerant  into  Wilts,  Hants,  Beds, 
and  Oxford.  He  held  the  office  of  iioe  d 
the  three  coroners  of  the  county  of  Gloo- 
cester,  all  of  whom  were  superseded,  *  pn^ 
ter  debilitatem,'  in  122^,  when  the  a&nfi 
was  ordered  to  cause  three  others  ti  he 
elected  in  their  stead.     (Hot,  Claw,  iL  3-ii 

TUTTEBTTET,  Thomas,  was  of  a  Dtrbt- 
shire   family,   and    is    first   mentioDt?d  a 
week,  the  claims  of  the  candidates  were    1  Henry  IV.  with  the  designation  of  cferk, 
never  decided.     History  is  silent  as  to  Tur-    as  keeper  of  the  king's  wardrobe,  in  whki 

character  he  received   two   sums  of  ^ 
ISs.  4d.  and  13/.  6«.  Sd.  <  for  the  costs  tod 


having  been  acknowledged  before  him  is  in 
48  Henry  HI.  In  51  Ilemr  III,  1267,  a 
writ  directing  the  removal  of  a  process  from 
his  court  to  the  Exchequer  is  addressed 
'  Nicholao  de  Turri  et  sociis  suis  justiciariis  * 
(MadoXj  i.  236),  which  would  seem  to  im- 
ply that  he  was  then  at  the  head  of  the 
court.  He  died  most  probably  in  1270, 
when  he  ceased  to  act ;  and  if  so,  he  would 
then  have  sat  on  the  bench  between  nine- 
teen and  twenty  years.  From  an  entry 
among  the  pleas  of  Michaelmas,  51-52 
Henry  HI.,  relative  to  a  messuage  and 
some  land  at  Gretelington  in  Wiltshire,  it 
appears  that  Nicholas  de  Turri  was  parson 
of  the  church  of  All  Saints  in  that  place. 
{Abb.Phcit.  165.) 

TTTBTON,  John,  was  the  grandson  of 
Jobn  Turton,  of  West  Bromwich  in  Staf- 
fordshire, of  w^hose  two  sons,  John  and 
William,  the  former  was  the  ancestor  of 
Sir  Thomas  Tui-ton,  created  a  baronet  in 
17iXJ  (now  extinct)  ;  and  the  latter  was  the 
father  of  the  judge  by  his  wife,  Eleanor, 
daughter  of  Thomas  Fownes. 

He  was  born  at  Aire  was,  his  father's 
residence  in  the  same  county,  and,  becoming 
in  1669  a  member  of  Gray's  Inn,  was  called 
to  the  bar  in  1673.  At  the  general  election 
for  the  last  parliament  of  Charles  II.,  in 
1681,  his  name  is  contained  in  a  double 
return  for  the  town  of  Tamworth  ;  but  as 
the  dissolution  occurred  before  it  had  sat  a 


ton's  conduct  during  James's  reign;   but 
that  he  was  a  friend   to  the  Revolution, 

and  distinguished  among  his  legal  brethren,  charges  incurred  for  the  carriage  of  the  IxMir 
is  apparent  from  his  being  selected  as  a  of  Kichard,  late  King  of  England,  froa 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  May  4,  1689,  i  Pountfreyt  Castle  to  London.*  On  June 27, 
and  knighted.  He  sat  in  that  court  for  i  1401,  he  was  rewarded  for  this  servicf  by 
seven  years,  when  he  was  transferred  on  being  constituted  second  baron  of  the  Ei- 
July  1,  1696,  to  the  King's  Bench.  There  chequer.  In  May  1402  we  iind  him  «sk1- 
he  continued  during  the  remainder  of  Wil-  \  ing  a  messenger  to  the  king  annouodcg 
liam's  reign,  and  was  re-appointed  on  the  \  *  the  capture  of  a  certain  ship  sent  t» 
accession  of  Queen  Anne  in  March  1702. 
On  June  4  following,  however,  he  received 
a  message   from  the   lord  keeper  that  he 

might  forbear  to  sit  on  the  next  day,  the  is  the  sum  of  253/.  9«.  for  tish,  no  entrr 
first  day  of  Trinity  Term,  her  majesty  de-  concerning  him  is  published.  {DttvHilff 
signing  to   give  him   his  quietus,  and  he    Roll,  275-294;   Cal.  jRot.  I^t  244.) 

accordingly  received  his  supersedeas  on  the        " -'^■■•-'  '^ "^^     -      •»     -'^ 

9th.     This  removal  no  doubt  was  caused 
by  the  prevalence  of  tory  politics,  which 


'  me  capiuro  ui  a  cenain  snip  seni  w 
Scotland  to  victual  those  parts,  Bejmi 
July  1403,  when  he  received  paymenteot 
account  of  his  former  otfice,  among  wbiffc 


then  ran  to  great  extremes.  It  became  the 
fashion  to  decry  all  King  William's  acts, 
and  even  in  an  address  to  the  throne  the 
victories  of  the  Duke  of  Marlborough  were 
spoken  of  as  signally  *  retrieving '  the  an- 
cient honour  and  glory  of  the  English 
nation.  That  Sir  John  Turton  felt  himself 
aggrieved  may  be  well  supposed,  and  the 
sentiments  of  his  family  on  the  subject 
were  expressed  by  his  grandson  in  a  memo- 
rial presented  to  Geoi^^l.  va  Vl*21,  ^tatin^; 


TWISDEK, Thomas.  The  family  ofTwj^ 
den  is  one  of  the  most  ancient  in  the  countr 
of  Kent,  and  can  be  traced  from  the  reign  i 
Edward  I.,  when  it  possessed  a  manor  of  tbat 
name  in  the  parish  of  Sandhurst.  In  tk 
reign  of  Henry  VIII.,  William  Twrsdcn,  K 
his  marriage  with  Elizabeth,  one  of  tbe 
daughters  and  coheirs  of  Thomas  Royd* 
came  into  possession  of  Kovdon  Hall  is 
East  Peckham,  thence  the  chief  seat  of  the 
family.  This  William  was  the  grandfitbfr 
of  Sir  William  Twyaden,  the  first  baren^ 
who  bv  his  marriage  with  Anne,  daugbw 
of  Sir  Moyle  Finch,  of  Eastwell,  Bait,  W 


that  the  iudge  '  l^\it\i^  ^ift\,«i«jcxv^vi^\a\^ia\'vis^^Q^\^^        the  eldest  of  whom,  Sir 


TWISDEN 

Ro^r  TwysdeD,  renowned  as  much  for  his 
'jantiquRrian  and  constitutional  learning  as 
fcr  his  loyal  and  exemplary  life,  the  title 
has  descended  to  the  present  time.  (  Wot- 
Um*»  Barmet,  i.  211 ;  Hasted,  v.  96.)  This 
Thomas  was  Sir  William's  second  son,  and 
on  establishing  a  new  family  altered  the 
QSiiid  spelling  of  his  name  from  Twysden  to 
Twisden,  in  order  to  distinguish  the  two 
branches.  {Ex  inf,  of  the  late  Rev,  Lambert 
JB.  Larking.) 

He  was  born  at  Roydon  Hall  on  January 
8,  1602,  and  became  a  fellow  commoner  of 
Smmanuel  College,  Cambridge,  to  the  re- 
building of  the  chapel  of  which  he  after- 
wards was  a  liberal  contributor.  Being 
admitted  a  member  of  the  Inner  Temple  in 
1618y  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1625. 
He  was  not  raised  to  the  bench  of  the 
aociety  till  November  6,  1646,  but  long 
before  that  time  he  was  in  full  employment 
•a  an  advocate,  his  name  appearing  in  the 
Reports  of  Croke,  Styles,  Aleyn,  &c.  After 
the  death  of  Charles  I.,  Sidertin  mentions 
him  frequently ;  and  it  is  evident  he  acquired 
much  eminence  in  his  profession,  as  Crom- 
well,  in  Hilary  Term  1654,  called  him  to 
the  degree  of  serieant,  a  dignity  which  he 
■ays  he  accepted  *  animo  reluctante.'  In 
the  next  year  Cony's  case  arose.  This  gen- 
tleman had  been  illegally  imprisoned  for 
xefusing  to  pey  certam  customs  imposed 
without  any  authority  but  the  protector's 
dictum.  He  either  brought  an  action  for 
false  imprisonment,  or  sued  out  his  Habeas 
Corpus  (for  the  accounts  differ),  and  he 
•mployed  Serjeants  Twisden,  Maynard,and 
Wadham  Wyndham  as  his  counsel.  Their 
•dyocacy  was  so  effective  that  they  were 
trrannically  silenced  by  being  sent  to  the 
Tower,  from  which  they  did  not  get  release 
till  they  petitioned  the  protector.  (Ltidlotc, 
23S ;  Clarendon,  vii.  206 ;  Harrises  Lives, 
iu.  446.) 

Twisden,  like  the  rest  of  his  family,  was 
•  staunch  loyalist ;  and  that  his  wife  shared 
Id  his  feelings  is  apparent  from  a  letter 
addressed  to  her  by  Charles  II.  in  1650,  in 
irhich,  after  stating  that  he  has  assurance 
of  her  readiness  to  perform  his  desires,  he 
gives  her  directions  as  to  the  delivery  of 
•  the  George  and  Seals,'  according  to  her 
^  brother's  promise  '  to  '  his  blessed  father.* 
This  lady,  whom  Mr.  Twisden  married  in 
ld39,  was  Jane,  daughter  of  John  Tomlin- 
ion,  Esq.,  of  Whitby  in  Yorkshire ;  and  the 
brother  alluded  to  was  Matthew  Tomlin- 
lODy  a  colonel  in  the  parliamentary  army, 
under  whose  charge  Cnarles  I.  was  placed 
iaring  the  time  of  his  trial,  and  on  the 
day  of  his  execution.  Unlike  others  about 
the  king,  he  treated  him  with  kindness  and 
eiTility.  This  considerate  conduct  was 
gratefully  acknowledged  by  his  majesty  in 
Sia  last  momenta,  when  he  presented  the 
colonel  with  his  gold  toothpick  and  case  as 


TWISDEN 


683 


a  remembrance,  and  entrusted  him  with 
the  George  and  Seals  to  be  transmitted  to 
his  son.  Though  Tomlinson  was  afterwards 
one  of  Cromweirs  peers,  and  a  commissioner 
for  the  management  of  Irish  affaires,  he 
reaped  at  the  Ilestoration  ^  the  effect  and 
/ruit'  of  his  generous  treatment  of  the 
fallen  monarch  by  being  called  as  a  witness 
on  the  trial  of  the  regicides,  instead  of 
being  arraigned  as  an  accomplice  in  their 
guilt.  {Evelyn,  v.  183;  Whitelocke,  666, 
698  ;  State  trials,  v.  1178.) 

The  seijeant  continued  the  practice  of 
his  profession  through  all  the  subsequent 
changes,  and  it  may  well  be  supposed  that 
the  king's  return  was  gladly  welcomed  by 
him.  faying  down  the  dignity  which  had 
been  forced  upon  him  by  the  usurper,  he 
was  legitimately  invested  with  the  coif  a 
few  days  after ;  and  on  July  22,  1660,  he 
was  sworn  in  as  one  of  the  judges  of  the 
King's  Bench,  and  knighted.  lie  retained 
the  oHice  for  the  remainder  of  his  life,  but 
ceased  to  exercise  its  functions  in  October 
1678,  more  than  four  years  before  his 
death,  the  king,  in  consideration  of  his 
great  age,  or,  as  Noble  says  {Oromwelly  i. 
4381  from  being  too  virtuous  for  the  place 
he  neld,  then  excusing  him  from  further 
attendance  in  court. 

Though  on  the  commission  for  the  trial 
of  the  regicides,  he  took  little  part  in  it, 
the  principal  conduct  being  left  to  the  lord 
chief  baron.  Sir  Orlando  Bridgeman ;  and 
in  the  trials  of  the  Fifth  Monarchy  men 
and  Sir  Harry  Vane  in  the  King's  Boucli, 
he  is  only  mentioned  as  speaking  on  points 
of  law.  He  was  one  of  the  judges  in  tho 
harsh  proceedings  against  George  Fox  and 
other  Quakers  tor  not  taking  the  oath  of 
obedience,  and  seems  to  have  been  some- 
what puzzled  to  answer  the  arguments  of 
the  zealous  disputants.  {State  2'nals,  vi. 
74,  156,  206,  6:34.) 

Eoger  North  {Examen,  56)  gives  an 
amusing  account  of  an  accident  which 
befell  the  judge  in  Hilary  Term  1673 : — 

*  His  lordship  (Lord  Shaftesbury)  had 
an  early  fancy,  or  rather  freak,  the  first 
day  of  the  term  (when  all  the  officers  of 
the  law,  king's  counsel  and  j  uderes,  used  to 
wait  upon  the  Great  Seal  to  Westminster 
Hall)  to  make  this  procession  on  horse- 
back, as  in  old  time  the  way  was  when 
coaches  were  not  so  rife.  And  accordingly 
the  judges  were  spoken  to  to  get  horses, 
as  they  and  all  the  rest  did  by  borrowing 
or  hiring,  and  so  equipped  themselves  with 
black  foot-cloaths  m  the  best  manner  thev 
could:  and  diverse  of  the  nobility,  as  usual, 
in  compliment  and  honour  to  a  new  lord 
chancellor,  attended  abo  in  their  equip- 
ments. L^pon  notice  in  town  of  this  caval- 
cade, all  the  show  company  took  their 
places  at  windows  and  balconies,  with  the 
foot  guG^  in  the  stc^\»,\A  ^^d^i^uikj^  ^i  "Cc^^ 


684 


TYRRELL 


fine  sight,  and  being  once  settled  for  the 
niATch^  it  moved,  as  the  design  was,  state- 
lily  along.  But  when  they  came  to  straights 
and  interruptions,  for  want  of  gravity  in 
the  beasts,  or  too  much  in  the  riders,  there 
happened  some  curvetting  which  made  no 
little  disorder.  Judge  Twisden,  to  his 
great  afiiight,  and  the  consternation  of  his 
firrave  brethren,  was  laid  along  in  the  dirt, 
but  all  at  length  arrived  safe,  without  loss 
of  life  or  limo  in  the  service.  This  acci- 
dent was  enough  to  divert  the  like  frolic 
for  the  future,  and  the  very  next  term  after 
they  fell  to  their  coaches  as  before.* 

The  author  speaks  of  this  as  the  revival 
of  an  ancient  custom ;  but  it  is  one  which 
could  not  have  been  long  left  off,  for  in 
October  1G60,  only  thirteen  years  before, 
Pepys  (i.  110)  says,  *  In  my  way  I  met 
the  lord  chancellor  and  all  the  judges 
riding  on  horseback  and  going  to  West- 
minster Hall,  it  being  the  first  day  of  the 
term.*  And  Aubrey  (ii.  380)  fixes  the 
date  of  its  discontinuance  at  the  death  of 
Sir  liobert  Hyde  in  1065. 

Sir  Thomas's  health  began  to  fail  him  in 
the  year  1077,  and  in  October  of  the  next 
year  he  received  hie  quietus  in  the  honour- 
able manner  before  related,  being  allowed 
to  retain  the  title  of  judge  with  a  pension 
of  500/.  a  vear  during  the  continuance  of 
his  life.  lie  enjoyed  the  reputation  of 
being  a  sound  lawjer  and  an  upright  judge, 
though  withal  somewhat  passionate,  so 
that  the  contemporary  reporters,  in  record- 
ing his  judgments,  begin,  *  Twisden,  in 
furore^  observed,'  &c.  (Lord  CaynpheWs 
Ch.  JndiceSy  i.  559.)  Having  purchased 
Bradburn,  a  seat  in  East  Mallmg  in  Kent, 
at  a  very  early  period,  the  king  in  June 
1000  conferred  on  him  a  baronetcy  of  tbat 
place.  There  he  died  on  January  2,  1083, 
and  was  buried  under  a  monument  in  the 
church  of  that  parish.  He  was  the  father 
of  eleven  children,  five  sons  and  six  daugh- 
ters; but  the  baronetcy,  after  being  enjoyed 
by  seven  of  his  descendants,  became  extmct 
in  1841. 

T7BBELL,  Thomas,  was  one  of  the 
militaiy  lawyers  of  the  Commonwealth. 
He  was  the  third  son  of  Sir  Edward  Tyrrell, 
of  Thornton  in  Buckinghamshire,  a  knight 
of  very  nncient  family  (descended  from 
that  Sir  Walter  who  shot  William  II.  in 
the  New  Forest),  by  his  second  wife,  Mar- 
gfaret,  daughter  of  Thomas  Aston  of  Ae^ton 
in  Cheshire,  and  relict  of  Thomas  Egerton 
of  W^algreve.  Sir  Edward,  by  his  first 
wife,  Mary,  daughter  of  Benedict  Lee,  Esq., 
of  Huncote,  Bucks,  had  a  son  also  uamed 
Edward,  who  obtained  a  baronetcy  in  1027, 
which  became  extinct  in  1749. 

Thomas  was  bom  about  the  year  1594, 
and  began  his  legal  career  at  the  Inner 
Temple,  where  he  was  called  to  the  bar  on 
November  13,  1021.    His  military  career 


TYRRELL 

began  in  May  1042,  when  he  accepted  tlie 
ofiice  of  deputy  lieuteDant  of  bis  natiTi 
county  under  Lord  Paget,  having  Hampdes 
and  Whitelocke  among  his  colleagues  He 
soon  after  received  a  cooiiuisaion  as  colosel 
in  the  parliament  army,  hut  nothing  b 
recorded  of  his  prowess,  except  that  in  i 
quarrel  that  arose  in  Westminster  HiH 
between  him  and  Sir  William  Andrei^iy 
in  April  1045,  he  *■  hehaved  himself  dis- 
creetly,' and  was  called  into  the  hou^  lad 
thanked  *  for  his  carriage  therein.'  Pleiwd 
perhaps  with  the  flattering  expreseiiiS 
addret«sed  to  him,  he  became  deairoui  d 
entering  the  parliament  aa  a  member,  k: 
did  not  succeed.  During  the  next  thirteei 
eventful  years  history  makes  no  meDti(«  of 
him,  though  probably  he  resumed  hii^  prv- 
tice  at  the  bar ;  but  at  the  end  of  them  V 
was  returned  to  Protector  Richard's  p•^ 
lianient  of  January  lG>59y  as  member  ix 
Aylesbury.  In  that  short  se^on  tk 
colonel  took  an  active  part  in  all  quesdou 
connected  with  the  law,  and  sat  as  ciui^ 
man  of  the  Committee  of  Grievanoefliod 
Courts  of  Justice.  On  the  di»soluti<ffl  of 
the  parliament,  and  the  consequent  expinr 
tion  of  Richard's  power,  the  Long  Paiti*- 
ment  met  again ;  and  soon  after  its  reri^iL 
dismissing  the  late  comniissioners  of  tii? 
Great  Seal  because  they  'were  membeis  of 
the  house,  thev  committed  its  cuistodT  to 
Tyrrell  in  conjunction  with  Bradshawaad 
Fountaine  on  June  4  for  a  period  of  fivt 
months. 

On  the  13th  he  was  called  to  the  beoeh 
of  his  inn  of  court,  being  de«giiitird 
<  Thomas  Lord  Tyrrell/  and  on  the  16ti 
the  parliament  made  him  a  seijeant-at-ltw. 
The  three  commissioners  held  the  Seal  till 
November  1 ,  when  the  army  having  «^ 
prevented  the  house  from  meeting,  and  di>- 
minated  a  committee  of  safety,  it  was  tnat- 
fei-red  to  Whitelocke  as  sole  teeper.  Wiia 
the  Long  Parliament  was  again  permittid 
to  sit,  Tyrrell  was  restored  on  JauuniT  16, 
1000,  with  Fountaine  one  of  h\>  fonnff 
colleagues  and  Sir  Thomas  Widdriogtia 
The  Convention  Parliament,  soon  «Aer 
summoned  (to  which  Tyrrell  was  wtunwd 
as  member  for  his  county),  caused  ChariM 
II.  to  be  proclaimed  on  ^ay  7,  and  at  th 
same  time  named  the  Earl  of  Mancbesttfi 
the  speaker  of  the  House  of  Lords,  as  •&- 
other  commissioner  of  the  Seal,  which  wi* 
retained  by  all  four  till  it  was  ordered  td 
be  defaced  just  before  the  return  of  the 
king.  When  that  event  took  place  TvitsU 
was  considered  to  have  acted  with  so  mock 
discretion  that  he  was  confirmed  in  hi* 
degree  of  the  coif,  and  on  July  27  was  ad- 
vanced to  the  bench  as  a  justice  of  Um 
Common  Pleas,  and  knighted. 

King  Charles  in  1603  granted  him  in  fui 
the  estate  of  Castlethorpe  in  Bucks,  where 
he  died  on  March  8^  16i  1-2,  at  the  age  of 


ULECOT 

7By  and  in  the  cburch  of  which  he  was 
knried  under  a  stately  monument  with  his 
effiffy  in  robes  and  coif.  He  married 
tiince,  but  the  names  of  two  of  his  wives 
only  are  known,  the  first  and  the  third — viz., 
a  daughter  of  —  Saunders,  of  Buckingham- 
Mte ;  and  Bridiret,  one  of  the  daughters 
of  Sir  Richard  Harrington,  of  Ridlington, 
Ratland,  Bart.,  who  was  also  the  father- 
in-law  of  his  colleague  John  Fountaine. 


UBSWYKE 


685 


By  his  first  wife  he  had,  besides  daughters, 
two  sons,  Thomas  and  Peter,  the  latter  of 
whom  married  a  daughter  of  Carew  Ra- 
leigh, eldest  surviving  son  of  Sir  Walter 
Raleigh,  and  was  created  a  baronet  during 
his  father's  life  in  1665,  but  the  title  be- 
came extinct  in  1714.  (Lipscomhe's  Bucks, 
iv.89;  Wotton's  Baronee.il.  77  J  WhMocke^ 
56, 144, 167,  680-700 ;  Burton's  Diary,  iv. 
1,  126,  &c. ;  I  Siderjm,  3.) 


U 


ITLSGOT,  JoHKDE,  wasprobablyayounger 
Immch  of  the  same  family  as  the  under- 
BMntioned  Philip  de  Ulecot,  and  from  the 
employments  which  he  is  recorded  to  have 
keld  seems  to  have  been  a  retainer  of  the 
eoort.  He  was  sub-sheriff  of  Northamp- 
tonshire in  6  John,  and  of  Cambridge  aud 
Huntingdon  for  four  years  from  5  Henry 
KL  The  only  time  he  acted  as  a  justice 
llineraiit  was  in  14  Henry  III.,  1229,  when 
be  "was  appointed  for  Sussex  and  Rutland. 
Ten  years  afterwards  he  and  Everard  de 
Pmmpington,  probably  as  the  king*s  es- 
beators,  were  commanded  to  extend  the 
Mods  of  John,  late  Earl  of  Chester  and 
fontingdon,  beyond  the  county  of  Chester, 
nd  cause  the  same  to  be  divided  among 
he  heirs  of  the  eacl.  (Madox,  i.  226 ;  Bx- 
trpi.  e  Hot,  Fin.  i.  318.) 

UXSGOT,  Philip  de,  was  a  northern 
ni^ht  of  great  power  and  possessions,  and 
fas  fined  100/.  and  a  complete  horse  in  the 
jrst  year  of  King  John*s  reign  for  his  mar- 
mg&  with  Johanna,  the  sister  of  the  wife 
f  Sewel  Fitz-Henry,  part  of  which  fine 
mB  subsequently  remitted.  (Rot.  de  Ob- 
ti£0^  6  ;  Bat.  de Liberat.  25.)  In  5  John  he 
mm  appointed  constable  of  Chinon  in  Tou- 
line  (x2o^.  Pat.  40) ;  and  it  would  appear 
^t  he  was  taken  in  battle,  as  the  king 
ik^re  him  two  hundred  marks  for  his  re- 
emption  (Bot.  Claus.  i.  62) ;  a  very  large 
ffww  in  those  times,  and  showing  by  the 
enmnd  his  value  as  a  knight,  and  by  the 
B,Tinent  the  extent  of  the  royal  favour. 
B  this  he  gradually  advanced,  and  in  14 
oliTi  "was  invested  with  the  office  of  forester 
f  Northumberland,  with  a  grant  of  several 
lanors.  {Bot.  Chart.  190).  To  these  was 
dded  the  sheriffalty  of  that  county,  in  con- 
onc^on  with  the  Earl  Warren  and  the 
lehdeacon  of  Durham,  who,  with  him, 
r«re  also  appointed  custodes  of  the  bishop- 
ie  of  Durham  during  its  vacancy.  (Bot. 
BkL  9S,  94 ;  Bot.  de  Fin.  476,  &c.)  The 
iieri&lty  he  then  held  alone  for  the  re- 
Bainder  of  this  and  the  first  four  years  of 
Om  nign  of  Henry  HI.  In  1216,  King 
Ibhn  having  constituted  him  and  Hugo  de 
Baliol  goyemors  of  all  the  country  to  the 


north  of  the  Tees,  they  stoutly  defended 
the  castles  committed  to  their  charge  from 
the  attacks  made  upon  them  by  the  King 
of  Scots  in  behalf  of  Louis  of  France.  (-R. 
de  Wendover,  iii.  430,  433.) 

Soon  after  the  accession  of  Henry  III. 
some  quarrel  seems  to  have  occurred  be- 
tween him  and  Roger  Bertram,  for  they 
were  both  summoned  to  appear  before  the 
council,  and  shortly  afterwards  the  sheriff 
of  Nottingham  was  commanded  to  seize  his 
lands  if  he  did  not  give  up  the  castle  of 
Midford  to  Roger,  according  to  the  king's 
frequent  commands.  His  favour  was  soon 
restored,  for  in  the  very  next  month  the 
manor  of  Corbrig  was  assigned  for  his  sup- 
port while  in  the  king's  service  (Bot.  CIqus. 
1.  336,  357,  360),  which  was  followed  by 
various  other  grants.  In  3  Henry  III.  he 
was  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  in  the  three 
northern  counties,  and  in  the  next  year  he 
received  the  appointment  of  seneschal  of 
Poictou  and  Gascony  ;  and  for  his  convey- 
ance thither  the  barons  of  Hastings  were 
ordered  to  provide  three  good  ships.  In 
this  service  he  died,  and  the  king,  in  a 
mandate  dated  November  2, 1220,  5  Henry 
III.,  announcing  his  death  to  the  sheriff  of 
Northumberland,  calls  him  '  dominus  tuus,* 
showing  that  he  still  continued  governor 
of  the  northern  district.  (Ibid.  430.  433, 
449,  466,  ii.  20;  Excerpt,  e  Bot.  Fin.  i.  56.) 

UPSALE,  Geoffrey  de,  of  a  Yorkshire 
family,  was  among  the  justices  itinerant  for 
pleas  of  the  forest  only  in  the  northern 
counties  in  64  Henry  iU.,  1270;  but  he 
never  appears  to  have  been  engaged  in  ge- 
neral jucQcial  duties.  (Excerpt,  e  Bot.  Fin. 
ii.  419.) 

UBSWTKE,  Thomas,  named  probably 
from  the  parish  of  Urswick  in  Lancashire, 
was  common  Serjeant  of  the  city  of  London, 
from  which  he  was  raised  to  the  office  of 
recorder  in  1455.  In  that  character  he  was 
one  of  those  named  in  the  commission  to 
try  treasons  at  Guildhall  in  July  1460, 
when  Sir  Thomas  Brown  was  convicted. 
(Bot.  Pari.  vi.  19.)  In  the  following  year, 
after  the  queen  had  gained  the  second  battle 
of    St.    Albans,  dsid  >r«a  ^A^^sl^^^^  v^ 


686 


VALOINES 


London,  the  mob  prevented  the  lord  mayor 
from  sending  her  a  supply  of  provisions,  and 
deputed  Urswyke,  witn  the  Duchess  of 
Bedford  and  some  bishops,  to  make  his 
excuses,  and  to  give  her  majesty  hopes  of 
being  received  into  the  city  as  soon  as  the 
people  were  appeased.  (Raping  iv.  506.) 
The  recorder  willingly  announced  the  stop- 
page of  the  supplies,  but  no  doubt  did  not 
participate  in  the  encouragement  held  out 
A  strong  partisan  of  the  Yorkist  faction,  he 
knew  its  power  within  the  walls,  and  re- 
joiced to  see  the  Earl  of  March  enter  them 
shortly  after,  and  mount  the  throne  as 
Edward  IV. 

In  the  first  parliament  of  the  new  king 
he  was  retumea  as  the  representative  of  the 
city ;  and  andn  in  I4G7,  when  he  was  one 
of  the  members  selected  to  investigate  the 
silver  coinage.  (Hot,  Pari  v.  (V^4.)  He 
still  held  the  recordership  when  Henry  VI. 
re-assumed  the  crown;  out,  retaining  his 
loyalty  to  Edward  IV.  ^  he  rfiowed  his  de- 
votion to  that  prince  by  admitting  him 
through  a  postern  gate  into  the  city  oefore 
the  battle  of  Bamet,  when  the  slightest  im- 
pediment might  have  given  time  for  War- 
wick's army  to  arrive,  and  thus  have  brought 
about  a  different  consummation.  King 
Ileury  and  the  Archbishop  of  York  were  at 
the  Bishop  of  London's  palace,  and  had 
ridden  through  the  streets  to  urge  'the 
peple  to  be  trew  unto  hym  ; '  to  which  the 
chronicler  adds,  *Nevere  the  latter,  Urs- 
wyke, recordere  of  Londone,  and  diverce 
aldermen,  such  that  hade  reule  of  the  cyte, 
commaundede  alle  the  peple  that  were  in 
hames,    kepynge   the    cite    and    Kynge 


VAUOHAH 

Herry,  every  manne  to  goo  home  to  dynere; 
and  in  dyner  tyme  Kynge  Edwarde  wm 
late  in,  and  so  went  fortiie  to  the  BisAboppei 
of  Londone  palece,  and  ther  toke  Kyngt 
Herry  and  tne  Archebisschoppe  of  Yorb, 
and  put  theme  in  warde,  the  Thuradsr 
next  Wore  Esteivday.'  (  Warkwartk  Ckni 
15,  21.)  In  the  middle  of  May  the  leeoida; 
*  being  well  armed  in  a  etrong  jacke/  dii 
good  service  in  repelling  the  forces  of  tbe 
bastard  Fauconbriage  which  in  their  at- 
tempt upon  London  had  aaaaulted  AldgitL 
(IMinshed,  iii.  323.) 

Urswyke  was  immediately  knighted :  u^ 
soon  after  Edward  had  re-established  kin- 
self  on  the  throne  he  received  a  more  sa^ 
stantial  reward  by  being:  made  chief  bsno 
of  the  Excheau^  on  May  22,  1471,  the 
very  day  of  Henry's  death  in  the  Tawtt, 
when  he  resigned  the  recorderahip. 

Although,  filling  the  ofiSce  ot  recorder 
he  must  have  been  brouf^ht  up  as  a  lawro; 
it  is  evident  that  he  held  no  eminent  nik 
in  his  .profession,  as  his  name  never  om 
occurs  m  the  Year  Books  before  he  wii 
advanced  to  the  bench.  !Even  then  he  to 
not  seem  to  have  taken  a  prominent  part  ii 
the  judgments  in  the  Exchequer  Chamber 
there  recorded,  being  only  mentioned  ii 
four  terms,  in  the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth 
years,  during  his  continuance  in  office. 

He  presided  over  the  Court  of  Excheqwr 
eiglit  years,  and  died  in  the  commentt- 
ment  of  1479.  By  the  inquisition  taken  oi 
his  death  (CaL  iv.  397),  it  appears  that  hi 
was  possessed  of  the  manors  of  Market  an^ 
Doneres  in  Essex,  and  other  pcopeitr  ii 
the  county. 


V 


VAL0IHE8,  Theobald  de,  is  called  by  Le 
Neve  (189)  archdeacon  of  Essex  in  1218; 
but  he  is  not  so  designated  in  October  1223, 
7  Henry  III.,  when  he  was  commanded  to 
give  possession  of  the  bishopric  of  Carlisle 
(of  which  he  was  custos)  to  Walter  Mau- 
clerk,  the  newly-elected  bishop.  In  1225, 
however,  he  is  so  described,  wnen  he  was 
constituted  justice  itinerant  in  the  county  of 
York.  Le  Neve  adds  that  he  is  also  men- 
tioned as  archdeacon  in  1228.  (Hot,  Clous. 
i.  573,  ii.  8,  77.) 

VAUOHAK,  John,  whose  family  is  traced 
by  Cambrian  genealogists  as  high  as  the 
founder  of  one  of  the  noble  tribes  of  Wales, 
and  whose  property  of  Trowscoed  in  Car- 
diganshire is  stated  by  them  to  have  been  in 
possession  of  his  forefathers  for  ten  genera- 
tions, was  the  eldest  son  of  Edward  Vaughan 
and  Letitia  his  wife,  the  daugliter  of  John 
Stedman,  of  Stiala  ¥\oT\A«ki  \i\  the  sanie 
county,    and  waa  Yjotii  aX.  Tio^«fc<i^^  \\i 


lOaS.  He  was  educated  at  the  Kiv'i 
School  at  Worcester,  and  Christ  Churi, 
Oxford,  and  went  in  1G2I  to  the  looer 
Temple.  So  many  of  the  same  naotf 
appear  in  the  hooka  of  that  society  thit  it 
is  difficult  to  give  the  precise  date  of  \» 
call  to  the  bar.  A.  Wood  (iii.  IQ25) itiSBi 
that  he  for  some  time  devoted  himself  fi> 
the  study  of  poetry  and  mathematia  u 
curious  combination),  until  by  his  intimM^ 
with  the  learned  Selden  he  was  led  to  ip- 
ply  himself  to  the  law  with  so  much  tm 
and  industry  that  he  soon  established  the 
character  which  he  afterwards  maiDtaiaei 
He  also  associated  with  Edward  Hydsy  the 
future  chancellor,  who  (/^«,  i.  37),  thm^ 
giving  him  credit  for  his  auperior  attsia- 
ments,  describes  him  as  magisterial  ui 
supercilious  in  his  humour,  and  proud  sad 
insolent  in  his  behaviour.  But  as  the 
chancellor  at  the  close  of  his  career  beliervd 
\>^eaX  V^  ^oad  aome  reascm  to  compiain  ol 


VAUGHAN 

Vaugliaii*8  ingratitude,  the  harshness  of 
tlie  picture  might  re(]^uire  a  little  Boftening, 
were  it  not  that  he  is  painted  in  the  same 
colours  by  others  of  nis  contemporaries. 
(J^«,  ii.  408.)  Though  Hyde  says  *  he 
look^  to  those  parts  of  the  law  which 
disposed  him  to  least  reverence  to  the  crown 
ana  most  to  popular  authority/  he  proved 
his  disgust  at  the  violent  measures  taken 
by  the  Long  Parliament,  to  which  he  was 
letumed  as  member  for  the  town  of  Cardi- 
gan, by  retiring  from  the  scene  at  the  very 
commencement  of  them.  That  assembly, 
therefore,  treated  him  as  a  malignant,  dis- 
abled him  from  sitting,  and  gave  nis  library 
to  John  Glynn,  then  recorder  and  after- 
wards chief  justice.  He  withdrew  at  the 
same  time  from  the  practice  of  his  pro- 
fession, and  spent  the  twenty  ^ears  that 
elapsed  before  the  Restoration  m  his  own 
county,  unharmed  by  the  different  rulers 
in  the  interval.  The  Mr.  Vaughan  named 
by  Whitelocke  (177,  3C1)  among  other 
members  as  prisoners  to  whom  on  December 
12,  1648,  *  liberty  was  given  upon  their 
paroles,'  was  either  Charles  or  Edward 
Vaugban,  two  of  the  victims  of  Pride's 
Piuige. 

In  1654  he  acted  as  one  of  Selden's 
executors,  and  shared  in  the  bequest  of  his 
estate  with  Sir  Matthew  Hale  and  Rowland 
Je^Rrkes.  They  preserved  his  valuable 
collection  of  books,  amounting  to  8000 
-volumes,  bv  presenting  it  to  the  Bodleian 
Xibrary,  where  it  was  deposited  in  a  noble 
zoom,  now  generally  known  by  the  name  of 
the  Selden  End. 

In  the  Convention  Parliament  of  1660 
\^augban  was  returned  for  Cardiganshire, 
and  again  sat  for  the  same  county  in 
the  first  parliament  called  by  Charles  II. 
In  the  former  he  does  not  appear  to  have 
taken  any  part  in  the  debates;  but  in 
the  latter  he  is  noticed  by  Burnet  (i.  225) 
and  Pepys  (ii.  Ill,  125,  416)  as  taking  a 
prominent  part  in  opposition  to  the  court, 
and  is  spoken  of  by  tne  latter  as  '  the  great 
speaker.  In  1667  the  proceedings  against 
the  Earl  of  Clarendon  took  place,  and  were 
pressed  with  so  much  vehemence  by  Vaughan 
thaty  considering  his  alleged  intimacy 
with  that  nobleman  in  early  life,  and  his 
anbsequent  professions  of  friendship  and 
leepect  for  him,  it  is  somewhat  difficult  to 
account  for  his  conduct.  (Pari.  Hid. 
iT.  373,  &c)  The  bill  for  Clarendon's 
hanishment  passed  in  December  1667,  and 
in  the  following  May  Vaughan  was  raised 
to  the  judicial  bencn,  by  being  appointed 
ehief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  on  May 

2^  1668,  and  knighted.  lie  proved  him- 
f  worthy  of  his  promotion  by  the  learn- 
ing, discrimination,  and  judgment  which 
he  displayed  during  the  period  of  his  presi- 
dency. That  did  not  extend  beyond  six 
yean  and  a  half,  and  was  terminated  by  his 


VAUGHAN 


687 


death,  which  took  place  suddenly  at  his 
chambers  in  Serjeants'  Inn  on  December  10, 
1674.  His  remains  lie  in  the  Temple  Church, 
where  there  is  a  marble  to  his  memory. 

He  has  the  credit  of  having  put  an  end 
to  the  iniquitous  practice  of  fining  and  im- 
prisoning juries  for  not  giving  such  verdicts 
as  the  court  approved,  bv  the  famous  judg- 
ment, concurrea  in  by  all  the  judges,  which 
he  delivered  in  the  case  of  Bushell,  who 
being  imprisoned  with  the  rest  of  his  fel- 
lows, for  acquitting  Penn  and  Mead  contrary 
to  the  opinion  of  the  mayor  and  recorder  at 
the  Old  Bailey  sessions,  had  brought  his 
Habeas  Corpus.  He  was  rather  overbearing 
in  his  language,  and  treated  the  ignorance 
of  others  with  too  much  contempt.  Even 
his  colleagues  on  the  bench  did  not  escape. 
It  is  told  of  him  that  on  the  hearing  ot  a 
cause  in  which  ecclesiastical  points  arose, 
and  the  canon  law  being  cited,  two  of  the 
judges  interrupted  the  argument,  owning 
they  had  no  skill  in  that  law,  and  priding 
themselves  on  that  account.  On  which  the 
chief  justice,  lifting  up  his  hands  towards 
heaven,  exclaimed,  *  Good  God  !  what  sin 
have  I  committed  that  I  should  sit  on  this 
bench  between  two  judges  who  boast  in 
open  court  of  their  ignorance  of  the  canon 
law  ?'  (  Vaughan^ 8  JReports,  136  ;  Law  and 
Laxoyers,  ii.  204.)  To  the  evidence  of  his 
high  character  which  the  friendship  of 
Selden  gives  mav  be  added  the  unwilling 
testimony  of  Lord  Clarendon,  who  describes 
him  as  '  in  truth  a  man  of  great  parts  in 
nature,  and  very  well  adorned  bv  arts  and 
books,'  Evelyn  (ii.  293)  calls  him  *  a  very 
wise  and  learned  person  ;'  Harris  (v.  301) 
speaks  of  '  his  honesty  and  courage ; '  and 
his  legal  learning  is  proved  by  his  Re- 
ports on  the  special  cases  argued  while  he 
was  chief  justice,  which  were  published 
by  his  son  Edward  three  years  after  his 
death. 

lie  married  Jane,  daughter  of  John  Sted- 
man  of  Kilconnin.  His  eldest  son  Edward 
was  the  father  of  John  Vaughan,  who  in 
1095  was  raised  to  the  Irish  peerage  by  the 
title  of  Baron  of  Fethers  and  Viscount  Lis- 
bumo,  titles  to  which  the  earldom  of  Lis- 
bume  was  added  in  1776. 

VAUOHAK,  John,  was  of  a  different 
lineage,  as  well  as  of  a  different  character, 
from  his  above  namesake.  He  was  a 
native  of  the  county  of  Leicester,  and  the 
second  of  five  sons  of  Dr.  James  Vaughan, 
a  physician  at  Leicester,  and  of  Hester, 
daughter  of  John  Smalley,  alderman  of  that 
borough,  and  granddaughter  of  Sir  Richard 
Halford,  the  fifth  baronet  of  that  name. 
Three  of  the  judge's  brothers  became  emi- 
nent in  their  respective  professions:  the 
eldest,  Henry,  was  the  distinguished  court 
physician  in  the  reigns  of  the  three  last  sove- 
reigns, being  honoured  with  a  baronetcy  in 
1809,  and  assuming  the  nojsv^  «xA  vt\ck&  ^^ 


688 


VAUX 


Halford  in  1814,  on  succeedinff  to  the  Hal- 
ford  estates ;  the  third  son,  Peter,  rose  to 
be  dean  of  Chester ;  and  the  fourth  son,  Sir 
Charles  Richard,  was  employed  as  our  envoy 
extraordinary  to  the  United  States. 

John  was  bom  in  1708,  and  was  educated 
at  Westminster  School,  from  which  he  en- 
tered at  once  into  the  study  of  the  law  at 
Lincoln's  Inn,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  in 
Trinity  Term  1701.  He  chose  the  Midland 
Circuit,  and  by  his  agreeable  manners  and 
good  connection  speedily  succeeded.  His 
advance  was  rapid  :  first  he  was  elected  re- 
corder of  his  native  place,  Leicester,  and  in 
1799  he  took  the  degree  of  serjeant-at-law. 
During  the  next  twenty-eight  years  he  had 
an  immense  business,  which  he  owed  less 
to  his  legal  acquirements  than  to  his  fluency 
of  speech  and  the  energy  and  pertinacity 
which  he  always  displayed  for  nis  clients. 
In  fact,  he  was  not  aeeply  loamed  in  the 
science,  and  knew  little  of  the  law  of  real 
property.  But  he  was  industrious  and  pains- 
taking, and,  thouarh  his  manner  was  some- 
what boisterous,  nis  addresses  to  the  jury 
were  humorous  and  effective. 

For  his  subsequent  advances,  in  1814  as 
solicitor  and  in  1816  as  attorney  general  to 
Queen  Charlotte,  in  the  same  year  as  king's 
Serjeant,  and  lastly,  on  February  24,  1827, 
as  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  he  was  no 
doubt  greatly  indebted  to  the  influence  of 
his  brother,  the  royal  physician ;  and  when 
he  received  the  latter  appointment  the  bar 
joke  was,  that  no  one  had  a  better  title  to 
it,  as  he  was  ajudge  hy  prescription.  After 
sitting  in  the  Exchequer  for  seven  years,  he 
exchanged  on  April  29,  18.34,  with  Sir  Ed- 
ward Alderson  into  the  Common  Pleas,  and 
was  at  the  same  time  honoured  with  a  seat 
in  the  privy  council.  In  his  new  court 
he  remained  till  his  sudden  death  in  Sep- 
tember 1839,  of  a  heart  complaint.  As  a 
judge  he  was  much  respected  for  his  kind 
and  gentlemanly  demeanour,  and,  though 
not  pretending  to  any  superior  legal  know- 
ledge, his  good  sense,  patience,  impartiality, 
and  care  enabled  him  to  perform  his  judi- 
cial functions  very  satisfactorily. 

He  was  married  twice,  llis  first  wife 
was  Augusta,  daughter  of  Henry  Beau- 
champ,  twelfth  Lord  St.  John  of  Bletsoe ; 
and  his  second  was  Louisa,  daucrhter  of  Sir 
Charles  William  Rouse  IJrougliton,  Bart., 
and  widow  of  St.  Andrew,  thirteenth  Lord 
St.  John. 

VAUX,  Robert  be,  or  D£  VALLIBUS, 
was  the  son  of  Hubert  de  Vaux,  to  whom 
Ranulph  de  Meschines  granted  the  barony  of 
Gillesland  in  Cumberland,  and  of  Grajcia 
his  wife.  (Baronage^  i.  525.)  In  19  Henry 
II.,  1173,  he  was  governor  of  the  castle  of 
Carlisle :  and  when  William,  King  of  Scots, 
in  1174,  laid  siege  to  it,  he  made  so  brave 
A  defence  tbat  t\\e  \i\t\^\<j^  oUl^ed  to  turn 
the  siege  into  &\AocV«^ft.   Yx^^afc^lot  ^tq- 


VAUX 

visions,  Robert  de  Vaux  agreed  to  smrendcr, 
if  he  was  not  relieved  by  Michaelmas ;  bit 
before  that  period  the  Scottish  kmg  wis,  ^ 
the  gallantry  of  Ranulph  de  GlaiiTille^  ^ 
feated  and  taken  prisoner  before  AlniricL 
(Lord  LytteUoH,  iii.  134.)  He  alao  held  tk 
sherifTalty  of  that  county  from  21  to  30 
Henry  II.,  and  daring  some  of  those  yen 
he  acted  as  one  of  the  justices  itinerant  far 
the  northern  counties,  haTing  been  selected 
for  that  duty  when  the  council  of  Xoitk- 
ampton  made  the  judicial  division  of  tki 
kingdom  in  1176.    (Madox,  i.  130-18a) 

There  is  an  entry  on  the  Pipe  Roll  of  1 
Kichard  I.  (137)  of  a  fine  of  one  hniMM 
marks  which  he  incurred  for  allowing  oer> 
tain  prisoners  to  escape  out  of  his  cnstodr, 
and  for  permitting,  during  his  shetiffs)^, 
the  currency  of  the  old  coin  after  it  U 
been  prohibited. 

He  married  Ada,  the  daughter  and  bar 
of  William  de  Engaine,  and  afterwards  ksd 
a  second  wife,  named  Alice.  He  founded 
the  priory  of  Lanercost  in  Cumberbod 
(Mofiast,  vi.  228),  and  gave  the  chuirh  d 
Ilelton  to  the  canons  of  Carlisle.  His  dcitk 
occurred  iust  before  or  just  after  the  se- 
cession of  King  John,  feaviog  two  loi^ 
Kobert  and  Ranulph,  who  in  turn  succeeded 
him. 

VAUX)  Oliver  de,  was  descended  bm 
Robert,  a  vounger  brother  of  Hubert,  tW 
fatlier  of  the  above  liobert  de  Vaux-  Thii 
branch  of  the  family  was  settled  in  Norfolk, 
where  they  founded  the  priory  of  Peotnqr. 
Oliver  was  the  second  of  seven  sons  d 
Robert  de  Vaux,  and,  on  the  death  of  bif 
elder  brother  without  issue,  succeeded  to 
the  estate.  {Baronage^  i.  526.)  In  9  Jobi 
is  a  curious  entiy,  authorising  the  rooftiUe 
of  Winchester  Castle  to  permit  Jordan  de 
Bianney,  a  knight  whom  he  had  in  custiJj, 
to  go  out  of  his  prison  twice  a  day  ormoiv, 
'ad  eskermiandum,*  so  that  he  retained 
Oliver  de  Vaux  in  his  place  till  his  »- 
turn,  when  Oliver  might  be  discharged.  A 
caution,  however,  is  given  to  the  constshk. 
as  he  loves  his  goods  and  his  body,  to  kee» 
Jordan  safe.  {Rot.  Claus,  i.  88.)  In  li 
John  he  accompanied  the  king  to  Ireliod 
{Rot.  de  Prastit.  182, 200,  220);  but  tlteh 
I  wards  joining  the  barons  in  their  hcetSit 
measures  against  him,  aU  his  poseciwiopi 
were  seized  and  distributed  among  the  ad> 
herents  to  the  royal  cause.  Earlvin  2  Hemr 
III.  he  obtained  their  restoration ;  and  n 
10  Henry  III.  his  name  appears  at  the  held 
of  those  selected  to  assess  the  quinzime  for 
Norfolk  and  Suffolk.  (i?or.  Clmit.  L  3S5» 
252, 374,  ii.  146.)  He  was  appointed  to  art 
as  a  justice  itinerant  in  two  of  the  comaii^ 
sions  in  1 234. 

The  date  of  his  death  is  not  recorded,  hot 

he  lived  beyond  1245,  when  he  is  mentiiW 

in  the  Pipe  Roll.     By  his  wife,  PetronilU. 

\>iJii^.^Wwi  ^C  Henry'de  Mara  and  also  of 


VAUX 

WilUam  de  LoDgchampy  he  left  seyeral  sons. 
The  Boooesflion  of  this  barony  deyolved  on 
theeldeet,  on  the  death  of  whoee  two  sons, 
William  and  the  under-mentioned  John, 
iritlioat  male  iBsue,  it  fell  into  abeyance. 
OliTer's  fourth  son,  Roger  de  Vaux^  how- 
erer,  was  the  lineal  ancestor  of  Nicholas 
Vanz,  who  was  created  Baron  Vaux  of  Har- 
lOfwden,  hj  Henry  YIII;  in  1623.  This 
title  fell  mto  abeyance  m  1662,  which 
was  terminated  in  1838  in  favour  of  Oeorge 
lloetyn,  the  present  pder. 

▼AITX,  JoHK  DB.  was  one  of  the  justices 
itiiienmt  appointed  in  6  Edward  L,  1278, 
to  yisit  the  northern  counties,  and  also 
mp  to  the  fourteenth  year  in  various  other 
eoonties.  (Hot. Parll  29, 218;  Madox,  i. 
9SL)  As  he  takes  precedence  on  all  these 
eoeuions  of  three  who  were  regular  justices, 
he  was  no  doubt  selected  as  a  principal  baron 
cl  the  district  to  head  the  commission. 

He  was  the  grandson  of  the  above  Oliver 

de  Yaaz.    His  father,  Robert,  died  either 

in  the  lifetime  of  Oliver  or  soon  afterwards, 

leering  several  sons.    William,  the  eldest, 

died  without  children  in  1253,  when  this 

Jolizi  succeeded.     In  49  Heniv  m.,  after 

tihe  battle  of  Evesham,  his  fidelity  to  his 

ffDireieign  procured  him  the  sherinalty  of 

Korfolk  and  Suffolk,  and  a  grant  of  certain 

lioiieeB  'prope  Garther'  in  London.    (Cal 

JtoL  Pat.  39.)     Under  Edward  I.,  besides 

the  duties  which  he  performed  as  a  justice 

ilinenint,  he  was,  in  the  eleventh  year  of 

tliat  reign,  appointed  steward  of  Aquitaine. 

Se  died  in  1288,  leaving  by  Sibilla,  his  wife, 

-two  daughters.    (Baronagej  L  626.) 

TATAflM)UB,  WILLIAM  us,  is  inserted  by 

Ihigdale  as  a  justice  itinerant  in  34  Heniy 

TT-j  1188 ;  ana  in  the  roll  of  the  previous 

yier  he  appears  with  two  others  as  setting 

the  aseize  in  the  counties  of  Lincoln  and 

HoA.    (Madox,  i.  636,  713.) 

.  In  1  Richard  L   (Pipe  BoO,  139)  his 

i^eee  are  recorded  in  the  northern  counties. 

J>oxiiig  the  vacancy  of  the  archbishopric  of 

7osk  ne  was  one  of  the  custodes  of  its 

3cnt8  and  manors.    (Madox,  i.  309.) 

■  "His  own  property  was  at  Haslewood  in 

iihAt  county.    His  father  was  Mauger  le 

^mraaour,  who  gave  some  property  to  the 

yMMihw  of  Sallcey;  and  his  son  Robert  was 

^he  grandfiither  of  the  next-mentioned  Wil- 

le  Vavasour. 

▼ATAflM)IFX,  William  lb,  was  the  great- 

ttndaon  of  the  above  William  le  Vavasour, 

the  son  of  John  le  Vavasour  of  Hasel- 

urood.    He  served  his  kin^  in  the  expe- 

d^ion  into  Oascony  and  m  his  wars  in 

Seotland.  and  his  prowess  is  pithily  de- 

eeribed  oy  the  poetical  historian  of  the 

eiege  of  Carlaverock  (8, 113)  in  1300  in 

^tlieee  lines: — 

E  de  oelle  mesmepart 
Fo  GoiUemiB  11  Yavasonrs 
Ki  dannes  nmi  mvet  ne  tours. 


VAVASOUR 


689 


In  33  and  34  Edward  I.  he  was  appointed 
one  of  the  justices  of  trulbaston  for  sevend 
northern  counties.  (iV.  Fcedera,  i.  970 ; 
BoL  Pari.  i.  186,  218  j  Pari  Writs,  i.  407.) 
He  was  summoned  to  parliament  from  27 
Edward  L  to  6  Edward  IL,  the  year  in 
which  he  died.    {CaL  Ina.  p.  m.  i.  249.) 

He  had  three  sons  by  nis  wife,  Nichols, 
the  daughter  of  Sir  Stephen  Wallis  of 
Newton,  neither  of  whom,  nor  their  de- 
scendants, were  summoned  to  parliament ; 
but  there  are  now  two  baronets  derived 
from  the  same  stock.    {Baronagej  ii.  119.) 

VAVASOUB,  John,  was  the  son  of  John 
Vavasour  of  Haselwood,  by  Isabel,  daughter 
and  coheir  of  Thomas  de  la  Haye,  lord  of 
Spaldington,  who  brought  that  lordship 
to  the  family.  {Proc.  ooc,  Antiq.  iv.  79.) 
He  is  described  as  a  member  of  the  Inner 
Temple  when  he  was  called  seijeant  in  18 
Edward  IV.  (Y.  B.  10.)  His  first  em- 
ployment in  court  that  is  recorded  in  the 
Year  Books  is  in  Trinitv  Term  1467 ;  and 
having  been  invested  with  the  coif  as  above 
in  1478,  he  was  in  the  last  fortnight  of 
the  reign  of  Edward  V.  appointed  one  of 
the  king's  Serjeants,  his  jM&tent  for  which 
was  renewed  both  by  Kidiard  HI.  and 
Henry  VIL 

In  the  first  year  of  Henry^s  reign  it 
happened  that  Miles  Metcalfe,  the  recorder 
of  York,  died,  when,  in  opposition  to  the 
king's  recommendation  of  Thomas  Mid- 
delton,  and  to  the  Earl  of  Northumber- 
land's in  favour  of  Richard  Greene,  the 
corporation  thought  fit  to  exercise  their 
privile^  of  naming  their  own  officer,  and 
accordmgly  their  election  fell  on  Mr.  Ser- 
jeant Vavasour.  This  disre^;ard  to  the  king's 
wishes  did  not  prevent  him  from  visiting 
that  city  in  Apru  1486,  when  he  was  wel- 
comed in  a  speech  by  the  newly-made 
recorder,  who  m  the  following  year  had  a 
further  opportunity  of  ingratiating  himself 
with  the  monarch,  by  being  the  bearer  of 
important  despatches  from  the  corporation 
with  re^d  to  the  junction  of  the  Earl  of 
Lincoln  in  Lambert  Simnel's  rebellion.  He 
soon  after  received  the  honour  of  knigbt- 
hood,  and  it  was  not  long  before  his  loy- 
alty, or  his  talent,  was  rewarded  with  a 
seat  on  the  bench.  On  August  14,  1490, 
he  was  constituted  a  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas.  {Gent.  Mag.  May  and  November 
1861 ;  Proc.  Archaol.  Ink.  at  York.) 

From  a  memorial  dated  in  20  Henry  VII., 
it  is  much  to  be  feared  that  he  was  one  of 
those  who  were  influenced  by  the  infamous 
Sir  Richard  Empson  to  pervert  the  course 
of  justice  in  a  lawsuit  which  the  latter  had 
instigated  against  Sir  Robert  Flumpton. 
(Corresp.  cxvii.) 

The  last  fine  levied  before  him  was  in 
Michaelmas  1506,  soon  after  which  the 
date  of  his  death  may  be  fixed.  (DugdMt 
Orig.  47.) 


690 


VENTBIS 


TKSTBlBf  Pbttow,  ww  of  a  family 
foreign  in  its  origin,  but  traced  in  England 
for  at  least  three  centuries,  when  it  became 
divided  into  two  brancheSi  established  re- 
speetiyelj  in  the  counties  of  Bedford  and 
Cambridge;  to  the  latter  of  which  the  judge 
belonged.  One  of  his  ancestors  represented 
the  borouffh  of  Cambridge  in  the  reign  of 
Philip  and  Mary,  and  was  its  major  in  that 
of  Elizabeth.  lie  and  his  descendants  pos- 
sessed considerable  property  in  the  county, 
and  were  connected  in  marriage  with  the 
Evelyns,  the  Brewes,  the  Holts,  and  other 
distinguished  families.  Edwaid  Ventris, 
the  senator^s  great-grandson,  inherited  from 
his  father  the  manor  of  Granhams  in  Great 
Shelford;  and  the  rectory  of  Stow  Quy  in 
that  county,  together  with  other  estates  in 
Suffolk  ancl  Es»ex.  He  was  a  barrister  of 
Gray's  Inn,  and  died  in  1G49  at  the  age  of 
thir^,  leaving  by  his  wife,  Mary,  daughter 
of  Sir  John  Brewe,  of  Wenhara  Hall  in 
Suffolk,  four  children,  the  eldest  survivor 
of  whom  was  the  future  judge,  then  under 
four  years  old. 

Peyton  Ventris  was  bom  in  November 
1045  at  Wenham.  the  seat  of  his  maternal 
grandfather,  and,  naving  entered  the  society 
of  the  Middle  Temple,  was  called  to  the 
bar  on  June  2, 1607.  That  he  was  a  dili- 
gent student,  and  a  competent  master  of 
the  intricacies  of  his  profession,  he  gave 
early  proof  by  commencing  in  1068  his 
reports  of  cases  adjudged  in  the  King's 
Bench  and  Common  Pleas.  These  he  con- 
tinued during  the  rest  of  the  reign  of 
Charles  II.,  and  in  part  of  that  of  James 
II. ;  and  in  the  reign  of  William  and  Mary 
he  recorded  those  in  his  own  court  as  long 
as  he  sat  there  as  judge.  They  were  first 
published  after  his  death,  and  in  the  cus- 
tomary allowance  of  the  publication  all  the 
judges  expressed  their  '  knowledge  of  the 

f*eat  leammg  and  judgment  of  the  author.' 
he  editor  also  refers  to  his  eminence  in 
the  profession  and  his  great  worth,  and  the 
high  reputation  of  the  work  is  evidenced  by 
the  demand  of  no  less  than  four  editions  in 
thirty  years. 

As  a  constitutional  lawyer  he  could  not 
but  be  disgusted  with  the  recent  encroach- 
ments of  the  crown,  nor  fail  to  rejoice  at 
the  prospect  of  the  beneficial  change  which 
the  arrival  of  the  Prince  of  Orange  opened. 
He  represented  Ipswich  in  the  Convention 
Parliament,  but  sat  there  only  four  months, 
being  appointed  a  judge  of  the  Common 
Pleas  on  May  4, 1689,  and  knighted  in  the 
following  October.  The  honourable  esti- 
mation in  which  his  character  is  regarded, 
although  he  graced  the  bench  for  less  than 
two  years,  is  the  best  proof  of  the  excel- 
lence and  efilcienc^  with  which  he  per- 
formed the  responsible  duties  of  his  office. 
His  phraseology  on  \)kie  \megl<c3i  *««&  rather  I  career  was  d< 
famiuar.    On  a  (v\iea\ion  ^\is{Cast  %  ^^toa^  v^^^<:Susd  Ui  bis  expadi 


VERDUN 

in  fee  could  disclaim  the  estate  devised,  be 
said  that '  a  man  cannot  have  an  estate  pst 
into  him  in  spite  of  his  teeth.' 

He  died  on  April  6,  1601,  at  Ipswiek, 
and  was  buried  in  the  dmich  of  8t 
Nicholas  there.  B]^  hia  wife,  Mamret, 
daughter  and  coheir  of  Henry  Whitiog, 
Esq.,  of  Coggeshall  in  Essex,  he  left  sevenl 
children,  one  of  whom  held  the  post  of 
master  of  the  King^s  Bench.  Some  mcB- 
bers  of  the  original  stock  still  survive,  aad 
to  the  kind  information  of  the  Rev.  Ed- 
ward Ventris,  incumbent  of  Stow  Qny,  tke 
present  representative  of  both  bmenes  of 
the  family,  who  poasesaes  the  original  po^ 
trait  of  the  judffe  by  Riley,  I  owe  manv  of 
the  particulars  neie  recorded.  (iMUrmL  i 
620,  508,  ii.  206;  ParL  HuL  t.  20.) 

TEBSmrS,  Bbrtrajc  de,  was  a  powedU 
baron,  who  signalised  himself  both  in  i 
civil  and  military  capacity,  actiitt^ii  i 
judge  and  counseUor  under  HemyU.,  ad 
doing  his  devoir  as  a  soldier  under  his  Ika- 
hearted  successor,  Richard. 

His  grandfather,  of  the  same  name,  mi 
of  French  extraction,  probably  coming  onr 
with  the  Conqueror,  as  in  his  time  he  m 
possessed  of  Famham-Royal  in  Badiflf- 
namshire,  which  he  held  by  theserneeof 
providing  ajp:love,  on  the  day  of  thskn^ 
coronation,  lor  his  right  hano,  and  of  so- 
porting  his  right  arm  while  he  hdd  m 
royal  sceptre.  This  service  is  now  atticM 
to  the  lord  of  the  manor  of  Woriksn  ii 
Nottinghamshire,  that  estate  having  tea 
granted  by  letters  patent  of  King  Em 
VDl.,  dated  November  28, 1641,  to  Rmoi 
Earl  of  Shrewsbury,  then  the  proprietor  df 
Famham-Royal,  in  exchange  for  the  litta; 
and  upon  the  same  tenure* 

Bertram's  father  was  Norman  de  Verdm 
who  possessed  Lutterworth  in  LeioeiCff- 
shire,  and  his  mother  Liuceline,  the  ^ms^ 
terofGeofl^yde  Clinton,  chamberiiiito 
Henry  I. 

Bertram  de  Verdun  held  his  prindpl 
seat  in  Staffordshire  in  11G6,  and  «* 
sheriff  or  former  of  the  counties  of  Wtf- 
wick  and  Leicester  from  the  15tk  to  tk 
30th  years  of  the  reign  of  Henry  IL 

In  1176,  21  Henry  IL,  and  the  tb* 
following  years,  he  waa  regularly  prBHit' 
a  baron  m  the  judicial  proceedings  of  tke 
Curia  Re^;  and  from  the  22nd  to  the  dft^ 
of  the^  rei^  and  probably  later,  he  kd 
as  a  justice  itinerant  in  eight  ooMBL 
(Madoxj  i.  04-137.)  There  are  some  mW 
of  his  pleas  on  the  Pipe  Roll  of  Bi^udl* 
(164),  but  they  are  clearly  arreanof  ftoM' 
years. 

These  and  other  employments  ahsKM^ 
only  that  he  enjoyed  Uie  confideae^ ' 
sovereigp,  but  aUio  that  his  tal^ 
a  supenor  order.     The  rem* 
deyoted  to  hi' 


VERDUN 

Land,  wMther  he  acoompamed  him  in  the 
second  year  of  his  reign.  In  the  agreement 
between  the  Kings  of  England  and  Sicily 
he  was  one  of  the  sureties  for  its  due  per- 
formance on  the  part  of  Richard,  who 
committed  Acre,  on  its  being  taken,  to  his 
coBtody.  Two  years  afterwards,  in  1102, 
he  died  at  Joppa,  and  was  buried  at  Acre. 

His  religious  benefactions  were  numerous. 
He  was  twice  married.  His  first  wife 
was  Maud,  daughter  of  Robert  de  Ferrers, 
Earl  of  Derby,  Dy  whom  he  had  no  issue. 
By  his  second  wife,  Rohese,  he  had  two 
sons,  Thomas  and  Nicholas,  who  in  turn 
succeeded  him.  Rohese.  the  only  daughter 
of  the  latter,  married  Theobald  fe  Butiller, 
and  was  the  mother  of  the  next-mentioned 
John  de  Verdun.  (DugdMs  Baron,  i.  471 ; 
Monaa.  y.  660.) 

VSBBITV,  John  de,  was  the  son  of  Theo- 
bald le  Butiller,  and  his  wife  Rohese  de 
Verdun,  the  daughter  and  sole  heir  of 
Nicholas  de  Verdun,  and  the  granddaughter 
of  the  aboye  Bertram  de  Verdun.  Being 
hw  of  the  barony  and  of  the  large  posses- 
sions attached  to  it,  she  retained  her  sur- 
name, which  continued  to  be  bonie  by  her 
descendants.  John  was  among  the  twelye 
'who  were  appointed  at  the  parliament  of 
Oxford  in  12oo  to  treat  for  the  whole  com- 
munity on  the  common  business,  and  as  a 
baron-marcher  was  in  1260  called  upon  to 
lesist  the  incursions  of  the  Welsh.  In  the 
same  year  he  was  constituted  one  of  the 
josticee  itinerant  for  Shropshire,  Stafibrd- 
•hire,  and  the  neighbouring  counties.  He 
stood  on  the  part  of  the  king  in  the  subse- 
quent troubles,  and  was  employed  in  pur- 
suing such  of  the  rebellious  baions  as  neld 
out  after  the  battle  of  Eyesham.  In  64 
Henry  HI.  he  took  the  cross  with  Prince 
£dward,  and  the  next  year  went  to  the 
Holy  Land.  He  died  on  October  21, 1274, 
8  Edward  I.,  leaying  Alianore,  his  second 
wife,  suryiying.    His  first  wife  was  Mar- 

Crie,  the  daughter  of  Gilbert  de  Lacy^  and 
ir  to  her  grandfather,  Walter  de  Lacy. 
(^£xcerpt.  e  JRot.  Fin,  i.  446.)  By  her  he 
liad  a  son,  Theobald,  who  succeeded  him 
and  was  summoned  to  parliament;  on  the 
death  of  whose  son,  also  Theobald,  the 
iMurony  fell  into  abeyance  among  his  four 
daughters.    (Bttronage,  i.  473.) 

VZBDini,  Walteb  de,  was  probably  a 
junior  branch  of  the  noble  family  noticed 
thfpre.  He  was  in  King  John's  seryice  in 
the  eleyenth  and  twelfth  years  of  his  reign, 
accompanying  him  to  Ireland  in  the  latter. 
(MoL  MtMy  123 )  Rot,  de  Prt^tit.  193,  &c.) 
in  16  John  he  and  Robert  de  Courtenay 
-were  sent  into  Shropshire  for  the  defence  of 
that  county,  and  the  custody  of  the  castle 
of  Bridgenorth  was  committed  to  them. 

gM.  Ftit.  136.)    In  1  Henry  HI.  he  held 
e  office  of  one  of  the  escheators  of  Lin- 
cokishiie;  in  the  next  year  he  seems  to 


VERE 


691 


haye  had  the  custody  of  the  Tower  of 
London ;  and  in  3  Henr^UI.  was  sheriff  of 
Essex  and  Hertfordshire.  In  that  year 
also  a  fine  was  leyied  before  him  and  his 
associates,  justices  itinerant,  at  Westminster ; 
and  he  again  was  selected  to  perform  the 
same  duties  in  9  Henry  IH.  for  the  coun- 
ty of  Oxford.  Between  the  two  last  dates 
his  services  were  required  in  a  diplomatic 
capacity,  he  being  sent  to  Rome  in  4  Henry 
III.,  and  in  the  next  year  to  Puictou.  (Hot, 
Ottus,  i.  168,  313,  320,  384,  433,  477,  525.) 
His  death  occurred  in  1220,  in  March  of 
which  year  his  son  Ralph  was  admitted  to 
the  seisin  of  his  land  at  Blokesham  in  Ox- 
fordshire, on  the  payment  of  a  relief  of  a 
hundred  shillings.  (Excerpt,  e  Hot,  Fin,  i. 
182.) 

YEBE,  Alberto  de,  was  the  son  of  a 
Norman  baron  of  the  same  name,  who  ac- 
companied King  William  on  his  conquest 
of  England,  and  who  receiyed  for  his  re- 
ward Aensington  and  other  lordships ;  and 
of  Beatrice,  daughter  of  Henry,  castellan 
of  Bourbourg,  and  niece  and  heir  of  Ma- 
nasses  Count  of  Ghisnes. 

The  priory  of  Colne  in  Essex  was  founded 
by  them  in  llll.  {Monaeticon,  iy.  09, 100.) 
The  first  mention  that  occurs  of  Alberic 
Junior,  as  he  was  called,  is  in  a  charter  of 
King  Henry,  granting  power  to  the  prior 
of  Ohristchurcii,  or  the  Holy  Trinity,  in 
Aldgate,  London,  to  enclose  a  way  near 
the  church,  addressed  '  To  Richard,  Bishop 
of  London,  and  Albericus  de  Vere,  sheriff', 
and  all  his  barons  and  lieges  of  London.' 
(Ibid,  yi.  156.)     Stow  also  mentions  tiiat 
Henry  sent  *  his  sheriff's,  to  wit,  Aubrey  de 
Vere,  and  Ro^er,  nephew  to  Hubert,'  to 
inyest  that  priory  with  the  soke  of  the 
English  Ejiighten  Guilde,  in  pursuance  of 
his  charter  addrassed  to  the  same  bishop, 
and  witnessed  by  Queen  Adelisa.     This, 
therefore,  must  haye  been  between  1121, 
when  Adelisa  was  married,  and  1127,  when 
Bishop  Richard  died.     The  office  of  sheriff 
or  portgraye  of  London  corresponded  with 
that  of  the  present  mayor,  but  was  in  those 
times  one  or  considerable  dignity,  and  held 
by  persons  of  high  rank. 

Both  Dugdtde  and  Spelman  introduce 
him  into  their  lists  of  chief  justiciaries  of 
England,  but  there  does  not  appear  suffi- 
cient authority  for  so  designating  him. 
That  he  acted  judicially  with  the  other 
barons  in  the  Curia  Regis  there  can  be  no 
doubt,  and  that  he  shared  highly  in  the 
confidence  of  the  king  there  is  as  little 
question.  But  that  he  neyer  filled  the 
highest  judicial  office,  the  aboye  and  other 
documents  that  remain  afford  strong  pre- 
sumptiye  eyidence. 

In  the  ancient  Exchequer  Roll  of  31 
Henry  I.  (1130)  he  appears  to  haye  had, 
in  conjunction  with  Richard  Basset,  the 
control  oyer  eleyeu  co\aL\i»&  «&  ^<^t>SSL  ^^ 


692 


VERE 


VERE 


in- 


fenner,  but  Richard  Basset's  name 
Tariably  stands  first.  That  this  was  an 
office  of  at  least  as  much  trouble  as  honour 
appears  from  the  fact  that  he  fined,  in  the 
same  year,  to  be  relieved  from  the  burden 
in  Essex  and  Hertfordshire.  The  preced- 
ing entry,  that  he  was  charged  with  650/. 
and  four  war-horses  for  the  escape  of  a 
prisoner,  shows,  perhaps,  the  cause  of  his 
retirement. 

In  1134  King  Henry  granted  to  him  and 
his  heirs  the  office  of  his  magistra  came- 
raria  (great  chamberlain)  of  all  England,  in 
which  character  he  was  present  at  the 
general  council  held  the  first  year  of  Ste- 
phen ;  and  when  that  king,  in  the  fourth 
year  of  his  reign,  was  summoned  to  a  coun- 
cil by  the  Bbhop  of  Winchester,  to  answer 
for  having  seizea  the  old  Bishop  of  Salis- 
bury, ana  his  nephew  Alexander,  Bishop 
of  Lincoln,  and  confiscated  their  property, 
he  sent  Alberic  de  Vere  to  defend  him,  as 
one  experienced  in  those  matters.  This, 
however,  required  more  of  policy  than  law, 
and  his  attendance  in  the  Curia  Regis 
would  sufficiently  instruct  him  in  the  latter. 
The  selection,  however,  by  no  means  proves 
him  to  have  been  chief  justiciary  at  the 
time,  and  William  of  Mafmesbury's  desig- 
nation of  him  as  '  Albericus  quidam  de  Ver, 
homo  causamm  varietatibus  exercitatus/ 
and  aa  'causidicus  Albericus,'  certainly 
bears  no  appearance  that  he  was  so. 

He  was  killed  in  London  on  the  ides  of 
May  1140,  probably  in  performing  some  of 
his  duties  as  por^rave  of  the  city.  A 
query  is  raised  by  Spelman  whether  there 
were  not  two  Alberics,  one  the  earl  and  the 
other  the  portgrave;  but  he  suggests  no 
adequate  reason  for  the  doubt. 

He  married  Adeliza,  the  daughter  of 
Roger  de  Yvery,  who  came  over  with  Wil- 
liam the  Conqueror,  and  whose  son  Roger 
was  chief  butler  to  William  II. 

Alberic,  their  eldest  son  (the  third  of 
that  name),  was  created  Earl  of  Oxford  in 
1155.  The  ninth  earl  was  advanced  to  the 
titles  of  Marquis  of  Dublin  and  Duke  of 
Ireland,  but  forfeited  his  honours.  The 
earldom  was  granted  to  his  uncle ;  and  on 
the  death  of  the  twentieth  earl,  without 
issue,  in  1702,  the  title  became  extinct; 
but  the  office  of  great  chamberlain  had,  by 
the  death  of  the  eighteenth  earl,  without 
issue,  passed  with  his  aunt  Mary  to  the 
family  of  Bertie  Baron  Willoughby  de 
Eresby,  afterwards  Earls  of  Lindsey  and 
Dukes  of  Ancaster,  whose  representative, 
the  present  Baron  Willoug^hby  de  Eresby, 
is  now  great  chamberlain  of  England. 
(Slow^s  London^  116;  Moranfa  Essex y  ii. 
292;  Madox,  i.  13,  66,  164,  827,  458; 
Baronage f  i.  188 ;  Leland,  i.  120.) 

V£B£,  William  de  (Bishop  op  Hbre- 
fobd),  was  II  8011  oi  X&en^i  ^^Nci%,  iVi^  I  ^^entua 
thixd  of  that  namft,  'E»x\  ol  Oiicrt^.  'Va.^\\«&s^« 


Henry  U.,  1177,  he  was  engaged  widi 
Walter  de  Qant  in  building  the  church  at 
Waltham,  and  they  had  40/.  allowed  to 
them  towards  the  expenaee.  {MaSox,  i 
226.)  He  was  raised  to  the  Inahopnc  of 
Hereford  on  August  10, 1186,  and  presided 
there  for  thirteen  years. 

His  pleas  aa  a  justice  itinerant  in  tiie 
counties  of  Buckingham  and  Bedford,  Lb- 
coin  and  Derby,  appear  on  the  Pipe  Roll  of 
1  Richard  L,  1189  (32,  58,  156) ;  but  ther 
seem  to  refer  to  a  former  year.  He  acted 
in  the  same  capacity  in  7  Richard  L,  im- 
posing fines  in  Staffordshire  and  aaeesBaiig 
tallages  in  Gloucestershire.  (MadoXj  I 
546,  703.)  In  the  latter  year,  also,  &itt 
were  levied  before  him  as  a  juatider.  H« 
died  on  December  24, 1199,  and  was  bmied 
in  his  own  cathedral.     {GodwiHj  484.) 

YEBE,  Robert  db  (the  third  Eabl  of 
OxpoRD),was  grandson  of  the  above  Albezie 
de  Vere,  and  the  son  of  Alberic  the  fiist 
earl,  by  Luda  his  wife,  who  became  fiist 
prioress  of  Heningham  in  Essex,  founded 
oy  her  husband.  After  the  death  of  Us 
brother  Alberic  the  second  earl  he  joined 
the  rebellious  barons,  for  which  he  was  not 
only  excommunicated  (IL  de  Wemdover,  m. 
297,  355\  but  had  his  lands  seiied  iato 
the  king  s  hands  in  May  1215.  In  tiie 
following  June,  however,  they  were  it- 
stored  to  him ;  but  before  the  end  of  thf 
year  he  again  fell  off  from  his  all^isnce, 
and  again  was  in  negotiation  for  a  retnntn 
favour,  which  does  not  appear  to  have  bees 
completed  at  King  John's  death.  Bit 
soon  after  the  accession  of  Heniy  IIL  tids 
was  accomplished,  and  the  whole  of  hb 
possessions  were  once  more  put  into  ^ 
hands.  (Hat,  Clous,  i.  116-^7 ;  JW.  ft^ 
171, 172.) 

Dugdale  introduces  him  as  a  jusdder  is 
4  Henry  HI.,  1220,  on  the  anthority  of  fines 
acknowledged  before  him  from  the  Easts 
of  that  year  to  the  same  festival  in  tke 
following.  As  none  of  these  fines  are  stated 
to  have  been  levied  at  Westminster,  tod 
aA  there  is  no  evidence  of  his  having  (a 
any  other  occasion  acted  in  the  King^s  Oomt 
there  may  be  some  reason  to  doubt  whetba 
he  was  more  than  a  justice  itinerant  bete 
whom  fines  were  frequently  levied  on  the 
circuits.    He  was  certainly  at  the  head  d 
the  itinerant  justices  sent  in  the  foDofwxnf 
year  into  Hertfordshire  (JRot.  C1mu»  L  444, 
^73),  and  not  improbably  had  previmidv 
acted  in  a  similar  commission,  at  the  bead 
of  which  noblemen  were  finequently  pbcei 
Still  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  from  tiie 
death  of  his  father  in  1194,  till  that  of  l» 
brother  in  1214,  he  held  the  position  of  a 
younger    son,    and    may    therefore  bite 
adopted  the  profession  of  the  law  aa  ib 
honourable   means  of  support,  and  tecs 
^^entually   advanced  to  a   aeat  on  the 


VBBNEY 

He  died  in  October  in  1221.  leaving  a 
son  Hugh,  a  minor,  by  his  wife,  Margaret  de 
Bolebec.  (Sxcerpt.eB(4.Fin.li.7 ^,101,426.) 

yXBVXT,  JoHKy  was  the  youngest  son  of 
Geonpe  fourth  Loixl  Willou«;hby  de  Broke, 
by  Margaret,  daughter  and  heir  of  Sir  John 
Heath,  of  Brasted  in  Kent,  the  son  of  Sir 
Robert,  tiie  persecuted  judge  in  the  reign 
of  Charles  L  He  studied  the  law  at  the 
Middle  Temple,  where  he  was  called  to 
the  bar  in  17zl.  He  represented  Downton 
in  the  last  narliament  of  George  1.  and  in 
the  first  of  George  XL,  and  while  a  member 
of  the  former  ne  was  made  a  jud^  of 
South  Wales.  G^rge  U,  selected  him  to 
be  one  of  his  counsel,  and  in  1729  appointed 
him  attorney-general  to  Queen  Caroline. 
His  next  promotion  was  in  December  1733 
as  chief  justice  of  Chester ;  and  he  was  ap- 

?ointed  master  of  the  Rolls  on  October  % 
738.  After  enjoying  this  comfortable 
judicial  seat  not  quite  three  years,  he  died 
on  August  6, 1741. 

He  married  Abigail,  only  daughter  of 
Cdward  Harley  of  Eyewood  in  Hereford- 
ahire,  and  sister  of  the  first  Earl  of  Oxford ; 
and  by  her  he  left  a  son,  John  Feyto  Vemey, 
who,  upon  the  death  of  his  uncles  without 
iaaue,  oecame  sixth  Lord  Willoughby  de 
Broke.  {CoJUns's  Feerage,  iv.  71,  vi.  701.) 
YEBVOH,  WnxiAK  db,  was  a  knight  of 
the  county  of  Lancaster,  and  was  at  the 
head  of  a  body  of  archers  in  5  John.  (J2o<. 
ie  lAbend,  78.)  A  few  years  afterwards 
he  was  imprisoned  for  some  ofience,  and 
paid  a  fine  of  twenty  marks  for  his  release. 
\B4A.  de  Fin,  416  ;  Hot  Oaus,  i.  09.)  He 
accompanied  the  king  to  Ireland  in  12  John 
(JSot.  ae  PrtBstit  218),  and  was  attached  to 
the  senrice  of  William  Earl  Ferrers,  tmder 
whom  he  held  yarious  lands  in  Nottingham 
and  Derby.  He  had  also  other  possessions 
In  Berkshire,  Oxfordshire,  Buckingham- 
ahire,  Staffordshire,  and  Lancashire.  {Bot, 
Clau8.  i.  206-631.)  It  was  probably  in 
laflpect  to  the  latter  that  he  was  appointed 
in  5  Henry  UL,  1219,  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant  for  the  northern  counties  {Hymer, 
L  154),  an  office  which  he  afterwards  ex- 
erdiBed  in  1225  in  Nottingham  and  Derby. 
In  11  Henry  HL  he  was  excused  the  scu- 
tage  on  his  property  in  those  counties.  (^Hoi, 
dbtf.  ii  77,  204.) 

YEBVOH,  Geobge,  was  descended  from 
the  noble  and  ancient  family  of  Vernon  in 
Nonnandy,  which  established  itself  in  this 
eoontiy  at  the  Conquest.  He  was  the 
aon  of  Sir  Thomas  Vernon,  of  Haslington 
in  Cheshire,  and  his  wife,  Dorothy,  the 
daughter  of  William  Egerton.  Esq.,  of 
Bet&y.  Becoming  a  member  or  the  Inner 
Temple,  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1603, 
mad.  was  elected  reader  in  1621.  On  July 
4,  UBSff,  he  was  raised  to  the  denee  of  the 
aoii^  an  honour  which  Judge  Whitelocke 
ftatee  that  he  paid  for— ifec^  aurum.    In 


VB80Y 


693 


four  months^  no  doubt  as  part  of  the  bar- 
gain, he  was  made  a  baron  of  the  Exche- 
chequer,  his  patent  being  dated  November 
13.  After  remaining  in  that  court  three 
years  and  a  half,  he  was  removed  to  the 
Common  Pleas  on  May  8, 1631.  (Itymer, 
xix.  348.)  In  the  great  case  of  ship-money 
in  1637  he  abstained  from  stating  his  rea- 
sons on  account  of  his  want  of  health,  but 
delivered  his  opinion,  not  only  in  favour  of 
the  charge,  but  also  asserting  that  a  statute 
derogatory  from  the  preroffative  did  not 
bind  the  king,  and  that  the  king  mi^ht 
dispense  with  any  law  in  cases  of  necessity. 
(State  Triak,  iii.  1126.)  For  these  ultra 
sentiments  he  escaped  the  retribution  which 
in  the  parliament  of  1640  visited  those  of 
his  colleagues  who  pronounced  a  similar 
judgment,  by  his  death,  which  occurred  on 
December  16,  1639,  at  his  chambers  in 
Serjeants'  Inn,  Chanceiy  Lane.  He  was 
buned  in  the  Temple  Church.  Croke  (Car, 
665),  his  brother  judge,  describes  him  as 
being  '  a  man  of  great  reading  in  the  sta- 
tute and  common  law,  and  of  extraordinary 
memory,'  but  says  nothing  of  his  integrity 
or  independence. 

His  tirst  wife  was  Jane,  daughter  of 
Sir  George  Corbett,  of  Morton  Corbett 
in  Shropshire.  By  her  he  had  an  only 
daughter  and  heir,  Muriel.  Of  his  second 
wife  nothing  is  known,  except  that  she 
produced  no  issue. 

YEBTTLAM,  LoBi).    /S^ee  F.  Bacon. 

VESCT,  William  de,  was  a  descendant 
of  Yvo  de  Vesci,  who  came  over  with  the 
Conqueror,  and  was  rewarded  by  receiving 
in  marriage  the  heiress  of  the  lordships  of 
Alnwick  in  Northumberland,  and  Malton 
in  Yorkshire.  He  was  second  son  of  Wil- 
liani  de  Vesci,  and  of  Agnes,  one  of  the 
daughters  of  William  de  Ferrers,  Earl  of 
Derby.  His  elder  brother  dying  without 
children  in  1289,  he  succeeded  to  the  barony. 
(Baroruige,  i.  90.) 

Having  begun  his  career  as  a  yoimger  son, 
he  had  pursued  the  profession  of  the  law, 
and  was  advanced  to  the  office  of  justice  of 
the  forests  beyond  Trent,  receiving  his  ap- 
pointment in  1286  {Abb.  Hot,  Ortg,  i.  50, 
90) ;  and  in  the  following  year  he  was  at 
the  head  of  the  justices  itinerant  for  pleas 
of  the  forest  in  Nottinghamshire  and  Lan- 
cashire. He  retained  his  place  till  1289, 
when  he  was  appointed  governor  of  Scar- 
borough Castle ;  and  in  the  following  year 
he  was  constituted  chief  justice  of  Ireland. 
Three  years  afterwards,  while  in  the  execu- 
tion of  his  duties,  he  was  charged  by  John 
Fitz-Thomas  with  contederating  against  the 
king.  The  Rolls  of  Parliament  contain  a 
curious  account  of  the  proceedings  taken  by 
him  against  the  accuser  for  defiunation ;  of 
the  duel  that  was  awarded;  of  the  summons 
to  appear  before  the  king  at  Westminster, 
when  De  Vesci  camA  Mkj  «n&»^\p(^^'^^ac> 


694 


VETERI  PONTE 


Thomafl  kept  away ;  and  of  the  ultimate 
annulling  ot  the  process  in  23  Edward  I.,  on 
account  of  some  irregularity.  (Hot,  Pari, 
i.  127,  132 ;  Abb,  Placit,  234.)  It  does  not 
appear  that  any  further  proceeding  took 
place,  but  it  is  evident  that  the  charge  was 
not  believed,  as  he  was  in  the  same  year 
summoned  to  parliament,  was  employed  in 
the  wars  of  Gascony  in  that  and  the  follow- 
ing year,  and  had  grants  showing  the 
favour  of  his  Hovereign. 

On  the  death  oi  Margaret,  Queen  of 
Scotland,  in  1290,  he  became  one  of  the 
competitors  for  that  crown,  in  right  of 
Mai^aret,  daughter  of  William  the  Lion, 
and  sister  of  Alexander,  King  of  Scotland, 
whom  his  ancestor  Eustace  de  Vesci  had 
married.  From  the  immediate  dismissal  of 
this  claim,  and  those  of  other  daughters  of 
William  the  Lion,  a  doubt  has  arisen  as  to 
their  legitimacy,  the  pretensions  of  Baliol 
and  Bruce  being  founded  on  a  title  which, 
but  on  that  presumption,  would  have  been 
posterior.     ( TuUer's  Scotland^  i.  90.) 

He  died  on  July  19, 1297,  at  his  manor 
of  Malton.  His  wife  was  Isabel,  daughter 
of  Adam  de  Periton,  and  widow  of  Robert 
de  Welles.  By  her  he  had  a  son  John, 
who  died  before  him. 

VETEBI  POKTE,  Hobert  be,  whose 
ancestor  of  the  same  name  (Vieuxpont,  or 
Vipont)  flourished  in  the  reign  of  the  Con- 
queror (Baron^iffe,  i.  347),  held  an  office  in 
the  treasury  at  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  _ 
Kin^John,  and  probably  at  the  end  of  that    was  committed  to  his  charge,  to  be  tdcui 


VETKRI  PONTE 

the  favour  which  he  then  enjoyed.  In  that 
year,  also,  the  bailiwick  of  Caen  in  Noi^ 
mandy  was  committed  to  his  charge,  u 
that  of  Rouen  had  been  in  the  pieriooa 
year.  In  the  following  year  he  wis  ap- 
pointed constable  of  Nottingham  Ca^ 
with  the  sheriffalty  of  that  county  and  of 
Derby,  in  which  he  continued  till  11  John. 
(Ibid,  26,  33,  46.) 

Up  to  this  period  he  does  not  appear  to 
have  acted  in  a  judicial  capacity;  Win 8 
John,  Mr.  Hunter  introduces  him  into  his 
list  of  justiciera  before  whom  fines  were 
acknowledged.  It  is  not  improbable  thM 
he  performed  this  duty  in  one  of  his  jounify? 
with  the  king,  who  frequently  was  himself 
present  on  these  occasions,  lliis,  howenr, 
was  the  sole  year  in  John*8  reign  in  whic& 
he  is  so  noticed.  During  the  remainder  o^ 
it  he  was  actively  engaged  in  many  respoo- 
sible  and  important  trusts. 

In  9  John  he  had  the  custody  of  the 
bishopric  of  Durham,  and  had  a  patent  of 
approval  and  confirmation  of  the  sale  he 
haa  made  of  the  woods,  and  the  terms  oo 
which  he  had  let  the  lands,  of  the  Arch- 
bishop of  York.  {Ibid,  70,  81.)  From  li 
to  17  John  he  held  the  sheriffalty  of  De- 
vonshire, and  from  12  to  15  John  that  of 
Wiltshire.  He  accompanied  the  king  io 
Ireland  and  Wales  in  12  John  (Rot,  Mitt^ 
141-231),  and  adhered  to  him  both  during 
the  interdict  and  in  his  subsequent  wan 
against  the  barons.  The  king*s  son,RiciiAri, 


of  Richard  I.  The  Kotulus  Cancellarius  of 
3  John  makes  him  account  for  several  ferms 
in  Northamptonshire  and  Nottinghamshire 
for  the  9  and  10  llichard  I.  In  2  John  the 
necessaries  for  the  queen  and  her  company, 
at  Marlborough,  were  ordered  to  be  provided 
'  per  testimonium  Robert!  de  Veten  Ponte.* 
Similar  entries  are  recorded  in  3  and  5 
John.  {Rot,  de  lAberat.  7,  16 )  Rot,  CanceU, 
306.)  From  this  time  the  rolls  contain 
numerous  orders  to  him  to  pay  money  from 
the  treasury,  showing  his  connection  with 
that  department.  They  evidence  also  his 
continual  attendance  on  the  king,  and  that 
prisoners  taken  in  the  French  war  were  in 
his  custody.     {Rot,  Pat.  9-23.) 

That  his  services  were  at  this  time  highly 
appreciated  by  his  royal  master,  ample 
proof  is  given  by  the  grant  he  received, 
m  4  John,  of  the  castles  of  Appleby  and 
Bur^h,  with  the  barony  of  the  Tormer,  in- 
cluding divers  manors  and  castles,  among 
which  was  Brougham  Castle.  To  these 
was  added  the  sheriffwick  of  the  county  of 
W^estmoreland  {Ibid,  25,  27),  which  re- 
mained in  his  family  long  after  the  male 
branch  of  it  became  extinct.  In  5  John  the 
castle  of  Bowes  in  Richmondshire  was 
committed  to  him,  and  was  delivered  to  his 

nephew  Eudo  to  \sx^  (^Rot.  de  liberat.Q^"^  \  (after  the  termination  of  the  war  wit^  Loois 
ana  yariouB  othex  ^wdftuoei^  «x^  t^cAt^^  qI\^1  ^TWi^\  ts^^tkat^  after  some  resiBtaDoe, 


to  his  father  {Rot,  Pat,  104)  ;  and  in  li 
John  he  was  entrusted  with  the  custody  of 
the  castles  of  Carlisle  and  Durham,  together 
with  the  county  of  Cumberland,  and  alltbc 
manors  on  the  Tyne  and  the  Tees  {Ib^'- 
162,  103),  and,  with  Brian  de  Insula  ard 
Geoffrey  de  Luci,  was  appointed  the  kinjr^ 
lieutenant  of  all  the  castles  and  other  ropl 
possessions  in  Yorkshire. 

The  first  notice  under  the  reign  of  Henir 
III.  is  a  gi'ant  to  him  of  the  manor  of  li^- 
dingesthom  in  Northamptonshire,  which 
belonged  to  his  brother  Yvo,  who  had  joia^ 
the  insurgent  barons  {RU.  CUnu,\.'i^]'' 
a  grant  probably  made  with  a  view  to  it< 
ulterior  restoration  to  his  brother.  He  wi5 
among  the  loyal  barons  at  the  siege  of  ^ 
castle  of  Montsorel,  and  assisted  in  the  re- 
lief of  Lincoln,  receiving  in  reward  th« 
forfeited  possessions  of  several  of  the  rebeh. 
In  3  Heniy  III.  he  was  made  sheriff  (^ 
Cumberland ;  and  was  also  selected  as  one 
of  the  justices  itinerant  in  the  counties  of 
York  and  Northumberland ;  and  again  pe^ 
formed  the  same  duty  in  10  Henry  IIL  in 
Yorkshire.  Dugdale  adds  that  fines  were 
levied  before  him  in  the  following  year. 
Roger  de  Wendover  states  that  he  was  ooe 
of  the  barons  who   continued  to  plooder 


I 


VEYM 

iie  was  oUiged  in  1224  to  deliTer  up  to 
the  king  the  castles  he  had  in  his  custody. 
The  aboTe  appointments,  however,  as  jus- 
tice itinerant  with  several  instances  of 
favours  and  employments  conferred  upon 
him  about  the  same  time,  manifest  no  great 
animosity  on  the  put  of  the  govemmeot 
Thus,  in  7  Henry  Ul.,  1222,  five  bucks  and 
fifteen  does  were  ^ven  to  him  from  the 
forest  of  Olive  for  his  park  at  Isenden;  two 
years  afterwards,  his  debts  to  the  king  were 
XMpited  from  Februarv  to  Michaelmas ;  and 
In  the  ensuinff  May.  the  quinzime  of  West- 
moreland and  of  the  bishopric  of  Carlisle 
was  directed  to  be  collected  under  his  con- 
duct.   (Ibid.  618,  ii.  15,  76.) 

He  died  in  12  Heniy  ILL,  previous  to 
March  2, 1228,  leaving  his  wife  surviving, 
w^ho  vras  Idonea.  the  aaughter  of  John  de 
Bnilly,  lord  of  Tickhill.  By  her  he  had  a 
aon  named  John,  who  died  leaving  a  son 


WAKERING 


693 


Boberti  on  whose  death,  without  male  issue, 
in  49  Heni^  HI.,  at  the  battle  of  Evesham, 
his  possessions,  though  seized  by  the  king, 
were  regranted  to  his  two  daughters,  one  uf 
whom,  Isabel,  married  Roger  ae  Clifford,  a 
justice  itinerant  before  noticed,  ancestor  of 
the  present  Baroness  de  Clifford,  and  of  Lord 
Clinord  of  Chudleigh.  {Baronage^  i.  347  ; 
22.  de  Wendouer,  iiL  237,  301,  363,  iv.  16, 
19,  34,  98.J 

VETIL  RiCHAJtD  DE,  was  apijointed,  in  9 
Henry  IIL,  1226,  to  act  as  a  justice  itinerant 
in  Gloucestershire,  where  his  property  was 
situate.  During  the  troubles  at  the  end  of 
King's  John  reign  his  land  had  been  given 
to  Robert  de  Vemay  j  but  it  may  be  pre- 
sumed it  was  afterwards  restored  to  him,  as 
he  was  selected  in  10  Henry  IH.  as  one  of 
those  who  were  to  assess  and  collect  the 
quinzime  of  the  county.  {Eot,  Clatis,  i. 
262,  il  64,  76, 147.) 


W 


WABHAX,  John,  whose  family  took  its 
oame  from  the  place  of  its  residence  in  the 
parish  of  Knowston,  near  South  Molton,  in* 
J)evonshire,  was  the  son  of  Sir  John  Wad- 
ham,  knight,  and  was  educated  as  a  lawyer. 
His  name  appears  among  the  advocates  in 
H.  Bellewe's  Reports,  and  he  was  eventu- 
ally made  one  of  the  king's  seijeants.    His 
appointment  as  a  justice  of  the  Court  of 
-Ciommon  Fleas  is  not  recorded,  but  it  pro- 
bably took  place  in  11  Richard  H.,  at  the 
time  when  tne  court  was  almost  cleared  by 
the  impeachment  of  all  the  judges  except 
'8ax  William  de  Skipwith.    The  fines  levied 
liefore  him  commence  in  12  Richard  H., 
1888,  and  continue  till  1397   {DuadMs 
Orig.  46) ;  and  as  beyond  that  year  he  was 
not  summoned  to  parliament,  he  probably 
"was  then  removed,  or  resigned.    He  lived 
tiU  1411  (CaL  Inq.  p.  m.  iii.  338),  and  it 
is  said  of  him  'that  being  free  of  speech, 
he  mingled  it  well  with  discretion ;  so  that 
he  never  touched    any  man,  how  moan 
oaoever,  out  of  order,  either  for  sport  or 
«pight;  but  with  alacrity  of  spint  and 
soundness  of  understanding,  menaged  all 
hisproceedings.' 

^s  descendants  continued  in  lineal  suc- 
-cession  till  Nicholas,  who,  with  his  wife 
Xk>rothy,  the  daughter  of  Sir  William 
Petre,  secretary  of  state  to  Queen  Eliza- 
he^,  founded  the  college  at  Oxford  which 
hean  his  name.  (Co&na'a  Peerage,  vii. 
273 ;  IMnce.) 

WAKSBIHG,  John  (Bishop  of  Nob- 
unoH),  so  called  from  a  village  of  that  name 
in  Essex,  was  certainly  one  of  the  masters, 
<sir  ciedcs  of  the  higher  grade,  in  Chancery 
in  l9  Richard  XL,  1396,  when  he  acted  as 


'  receiver  of  the  petitions  to  parliament  (Hot, 
Pari.  iii.  337.)  He  probably  held  the  office 
for  some  time  before,  as  he  was  instituted 
to  the  valuable  living  of  St.  Benet  Shere- 
hog  in  the  city  of  London  in  1389.  He 
was  advanced  on  March  2^  1405,  to  the 
mastership  of  the  Rolls,  which  he  enjoyed 
for  more  tnan  ten  years.  During  this  period 
he  twice  held  the  Great  Seal  as  keeper,  in 
11  and  12  Henry  lY.,  in  the  absence  of  the 
chancellor. 

He 'became  archdeacon  of  Canterbury  in 
1405,  and  canon  of  Wells  in  1409.  On 
June  3,  1415,  he  exchanged  the  office  of 
master  of  the  Rolls  for  that  of  keeper  of 
the  privy  seal  {Kal,  Exch.  ii.  130-2),  and 
in  the  following  year  was  elected  Bisnop  of 
Norwich. 

When  the  Council  of  Constance  was  held 
in  1417,  to  settle  the  contention  between 
the  three  claimants  of  the  papal  chair,  the 
bishop  was  one  of  the  six  ecclesiastics  who 
were  selected  to  attend  on  the  part  of 
England,  and  he  is  said  to  have  gained  the 
applause  of  the  assemblv  by  his  learning 
and  wisdom.  One  of  the  candidates  re- 
signed, the  two  others  were  formally  de- 
posed from  their  assumed  authority,  and 
the  election  fell  on  Martin  V. 

On  the  accession  of  Henry  VI.  he  was 
named  as  one  of  the  special  council  of 
assistance  to  the  protectors;  but  his  ser- 
vices in  the  third  year  of  that  reign  were 
terminated  by  his  death  at  his  manor  of 
Thorpe  on  April  9, 1425.  He  was  buiied 
in  his  cathedraL 

He  is  spoken  of  as  having  been  a  person 
of  extraordinary  merit,  pious^  bountiful, 
and  affable,  and  governing  his  see  with 


696 


WALCOT 


Prudence  and  moderation.    (Godwrn,  438 ; 
^hmffield'8  Norwich,  i.  628;  Hasted^  xii. 
681 ;  Rot.  Pari  iv.  176.  201.) 

WALCOT,  Thomas,  aerived  Hs  descent 
from  Llewelyn  with  the  Oolden  Chain,  lord 
of  Yale  in  Denhighland,  one  of  whose 
descendants  married  the  heir  of  Sir  John 
Walcot,  of  Walcot  in  Shropshire,  and  there- 
upon assumed  the  name  with  the  extensive 
estates.  He  was  the  second  surviving  son 
of  Humphrey  Walcot,  who  was  sheriff  of 
the  county  in  1631,  and  suffered  consider- 
ahly  by  his  adherence  to  the  royal  cause, 
by  Anne,  daughter  of  Thomas  Dockwra,  of 
Poderich  in  Hertfordshire. 

Bom  in  1629,  and  admitted  to  the  Middle 
Temple,  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1663, 
became  a  bencher  in  1671,  and  Lent  reader 
in  1677.   He  was  elected  recorder  of  Bewd- 

ain  1671,  and  in  1679  was  summoned  to 
e  the  degree  of  the  coif.  In  the  parlia- 
ment of  October  1679,  dissolved  m  Ja- 
nuary 1681,  he  was  elected  member  for 
Ludlow,  and  in  the  same  year  he  received 
the  honour  of  knighthood.  On  October  22, 
1683,  he  was  constituted  a  judge  of  the 
King's  Bench  by  Charles  U.,  out  retained 
his  seat  there  for  less  than  two  vears, 
dying  in  the  Trinity  vacation  whicn  fol- 
lowed King  James's  accession.  When  the 
sentence  pronounced  by  that  court  in  June 
1684  agamst  Sir  Thomas  Armstrong,  on  his 
attainder  by  outlawry,  was  taken  up  by  the 
parliament  in  January  1689,  it  appeared 
that  Mr.  Justice  Walcot  had  died  intestate, 
and  had  not  left  an  estate  sufficient  to  pay 
his  debts.  In  the  only  other  public  tnafs 
in  which  his  name  appears,  those  of  Rose- 
well  and  Titus  Oates,  ne  made  no  remark  in- 
dicative of  either  his  character  or  his  talents. 

He  married  Mary,  daughter  of  Sir  Adam 
Littleton,  of  Stoke  Melbuiy  in  Shropshire, 
Bart.,  and  by  her  had  several  children.  He 
was  seated  at  Bitterly  Court  in  that  county, 
which,  by  various  intermarriages,  has  be- 
come the  propertv  of  the  senior  branch  of 
the  family,  the  Walcot  estate  having  been 
sold  in  1764  to  Lord  Clive.  (Pedigree  of 
the  Family ;  Nash's  Worcester,  ii.  279  j  State 
THals,  X.  119,  161,  1198;  2  Shotcer,  434.) 

WALDHTTLL,  SiMON  DE,  probably  mean- 
ing Wahull,  is  introduced  by  Dugdale  as  a 
justicier  in  12  John,  1210,  on  the  authority 
of  a  fine  levied  before  him.  But  Mr.  Hunter 
omits  him  in  the  list  he  has  given,  and  cer- 
tninhr  his  name  does  not  appear  on  any  of 
the  fines  in  those  counties  wnich  have  been 
hitherto  published. 

There  was  a  barony  of  Wahull  in  Bed- 
fordshire, the  lord  of  which  at  this  time  was 
John  de  WahuU,  of  whom  this  Simon  may 
have  been  a  yoimger  brother.  {BaronagCy 
i.  603.) 

WALDHIC  appears  as  chancellor  to  the 
concord  between  thQ  abbot  of  Fescamp  and 
Philip  de  Braioaa  mai^^  ^\.  ^«2^i!^Mrj  wi' 


WALEDENE 

Janoaiy  13, 1103-4;  and  there  axe  figmrolW 
documents  of  this  reign  in  the '  MonaatieaB,'  i 
attested  by  him  in  the  aame  cfaaoctei^ 
which,  though  bearing  no  date,  mnst  hif« 
been  executed  about  this  time.  {Mamd, 
i.  164,  vi.  1083,  llOS,  1273.) 

In  1106  a  charter  oocarsy  granted  to  ib 
church  of  Tewkesbury,  one  of  the  ognitoni 
to  which,  immediately  following  the  kmgfi^ 
is  that '  Walteri,  Canoellarii ; '  and  theiuK 
signature  is  added  to  another  charter  gnatod 
to  the  priory  of  Thetford,  -which  la  £itedit 
Ramsey,  m  trangUu  regis,  on  Febmaiy  14. 
(i^ui.  u.  66^  V.  149.)  The  year  18  not  mn- 
tioned,  but  it  probably  was  signed  wheo  ^ 
Idn^  went  to  Normandy,  in  the  aame  year. 
No  author  notices  such  a  chancellor  » 
Walter,  and  the  name  onl^  oocors  on  tiMR 
two  occasions.  It  may  &irly  be  presiiMd, 
therefore,  that  they  are  merely  eirors,  eite 
of  the  scribe  or  the  printer,  in  8ubatitatiii| 
them  for  Waldric. 

In  the  preceding  notice  of  Galdric^  tin 
chancellor  under  William  II.,  it  is  sajmtod 
that  he  may  be  the  same  aa  this  "V^^udiie; 
and  an  account  is  given  of  his  taking  Dob 
Kobert  at  the  battle  of  Tenchebni,  lad 
being  rewarded  with  the  bishopric  of  LaoB. 
It  wul  be  observed  that  all  the  above-aoh 
tioned  instruments  were  executed  hdon 
that  battle,  which  was  fought  on  September 
28, 1106,  and  that  the  last  of  them  wis  pro- 
bably dated  before  embarking  on  the  ex- 
pedition against  Duke  Robert. 

That  the  name  neither  of  Waldric  nor  of 
Galdric  occurs  at  any  subsequent  date,  snd 
that  Ranulph  soon  after  appears  as  alias- 
cellor,  if  anording  no  positive  confirmatioiV 
at  least  offers  no  contradiction  to  the  mf^ 
gestion. 

WALEBEKS,  Huxpret  de,  was  an  o&eet 
in  the  Exchequer  long  before  he  became  ft 
baron  of  that  court.  In  19  Edward  L  tke 
manor  of  Horsington  was  committed  to  Ub^ 
during  the  minority  of  the  heir,  at  a  rent  d 
50/.  a  year.  In  28  Edward  L  he  was  ip- 
pointed  to  perambulate  the  for^ta  of  Soawr- 
set,  Dorset,  and  Devon.  !bi  30  Edwaid  L 
the  bishopric  of  Worcester  was  oonunitted 
to  him  during  its  yacancy,  and  four  rettf 
afterwards  the  archbishopric  of  Cantennzy. 
(Abb.  Hot,  Orig,  i  66, 119, 150 ;  Pari  WW^ 
i.  398.) 

He  was  appointed  a  baron  of  the  Es- 
chequer  on  October  19, 1306, 34  Edwaid  L ; 
but  he  only  retained  his  office  till  the  (el- 
lowing  July,  when  the  reign  termiDite^ 
{Madox,  ii.  46-325.) 

Although  he  was  not  one  of  the  baroBi 
sworn  in  on  the  accession  of  Edwaid  Vi^ 
there  is  nothing  to  show  that  he  was  dii- 
graced.  On  the  contrary,  he  is  found  amoag 
the  justices  of  Oyer  and  Terminer,  in  ^ 
fourth  and  eighth  years  of  that  letgnffiv 
Essex  and  Hertford.  In  13  Edward  H  bt 
\\i^«si^iLtenaiye  grant  of  the  atewaidakj^ 


WALEIS 

of  varions  royal  castles  and  manon  in  eleven 
counties— among  which  was  the  park  of 
Windsor, — and  of  the  auditoTBhip  of  their 
aooounts.  He  is  mentioned  also  as  steward 
to  the  Earl  of  Hertford,  and  seems  to  have 
been  appointed^  at  his  desire,  one  of  the 
lustiees  to  take  an  assize  in  which  he  was 
interested.  (Abb.  BoL  Orig.  L  252,  276: 
EaL  PtirL  L  898.) 

He  was  restored  to  his  place  on  the  Ex- 
(^equer  bench  on  June  18, 1824, 17  Edward 
[L  j  hat,  though  he  acted  during  the  re- 
oiamder  of  the  reign,  it  does  not  appear  that 
be  sat  as  a  baron  under  Edward  HL  He 
lied  in  the  fifth  year  of  that  kins,  leaving 
m  infiant  heir,  who  became  escneator  of 
Basex  and  Hertford  in  28  Edward  UL  (Abb. 
RoL  Orig.  60-203 ;  Ctd.  Inq.  p.  m.  iL  87.^) 

WALEIS,  William  le,  was  one  of  the 
j  aatices  itinerant  for  Dorsetshire  in  9  Henry 
LIL,  1225^  and  in  the  next  year  was  ap- 
pointed to  assess  and  collect  the  quinzime 
in  that  county. 

WALERAHD,  KoBEBT,  was  a  favourite  of 
Henry  UI.,  and  frequently  employed  in  his 
service,  particularly  in  the  Welsh  wars. 
The  rolls  contain  frequent  proofs  of  the  con- 
ddence  reposed  in  him,  and  of  the  favour 
Ue  enjoyed.  In  80  Henry  HI.,  1246,  he 
had  the  custody  of  the  lands  and  castles  of 
William  Mareschall,  late  Earl  of  Pem- 
broke, and  in  the  next  year  those  of  John 
de  Munchanes.  In  84  Henry  HI.,  1260,  the 
castles  of  Carmarthen  and  Cardigan,  with 
tlie  lands  of  Meilgon  Fitz-Meilgon,  were 
committed  to  his  charge  at  the  small  annual 
rent  of  forty  marks ;  and  three  years  after- 
wards he  paid  a  fine  of  forty  shillings  of 
gold  for  the  marriage  of  &Atrice,  the 
daughter  of  Robert  de  Brus.  (Excerpt,  e 
Rot.  Fin.  L  458,  ii.  14,  87, 168.) 

From  June  1251  there  can  be  little  doubt 
that  he  was  a  regular  justicier,  many  entries 
oociuring  on  the  Rotmus  de  Finibus  of  pay- 
ments made  for  assizes  to  be  taken  before 
him.  These  continue,  with  slight  interrup- 
tion, till  August  1258.    (i6k/.  ii.  107-286.) 

He  is  described  as  the  king^s  seneschal 
in  86  Henry  lU.  (Ibid.  ii.  868)  and  the  fol- 
lowing years ;  and  it  probably  arose  from 
his  attending  the  court  as  seneschal  that  in 
46  Henry  III.,  1262,  the  Great  Seal  was 
temporanly  put  into  his  and  Imbert  de 
Munster's  hands  during  the  chancellorship 
of  Walter  de  Merton. 

The  Earl  of  Leicester's  ravages  in  1268 
were  specially  directed  against  him  as  one 
of  the  kind's  chief  favourites:  but  after 
Henry  regamed  his  authority  he  resumed 
Ms  former  position,  and  received  some  com- 
pensation for  his  losses.  From  April  1268 
till  August  1271,  the  frequent  entries  of 
assizes  to  be  held  before  nim  prove  that 
he  was  restored  to  his  place  on  the  bench. 
(nnd.  iii  441,  468-546 ;  AlA.  BacU.  182.) 
He  died  about  Edward  L,  and  was  found  I 


WALLOP 


697 


possessed  of  sixteen  manors,  and  extensive 
possessions  in  eight  counties.  (Ctd.  Inq, 
p.  m.  i.  48.) 

WALXniGHAX,  Alak  be,  whose  family 
had  considerable  possessions  in  Yorkshire, 
was  probably  the  son  of  John  de  WaUdng- 
ham,  whose,  widow,  Agnes,  paid  for  an 
assize  in  that  county  in  1267.  (Excerpt,  e 
Eot.  jFVn.  iL  484.)  He  pursued  the  legal 
profession,  and  was  appointed  in  8  Edward 
L,  1280,  one  of  the  justices  to  take  assizes 
in  different  counties.  In  the  next  year  he 
acted  as  the  king's  advocate,  or  local  at- 
tomey-^neral,  in  the  pleas  before  the  jus- 
tices itmerant  in  Yorkshire,  and  in  10 
Edward  1.  was  added  to  the  conmiission  of 
justices  itinerant  in  Cornwall.  He  died  in 
12  Edward  I.  (Col.  Inq.  p.  m.  i.  84, 128  j 
Madax,  iL  112.) 

WALLOP,  KiCHABD,  belonged  to  the 
Hampshire  family  which  was  ennobled  by 
George  J.  with  the  earldom  of  Portsmouth. 
His  branch  was  settled  at  Bugbroke  in 
Northaniptonshire,  and  his  father,  Richard, 
was  resident  in  that  place.  He  was  called 
to  the  bar  by  the  Middle  Temple  in  Fe- 
bruary 1646,  and  was  elected  a  oencher  in 
1666.  Though  not  mentioned  by  the  re- 
porters till  1601,  his  future  success  in  his 
profession  may  be  estimated  by  the  nume- 
rous state  trials  in  which  he  was  engaged ; 
and  his  political  tendencies  are  apparent 
from  his  being  generally  retained  against 
the  government  during  the  reigns  of  Charles 
U.  and  James  U.  In  1680  he  was  leading 
counsel  for  Lord  Stafford,  one  of  the  five 
Popish  lords.  In  1681  he  was  selected  as 
counsel  for  the  Duke  of  York  on  the  indict- 
ment for  recusancy,  and  was  assigned  to 
argue  points  of  law  in  defence  of  Edward 
Fitzharris,  and  of  Stephen  Colledge.  In 
1682  he  assisted  in  defending  the  city  of 
London  against  the  quo  warranto,  and 
was  engaged  as  counsel  for  the  Earl  of 
Danby.  He  was  peculiarly  obnoxious  to- 
Chief  Justice  Jefl&eys,  who  took  every 
opportunity  of  browbeating  him.  When 
Wallop,  on  the  trial  of  Bradford  and  Speke 
in  1684  for  asserting;  that  the  Earl  of  Essex 
was  murdered  in  uie  Tower,  persisted  in 
askinff  some  question  of  the  witness,  which 
the  chief  justice  disapproved,  his  lordship 
exclaimed.  ^  Nay,  Mr.  Wallop,  be  as  angry 
as  you  will,  you  shall  not  hector  the  court 
out  of  their  imderstandings ; '  and  upon 
Wallop's  saying,  *  I  refer  myself  to  all  that 
hear  me,  if  I  attempted  such  a  thing  as  to 
hector  the  court,'  he  was  checked  thus 
intemperately  by  the  judge :  *  Refer  your- 
self to  all  that  hear  you  1  refer  yourself  to 
the  court  It  is  a  reflection  on  ue  govern- 
ment, I  tell  you  the  question  is,  and  you 
sha*n't  do  any  such  thmg  while  I  sit  her& 
by  the  grace  of  God,  if  I  can  help  it ;  *  and 
again,  'Pray  behave  yourself  as  you  ought^ 
Mr.  Wallop ;  you  must  not  think  ^  lo^^ 


•698 


WALMESLEY 


and  swagger  here.'  On  the  trial  in  the 
6ame  year  of  Thomas  Rose  well  for  high 
treason  the  chief  justice  took  another  op- 
portunity of  showing  his  prejudice  a^^ainst 
the  unfortunate  counsel.  Seeing  him  in 
court,  he  asked  him  what  husiness  he  had 
there,  and  on  his  saying  that  he  only  came 
from  curiosity  to  hear  the  trial,  Jeffreys 
declared  that  it  should  not  proceed  while 
he  remained.  Wallop,  however,  had  the 
pleasure  afterwards  of  moving  successfully 
in  arrest  of  the  judgment.  Another  in- 
stance of  this  judge's  brutality  towards  Mr. 
Wallop  occurred  shortly  after,  when  he  was 
•counsel  for  Kichard  Baxter.  *  Mr.  Wallbp,' 
said  Jeffireys, '  I  observe  you  are  in  all  these 
dirty  causes ;  and  were  it  not  for  you  gen- 
tlemen of  the  long  robe,  who  should  have 
more  wit  and  honesty  to  support  and  hold 
up  these  factious  knaves  oy  the  chin, 
we  should  not  be  at  the  pass  we  are  at' 
Mr.  Wallop  mildly  answered,  *  My  lord,  I 
humbly  conceive  that  the  passages  accused 
are  natural  deductions  from  the  text'  Upon 
which  the  infuriated  chief  cried  out,  *  You 
humbly  conceive  I  and  I  humbly  conceive ; 
•ewear  nim,  swear  him.'  Wallop  attempted 
to  proceed,  but  Jeffreys  stopped  his  ad- 
vocacy by  saying,  '  Sometimes  you  humbly 
conceive,  and  sometimes  you  are  very  posi- 
tive ;  you  talk  of  your  slnll  in  Church  his- 
tory, and  of  your  understanding  Latin  and 
English ;  I  think  I  understand  something 
of  them  as  well  as  you ;  but  in  short  I  must 
tell  you  that  if  you  do  not  your  duty  better, 
I  shall  teach  it  you.'  {State  Tiialsy  vols. 
vii.-xi. ;  LtOtrelij  I  69, 196, 297  j  WoolrycKs 
JeffireySj  146.) 

xhese  attacks  upon  him  originated  pro- 
bably from  some  personal  antipathy,  as 
every  other  judge  treated  him  and  his  ar- 
guments with  respect.  They  continued 
during  the  whole  of  the  coarse  chief  jus- 
tice's presidency  of  the  court,  and  were 
regarded  with  the  greater  disgust  from  the 
object  of  them  being  an  old  man  approach- 
ing his  seventieth  year. 

After  ten  or  eleven  years  more  of  hard 
forensic  duty,  he  obtained  a  retirement  from 
his  labours  in  the  snug  office  of  cursitor 
baron  of  the  Exchequer,  to  which  he  was 
appointed  on  March  16,  1696.  Not  long 
was  his  enjoyment  of  it.  Narcissus  Lutt- 
rell  (iv.  32,  267)  recording  that  '  old  Mr. 
Wallop,  cursitor  baron,'  died  on  August  22, 
1697. 

WALMESLET,  Tno:M:AS,  of  an  honour- 
able family  settled  at  Sholley  in  Lancashire, 
was  the  eldest  son  of  Thomas  Walmesley, 
by  his  wife,  Margaret,  daughter  of  —  Live- 
say.  He  was  bom  about  1537,  and  com- 
menced his  legal  studies  either  at  Barnard's 
Inn  or  Staple  Inn,  for  each  claims  him  as 
having  been  a  student,  before  he  was  en- 
tered at  LincoWa  lim.  H^  woua  called  to 
4;he  bar  by  the  \&1\ai  «od«Vj  ^^  ^>ai^\^^ 


WALMESLET 

1667;  and  being  elected  one  of  the  goTeiiK>Ts 
in  1675,  he  became  reader  in  1678,  ioJ 
again  in  1580.  On  the  last  occasion  be  hid 
just  received  his  summons  to  take  the  de- 
gree of  the  coif,  which  he  aocordinglj  as- 
sumed on  October  18.  (DugdaUti  On§. 
253,  261 ;  Solmshed,  iv.  432.)  Chief  Ja»- 
tice  Dyer  having  named  the  banistoi 
whom  he  had  selected  to  receive  tbt 
honour,  Mr.  Justice  Francia  Wyndlttfii 
wrote  to  Lord  Burleigh,  sugsestiiig  tkt 
two  in  the  list  mi^ht  be  spared  '  in  re^ 
of  suspicion  of  their  religion.'  These  wen 
Mr.  Maryot,  of  the  Inner  Temple,  afid 
Walmesley;  and  the  judge's  repraenti* 
tions,  though  fiedling  in  regard  to  the  Istter, 
seem  to  have  been  successful  agaiiuttlH 
former.     (Marmmg's  Serv,  ad  legm,) 

He  was  constituted  a  judge  of  the  Cocc- 
mon  Pleas  on  May  10,  1^9.  On  Kioc 
James's  accession  he  was  re-appointed  a:^] 
knighted,  and  was  one  of  the  '  Thomi^' 
alluded  to  by  Lord  Ellesmere  as  difbisg 
both  in  the  House  of  Liords  and  the  Ex- 
chequer Chamber  from  the  majority  of  tlie 
judges  on  the  fquestion  of  the  post  mti 
{State  Trials,  iL  576,  069.) 

His  account  of  presents  received  and  ex- 
penses incurred  on  seme  of  his  circoit%  t 
very  curious  record,  has  been  preBerred 
amon^  the  Petre  Papers.  Bj  this  docu- 
ment it  appears  that  ne  went  the  Westeis 
Circuit  with  Mr.  Justice  Fenner  for  fire 
consecutive  years,  from  autumn  1696  to 
spring  1601.  At  each  place  of  hdimf 
the  assize  it  was  the  custom  for  the  majot 
and  the  sheriff  to  present  some  artide  d 
consumption,  varying  according  to  their 
means  or  liberality.  The  eatables  conasiMi 
of  *  half  a  bucke,'  'one  mutten,' '  one  vale,' 
lambs,  capons,  c^uayles,  conyes,  taikie&, 
hemeshawes,  chickings,  ducks,  galley 
samons,  lobsters,  gumetta,  soales,  haddoeb, 
and,  among  numerous  pies  and  pasdea,  *  (^ 
redd  deare  pie.'  Of  drinkables  there  wen 
wine  (without  naming  the  sort)  and  seveiti 
<  hoggesheades  of  beare.'  The  noblejoai 
and  gently  of  the  county  also  sent  similtf 
contributions  of  bucks,  muttons,  &c  ;  b^ 
sides  which  these  additional  articles  are  le- 
corded :  *  One  kidd,'  pigeons,  a  pecock,  pe- 
wetts,  *  two  peeces  of  turbett,'  *  one  isle  of 
sturgeon,'  ^  artychocka  and  peases,'  and  'xii 
suites '  (sweets  P^.  The  sheriff  of  Deros 
seems  to  have  been  a  most  muni&cst 
caterer,  for,  besides  presenting  half  a  buck 
and  two  hogsheads  of  beer,  he  provided  tk 
judges  with  an  excellent  supper  duriogti^ 
whole  time  they  were  at  Exeter. 

The  '  Rewardes '  paid  by  the  judges  &r 
these  presents,  varying  from  5«.  down  to 
Odl,  amounted  to  6A  Ida.  Besides  wBat 
they  thus  received,  they  had  themselves  \o 
furnish  a  plentiful  supply  of  food,  so  thtf 
their  joint  expenses  of  one  circuit  amoonted 
\  \G  Vll  \^,  I(k  To  Judge  Wahnesky a  bsif 


WALSH 

•f  this,  28/.  19«.  Bd.,  are  added  bis  private 
charges,  for  horse-meat,  &c,  servants,  and 
20d,  at  each  place  '  to  the  poore/  amount- 
ing to  28/.  2a.  6d.f  making  the  whole  cir- 
cuit cost  him  47/.  Is.  Wd.  {JSx,  inf.  of 
Wtn,  Durrani  Cooper,  JBsq.,  F.S.A.) 

He  retained  his  seat  allove  twenty-three 
years,  and  died  on  November  26, 1612,  aged 
aeventy-five.  He  was  buried  at  Blackburn 
in  Lancashire,  where  his  magnificent  monu- 
ment was  demolished  bj  the  parliamentary 
fioldiers  in  1642.  The  epitaph  on  it  com- 
menced with  the  following  auaint  lines 
iZanadowne  M8S.  No.  978,  fo.  88)  :— 

Tombs  have  their  period,  monuments  decay, 
And  rust  and  age  wear  Epitaphs  away. 
Bat  neither  rust  nor  age  nor  time  shall  wear 
Judge  Wahnesley's  name  that  lies  entombed 

here, 
Who  never  did  for  favour  nor  for  awe 
Of  great  men's  ftrowns  quit  or  forsake  the  lawe. 
His  inside  was  his  outside,  he  never  sought 
To  make  fair  showes  of  what  he  never  thought. 

He  had  the  repute  of  having  amassed 
considerable  wealth  by  great  rapadtr  in  his 
practice  of  the  law;  but  no  evidence  is 
given  of  the  charge.  He  became  possessed 
of  the  estate  of  Dunkenhalghy  in  the  parish 
of  WbaUey,  near  Blackburn ,  on  which  he 
built  a  fine  mansion.  By  his  vrife,  Anne, 
^e  rich  heiress  of  Robert  Shuttleworth, 
£8q.|  of  Hackinge  in  the  same  county,  he 
left  an  only  son,  whose  male  descendants 
failed  at  the  beginning  of  the  last  centuiy, 
•nd  the  large  property  passed  into  the 
fiunilies  of  Lord  Petre  and  Lord  Stourton, 
who  were  the  first  and  second  husbands 
of  the  last  possessor's  sister  and  heir. 
(Shuttleworth  Accounts,  Chetham  Soc. 
1856.) 

WALSH,  JoHKy  called  sometimes  WELSH, 
was  the  only  son  of  another  John  Walsh, 
of  Cathanger,  in  the  parish  of  Fivehead, 
Somersetshire,  by  Jane,  daughter  of  Sir 
Edward  Broke.  He  became  a  reader  at 
the  Middle  Temple  in  1555,  having  been 
pTOviouslv  mentioned  as  a  barrister  in 
Flowden^  Reports.  He  was  of  those 
gammoned  in  the  last  month  of  Mary's 
reign  to  take  the  degree  of  the  coif  in  the 
felfowing  Easter,  when  by  a  new  writ  from 
Queen  Elizabeth  they  were  admitted  on 
April  19, 1559.  His  next  step  was  to  the 
l)ench  of  the  Common  Pleas,  of  which  he 
was  constituted  a  judge  on  February  10, 
1563,  and  had  fines  acknowledged  before 
Jiim  as  late  as  February  1572.  {Dugdale^s 
Orig.  48,  217.^  In  that  year  he  died, 
4Uid  was  buriea  in  the  parish  church  of 
Hvehead. 

He  left  an  only  daughter,  who  married 
Sir  Edward  Seymour,  the  eldest  son  of  the 
first  Duke  of  Somerset  by  his  first  wife, 
wbo  was  excluded  from  the  title  till  the 
failure  of  the  issue  of  the  duke's  second 
wife.    This  failure  occurred  in  1740,  when 


WALTER 


699 


a  descendant  of  Sir  Edward's  succeeded 
to  the  dukedom,  which  now  remains  in 
his,  the  dder  family.  (jCdUmson^s  Somerset, 
i.  42.) 

WAL8HS,  Thomas^  like  many  of  the 
other  barons,  began  his  career  as  an  officer 
in  the  Exchequer.  He  was  clerk  of  estreats 
in  1516,  and  was  made  treasurer's  remem- 
brancer in  April  1523,  and  was  promoted 
to  a  seat  on  the  bench  of  that  court  as 
fourth  baron  on  April  27,  1536.  It  appears 
by  an  order  of  the  privy  council  in  June 
1541  that  he  was  then  engaged  as  a  com- 
missioner in  Ireland  on  some  of  the  king's 
business,  and  that  he  was  directed  to  return 
to  England  to  make  his  report  (Acts  Privy 
Council,  vii.  201^  He  continuea  baron  till 
August  6,  1542,  when  his  place  was 
filled  up. 

WALSINGHAIC,  LoBD.  iSee  W.  De  Grey. 

WALSINGHAK,  RicnARD  de,  was  a 
knight  residing  in  Norfolk,  his  family  being 
so  called  from  the  town  of  that  name.  He 
was  retumed  for  the  county  to  the  parlia- 
ments of  28,  29,  and  33  Edward  1. ;  and  it 
was  probablv  on  that  account  that  he  was 
placed  in  tne  latter  year  among  the  five 
justices  of  trailbaston  appointed  for  Norfolk 
and  Suffolk,  and  was  re-nominated  in  the 
new  commissions  of  1307. 

He  was  summoned  among  the  justices  to 
parliament  in  the  first  year  of  Edward  II., 
and  during  the  remainder  of  his  life  was 
occasionally  employed  in  judicial  business. 
He  Htill  continued  to  represent  Norfolk  in 
parliament  up  to  7  Edward  II.,  and  is  last 
mentioned  in  12  Edward  II.  In  the  fol- 
lowing year  his  executors  were  directed 
to  bnng  in  the  proceedings  before  biiu. 
(Pari.  Writs,  i.  892,  iL  1574;  Pot.  Pari. 
i.  218.) 

His  wife,  whose  name  was  Anastasia, 
was  buried  in  the  Black  Friars  at  Thetford. 
(  Weever,  828.) 

WALTEB,  Hubert  (Archbishop  of 
Canterbury),  bom  at  West  Dereham  in 
Norfolk,  was  one  of  the  sons  of  Hervey 
Walter,  whose  barony  was  in  that  county. 
His  mother  was  Maud,  the  daughter  of 
Theobald  de  Valoines,  and  the  sister  of 
Berta,  the  wife  of  Hanulph  de  Glanville, 
the  great  justiciary.  Brought  up  under  that 
celebrated  man  to  the  two  learned  profes- 
sions of  the  church  and  the  law,  bis  ad- 
vance in  both,  under  such  instruction 
and  with  such  patronage,  could  not  be 
doubtful. 

So  early  as  31  Henry  H.,  1185,  his 
name  appears  among  the  barons  and  Justi- 
ciers  before  whom  fines  were  levied  m  the 
Curia  Regis.  Soon  afterwards  he  was  raised 
to  the  deanery  of  York.  Even  at  this  early 
period  of  his  career  he  gave  evidence  of  his 
piety  and  his  gratitude  by  founding  a 
monastery  for  PrsBmonstratensian  monks  at 
his  native  place,  for  the  souls  of  his  father 


700 


WALTEE 


and  motHer,  and  of  his  patron  Ranolph  do 
Qlanville  and  Ms  wife. 

Immediately  after  the  coronation  of 
Kichard  I.  he  was  elected  to  the  see  of 
Salisbury,  and  in  the  following  year  he 
accompanied  that  monarch  on  the  crusade, 
and,  with  Archbishop  Baldwin  and  his 
unde  Eanulph  de  Glanyille,  was  placed  in 
command  of  the  forces  before  Acre.  He 
alone  of  ,the  three  survived  the  campaign, 
and  by  his  spirit  and  wisdom  was  of  the 
greatest  service  to  the  army  during  Ri- 
chard's illness,  being  mainly  instrumental 
in  procuring  the  truce  with  Saladin  when 
the  King  of  France  had  deserted  the  cause. 
Before  his  return  to  England  he  had  the 
satisfaction  of  visiting  Jerusalem. 

The  king  was  so  deeply  impressed  with 
his  talents  and  prudent  counsel  that  when 
he  heard  of  the  sudden  death  of  Reginald 
Fitz-Josceline,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
he  took  every  means,  even  before  his  own 
release  from  prison,  to  procure  Hubert's 
appointment  to  the  vacant  primacy.  His 
election  having  taken  place  on  May  30, 
1198,  the  new  archbishop  exerted  himself 
in  collecting  the  ransom  for  the  release  of 
his  sovereign.  In  September  1193  he  was 
raised  to  the  office  of  chief  justiciary,  and 
his  power  was  afterwards  greatly  increased 
by  his  being  appointed  legate  of  the  apos- 
tolic see. 

On  Richard's  return  he  was  high  in  his 
confidence,  officiated  at  his  second  corona- 
tion in  April  1194,  and  continued  for  four 
years  to  perform  the  duties  of  his  office 
with  firmness  and  moderation.  By  his  ad- 
vice weights  and  measures  were  regulated, 
and  other  laws  against  fraud  were  ordained. 
The  possessor  of  power,  however,  is  certain 
to  have  enemies^  and  he  must  be  fortunate 
indeed  who,  in  its  exercise,  commits  no  act 
which  is  obnoxious  to  censure.  The  arch- 
bishop was  charged  with  neglecting  his 
ecclesiastical  duties,  and  with  having  vio- 
lated the  right  of  sanctuary  in  directing 
the  execution  of  William  Fitz-Osbert,  a 
factious  demagogue,  who  had  taken  refuge 
in  the  church  of  St.  Mary-le-Bow.  These 
and  other  representations  to  his  disadvan- 
tage were  urged  upon  Pope  Innocent  by 
the  monks  of  Canterburv,  who,  however, 
tire  stated  by  Roger  de  Wendover  to  have 
been  instigated  by  the  fear  lest  a  magni- 
ficent church  which  the  archbishop  was 
erecting  at  Lambeth  should  occasion  the 
removal  of  the  archiepiscopal  seat  from 
their  city.  Nevertheless,  their  application 
was  successful;  the  new  church  was  or- 
dered to  be  demolished,  and  the  king,  under 
the  threat  of  an  interdict,  was  compelled  to 
part  with  his  chief  justiciary  on  the  shallow 
pretence  that  it  was  not  lawful  for  bishops 
to  be  engaged  in  secular  affairs.  Hubert's 
resignation  was  reluctantly  accepted  in  July 
1198,  9  Richard  I. 


WALTEB 

Although  he  had  been  a  £utlif  iil  aomrt 
to  Richaidi  his  absence  in  the  Holy  Ltnd 
had  prevented  him  from  cominff  into  o(d- 
lision  with  the  king's  brother,  J^m.  T^ 
prince  then,  on  Richard's  death,  knowii^ 
the  respect  with  which  he  was  refftidei 
deputea  him  and  WiUiam  Mar^chally  Eizl 
of  Pembroke,  to  receive  the  fealty  of  tb 
English  barons.  How  the  archbishop  me 
induced  to  set  aside  the  more  legitimite 
claims  of  Prince  Arthur  does  not  appeir: 
but,  as  no  improper  motive  is  imputed  t» 
him,  it  may  be  presumed  that  he  had  boI 
obtained  an  insight  into  John's  real  di»- 
racter,  and  that  he  considered  the  safetj  of 
the  Inngdom  in  its  then  misettled  state 
would  be  risked  in  the  weak  hands  oft 
youthful  sovereign.  He  placed  the  cnmi 
on  John's  head  on  May  27,  1199,  bemf 
Ascension-day,  and  either  on  that  dar  or 
immediately  after  was  constituted  his  caasr 
cellor.  There  is  a  charter  given  under  hb 
hand  as  chancellor,  dated  on  June  6,  beiii| 
ten  davs  after  that  solemnity.  (Bymer^  l 
75.)  iFIis  acceptance  of  this  post  did  nol 
escape  remark  as  a  proof  of  nis  cupidity. 
It  was  sneeringly  observed  to  him  thk 
'  Heretofore  chancellors  have  been  created 
archbishops,  but  no  archhishop  before  voo 
has  vouchsafed  to  become  chancellor.'  ll» 
fact,  however,  merely  proves  that  the  (^ee 
of  chancellor  was  then  advancing  in  im- 
portance, and  was  rapidly  treading  od  tb 
neels  of  that  of  chief  justiciary,  which  ii  i 
few  years,  in  reference  to  all  political  power, 
it  entirely  superseded.  In  October  1201 
he  again  crowned  King  John,  with  kis 
second  wife,  Queen  Isabella,  at  Westmin- 
ster, and  soon  afterwards  repeated  the  cere- 
mony at  Canterbury. 

He  continued  to  perform  all  the  duties  of 
the  office  of  chancellor,  if  not  to  enjoj 
the  favour  of  his  sovereign,  during  tlie  re- 
mainder of  his  life.  (Jdftdox^  i.  57.)  He 
died  at  Tenham  on  July  Id,  1205^  and  wis 
buried  in  Canterbury  CathedraL 

Few  persons  who  have  filled  suchliigi 
offices  have  passed  through  their  csieff 
with  so  little  blame.  Coouuencing  his  H£b 
under  the  eye  of  his  illustrious  unde,  he 
acquired  that  knowledge  and  laid  the 
foundation  for  that  experience  and  dieoe- 
tion  which  gained  him  the  confdeoce  of 
three  kings  of  yer^  opposite  characten, 
without  degrading  himself  by  any  low  sits 
or  imdue  subserviency.  His  private  worth 
is  evidenced  by  the  friendship  (xf  Arch- 
bishop Baldwin,  who  entrusted  him  with 
the  execution  of  his  vdU ;  his  resolotko 
and  high  spirit  were  shown  by  hiB  aooom- 
panyin^  Isin^  Richard  in  his  dangerous 
enterprise  in  the  Holy  La&nd;  his  lojtltj 
and  gratitude  by  his  energetic  efibrts  to 
release  him  from  captivity ;  his  wisdom  ht 
his  administration  of  the  government,  as) 
the  useful  laws  he  introduced ;  and  if^from 


WALTER 

hiB  secular  employments,  he  neglected  some 
of  his  eodesuistiad  daties,  those  of  hos- 
mtality  and  charity  were  not  forgotten, 
bemdes  the  monasteiY  at  Dereham,  he 
foonded  another  at  Wolverhampton,  en- 
riched the  revenues  of  his  see,  ornamented 
it  with  many  huildings,  and  procured  for  it 
some  valuable  privileges.  He  presented 
also  the  living  or  Hale^urt  to  the  church  of 
Canterhuiy,  devotmg  its  revenues  to  the 
support  of  the  library  there,  and  obtained 
firom  King  John  the  liberty  of  a  mint  for 
coining  money  in  the  city  of  Canterbury. 
{DugdMs  Orig.  8.) 

He  was  the  brother  of  the  next-men- 
tioned Theobald  Walter.  (Godwin,  88, 
9^;  Atkyns'sGloucestersKd;  Weever, 21S; 
Mailed,  zii.  346;  JL  de  Wendaver,  iii.  80- 
188 ;  lAngardy  &c.) 

WALTJEBy  Thbobald,  was  one  of  the 
four  brothers  of  the  above  Hubert  Walter. 

King  Ridiard  granted  him  the  lordship 
of  Preston  in  Lancashire,  with  the  whole 
wapentake  and  forest  of  Amundemesse; 
jmd  he  became  sheriff  of  that  county  in  6 
Hichard  L,  and  so  continued  till  1  John. 
In  0  Richard  L,  1197-8,  he  was  one  of  the 
justices  itinerant  to  set  the  tallage  in  Col- 
eheeter.    (MadoXj  i.  738.) 

In  6  John  he  paid  a  fide  of  two  palfrevs 
for  licence  to  go  to  Ireland,  where  ne  held 
the  office  of  chief  butler,  and  where  he  pos- 
sessed large  property.  He  founded  two  ab- 
beys in  that  Idngdom,  that  of  Wotheny  in 
Ldmerick,  and  that  of  Nenagh  in  Tipperary, 
besides  the  monastery  of  Arkelo.  In  Eng- 
land, also,  he  founded  an  abbey  at  Cocker- 
«and  in  Lancashire,  for  canons  regular  of 
the  order  of  St.  Augustin. 

He  died  in  9  John,  and  his  widow,  Maud, 
the  daughter  of  Kobert  le  Vavasour  (Rot, 
ToL  74),  a  few  years  afterwards  married 
Fnlke  Fitz- Warren.  His  son,  Theobald, 
assumed  the  name  of  Boteler,  from  his 
office,  and  was  the  progenitor  of  tiie  noble 
family  of  that  name,  the  head  of  which  is 
the  present  Marquis  of  Ormond.  (DugdMs 
Barm,  i.  633 ;  Nicolas,) 

WALTEB,  John,  was  the  son  of  Edmund 
Walter,  of  Ludlow  in  Shronshire,  an  eminent 
counsel  in  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth, 
«nd  chief  justice  of  South  Wales.  The 
family  was  an  offshoot  of  that  of  the  above 
Hubert  and  Theobald.  His  mother  was 
Mary,  the  daughter  of  Thomas  Hackluit, 
£Ssq.,  of  Eyton  in  Herefordshire.  He  was 
bom  in  1563,  and,  after  completing  his  edu- 
cation at  Brazenose  College,  Oxford,  was 
admitted  a  member  of  the  Inner  Temple, 
and  in  1690  was  called  to  the  bar,  and 
became  reader  there  in  1607.  Previously 
to  tibia  time  he  had  suffident  reputation  as 
a  barrister  to  be  employed  with  Serjeant 
Althun  and  Mr.  Stevens,  before  the  council 
mod  the  judges,  in  defence  of  the  rights  and 
pivflegea  of  the  Court  of  Exchequer,  and 


WALTER 


701 


as  counsel  before  the  Peers  in  defending  the 
king's  title  to  alnage.  (luueofExch,  82, 
64.)  He  was  also  counsellor  for  the  uni- 
versi^  of  Oxford,  and  received  firom  it  on 
July  1, 1618,  the  degree  of  M.A.  In  the 
same  vear  he  was  selected  as  attorney- 
general  to  Prince  Charles,  and  was  koighted 
on  May  18, 1619.  He  still  held  this  place, 
when  on  a  brief  being  sent  to  him  against 
Sir  Edward  Coke,  then  prosecuted  by  the 
court,  he  had  the  courage  to  decline  it, 
saying,  *  Let  my  tongue  cleave  to  the  roof 
of  my  mouth  when  1  open  it  a^rainst  Sir 
Edward  Coke.'  (Brit,  Biog,\y, 17^,)  This 
generous  conduct,  forming  such  a  con- 
trast with  Bacon's  on  a  similar  occasion, 
did  not  prevent  his  advancement  Imme- 
diately on  Charles's  coming  to  the  crown 
he  appointed  Sir  John  Walter  one  of  his 
Serjeants,  and  a  month  after  he  raised  him 
to  the  duef  seat  in  the  Exchequer,  on  May 
12,1626.    (iJytn^r,  xviii.  638.) 

The  new  chief  baron,  however,  did  not 
answer  the  king's  expectations.  He  was 
too  independent  and  too  honest  to  suit  the 
royal  will.  For  some  cause  or  other,  which 
is  not  predselv  described,  the  Hng  was 
dissalisned  with  his  conduct,  and  would 
have  discharged  him,  had  he  submitted  io 
be  thus  thrown  aside.  But  he  alleged  that 
by  his  patent  he  held  his  office  '  quamdiu 
se  bene  gesserit,'  and  he  refused  to  retire 
without  a  scire  facias  to  show  *  whether  he 
did  bene  se  gerere,  or  not ; '  a  course  which 
the  king  did  not  think  proper  to  adopt,  but 
vras  obli^d  to  be  contentea  with  forbiddinp: 
him  to  sit  in  court  Before  this  event  had 
taken  place — viz.,  on  February  14, 1628-9— 
he  and  the  other  barons  had  given  the 
somewhat  equivocating  answer  to  the  House 
of  Commons  for  refusing  to  deliver  back 
the  goods  seized  for  tonnage  and  potmdage. 
(Pari,  Hist,  iL  472.)  But  the  immediate 
cause  of  his  disgrace  was  said  to  be  that  he 
disagreed  with  the  rest  of  tlie  judges  as  to 
the  legality  of  proceeding  criminally  against 
a  member  of  parliament  for  acts  done  in 
the  house.  (iVhitelocke,  16.)  Sir  W. 
Jones  (Reports,  228)  says  he  received  his 
prohibition  to  sit  in  court  in  the  beginning 
of  Michaelmss  Term  1630,  and  that  he 
forbore  till  he  died.  The  interval  between 
the  two  events  was  but  short,  for  his  de- 
cease took  place  on  November  18,  at  his 
house  in  the  Savoy.  He  was  buried  in  the 
church  of  Wolvercote,  near  Oaoford,  where 
there  is  a  splendid  monument  to  him  and 
his  two  wives.    (Fasti  Oxon,  i.  865.) 

His  contemporary  Judge  Croke  (Car.  203^ 
describes  him  as  'a  profoundly  leamea 
man,  and  of  great  integrity  and  courage ; ' 
and  Fuller  (Worthies,  ii.  260^  joins  his 
testimony  to  the  same  effect,  adoing  that  he 
'was  most  passionate  as  Sir  John,  moat 
patient  as  Judge  Walter; '  and  that  saek 
was  hia  gravity  thai  ^noa  '<«V<ts^  "*  "^  ~ 


702 


WALTHAH 


Denham  said  to  him,  'Mj  lord,  yoa  are 
not  merrj/  he  anftwered,  '  Merry  enough 
for  a  judge/  In  the  year  after  his  eleva- 
tion he  obtained  a  curious  licence  for  him- 
self and  bis  wife,  and  any  four  friends 
invited  to  his  table,  to  eat  nieat  on  the 
proliibited  days,  on  payment  of  13«.  4J.  per 
annum  to  the  parish  where  he  resided. 
(^Iti/mer,  xviii.  300.) 

His  first  wife  was  Margaret,  daughter  of 
William  Offley,  Esq.,  an  eminent  London 
merchant ;  his  second  was  Anne,  daughter 
of  William  Wytham,  Es^.,  of  Leastone  in 
Yorkshire,  and  relict  of  Sir  Thomas  Bigges, 
of  Lenchwike  in  the  county  of  Worcester, 
baronet.  By  the  latter  he  left  no  issue, 
but  by  the  former  he  had  four  sons  and 
four  daughters.  His  eldest  son  was  created 
a  baronet  in  1641,  but  the  title  became  ex- 
tinct in  1731. 

WALTHAX,  John  de  (Bishop  of  Salis- 
bury), was  bom  at  Waltham,  near  Grimsby,  ; 
in  Lincolnshire,  in  the  church  of  which  his  ' 


father  and  mother  were  buried^  with  the  fol- 
lowing monumental  inscription  {Archeeol, 
Jourti,  Tii.  389) : — 

Hie  jacent  Johes  et  Margareta  nx'  ei  quond'm 

pater  et  mater 
Joh'is  Walth^m  nop*  Sar*  £p*i    qnor*  aiab3 

p'picict*  dens.  ame\ 

It  is  not  known  whether  he  was  a  clerk 
of  the  Chancery  before  he  received  his 
patent  as  keeper  of  the  Rolls  from  Richard 
II.,  on  September  8,  1381.     He  held  the 
place  for  more  than  five  years,  during  which, 
ou  the  allegation  that  it  was  incumbent 
upon  him  to  visit  his  archdeaconiy,  he  ob- 
tained a  patent  enabling  him,  as  often  as  he 
should  aosent  himself  for  that  or  any  other 
reasonable  cause,  to    depute  any  person, 
whom  the  chancellor  should  consider  suf- 
ficient, to  exercise  his  ofiice  in  his  absence, 
the  power  of  such  deputy  to  cease  after  his 
return. 

It  appears,  from  a  petition  of  the  Com- 
mons in  the  reign  of  Henry  V.  (Rot,  Pari. 
iv.  84),  that  he  extended  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  Court  of  Chancery  by  the  introduction 
of  the  writ  of  subpoena ;  a  form  of  proceed- 
ing of  which  they  complained,  but  which, 
the  king  refusing  to  discontinue  it^  has  sur- 
vived to  the  present  time. 

On  the  discharge  of  the  chancellor,  Ri- 
chard le  Scrope,  from  July  11  to  Sep- 
tember 10,  1382,  he  was  one  of  the  persons 
to  whom  the  custody  of  the  Great  Seal  was 
entrusted  till  the  appointment  of  a  new 
chancellor.  In  1386  he  twice  performed 
the  same  duties:  on  one  occasion,  from 
February  9  to  March  28,  two  clerks  of  the 
Chancery  were  associated  with  him ;  but  on 
the  other,  from  April  23  to  May  14^  he 
acted  alone. 

Aftei  the  death  of  his  predeceaBor,  Wil- 
liain  de  BQnt8^,\ie\^QitMnA\nft^  of  the 


WARBUBTOK 

ever  after  appended  to  the  office  of  muter 
of  the  Rolls.  He  resigned  both  on  October 
24, 1386,  and  was  then  appointed  keeper  of 
the  privy  seaL    (Bot,  BmrL  vL  229.) 

In  the  meantime  his  ecdesiastiGBl  pre- 
ferments were  numerous.  He  became  la^ 
cessively  canon  of  York,  ardideaooo  d 
Richmond,  master  of  Sherbum  Hosritd, 
Durham,  and  sab-dean  of  York,  tndbad 
not  lonff  redgned  the  mastership  of  the  BoOi 
before  he  was  elected  Bishop  of  SaluVmTy 
the  papal  provision  being*  dated  April  3, 
1388.  (i?ym<9\Tii.3e9,  416;  SiaU^ Lm^ 
ham,  i.  138 ;  Xe  Neve^  258,  325.)  Heiw 
called  upon  to  serve  the  responsiUe  office  <tf 
treasurer  in  1391,  14  Ric£ard  IL,  and  k 
retained  it  till  his  death,  about  8ept»nber 
17, 1395. 

The  favour  with  which  he  was  regtrded 
b^  his  sovereign,  testified  by  the  vtzioB 
dimities  he  received,  "was  more  strai||f 
evidenced  at  his  death,  when  the  k^ 
notwithstanding  the  murmurs  of  manr  oi> 
jectors,  caused  his  remains  to  be  intenrf 
m  the  royal  chapel  of  Westminster  Abbef, 
where  they  now  lie  near  the  mooomenttf 
Edward  I. 

He  was  one  of  the  bishops  who  lesaferi 
the  rijB^ht  of  Archbishop  Courteneye  toviit 
his  diocese,  but  was  eoon  frightened  isto 
submission ;  for  within  two  days  after  mt 
tence  of  excommunication  was  proDooaorf 
against  him  he  underwent  the  riatatMa 
{Godwin,  348.) 

WALTHAX,  William  de,  was  doabtlM 
in  some  way  related  to  the  above,  bnt  hov 
does  not  clearly  appear.  He  beoune  keenr 
of  the  Hanaper  about  18  Richard  IL,  1M» 
and  had,  with  the  master  of  the  Rolh,  the 
temporary  custody  of  the  Great  Seal  <a 
October  1.  He  granted  a  messuage  aad  a 
shop  in  St  Martm's-le-Grand,  London,  o 
the  abbot  and  convent  of  Croyhuid,iBSl 
Richard  H.,  after  which  date  we  find  a» 
further  mention  of  hia  name.  {Cd.b^ 
p.  m.  iii.  219.) 

WALTHAX,  KoGEB.  There  waa  a  Bofff 
de  Waltham  who  waa  keeper  of  the  wd- 
robe  in  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Ei- 
ward  n.  (Rat,  PtirL  iL  383,  4d3),  and  i 
seems  not  improbable  that  this  penoo  «» 
not  only  the  progenitor  of  both  the  abon^ 
but  also  of  this  Koger  Waltham,  tlie  bun 
of  the  Exchequer. 

Of  the  latter,  aa  of  those  of  his  ooadiito 
on  that  bench,  scarcely  any  memeriali  ou 
be  found.   All  that  ia  known  of  him  is  tbt 
he  was  appointed  a  baron  in  1418, 6  Bcoy 
V.  (Cal  Rot.  Pat.  267)  ;  but  we  hawtt* 
the  date  of  his  resignation  or  hu  dealL 
He  was  not,    hoigvever,  re-appointod  If 
Henry  VL,  so  that  he  could  not  ^ 
his  place  more  thui  four  yean^ 
WASBVBTOV,  PnsB,  d«i' 
rectiy,  from  the  ancieot  C 


House  of  Oonyoil^,  «^\Mii^<&sft'«\a!dDL^fi%a\^l^t&^^      and  AiIbj, 


WABBUBTON 

Thomas  Warburton  (an  illegitimate  son 
of  John  Warbnrton  of  Northwich  in  that 
county),  and  Anne,  the  daughter  of  Richard 
Blaisterson  of  Winnington.    (Farmfy  Pedi- 

He  was  bom  at  Northwich,  and  began 
his  legal  studies  at  Staple  Inn  (where  nis 
anna  are  in  the  south  wmdow  of  the  hall), 
finishing  them  at  Lincoln's  Inn.  By  the 
latter  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in  1672,  be- 
came one  of  the  governors  in  1681,  and  was 
elected  Lent  rmer  in  1584.  (DugdMs 
Orig,  253, 261.)  He  was  then^  and  for  some 
time  after,  resident  in  a  mansion  called  the 
Black  Hall,  Watemte  Street,  Chester,  for- 
merly the  house  ofthe  Grey  Friars ;  and  in 
this  year  he  was  recommended  by  Henry 
EUirl  of  Derby  to  the  ma^or  of  Chester,  to 
be  an  alderman  of  that  city.  (Harl,  MSS. 
2178.)  Though  it  is  evident,  from  the  large 
purcliases  he  made  in  the  county,  that  he 
had  a  considerable  practice  as  a  barrister, 
it  was  probably  chiefly  in  the  provinces, 
for  his  name  does  not  occur  in  the  Reports 
€^  Westminster  till  1589,  four  years  beforo 
he  took  the  degree  of  the  coif,  on  November 
29. 1693.  In  September  1593  he  was  ap- 
pomted  vice-chamberlain  of  Chester,  and 
m  Novembcnr  1599  he  appears  as  one  of  the 
commissioners  'de  schiconate  supprimendo.* 

JPddt^t  DeM,  Cur.  b.  v.  1 ;  Egertcn  Papers, 
.82 ;  Hymer,  386.) 

Eus  elevation  to  the  bench  at  Westmin- 
ster soon  followed,  his  patent  as  a  Judge  of 
the  Common  Pleas  being  dated  November 
S4y  1600.  King  James  renewed  it  on  his 
aoceasion,  and  knighted  him.  In  none  of 
the  state  trials  at  which  he  was  present 
does  he  seem  to  have  taken  a  prominent 
pert,  and  no  record  remains  of  his  argument 
m  the  great  case  of  the  poet  nati.  Cham- 
heilain,  the  letter-writer,  records  that  in 
October  1616  he  was  in  disgrace  at  court 
§ot  hanging  a  Scotch  falconer  of  the  king, 
contrary  to  express  commands.  (Co/.  SUUe 
JP^pen  [161148],  398.)  He  died  on  Sep- 
tember y ,  1621^  at  Grafton  Hall  in  Cheshire, 
m  stately  buildmg  erected  by  him  on  a  manor 
he  purchased  after  he  became  a  judge.  He 
'waa  buried  in  the  church  of  Tilston,  the 
peiuh  in  which  the  manor  is  situate.  (Or^ 
nuroePs  Cheshire,) 

He  was  thrice  married.    His  first  wife 

ivaa  Margaret,  daughter  and  sole  heir  of 

George  Barlow,  of  Dronfield-Woodhouse 

hi  Derbyshire;  his  second  was  Elizabeth, 

daughter  and  coheir  of  Sir  Gliomas  Butler, 

t   of  ^ewsey  in  Lancashire ;  and  his  third 

waa  Alice,  daughter  and  coheir  of  Sir  Peter 

Warburton,  of  Arley  Hall.  By  the  first  only 

;  he  had  issue.    His  son  John  cued  in  infancv, 

•  and  his  onlv  surviving  daughter,  Elizabeth, 

.  inherited  sll  his  rich  possessions.    Bv  her 

meniM^ with  Sir  Thomas  Stanley,  of  Wever 

and  Alderley,  she  is  the  ancestress  of  the 

preeent  Lora  Stanley  of  Alderley. 


WARD 


70* 


WASBVBTOV,  PsTEB,  was  a  direct  de- 
scendant from  the  same  family  as  the  above. 
It  originated  from  one  of  five  brothers  who 
came  over  vdth  the  Conqueror,  and  who 
were  all  largely  rewarded.  The  township 
of  Warburton  in  Cheshire  was  acquired  by 
a  youneer  sou,  one  of  whose  descendants, 
Peter,  first  assumed  its  name  in  the  reign 
of  Edward  H.,  and  it  has  been  since  borne 
by  his  posterity.  The  seat  of  Arley  Hall 
in  the  same  county  was  built  in  the  time  of 
Henry  VII.,  and  thenceforward  became  the 
residence  of  the  family. 

The  second  Peter  Warburton,  in  legal 
biography,  was  the  grandson  of  Peter  tbe 
purchaser  of  HefTerston  Grange,  who  was 
the  third  son  of  Sir  Peter  Warburton,  of 
Arley,  knight.  He  was  bom  in  1588,  and 
acquired  the  rudiments  of  the  law  in  Staple 
Inn,  of  which  he  was  a  member  in  1618, 
probably  completing  his  studies  at  Lin- 
coln's Inn,  where  several  of  his  family  had 
previously  been  educated. 

The  first  account  of  him  is  that  he  was 
appointed  by  the  Long  Parliament  in  Maroh 
1647  one  of  the  judges  in  Wales,  and  that 
John  Bradshaw  and  he  were  joined  together 
on  the  Chester  Circuit.  His  next  advance 
was  on  June  1,  1649,  when  he  was  raised 
to  the  bench  at  Westminster  as  justice  of 
the  Common  Pleas  ( IVhitdocke,  240,  405, 
407),  in  which  character  he  was  one  of  the 
commissioners  for  the  trial  of  John  Lilbum 
in  October  following,  but  he  does  not  seem 
to  have  taken  any  active  part  in  it.  At  a 
later  period,  apparently  aoout  June  1655, 
he  was  removea  to  the  Upper  Bench,  but 
the  date  is  not  precisely  given.  lie  is 
mentioned  as  sitting  in  that  court  in  Style's 
and  Siderfin's  Reports,  and  on  the  trial  in 
1657  of  Miles  Sindereome  for  attempting 
to  murder  the  ptotector.  {State  Trials^  iv. 
1269,  V.  841.)  His  name  does  not  appear 
in  Siderfin's  Reports  after  Easter  Term 
1659,  and,  though  ho  did  not  die  till  Fe- 
bruary 26,  1666,  his  name  is  not  among 
the  judges  who  were  named  by  the  Rump 
Parliament  in  January  1660,  nor  among  the 
Serjeants  re-made  by  Charles  II.  He  was 
buried  at  Fetcham  in  Surrey.  {OrmerodCs 
Cheshire^  ii.  93  j  Family  hif, ;  NichoUe 
Lit,  Anecdotes,  v.  529.) 

WABD,  William,  was  an  officer  of  the 
Exchequer,  and  in  1  Henry  V.,  1413,  was 
appointed  to  audit  the  accounts  of  the  re- 
ceivers, &c.,  of  the  duchy  of  Cornwall. 
(Devon* s  Issue  JRoUj  333.)  In  the  first  year 
of  the  following  reign  he  was  constituted 
king's  remembrancer ;  and  on  May  26, 1426, 
4  Henry  VL,  he  became  a  baron  of  that 
court  (CaL  Rot.  Pat.  269,  273)  ;  but  how 
long  he  retained  his  seat  on  the  bench  does 
not  appear. 

WABD,  Edward,  is  described  by  Noble 
(Granger,  ii.  181)  as  a  native  of  Northamp- 
tonshire ;  and  LuttreU  (yr.  271')  «a.^^  S^cAi^. 


704 


WABD 


WABENNE 


in  1G97  he  purchased  an  estate  in  that  I  nence,  and  the  funilj  is  now  icpmailiri 


countj  of  200(V.  a  year.  He  was  called  to 
the  bar  by  the  Inner  Temple  in  1670,  and 
soon  got  into  good  practice.  The  tendency 
of  his  political  opmions  may  be  inferred 
from  his  being  engaged  by  Lord  Russell  to 
arg^e  points  of  law  on  his  trial  in  1683. 
He  had  married  in  1676  Elizabeth,  the 
third  daughter  of  Mr.  Thomas  Papillon,  of 
Acrise  in  Kent,  a  merchant  of  London, 
who  was  afterwards  a  candidate  for  the 
office  of  sheriff  of  that  city  in  the  famous 
contest  that  took  place  in  1683.  He  brought 
an  action  against  Sir  William  Pritchaid, 
the  lord  nuiyor,  for  a  false  return,  and  the 
lord  nuiyor  m  his  turn  brought  an  action 
against  Mr.  Papillon  for  a  mfuicious  arrest 
Mr.  Ward  was  one  of  the  counsel  employed 
to  defend  his  father-in-law,  and  being  ob- 
noxious to  Sir  George  Jeffreys,  before  whom 
it  was  tried,  not  only  on  account  of  his 
politics,  but  of  his  known  connection  with 
the  defendant,  the  chief  justice  took  the 
opportunity  of  attempting  to  browbeat  hiuL 
Wnile  maxing  a  very  temperate  statement, 
and  endeavouring  to  show  that  there  was 
probable  cause  for  the  arrest,  Jeffreys  rudely 
mterrupted  him,  telling  him  that  he  did 
not  unaerstand  the  question  at  all,  but  that 
he  launched  out  in  an  ocean  of  discourse 
that  was  wholly  wide  of  the  mark,  and 
desired  him  not  'to  make  excursions  ad 
capt€mdum  poptiluniy  for  he  would  suffer 
none  of  his  enamels  nor  his  garnitures.' 
On  Mr.  Ward's  attemptinc^  to  explain,  Jef- 
freys repeated  his  remarks  so  insultingly 
that  the  people  hissed.  This  of  course 
made  the  chief  justice  more  irate,  but  at 
length  he  was  obliged  to  succumb,  silenced 
by  the  respectful  fimmess  of  Mr.  Ward, 


by  G.  Ward  Hunt,  Esq.,  the  deacendaDi  of 
Jane,  the  chief  baron's  eldest  dauriiter,  nd 
member  for  North  Northamptonuiire.  (£r 
fVi/.  T.  PapOUmj  Etq.,  of  CrawhunL) 

WAEB,  RiCHABD  DS,  who  was  elected 
abbot  of  Westminster,  Decembn  15, 12SB, 
was  placed  at  the  head  of  the  commiaui 
of  justices  itinerant  into  the  three  northai 
counties  in  6  Edward  L,  1278 ;  and  in  tkt 
year  he  was  sent  on  an  embassy  to  Job 
Duke  of  Brabant,  to  negotiate  a  munaft 
between  that  prince's  eldest  son  and  Ma^ 
garet,  the  king's  daughter.  His  name  doH 
not  appear  on  any  future  iter. 

He  presided  nearly  twenty-fire  jmb^ 

during  which  he  procured  many  imonod- 

ties  for  the  abbey,  and  adorned  it  with  ^ 

mosaic  payement  before  the  high  altar,  ^ 

rich  nuiterials  of  which  he  brought  fioa 

Home.    Besides  the   employments  dbon 

mentioned,  he  was  engaged  in  1261  in  n 

embassy  to  France,  and  m  1281  wis  trah 

surer  of  the  Exchequer,  in  which  office  be 

died  on  December  2,   1283,  this  epitaph 

bemg  placed  oyer  his  tomb : — 

Abbas  Richardus  de  Ware,  qui  reqmetot 
Hie,  portat  lapides,  qaos  hnc  portarit  ab  Uibe, 

(MontuUam,  i.  273 ;  Madax,  iL  87.) 

WABEVVS,  William  de  (Easl  Wa- 

BENNE  andEABL  OF  Subret).    TlieNif- 

man  family  of  Warenne  was  ennobled  kog 

before  the  conquest  of  England,  beniB; 

the  name  of  St  Martin  before  the  euito 

of  Warenne  was    conferred  upon  tJien. 

William  de  Warenne  was  distantiy  rel^ 

to  the  Conqueror,  his  aunt  Gunnora  hsria^ 

been  that  prince's  great-grandmother.  Ha 

connection  was  further  cemented  hj  tii 

subsequent  marriage   with   Gundreda,oDe 

and  by  a  confirmatory  sentence  from  Ser-  '  of  the  daughters  of  King  William  and  3b- 

jeant  Maynard.     (State  Trials,  ix.  589,  x.    tilda.    An  attempt  has  lately  been  mut 


336 ;  Topog,  and  Geneal  iii.  35,  611.) 
In  1087  Ward  was  elected  a  bencher  of 


to  proye  that  she   was  the  danghterof 
Matilda  by  a  former  marriage  with  Go^ 


his  inn,  and  at  the  Reyolution  he  modestly  .  bodo,  an  ayou6  of  St.  Bertin,  at  St  Guff 
declined  a  judgeship  that  was  offered  to  |  (ArdueoL  Joum,  iii.  1,  26)  ;  but  the  hr- 
him.    But  on  March  30, 1093,  he  accepted  '      *^''~-  --  '-"-       -^    — ^-^--x__.i 
the  office  of  attorney-general ;  and  on  June 


8, 1695,  he  was  appointed  chief  baron  of 
the  Exchequer,  and  Kui^rhted.  In  this  office 
he  remained  during  King  ^^^lliam's  life, 
and  nearly  all  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne. 
For  a  brief  interval  of  three  weeks  in  May 
1700  he  held  the  Great  Seal  as  one  of  the 
commisfdoners.  (Chrendon8Dian/,iL27S; 
LvUreU,  i.  522 ;  1  Lord  Raymond,  57, 566.) 
He  seems  to  have  been  an  honest  and  in- 
telligent judge,  with  sufficient  legal  know- 
ledge and  discretion ;  but  his  name  is  not 
distinguished  by  any  prominence  of  cha- 
racter.   He  died  at  his  house  in  Essex 


Street  on  July  16,  1714,  a  fortnight  before 

his  royal  mistress,  and  was  buried  at  Stoke 

Doyle  in  the  county  of  Rutland.    By  his  ^  ^ 

We  he  had  twQ\yQ  eVAtesn.  Tw^  c^  hia  I  ^  oyerooming  the  rsbaUkB 

MD8  became  lKwy«n  ol  cnfunitoili^  «b&.\''S«£a  ^  'QsB^Aiid  «ii4  Noi 


pothesis  is  fully  and  satisfactorily  oro^ 
turned  by  an  able  paper  in  the  ^  Axchsolopi' 
(xxxii.  108). 

He  was  entrusted  with  a  commaiid  it 
the  battle  of  Hastings,  and  greatly  eootd- 
buted  to  its  successiul  result.  In  mnri 
the  layish  Conqueror  conferred  upon  Ua 
lordships  and  landa  in  almost  eveir  part  of 
the  kingdom,  his  share  of  the  spoil  amoot- 
ing  to  298  manors.  He  built  cutkstf 
Relate  in  Surrey^  Castle  Acre  in  Xoifiift, 
Conisburgh  in  Yorkshire,  and  Lemi  is 
Sussex,  at  the  latter  of  which  he  fixed  Iv  I 
residence.  1 

When  the  king  left  EngUmd  in  1099  hi     J 
and  Richard  Pita-Gilbert  were  vg^ 
chief  justiciariea  of  the  kingdri* 
goyemment  was  prindpally  i^ 


WARENNE 

diBgraced  their  victory  by  cruelly  ordering 
the  right  feet  of  their  prisoners  to  be  am- 
Butated — a  barbaroos  practice  for  which 
they  had  the  example  of  the  king  in  some 
of  his  Norman  wars. 

On  the  death  of  the  Conqueror,  William 
de  Warenne  assisted  his  second  son,  Wil- 
Ham,  to  mount  the  throne,  and  was  in 
such  favour  with  that  monarch  that  he  was 
created  Earl  of  Surrey  at  his  coronation. 
He  did  not  long  survive  this  honour,  dving 
in  the  following  June.  The  two  earldoms 
devolved  on  his  eldest  son  William,  whose 
aon,  William,  dying  in  1148  without  male 
issue,  that  of  Surrey  passed  with  his 
daughter  Isabel  to  her  husband,  Hameline 
Plantagenet,  and  ultimately,  through  sis- 
ters, first  to  the  Fitz-Alans,  and  after- 
wards to  the  Howards,  Dukes  of  Norfolk, 
in  which  title  it  is  now  merged.  {Baronage^ 
L  73;  HorsfiM s  LeiDeSj  i.  116;  Turner^ 
Idngard,  &c.) 

WABEKHS,  Reginald  de,  was  grandson 
of  the  above  William,  and  was  one  of  the 
eons  of  the  second  William,  who  succeeded 
to  both  earldoms,  by  his  wife  Elizabeth, 
daughter  of  Hugh  the  Great,  Earl  of  Ver- 
mandois,  and  widow  of  Kobert  Earl  of 
Mellent. 

He  was  appointed  by  the  convention  be- 
tween King  Stephen  and  Henry  Duke  of 
Normandv  to  have  the  custody  of  the 
castles  of  Bellencumbre  and  Mortimer  in 
Normandy.  Under  Henry  11.  he  became 
an  attendant  at  the  court,  and  his  name  ap- 
pears as  the  first  of  the  witnesses  to  a  con- 
cord at  the  Exchequer  soon  after  Richard 
de  Luci  was  made  sole  chief  justiciary. 
{Madox,  i.  215.)  He  naturally  took  the 
part  of  the  king  in  the  contest  with  Becket ; 
Dut  his  devotion  to  the  cause  was  somewhat 
too  violent,  if  it  be  true  that  he  threatened 
to  cut  off  the  archbishop's  head  when  he 
landed  in  England.  But  although  he  joined 
Gkrvase  de  Comhill,  the  sheriff  of  Kent,  in 
appearing  on  the  shore  of  Sandwich  on 
that  occasion,  the  intervention  of  John  of 
Oxford  prevented  any  mischief. 

From  the  14th  to  the  23rd  Henry  H., 
1168-1177,  he  was  regularly  employed  as 
a  justice  itinerant,  his  pleas  appearing  in 
twenty-one  counties.  (i&r(f.i.  123-149.)  He 
was  also  sheriff  of  Sussex  for  seven  years, 
ending  23  Henry  U. 

By  nis  marriage  with  Alice,  the  daughter 
and  heir  of  Robert  de  Wirmgay,  in  Nor- 
folk, he  became  possessed  of  that  barony. 
He  died  before  31  Henry  11.,  leaving  a  son, 
the  next-mentioned  William.  (JDidgdale's 
"Baron,  L  83 ;  Lord  Lyttelton,  i.  542,  ii.  583.) 

WABEKHE,   Willi Aic  de,  the  son  of 
I  the  above  Reginald  de  Warenne.  like  his 
,  fttfaer,  pursued  the  profession  of  the  law, 
■  iod  in  o  Richard  L,  1193-4,  was  a  justice 
itiiierant  in  the  counties  of  Essex  and  Hert- 
ford.    (Jdadox,  ii.  20.)    From  7  Richard 


WARENNE 


705 


to  1  John,  1195-1200,  his  name  frequently 
appears  among  the  justiciers  of  the  Curia 
Regis  at  Westminster,  before  whom  tines 
were  levied.     {Hunter's  Preface.) 

In  the  next  year  he  was  appointed  jus- 
tice of  the  Jews,  and  the  rolls  contain  va- 
rious mandates  to  him  and  his  fellows  in 
that  capacity  till  the  ninth  year  of  that 
reign,  1207-^.  His  death  must  have  oc- 
curred shortly  afterwards,  as  in  11  John  his 
daughter  Beatrice  fined  in  three  thousand 
one  hundred  marks,  to  be  paid  in  four 
years,  for  having  his  lands.  {MadoXy  i. 
490.)  He  founded  the  priory  of  Wirmgay, 
and  gave  sixty  acres  of  land  to  the  canons 
of  Southwark. 

She  was  the  daughter  of  his  first  wife, 
Beatrice,  and  at  the  time  of  his  death  was 
the  widow  of  Doun  Bardolf,  and  afterwards 
became  the  wife  of  Hubert  de  Burgh,  Earl 
of  Kent. 

By  his  second  wife,  Milicent,  widow  of 
Richard  Muntfichet,  he  left  no  family. 
(Baronage f  i.  83  ;  Monad,  vi.  591.) 

WABEKKE,  John  de,  or  FLAHTAOE- 
HET  TEabl  WABSENand  EarlopSurrey), 
was  tne  grandson  of  the  third  Earl  Willianj, 
who  left  a  daughter  Isabel,  whose  son, 
named  William,  succeeded  to  the  earldoms 
and  married  Maud,  sister  and  one  of  the 
coheirs  of  Anselm  Mareschall,  Earl  of  Pem- 
broke, and  widow  of  Hugh  Bigot,  Earl  of 
Norfolk.  They  were  the  parents  of  this 
Earl  John. 

At  the  time  of  his  father*s  death,  in  1240, 
he  was  a  minor  {Excerpt,  e  Rot  Fin.  i.  3.*<H, 
447),  but  attained  his  full  age  before  124s, 
when  he  sat  with  the  rest  of  the  earls  in 
the  parliament  held  in  London. 

The  only  time  he  acted  as  a  justice  iti- 
nerant was  in  12(30,  when  he  headed  the 
commission  into  Somersetshire,  Dorsetshire, 
and  Devonshire. 

In  the  contests  between  the  king  and  the 
barons  he  sided  with  his  sovereign,  but  is 
stated  to  have  fled  from  the  battle  of  Lewes. 
He  redeemed  his  character,  however,  at 
Evesham,  where  the  barons  were  defeated. 
During  the  rest  of  this  reign  little  worthy 
of  note  is  recorded  of  him,  except  the  vio- 
lent attack  he  made  in  Westmmster  Hall 
on  Alan  de  Zouche  and  his  son,  occasioned 
by  some  contest  between  them  relative  to 
the  title  to  certain  land,  in  which  he  killed 
the  former  and  wounded  the  latter,  and  for 
which  he  was  compelled  to  make  satisfac- 
tion, and  was  fined  ten  thousand  marks, 
part  of  which  he  was  afterwards  pardoned 
m  the  next  reign. 

He  lived  during  thirty-two  years  under 
King  Edward,  and  signalised  himself  on 
various  occasions  against  the  Welsh  and 
Scotch,  by  the  latter  of  whom,  after  seve- 
ral successful  campaigns,  he  was  eventually 
defeated  in  25  Eaward  1. ;  but  peace  be- 
tween the  two  countnft^  ^%&  ^^^iO^ax^^  ^'^ 


706 


WARHAM 


next  year.  Not  only  was  he  a  loyal  sun- 
porter  of  his  sovereign's  rights,  but  a  bold 
assertor  of  his  own.  When  he  was  asked 
by  the  judffesi  under  the  recent  statute  en- 
acted at  Gloucester,  called  Quo  Warranto, 
by  what  title  he  held  his  lands,  ha  drew 
his  sword,  and  said, '  This  is  my  warranty  1 
My  ancestors  coming  into  this  land  with 
William  the  Bastard  did  obtain  their  lands 
by  the  sword,  and  by  it  I  am  resolved  to 
defend  them.'  Another  time,  when  Ques- 
tioned as  to  the  authority  under  which  he 
claimed  free  warren  in  Wurth  and  other 
lands  in  Sussex,  he  pleaded  that  all  his  an- 
cestors had  adhered  to  the  Kings  of  Eng- 
land ;  that  when  Normandy  was  lost,  where 
they  were  earls,  they  also  lost  their  lands 
there,  because  theywould  not  join  the  King 
of  France  against  King  John ;  that  in  com- 
pensation the^  had  grants  of  other  lands 
in  England,  with  the  priyilege  of  free  war- 
ren over  them,  in  regard  of  their  surname 
de  Warenne ;  and  his  plea  was  allowed. 

So  highly  were  his  services  valued  by  the 
king  that  on  his  death  on  September  27, 
13(M,  82  Edward  I.,  a  royal  precept  was 
directed  to  the  bishops  and  abbots  to  recom- 
mend prayers  for  his  soul,  and  indulgences 
were  granted  to  those  who  joined  in  them, 
lie  was  buried  in  the  abbey  of  Lewes. 

He  married  Alice,  daughter  of  Hu^h  le 
Brun,  Earl  of  March,  by  Isabel,  the  widow 
of  King  John,  and  consequently  half-sister 
to  Henry  HI.  By  her  he  had,  besides  two 
daughters,  a  son,  William,  who  died  in  his 
father's  lifetime,  leaving  a  son,  named  John, 
who  succeeded  to  the  title.  On  John's 
death,  without  issue,  in  1347,  his  sister  Alice, 
the  wife  of  Edmund  Earl  of  Arundel,  be- 
came his  heir,  and  the  title  still  survives  in 
Iier  descendant,  the  present  Duke  of  Norfolk. 
{Baronage,  i.  73-81 ;  Nicolas.) 

WAKHAM,  WiLLiAK  (AjtcnBiSHOP  of 
Canterbitby),  was  bom  at  Walsanger  in 
the  parish  of  Okely  in  Hampshire,  the  resi- 
dence of  his  father,  Robert  Warham,  whose 
family  had  been  long  seated  there.  His 
education  was  commenced  at  William  of 
Wykeham's  school  at  Winchester,  and  con- 
tinued at  New  College,  Oxford,  of  which  he 
became  fellow  in  1475.  He  took  the  degree 
of  doctor  in  both  laws,  and  left  his  acade- 
mical retirement  to  enter  into  a  more  active 
career  in  1488,  having  previously  been  ad- 
mitted into  holy  orders,  and  received  from 
his  college  the  living  of  Horewood  Magna, 
in  the  diocese  of  Lincoln. 

Entering  as  an  advocate  in  the  Court  of 
Arches,  he  distinguished  himself  in  such  a 
manner  as  to  be  selected  by  Henry  VII.,  in 
July  1493,  to  go  on  an  embassy  with  Sir 
Edward  Poynings  to  the  court  of  Archduke 
Philip,  the  real  object  of  the  mission  being 

to  obtain  the  surrender  of  Perkin  Warbeck,  

who  bad  tsken  T%i^  m  EUnders.    Al-   the  appointoiQiit  of  legit" 
thougli  they  ^aWedi  vu  ^«a  Ti^<(i^A«.^CkT^^^\^ls^4  ^^e  bim  a  better 


WARHAM 

is  evident  that  the  king  was  not  ^ssaiisfied 
with  Warham's  conduct,  mnoe  he  wis  td- 
vanced  on  the  ISth  of  the  following  Fe- 
bruary to  the  mastership  of  tiie  Rd&,  an 
office  which  he  hel4  for  eight  yean^  DioiBf 
this  period  he  was  frequently  engaged  in 
diplomatic  servicee,  and  in  his  dencd  cbs' 
racter  was  instituted  to  the  living  of  Bidej 
in  Hertfordshire  in  I486,  and  prafieind,aB 
April  28  in  the  next  year,  mm  the  jr- 
centorship  of  Wells,  to  which  he  had  no 
appointed  on  November  2,  1498^  to  ik 
archdeaconry  of  Huntingdon. 

He  was  elected  to  tae  aee  of  Looiai 
in  October  1601,  and  resogned  the  offincf 
master  of  the  Rolls  on  Febniaiy  1,  lUH 
On  August  II  he  was  appointed  keeps  cf 
the  Great  Seal,  and  waa  raised  to  the  p 
macy  in  November  1503.  In  Januaiy  Im 
the  king  chanffed  his  title  of  keeper  for 
the  more  dignified  one  of  lord  chaneeUorof 
England,  which  he  retained  dnzing  thent 
of  uie  reign^  taking  a  prominent  part  ia  tke 
administration  of  the  kingdom.  {Bjf^Tj 
xiL  644,  666,  608,  xiii.  IS^l,  27, 9a) 

In  1606  the  archbishop  wai^  elected  cha- 
cellor  of  his  university,  and  his  preeidaff 
only  terminated  with  his  life,  a  period  of 
twenty-six  years,  during  which  he  ihond 
his  love  for  his  alma  mater  by  nvt 
benefactions,  in  return  for  whidi  he  m 
regarded  with  a  feeling  approa^iif  to 
veneration. 

Standing  hiffh  as  Warham  did  is  & 
favour  of  the  father,  he  was  natoiallyR- 
tained  in  his  elevated  poet  of  chsnoelkr 
when  Henry  VIII.  succeeded  to  tiie  thnee; 
but  it  was  not  long  ere  he  lost  the  tnei- 
dency  which  he  had  hitherto  poeseandis  the 
royal  councils.  Wolsej,  with  no  hi^ 
omce  than  that  of  idmoner,  was  gnW|T 
acquiring  an  influence  over  the  kii^*ff  iohi 
which  enabled  him  at  length  to  attaiitke 
highest  position  in  the  state;  andHein', 
not  well  pleased  perhaps  wtth  the  eiB^ 
scruples  which  the  archDishop  had  lun 
a^fainst  his  proposed  maniaffs  with  CtA»- 
rme  of  Arrajgon,  was  probaUy  awue  M 
though  in  his  character  of  pninaie  hef^ 
formed  the  ceremony,  he  did  not  heink 
approve  it.  He  contmued,  however,  to  hw 
the  Great  Seal  for  the  first  six  yeenai* 
half  of  the  reign,  although  his  palpihlf  i^ 
creasing  power  and  the  purposeamfigBiia 
offered  to  him  by  the  new  £ftvoiirite^  op^ 
cially  since  the  acquisition  of  the  iio- 
bishopric  of  York  and  the  caidimkhi^^ 
several  times  induced  him  to  tender  kiR- 
signation.  Having  been  obliged  to  iw** 
strate  vnth  Wolsey  for  causing  hie  oost* 
be  carried  before  him  in  the  proriMif 
Canterbury,  contrary  to  establish^' 
the  wily  cardinal  seemin^y  tohr 
forthwith  took  steps  to  obtav 


I 


WABHAM 

puted  right.  This  at  once  decided  Warham, 
who  two  months  after,  on  December  22, 
1515.  retired  from  his  office  of  chancellor, 
iprhicn  was  immediately  ffiven  to  his  rivid. 
The  pride  and  insolence  of  the  cardinal  were 
ezhimted  against  the  archbishop  on  many 
subsequent  occasions,  and  he  even  went  so 
far  M  to  take  offence  at  his  subscribing  him- 
self '  your  Brother  of  Canterbury.'  War- 
ham  bore  these  insults  with  calmness  while 
they  affected  himself  alone,  although  during 
Wolsey's  power  his  ecclesiastical  dignity 
was  reduced  to  a  mere  shadow ;  but  when 
hiB  clergy  were  interfered  with  and  his 
aichiepiscopal  authority  invaded,  by  the 
erection  of  a  le^tine  court  and  the  arbi- 
trary judgments  pronounced  there,  Warham 
made  a  representation  to  the  king,  who,  de- 
claring his  ignorance,  charged  him  to  convey 
to  the  cardinal  the  royal  pleasure  that  these 
things  should  be  amended.  However  an- 
nojring  such  a  command  must  have  been 
when  delivered  b^  such  a  messenger,  it  was 
followed  by  a  still  more  bitter  reprimand 
Ifom  the  kin^  himself,  which  compelled  the 
ambitious  pnest  to  exercise  ^^reater  caution. 
On  Wouey's  disgrace  m  1529,  some 
writers  say  ^at  Warnam  declined  the  ofier 
of  his  former  office  of  lord  chancellor,  while 
others  assert  that  the  kinsr  had  determined 
that  no  churchman  should  hold  the  Great 
Seal.  Indeed,  the  archbishop  must  have 
beeoi  then  too  old  to  desire  sucn  an  addition 
to  his  responsibilities  in  times  so  dangerous. 
Attached  as  he  was  to  the  ancient  system, 
and  a  supporter  of  the  papal  authonty,  he 
must  have  looked  with  an  anxious  eye  on 
the  king's  proceedings ;  and  it  may  be  readily 
OOQoeived  now  gratmg  it  must  have  been  to 
Ilia  feelings  when  he  was  compelled  in  con- 
vocation to  pass  a  ^^rant  with  a  preamble 
abknowledging  the  kmg  '  to  be  the  protector 
and^  under  God,  the  only  supreme  head  of 
the  Church  and  clergy  of  rlufj^land.'  His 
eahaequent  private  protest  agamst  any  sta- 
tute tnat  derogatea  from  the  authority  of 
the  pope  shows  how  fortunate  it  was  for 
liim  that  the  kind's  supremacnr  was  not  re- 
oogniaed  by  parliament  till  auer  his  death. 
Illiat  event  occurred  on  August  23, 1532,  at 
BL  Stephen's,  near  Canterbuxr^  in  the  house 
of  his  relative.  Archdeacon  Warham.  His 
lemains  were  deposited  in  a  chapel  built  bv 
luinself  near  the  martyrdom  in  his  cathedral 
I£s  liberality  during  his  Ufe  was  evidenced 
Yij  his  poverty  at  his  death,  when,  though 
lie  had  nlled  the  profitable  office  of  chan- 
cellor for  thirteen  years,  and  had  enjoyed 
the  primacy  for  twenty-eighty  he  left  barely 
!  sufficient  to  satisfy  his  creditors.  On  the 
\  ttproach  of  his  decease  he  is  said  to  have 
.  aaked  his  steward  how  much  money  re- 
^J  mained  in  his  hands^  and,  on  being  told 
that  he  had  but  thirtv  pounds,  to  have 
i  cheerfully  answered  'that  was  enough  to 
laat  till  he  got  to  heaven.' 


WARNEVILLE 


707 


His  zeal  for  the  Church  made  him  too 
ffreat  a  persecutor  of  those  who  differed 
from  him  to  leave  his  character  quite  free 
from  blame.  To  the  same  cause  is  to  be 
attributed  his  unavailing  prohibition  of  Tyn- 
dal's  Bible ;  and  his  tendency  to  superstition 
may  be  seen  in  his  too  easy  credence  in  the 
pretended  miracles  of  Elizabeth  Barton,  the 
Holy  Maid  of  Kent  But,  notwithstanding 
these  drawbacks,  it  is  impossible  not  to  ad- 
mire a  man  who  in  other  respects  passed 
through  his  public  career  with  so  much 
credit,  and  who,  as  an  ecclesiastic,  has  so 
manv  claims  on  our  respect. 

Tne  principal  descriptions  of  the  private 
life  of  the  archbishop  are  derivea  from 
Erasmus  {Epist,  138  \  JEcdesiaties),  of  whom 
he  was  one  of  the  earliest  English  patrons, 
contributing  towards  his  expenses  when  he 
came  to  England  in  1509,  and  supporting 
him  wholly  here  in  the  following  year. 
(Aihen.  Oxan.  ii  738 ;  Oodtoin,  133,  190 ; 
ie  Neve ;  Ht^P^ ;  Lmgardj  &c.) 

WABDIE  (JPsior  OF  LooHES).  The  only 
mention  made  of  *  Magister  Guarinus,'  prior 
of  Loches  in  Touraine,  is  that  his  authen- 
tication appears  to  a  royal  charter  to  the 
monastexy  of  Bonport,  dated  at  Bellum 
Castrum  de  Rupe,  on  February  28,  1198, 
9  Richard  I.,  with  the  words  '  tunc  agentis 
vicem  Cancellarii'  added  to  his  name. 
{M(ma8t,  vi.  1110;  Neiutria  Pia,  897.)  He 
probablv  died  soon  after,  as  Peter  de  Rupibus 
is  callea  prior  of  Loches  in  a  charter  aated 
July  30, 1199, 1  John.   (Eot,  Chart.  10, 34.) 

WAELEE^  INGELABD  DB,  was  of  the  cle- 
rical profession,  and  was  procurator  for  the 
archdeacon  of  Worcester  m  the  parliament 
of  35  Edward  L  (22o<.  PtirL  i.  190,341.)  Sir 
T.  D.  Hardy  has  introduced  him  as  keeper  of 
the  Great  Seal  on  May  11, 1310,  3  Edward 
U.,  because  on  the  resignation  of  the  chan- 
cellor on  that  day  the  King  delivered  it  to 
him  to  be  kept  in  the  wardrobe.  He  was 
then  keeper  of  that  department,  in  which, 
during  any  vacancy,  the  Seal  was  ordinarily 
deposited  merely  for  safe  custodv.  It  so 
remained,  on  this  occasion,  only  till  the  next 
day,  when  it  was  delivered  to  certain  clerks 
of  the  ChanceiT,  to  perform  the  duties,  and 
afterwards  re-deposited  there.  Ingelfurd  de 
Warlee  continued  keeper  of  the  wardrobe 
till  the  eighth  year  ot  that  reiffn.  In  10 
Edward  IL,  on  December  29, 1316,  he  was 
appointed  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer,  and 
he  so  continued  till  his  death,  whicn  oc- 
curred in  June  1318.  There  is  an  entry  in 
the  wardrobe  accounts,  that  'two  nieces 
of  Lucca  doth 'were  kid  upon  his  oody, 
buried  in  the  church  of  St.  Martin's-le- 
Grand.    {Archaologia,  xxvi.  340.) 

WASVSYILLE,  Ralph  db.  Koffer  de 
Wendover  (ii.  370)  states  that  Ralph  de 
Wameville,  sacrist  of  Rouen  and  trea- 
surer of  York,  was  constituted  chancellor 
of  England  in  the  year  117S  \  and  Matthn^^^ 


708 


WARWICK 


Paris  repeats  the  account  in  the  same 
words ;  but  neither  of  them  says  whom  he 
succeeded  in  the  office,  nor  how  long  he 
retained  it.  Le  Neve  (319)  inserts  him 
among  the  treasurers  of  York  on  the  au- 
thority of  a  similar  passage  in  Matthew  of 
Westminster,  and  places  Richard  Pudsey 
next  in  the  list,  on  whom  he  says  the  trea- 
Burership  was  conferred  by  the  king  in  1189. 
Ralph  ae  Diceto  (667)  is  the  only  author 
who  makes  any  addition  to  this  announce- 
ment. He  describes  Ralph  de  Wameville 
as  not  altering  in  his  advancement  the 
simple  coui-se  of  living  which  he  had 
adopted  in  his  private  life,  and  adds  that 
he  committed  his  duties  in  the  Curia  Regis 
to  Walter  de  Constantiis,  a  canon  of  Rouen. 

There  are  two  charters  in  the '  Monasticon* 
(vi.  1007, 1106)  bearing  his  attestation  as 
chancellor,  both  dated  at  '  Juliam  Bonam ' 
(Lillebonne),  but  with  nothing  to  indicate 
the  year  in  which  they  were  granted.  It 
seems  clear  that  he  held  the  seals  till  the 
appointment  of  Geoffrey  Plantagenet,  the 
kmg's  illegitimate  son,  m  1181.  He  after^ 
wards  became  Archbishop  of  Lisieuz. 
(jRohert  de  Monte.) 

WASWICK,  Earl  op.    See  J.  de  Ples- 

BITIS. 

WATH,  Michael  de,  was  of  a  Yorkshire 
family,  and  in  16  Edward  IL,  1322,  was  a 
surety  for  one  of  the  adherents  of  the  Earl 
of  Lancaster.  He  is  then  described  as 
*  clericus,'  and  two  years  afterwards  is 
named  in  a  commission  to  assist  the  Arch- 
bishop of  York  in  removing  foreign  priests 
in  the  East  Riding  of  that  county.  In  June 
1332,  6  Edward  III.,  he  was  one  of  the 
tallagera  there  {K  Foedera,  ii.  674,  840), 
and  was  probably  a  clerk  in  the  Chancery, 
which  was  often  held  at  York ;  for  he  re- 
ceived the  appointment  of  master  of  the 
Rolls  on  January  20,  1334,  and  was  sworn 
in  at  the  abbey  of  St.  Mary  at  York. 

He  held  this  office  little  more  than  three 
years,  surrendering  it  on  April  28,  1337. 
it  is  remarkable  that  during  that  time  he 
never  held  the  Great  Seal  as  the  substitute 
of  the  chancellor,  as  was  then  the  custom 
with  masters  of  the  Rolls.  But  he  was 
subsequently  appointed  to  that  duty  in 
conjunction  with  two  associates,  at  the  end 
of  the  year  1339 ;  and  several  entries  prove 
that  he  continued  to  act  as  one  of  the  clerks 
of  the  Chancery  in  1338  and  1340.  (Eot, 
Pari  ii.  112.) 

In  the  latter  vear  he  was  one  of  the  suf- 
ferers on  the  ting's  angrv  return  from 
France,  and,  with  some  of  his  brother  offi- 
cers, was  cast  into  prison  for  maladminis- 
tration in  his  department.  John  de  Strat- 
ford, Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  remon- 
strating against  his  imprisonment  as  a 
clergyman,  procured  his  release;  but  he 
does  not  again  ai^peat  'm  eoTvn^txon  with 


WATSON 

of  the  commissioners  to  enquire  as  to  some 
complaints  of  the  inhabitants  of  Frismerk 
in  'i  orkshire  as  late  as  1347.  (AnffL  Sac. 
i.  20 ;  Barnes's  Edward  IIL  212,  21*7 ;  RoL 
Pari  ii.  187.) 

WATflAKB,  Alajc  de,  is  called  by  Mat- 
thew Paris  '  clericoa  regis.'  He  was  raised 
to  the  bench  about  1246,  30  Henry  lU. 
and  sat  there  till  his  death  in  Ni»Tember 
or  December  1257,  up  to  which  f<»isf7 
month  there  are  entries  of  payments  {cs 
writs  of  assize  to  be  taken  llefore  bim. 
His  name  is  often  writtenWaasand.  (Dug- 
dale's  Orig.  43;  ExcerpL  e  Hal.  Fk.  ii. 
6-219 ;  Abb,  Placit  126.) 

WATSON,  William  Heitrt,  was  bom  iX 
Bamborough  in  1796,  and  when  only  fifteai 
years  old  became  a  soldier,  being  the  9sa 
of  Captain  John  Watson  of  the  76th  foot 
upon  whose  early  death  the  Duke  ot  Y(^ 
gave  his  son  a  commission  in  the  1st  potiI 
dragoons  in  1811.  Haised  the  next  year  to 
a  lieutenancy,  he  exchanged  into  the  Och 
dragoons,  and  shared  in  the  glories  of  tli^ 
Peninsular  war,  and  in  the  crowning  vic- 
tory of  Waterloo.  His  march  into  Parif 
with  the  allied  army  very  shortly  precedeil 
his  retirement  from  the  service,  as  the  peace 
which  followed  promised  no  active  ogX' 
pation. 

He  then  determined  to  adopt  the  legs! 
profession,  and,  entering  Lincoln's  Inn  in 
1817,  he  pursued  the  studv  so  diligcntk 
that  he  soon  made  himself  competent  to 
commence  business  as  a  special  pleader, 
lie  continued  in  this  labonous  bnmch  of 
practice  for  a  great  number  of  yean  witb 
continually  increasing  success,  Ull  at  l&3t 
in  1832  £e  felt  it  necessary  both  for  hi^ 
health  and  the  prospect  of  advancement  to 
be  called  to  the  bar.  During  the  intenral 
he  published  two  books,  one  '  On  Arfcatn- 
tion '  in  1825,  and  the  other  on  *  The  Offic* 
and  Duties  of  Sheriff*  in  1827,  the  excel- 
lence and  usefulness  of  which  have  bees 
proved  by  their  being  frequently  reprinted. 
Both  on  the  Northern  Circuit,  which  he 
joined,  and  in  London,  his  previous i«pota- 
tion  secured  to  him  full  employment^  vhidi 
increased  so  much  that  in  184^  he  felt  jus- 
tified in  accepting  a  silk  gown.  As  a  leMer 
he  was  most  successful  bj  his  hearty  usi 
forcible  style  of  address ;  and  by  his  fiiendlr 
disposition  and  cordial  bonhomie  be  vtf 
most  popular  among  his  companicmf  ob 
the  circmt. 

In  the  meantime  he  had  entered  prlii- 
ment  in  1841,  and  sat  for  Kinaale  till  1847, 
and  afterwards  in  1854  for  Hull,  and  ccai- 
tinned  its  member  till  he  was  raised  to  the 
bench.  That  event  did  not  occur  till  Norem- 
ber  1856,  when  he  was  constituted  a  bana 
of  the  Exchequer.  His  judicial  cnieer  m 
not  of  long  duration.  On  the  spring  circoit 
of  1860  he  had  opened  the  commi^on  at 


the  Chancery,  t\\o\\g\\  \i<i  \a  \i«ctt\^\  ^^  Qw^^^^'^'^^^'sja.  March:  12,  and  had  just  cm- 


WAUTON 

eluded  his  charge  to  the  grand  jury,  when 
he   was  seized  with    apoplexy,  and  yery 
shortly  after  breathed  his  last. 

He  married  first  a  sister  of  Sir  William 
Armstrong,  the  inventor  of  the  new  artil- 
lery ;  and  secondly  Mary,  the  daughter  of 
Anthony  Capron,  Esq.  (who  afterwards 
took  the  name  of  Hollist),  of  Lodsworth, 
near  Petworth,  in  Sussex. 

WAXTTOV,  John  ds,  by  his  marriage 
"with  Alice,  the  sister  and  heir  of  Odo  ae 
Dammartin,  became  possessed  of  lands  in 
the  counties  of  Surrey,  Norfolk,  and  Suf- 
folk. By  a  mandate  in  1  Henry  IH.  for 
the  restoration  of  his  estates,  it  would  ap- 
pear that  he  had  been  an  adherent  to  the 
iNirons  in  the  last  years  of  King  John,  and 
so  had  lost  them.  His  name  ought  scarcely 
to  be  included  in  the  list  of  justices  itine- 
rant ;  for  although,  in  9  Henry  HI.,  1225, 
he  was  one  of  tnose  at  first  appointed  for 
Surrey,  another  was  put  in  his  place,  as 
he  was  not  able  to  oe  present.  He  died 
about  September  1230.  (Rot.  Clam.  i. 
324,  ii.  37,  76,  83  j  Excerpt,  e  Rot.  Fin.  i. 
202,  227,  266.) 

WAUTOH,  Simon  de  (Bishop  op  Nob- 
wich),  was  bom  at  Wauton,  or  Walton 
Dey  yille,  in  Warwickshire.  He  was  brought 
up  to  the  clerical  profession,  to  which,  ac- 
cording to  the  fashion  of  the  times,  he  united 
the  study  of  the  law.  In  7  John  he  was 
the  king's  clerk  or  chaplain,  and  had  a 
ffraot  of  the  church  of  St.  Andrew  in  Hast- 
iD^^s,  and  in  the  two  following  years  re- 
ceived letters  of  presentation  to  the  churches 
of  Slapton  and  Colered.  (Rot.  Pat.  61, 
68,76.) 

In  30  Henry  HI.,  1246,  he  was  justice 
itinerant  into  the  northern  counties,  and 

rerformed  the  same  duty  again  in  1249  and 
260  in  other  parts  of  England.    He  was 
raised  to  the  judicial  bench  in  1247,  the 
fine  Rolls  containing  en  tries  of  payments  for 
iiflsizes  to  be  taken  before  him  of  that  date, 
'which  are  regularly  continued  till  May 
1257,  just  before  he  was  elected  to  the 
bishopric  of  Norwich  ;  and  he  received  the 
acknowledgment  of  fines  till  about  the  same 
period.  (Excerpt.  eRoL  Fin.  ii.  passim ;  Ahh. 
TlncU.  127, 132,  143;  Dugdale\  Orig.  43.) 
In  his  circuits  of  1263  and  1266  he  stood 
at  the  head  of  his  commissions,  except  that 
an  abbot  was  placed  for  ornament  before 
him  in  the  kst.  On  April  13,  1267,  Robert 
de  Briwes  was  ordered  to  be  associated  with 
Simon  de  Wauton,  '  et  sociis  suis,  justi- 
dariis  de  Banco,'  from  which  it  may  be 
conjectured  that  he  was  then  at  the  head 
of  tne  court.     In  the  following  Aug^t  he 
yns  confirmed  Bishop  of  Norwich,  after 
^hicb  he  does  not  appear  to  have  acted  on 
the  legal  bench.   He  presided  over  that  see 
till  his  death,  on  January  2, 1266,  and  ob- 
tained the  pope's  permission  to  retain  all 
bia  ecdesiaatical  preferments  m  commendatn 


WAYNFLETE 


709 


for  four  years.  (Godmn,  431  j  Weever,  700 ; 
Le  Neoe^  209.) 

WATHTLETE,  WiLLiAJii  (Bishop  of 
Winchbster),  took  his  name  from  the 
market  town  in  Lincolnshire  so  called, 
where  he  was  bom.  His  father  was  Richard 
Patten  of  that  nlace,  and  his  mother  was 
Margery,  the  aaughter  of  Sir  William 
Brereton,  possessing  considerable  property 
in  Cheshire,  who  held  the  post  of  governor 
of  Caen  in  Normandy,  and  greatly  distiu- 
gxiished  himself  in  the  wars  with  France. 
That  he  bore  the  name  of  Barbour  also 
appears  from  a  formal  declaration  made  by 
Juliana  Churchstile,  that  she  was  the  heir 
of  the  bishop,  being  'sole  daughter  of 
Robert  Patten,  brother  and  heir  of  Richard 
Patten,  otherwise  called  Bai'bour  of  Wayn- 
fiete,  father  of  the  bishop.'  It  will  also  be 
presently  seen  that  the  bishop  himself  at 
first  used  the  name  of  Barbour. 

Richard  Patten,  besides  his  two  sons 
William  and  John  (who  became  dean  of 
ChichesterV  is  said  to  have  had  a  third, 
named  Ricnard,  who  settled  at  Boslow  in 
Derbyshire,  and  was  the  progenitor  of 
the  respectable  line  of  the  Patten  family, 
which,  removing  into  Lancashire,  is  now 
represented  by  John  Wilson-Patten,  Esq., 
of  Bank  Hall,  one  of  the  representatives  of 
that  county  in  parliament.  According  to 
his  pedigree,  the  family  is  as  old  as  the 
Conquest,  was  settled  in  Essex  in  1119,  re- 
moved to  Waynflete  in  Lincolnshire  in  the 
reign  of  Edward  III.,  and  the  prelate's 
father  was  the  third  in  succession  of  those 
who  lived  there.  But  Dr.  Chandler  gives 
several  reasons  for  doubting  whether  this 
Richard  was  a  brother  of  William  and 
John.  William  went  to  Wykeham's  school 
at  Winchester,  and  thence  proceeded  to 
Oxford,  but  to  what  college  there  is  un- 
certain. 

In  April  1420  WHiiam  Barhor  is  re- 
corded in  the  Lincoln  Registry  as  one  of 
the  unbeneficed  acolvtes ;  and  in  January  of 
the  following  year,  1420-1,  it  is  stated  tiiat 
*  William  Barhor  became  a  subdeacon  by 
the  style  of  WiOiam  Waynflete  of  Spald- 
ing.' In  the  following  March  he  was 
ordained  deacon  by  the  latter  name,  and 
in  January  1426  presbyter,  on  the  title  of 
the  house  of  Spaloing. 

It  was  not  long  hKdfore  he  attracted  the 
notice  of  Robert  Fitz-Hugh,  then  arch- 
deacon of  Northampton,  in  the  same  diocese, 
and  afterwards  Bishop  of  London ;  for  when 
that  learned  divine  was  appointed  to  go  on 
a  mission  to  Rome,  '  William  Waynflete 
in  legibus  bacallarius'  was  one  of  those 
designed  to  accompany  him ;  and  his  letter 
of  protection,  which  was  to  last  for  one 
year,  was  dated  July  16,  1429.  (Acts  Privy 
CouncUf  iii.  347.)  In  the  same  year  his 
talents  and  acquirements,  and  the  excel- 
lence of  his   cbttNi^l^t)  ^Ti^  Vvca.  •^'^ 


710 


WAYNFLETE 


appointment  of  master  of  Wjrkehtm's  school 
at  Winchester,  the  scene  of  his  early  edu- 
cation. Several  ecclesiastical  preferments 
have  been  appropriated  to  him  about  this 
time,  but  there  is  conaderable  doubt 
whether  he  held  any  of  them,  as  the  name 
of  Waynflete  was  not  of  uncommon  occiir- 
rence.  and  some  with  his  Christian  name 
are  clearly  shown  to  have  been  diH'erent 

Sersons.  It  is  certain,  however,  that  Car- 
inal  Beaufort  conferred  upon  him  the 
mastership  and  chantry  of  the  hospital  of 
St.  Mary  Magdalen,  about  a  mile  from 
Winchester.  He  was  in  possession  in  1438, 
and  continued  to  enjoy  it  till  he  himself 
was  raised  to  the  see. 

Wlien  Waynflete  had  filled  the  office  of 
roaster  of  Winchester  School  for  about 
eleven  years,  and  had  acquired  a  high  re- 
putation for  the  diligence,  judgment,  and 
success  with  which  he  had  performed  his 
duties.  King  Henry,  who  had  begun  to 
found  Eton  College  on  the  same  model, 
paid  a  visit  to  Winchester  for  the  purpose 
of  personally  ins{>ectin^  the  system.  So 
satisfied  was  he  with  his  examination  that 
he  resolved  to  give  the  mastership  of  his 
new  school  to  Waynflete,  who  accordingly 
removed  there  in  1442  with  five  of  uie 
fellows  and  thirty-five  of  the  scholars  of 
Winchester  to  commence  the  seminary.  On 
December  21,  1443,  he  was  promoted  to  be 
provost  of  Eton. 

The  king  regarded  him  with  such  especial 
favour  that  on  the  very  day  of  his  uncle 
Cardinal  Beaufort's  death,  on  April  11, 
1447,  he  wrote  to  the  church  at  Winchester 
to  proceed  immediately  to  a  new  election, 
with  an  urgent  recommendation  of  his 
'  right  trusty  and  well-beloved  clerc  and 
concelloure,  Maister  William  Waynflete,' 
for  their  bishop ;  and  on  the  same  day  he 
p^ranted  Waynflete  the  custody  of  the  tem- 
poralities of  the  see.  The  pope's  confirma- 
tion was  given  without  delay,  and  the  king 
himself  honoiu^d  the  new  prelate's  en- 
thronisation  with  his  presence  on  August 
30,  1448. 

In  the  contentions  which  then  agitated 
England  the  bishop  had  a  difficult  course 
to  steer;  but  while  his  devotion  to  his 
sovereign,  to  whom  he  was  bound  by  the 
ties  of  loyalty  and  gratitude,  was  always 
firmly  exhibited  when  his  counsels  were 
called  for,  in  allaying  the  storms  created  by 
the  insurrection  of  Jack  Cade,  the  loss  of 
the  French  acquisitions,  and  the  first  rising 
of  Richard  Duke  of  York,  his  mildness  and 
prudent  conduct  secured  him  from  that 
inveterate  enmity  which  followed  others 
who  took  so  decided  a  part.  Even  after 
the  first  battle  of  St.  Albans  in  1455,  and 
the  assumption  of  power  by  the  duke, 
apparently  coniiTmea  as  it  was  hj  the 
^Towing  imbecVWty  oi  t\\^  V\\v^,^^  WVvo.^  I, 
reinaint'd  uumoVesied  •,  mi^  ^Vwi,  oiii  ^^ 


WAYNFLETE 

king's  recovery,  the  energetic  condoct  of 
the  queen  had  for  a  time  restored  the  royil 
ascendency,  he  was  selected  for  the  thai 
onerous  post  of  chancellor  in  the  place  d 
Bourchier,  ArchbishoD  of  Canterbory,  wko« 
ministry  was  deemea  of  too  tameeerring  t 
character.  The  Great  Seal  was  placed  in 
his  hands  on  October  11, 1456,  ana  he  hc^ 
it  for  nearly  four  years — a  diaastroos  period, 
during  which,  though  he  at  first  efle^ 
a  temporary  accommodation  between  the 
contending  parties,  the  country  was  dis- 
tracted with  the  horrors  of  ciTil  war,  and 
it  was  soon  evident  that  the  contest  could 
not  be  terminated  but  by  the  absolute  nuo 
of  one  or  the  other.  Disheartened  at  htit 
by  the  reverses  of  the  field,  in  peipetul 
anxiety  by  the  doubtful  event  of  each  8Q^ 
cessive  conflict,  probably  feeling  that  lui 
services  were  misapplied  in  so  bloo^  i 
controversy,  and  perhaps  dissenting  nm 
the  violent  measures  of  his  party,  he  n- 
solved  to  retire.  Aocordlngfy  on  Jd1j7, 
1460,  three  days  before  the  battle  d 
Northampton,  so  fatal  to  the  LanoistiiiBa, 
he  surrendered  the  Seal  of  the  kingdom  in 
the  king's  tent  on  the  field.  The  same  dtT 
a  full  pardon  was  granted  to  him  for  it 
ofiences  which  he  might  have  previoudT 
committed;  and  the  jnooa  king,  thoofi 
defeated  and  a  prisoner,  cleared  him  fm 
any  imputation  of  disloyalty  or  lokewam- 
ness  in  an  affecting  letter  which  he  wrote 
to  the  pope  in  the  following  November, 
bearing  *  ample  testimony  to  the  Uihop*! 
innocence,  his  meritorioua  services,  and  mt- 
blemished  reputation.* 

During  this  anxious  period  his  friend  Sr 
John  Fastolf  died,  leaving  him  one  of  lui 
executors.  The  '  Paston  Correstpandenoe* 
(i.  102)  contains  his  inatructioos  as  to  tke 
execution  of  the  will^  which  show  that  h 
was  a  man  of  business,  and  of  a  pious  ud 
liberal  mind. 

That  Kin^  Edwaid  duly  appieciated  tk 
merits  of  Bishop  Waynflete,  and  did  aet 
treat  him  vnth  any  Jiarahnees  in  cobm- 
quence  of  his  attachment  to  the  hXi» 
Henry,  appears  from  the  bishop's  h&t$ 
appointed  a  trier  of  petitions  in  the  M 
parliament  of  thatreira  (Hot  PearL  ▼.461), 
and  from  the  just  decision  made  bytb 
king  in  that  parliament  against  the  data 
which  had  been  raised  hy  some  of  tk 
bishop's  tenants  in  Hampahue.  These  aeti 
were  followed  by  others  of  an  equally  g^ 
nerous  character,  tOl  at  last,  in  ue  eagkd 
year  of  the  reign,  Februaiy  1, 1469,  a  ftiH 
pardon  was  granted  to  him,  with  an  intro- 
duction declaring  his  manifest  good  dme^ 
and  that  the  king  had  ■iitnittH  him  isto 
his  special  fieivour.  Whatever  part  the 
bishop  took  in  the  following  year,  when 
King  Henry  was  for  a  white  restored,  rf 
which  we  have  no  clear  account,  it  urtf 
\Q.N^^y^^Vj  Edwaid  on  legainii^  tbe 


WAYNFLETE 

throne,  and  a  new  pardon  released  the 
bishop  from  any  fears  ne  might  have  enter- 
tained. Durinff  the  remainder  of  Edward's 
zeign,  though  he  received  frequent  tokens 
of  the  king's  ffoodwill  towaras  hiim  he 
continued  to  enjoy  the  regard  of  the  Lan- 
castrian party,  owing  both  to  the  mild  Tir- 
tues  of  nis  character,  and  the  absence  of 
intemperance  on  the  one  side  and  of  ser- 
Tili^^  on  the  other. 

Shortly  after  the  usurpation  of  Richard 
m.,  and  before  the  muraer  of  the  princes 
in  the  Tower,  Bishop  Waynflete  was  obliged 
to  assist  in  the  reception  of  the  king  at  Ox- 
ford, where  the  royal  condescension  and 
ffenerosity  seem  to  have  made  a  fi&vourable 
unpression.  It  mav  be  presumed,  however, 
that  the  bishop,  altnouffn  the  college  which 
lie  founded  was  benefited  by  some  royal 

Sants,  was  no  friend  to  the  character  of 
e  usuiper,  and  that  he  rejoiced  greatJy  at 
the  triumph  of  the  Lancastrians  in  the 
aooession  of  their  representative.  Heniy 
VIL  at  once  showed  his  regard  to  the  pre- 
late by  confimung  all  the  gifts  which  bad 
been  conferred  on  his  college. 

Of  that  coUese,  where,  after  an  interval 
of  more  than  three  centuries,  his  memory 
•till  survives  and  his  virtues  still  are  cele- 
brated, it  would  be  out  of  place  to  attempt 
more  than  a  short  account  So  early  was 
"Waynflete  impressed  with  the  low  state  of 
learning  at  the  universities,  that  he  had  no 
aooner  peen  invested  with  the  mitre  than 
he  commenced  his  exertions  to  improve 
the  condition  of  indigent  students.  He 
obtained  a  royal  licence  on  May  6,  1448, 
to  found  a  hall  at  Oxford  for  the  study  of 
divinity  and  philosophy;  and  he  lost  no 
time  in  procunug  adequate  premises  within 
the  dtv,  including  Bostar  Hall  and  Hare 
Hall,  which  he  united  under  the  name  of 
St.  Mary  Magdalen  Hall,  of  which  the  first 
president  received  possession  on  August  29 
in  the  same  year.  Msidee  this  officer,  the 
foundation  was  to  consist  of  fifty  poor 
scholars,  graduates,  with  a  power  to  aug- 
ment or  mminish  their  numbers,  and  they 
bad  the  right  to  use  a  common  seal.  The 
means  of  the  hall  were  afterwards  con- 
Mderablv  increased  by  several  royal  and 
private  benefactions.  With  these  the  bishop 
was  about  to  enlarge  the  site  of  his  esta- 
blishment, when  he  obtained  the  kinff*8 
consent  on  July  18,  1456,  to  convert  the 
hall  into  a  coUege.  For  this  purpose  he 
Boxchaeed  the  hospital  of  St  Jonn  the 
Mptist,  without  the  eastern  ^te  of  the 
oi^,  where  the  college  is  now  situate.  Its 
conversion  and  the  erection  of  the  new 
building  were  long  retarded  bv  the  public 
distractions ;  but  when  tranquimlr  was  re- 
atored  he  proceeded  diligently  in  his  work, 
xeceiving  numerous  donations  of  valuable 
endowments,  which  were  made  from  the 
xeepect  in  which  he  was  held,  and  the 


WEDDERBURN 


711 


high  admiration  which  his  pious  efibrts 
awakened. 

The  edifice  is  one  of  the  principal  orna- 
ments of  the  university,  and  is  a  lasting 
memorial  of  the  taste  as  well  as  the  munifi- 
cence of  the  founder,  who  spared  no  expense 
in  its  erection.  He  lived  to  see  the  whole 
completed,  and  to  find  that  the  statutes  he 
had  prepared  for  its  regulation  practiodly 
answered  the  purposes  he  contemplated. 

With  the  same  desire  of  encouraging 
learning  and  pietr  in  his  native  town,  he 
erected  there  a  school  and  chapel  of  hand- 
some construction,  which  he  also  dedicated 
to  St.  Mary  Magaalen,  with  a  liberal  en- 
dowment to  the  master. 

The  last  scene  of  the  venerable  prelate's 
useful  life  was  now  approaching,  and  he 
piously  prepared  for  its  termination.  His 
will  was  dated  April  27,  and  he  died  on 
August  11,  1486,  of  a  disease  which,  after 
a  me  of  uninterrupted  health,  suddenly  at- 
tacked him.  He  was  buried  at  Winchester 
in  a  magnificent  mausoleum  which  he  had 
provided  in  his  lifetime.  It  is  difficult  to 
speak  too  highly  of  his  character,  as  there 
is  scarcely  a  virtue  which  has  not  been  at- 
tributed to  him.  (Dr.  Chandler's  Life  of 
the  Bishop.) 

WEDDXBBUSV,  Alsxandjsb  (Lobd 
LouGHBOBOueH,  Eabl  of  Rossltn),  is 
another  example  of  a  political  chancellor, 
who,  although  he  was  gifted  with  neat 
talents,  and  possessed  many  accomplish- 
ments and  undoubted  eloquence,  failed  to 
ffain  the  respect  of  either  parhr  in  the  state, 
Decause  he  was  *  everything  by  turns,'  ana 
his  own  ihterests  and  advancement  seemed 
to  prompt  his  various  tergiversations.  Ac- 
cording to  the  common  custom  when  a  peer- 
age is  conferred,  the  descent  of  Alexander 
Wedderbum  is  traced  from  a  family  that 
held  lands  in  the  county  of  Berwick  at  the 
time  of  the  Conquest  Then  follow  a  suc- 
cession of  individuals  noticed  in  various 
ways  in  ScottLsh  history,  till  we  arrive  at 
his  father,  Peter  Lord  Chesterhall,  eminent 
in  the  law,  and  advanced  by  that  title  in 
1765  to  be  one  of  the  senators  of  the  college 
of  justice,  who  married  Janet,  the  daughter 
of  Colonel  Ogilvie. 

He  was  born  at  Edinburgh  on  February 
13, 1738,  and  commenced  his  education  at 
a  school  at  Dalkeith,  finishing  it  at  the 
university  of  Edinburgh,  through  which  he 
passed  with  great  distinction.  He  natu- 
rally selected  the  law  as  his  profession,  and 
applied  himself  so  successfully  to  the  study 
of  civil  law  and  municipal  jurisprudence 
that  he  was  admitted  a  meml)er  of  the  fa- 
culty of  advocates  in  June  1754,  bein^  then 
only  twenty-one.  Before  he  took  this  step 
he  had  shown  a  strong  inclination  to  the 
English  bar  by  enterinff  himself  at  the  Inner 
Temple  on  May  8, 1753,  and  keeping  his 
terms  there.    Ue  was,  however,  persuaded 


712 


WEDDERBURN 


as  bis 


to  try  his  fortune  at  the  Scottish  bar. 
father's  present  position  at  it,  and  still  more 
his  elevation  in  1765  to  the  Scottish  bench, 
seemed  to  promise  prosperous  results.    The 
early  death  of  the  new  lord  in  the  next  year 
would  have  dissipated  those  hopes,  had  not 
the  young  man  attained  a  certain  eminence 
among  his  collecigues  by  his  association  with 
the  literati  of  his  country,  and  by  his  con- 
nection with  the  general  assembly  of  the 
Church  of  Scotland.     He  had  been  long 
on  intimate  terms  with  Robertson,  Adam 
Smith,  and  particularly  with  David  Hume, 
whom  he  had  lately  successfully  defended 
against  an  attack  upon  him  in  the  general 
assembly.    In  that  arena,  too,  he  soon  after 
strenuously  oppo^d  a  censure  upon  Home 
for  his  tragedy  of  '  Douglas,'  and  upon  all 
persons,  lay  and  clerical,  who  attended  the 
theatre.    He  had  been  a  prominent  member 
of  the  Poker  Club,  and  of  its  successor  the 
Select  Society,  formed  for  the  discussion  of 
questions  of  history,  law,  and  ethics.     In 
tnat  society  he  had  the  honour  of  presiding 
on  its  first  meeting  in  May  1764,  number- 
ing among  his  associates,  oesides  the  four 
eminent  men  just  named,  Hugh  Blair,  Sir 
David  Dalrymple,  Drs.  Alexander  Munro 
and  John  Hope,  and  other  persons  famous 
in  the  law  and  the  Church.    He  had  taken 
a  leading  part  in  projectinof  the  first  ^  Edin- 
burgh Review,'  to  which  he  was  during  its 
short  existence  both  editor  and  contributor. 
With  the  prestige  arising  from  all  these 
causes,  Weaderbum  still  continued  at  the 
Scottish  bar  till  about  a  year  after  his 
father's  death,  when  his  connection  with  it 
was  wholly  terminated  by  an  incident  in 
the  court,  originating  in  a  premeditated 
insult  to  Mr.  Lockhart,  then  the  dean  of 
faculty,  or  chief  of  the  advocates. 

Ix>ckhart  was  so  notorious  for  treating 
the  junior  advocates  with  rudeness  and  in- 
sult that  four  of  them  agreed  together  that 
the  first  who  was  the  subject  of  his  vitupe- 
ration should  publicly  resent  it.  The  chance 
fell  upon  Wedderbum,  whom  in  an  argu- 
ment ne  called  a  '  presumptuous  boy;'  and 
Wedderbum  in  his  reply  was  not  wanting 
in  the  attack  that  had  been  planned.  Among 
other  passages,  he  said,  *  1  do  not  say  that 
the  learned  dean  is  capable  of  reastming^  but 
if  tears  would  have  answered  his  purpose,  I 
am  sure  tears  would  not  have  been  wanting.' 
On  Lockhart's  look  of  vengeance,  he  unwar- 
rantably added, '  I  care  little,  my  lords,  for 
what  may  be  said  or  done  by  a  man  who 
has  been  disgraced  in  his  person  and  dis- 
honoured in  his  bed,'  alluding  to  some  cir- 
i  umstances  in  the  dean's  private  life.  The 
lord  president  very  properly  stopped  him, 
imdsaid  that  *  this  was  language  unbecoming 
<in  advocate  and  a  pentleman,'  on  which  the 
ivnte  junior  exclaimed  that  *  his  lordship 
}iad  said  that  as  a  ^udce  which  he  could  not 
j list ify  as  a  gt^ntVeman.  T\ife m^\^wi\.  ^qnm\. 


WEDDERBURN 

at  once  called  upon  him  to  retract  and  apo- 
logise, on  pain  of  deprivation,  when  Wt;d- 
derbum  deliberately  took  off  his  gown, 
and,  laying  it  on  the  bar,  said, '  My  lords,! 
neither  retract  nor  apologise,  but  I  will  save 
you  the  trouble  of  deprivation  ;  there  is  idj 
gown,  and  I  will  never  wear  it  more : — tIt- 
tute  me  involvo.'  Then,  bowing  to  the 
judges,  he  quitted  the  court. 

He  immediately  left  Scotland,  to  whifh 
he  never  returned,  and  was  cdled  to  tk<; 
English  bar  four  months  afterwards,  on  No-  i 
vember  26,  1767.  During  the  first  month: 
after  his  arrival  in  London  he  applied  him- 
self, under  the  instruction  of  the  elder  Sh^ 
ridan  and  Macklin,  to  the  study  of  Englifh 
pronunciation,  vrith  such  effect  that  the 
peculiarities  of  the  Scottish  accent  were 
almost  entirely  eradicated.  Through  this 
theatrical  connection  he  obtained  the  esrlj 
business  he  had ;  but  among  his  Scotch 
friends  was  the  Earl  of  Bute,  who  had  le 
longed  to  the  '  Select  Society '  in  Edio- 
burgh,  and  under  his  patronage  he  became 
member  of  the  burghs  of  Ayr,  &c.,  in  the 
first  parliament  of  Geoi^  III.  In  allaaon 
to  his  histrionic  alliances  and  eenatonal 
eiforts,  Churchill  introduced  him  into  th« 
'  Rosciad,'  in  a-most  severe  passage,  insert<^ 
in  1703,  showing  that  even  at  that  etrlr 
period  those  unfortunate  characteristics  west 
visible  which  were  attributed  to  him 
throughout  his  career. 

Becoming  a  member  of  a  club  of  liteniy 
natives  of  Scotland  "which  met  at  tii 
British  coffee-house  in  Cockspur  Street,  to 
which  many  Englishmen  were  soon  ad- 
mitted, his  success  was  gradually  forwarded 
by  the  influence  of  his  associates.  Bat 
still  his  business  was  so  small  that  lawr^ 
were  astonished  at  his  boldness  in  acce^sj? 
a  silk  gown  soon  after  his  patron  Lead 
Bute  became  prime  minister.  He  reoeiTed 
a  patent  of  precedence  in  Hilary  Tera 
17(33.  He  now  selected  the  >orth«ii 
Circuit,  from  which  its  leader  Sir  Fletchc  / 
Norton  had  just  retired,  and  in  London  . 
attached  himself  to  the  Court  of  Chancer, 
where,  and  in  the  House  of  Lonls  upoa 
Scotch  appeals,  he  achieved  great  suoe«^ 
He  was  remarkable  for  the  clearness  ot  hif 
statements  and  for  the  subtilty  of  his  ax^rs-l 
ments,  and  he  particularly  shone  in  th« 
great  Douglas  cause,  his  speech  in  which)> 
was  universally  admired. 

In  the  House  of  Commons,  to  which  be 
was  returned  to  the  new  parliament  of  1768 
as  member  for  Richmond,  he  displayed 
similar  efficiency.  After  Lord  Bute's  re- 
tirement, Wedderbum,  from  being  one  of 
the  '  king's  friends,'  assumed  the  Ssandar 
of  a '  patriot,'  strenously  defending  WiDcB& 
and  taking  the  part  of  the  Americans.  For 
his  conduct  with  regard  to  the  foraier  he 
felt  himself  in  March  1769  obliged  to  vacate 
V\e  «i%t  for  Richmond,  whidi  had  becfl 


WEDDERBURN 

^ven  to  him  as  a  tory,  but  was  returned 
as  a  whiff  in  the  following  January  for 
Bishop's  Castle  in  Shropshire.    This  seat 
he  owed  to  the  gratitude  of  Lord  Clive  for 
bis  eloquent  and  earnest  defence  of  him, 
which  his  lordship  further  exhibited  by  a 
munificent  present  of  a  mansion  atMitcham. 
His  secession  from  the  court  party  was 
hailed  by  the  oppositionists  with  a  compli- 
mentary dinner,  and  his  subsequent  efforts 
on  that  side  were  rewarded  by  the  freedom 
of  the  city  of  London  and  the  plaudits  of 
Lord  Chatham.     Wedderbum  continued 
his  patriotic  exhibitions  during  the  first 
year  of  Lord  North's  ministry,  personally 
pitting  himself  against  that  nobleman,  and 
exposing  with  great  eloquence  and  power 
all  his  measures.     Towards  the  end,  how- 
ever, of  that  year  he  was  evidently  laying 
himself  out  for  a  junction  with  the  minister; 
and  to  the  infinite  disgust  of  all,  but  to  the 
surprise  of  few,  on  the  meeting  of  parlia- 
ment on  January  25, 1771,  he  was  gazetted 
as  solicitor-general,  bound  to  support  all 
he  had  so  recently  and  earnestly  resisted. 
Well  might  Junius  say  of  him,  'As  for 
Wedderbum,  there  is  something  about  him 
which  even  treachery  cannot  trust.'    Yet, 
notwithstanding  this  decided  opinion  and 
Tarious  similar  expressions  by  this  extra- 
ordinary writer  with  regard  to  Wedder- 
bum, there  were  some  who  attributed  to 
hiin  the  authorship  of  Junius*s  Letters,  a 
notion  which  could  have  no  foundation 
except  in  the  elegance  and  force  of  his 
style,  and  which  no  one  who  investigates 
the  subject  can  possibly  support.    Braving 
the  sneers  of  the  opposition  bench,  he  soon, 
by  his  admirable  tact  and  insinuating  elo- 

guence,  recovered  his  ascendency  in  the 
ouse. 
In  1774  he  pronounced  the  tremendous 
invective  against  Franklin  before  the  privy 
council,  which  increased  the  exasperation 
of  the  Americans,  and  assisted  in  stirring 
up  the  civil  war,  in  the  progress  of  which 
he  gave  the  most  unflinchmg  support  to  the 
ministers,  with  undaunted  n*ont  defending 
them  from  the  attacks  of  the  opposition. 
Upon  that  speech  and  its  consequences  the 
following  lines  were  produced : — 

Sarcastic  Sawney,  full  of  spite  and  hate. 
On  modest  Franklin  pour'a  his  venal  prate ; 
The  calm  philosopher,  without  reply 
Withdrew — and  gave  his  country  Uberty. 

But  he  could  not  yet  make  himself  happy 
in  his  position.  He  fancied  that  his  ser- 
vice»  were  insufficiently  appreciated,  and 
that  he  was  neglected  by  Lord  North ;  yet 
when  he  was  ofiered  the  chief  barony  of 
the  Exchequer  at  the  end  of  1777,  he 
refund  it  unless  it  was  accompanied  by  '  a 
plaCe^  in  the  legislature,'  and  talked  of 
taking  an  ' opportimity  of  extricating' 
himself  from  omce.  As  ministers  had  some 


WEDDERBURN 


713 


experience  of  his  dexterity  in  shifting  the 
scene,  means  were  taken  to  quiet  his  im- 
patience, and  in  the  following  June  he 
became  attorney-general.  He  occupied 
this  post  for  just  two  years,  and  on  June 
14,  1780,  his  longing  for  promotion  and 
peerage  was  gratified  by  the  appointment 
of  chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas  and 
by  being  created  Baron  Loughborough. 

During  the  whole  period  of  his  holding 
office  he  had  been  a  most  zealous  and 
eifective  supporter  of  the  ministerial  mea- 
sures, charmmg  the  house  by  his  sarcasm 
and  his  wit,  as  well  as  leading  it  by  the 
force  and  eloquence  of  his  advocacy.  Pro- 
fessionally he  continued  to  distinguish 
himself  by  his  industry  and  management. 
His  speech  on  the  prosecution  of  the 
Duchess  of  Kingston  is  an  admired  speci- 
men of  his  forensic  excellence,  remarkable 
for  clear  and  close  argument  and  lucid 
arrangement.  In  his  last  act  as  attorney- 
general  he  has  the  credit  of  being  the  first 
to  put  an  effectual  stop  to  the  No  Popery 
riots,  by  the  advice  he  gave  to  the  privy 
council  that  the  military  might  act  without 
regard  to  the  Riot  Act. 

His  first  public  appearance  after  his 
appointment  was  to  preside  in  the  next 
month  at  the  trials  of  the  rioters,  when  his 
charge  to  the  grand  jury,  while  it  displayed 
his  usual  eloquence,  is  blamed  as  being 
more  like  the  inflammatory  address  of  an 
advocate  than  the  calm  direction  of  a 
iudffe.  During  the  twelve  years  that  he 
neld  the  office  he  preserved  its  dignity  and 
acquired  a  well-deserved  reputation  for  his 
impartial  administration  of  justice,  as  well 
as  for  his  patience  and  courtesy  to  those 
who  practised  under  or  came  before  him. 
But  he  had  not  much  credit  as  a  lawyer, 
and  his  decisions  are  not  greatly  regarded. 
Not  content  with  the  arena  of  "V^^estminster 
Hall  and  the  circuits,  he  acted  as  chairman 
of  the  quarter  seesions  in  Yorkshire,  where 
he  hacf  property;  and  it  is  said  that  the 
Court  of  King's  Bench  maliciously  rejoiced 
when  it  had  occasion  to  overturn  his  de- 
cisions. 

But  his  aspirations  had  a  higher  aim 
than  the  presidency  of  his  court.  He  looked 
with  longinff  to  the  chancellor's  seat,  but 
despaired  of  it  while  Lord  Thurlow  was 
patronised  by  the  king.  Though  he  sup- 
ported Lord  North  during  the  tottering 
remainder  of  his  ministry,  it  was  principally 
by  his  silent  vote,  and  when  Lord  Rock- 
ingham came  in  he  could  not  expect 
to  be  advanced.  But  under  Lord  Snel- 
burne's  administration  he  renewed  his 
intrigues,  and  when  by  the  aid  of  his 
exertions  in  parliament  that  ministry  was 
forced  to  resign,  he  hoped  that  the  coalition 
which  followed,  and  which  he  had  the 
credit  of  advising,  would  give  him  his 
expected  reward.    He  was,  however,  dis- 


714 


WEDDERBURN 


appointed;  the  Seal  was  put  in  commis- 
Bion,  and  he  was  obliged  to  content  himself 
with  being  the  first  commissioner,  a  post 
which  he  filled  during  the  short  existence 
of   that  unpopular   administration,    from 
April  9  to  December  13, 1783.    When  the 
coalitionists  were    indignantly  dismissed, 
Lord  Loughborough  exerted  himself  stre- 
nuously in  aid  of  the  factious  proceedings  in 
the  lower  house,  till,  b^  the  dissolution  of 
the  parliament,  Mr.  Pitt  was  firmly  esti^ 
blished  as  prime  minister.    He  had  now 
become  a  whig  and  a  Foxite,  and  was  con- 
si(1ered  the  leader  of   the  party  in  the 
House  of  Lords.    For  the  next  five  years 
nothing  occurred  to  give  him  hopes  of  a 
chance,  but  with  the  illness  of  the  king  in 
1788  his  prospects  brightened  in  the  view 
of  the  regency.    His  first  most  unwise  and 
unconstitutional  advice  to  the  Prince  of 
Wales  was  that  the  government  should  at 
once  be  assumed  by  him  as  of  right;  but 
his  royal  highness  was  most  fortunately 
influenced  by  more  moderate  counsels,  and 
the  bill  was  allowed  to    proceed.  Lord 
l^u^hborough  and  his  party  vainly  endea- 
vounn^  to  mitigate  its  more  objectionable 
restrictions.    On  the    discovery  of   Lord 
Thurlow*s  double-dealing,  the  transfer  of 
the  Great  Seal  seemed  secure,  when  the 
king's  sudden  recovery  reduced  the  whigs 
and  their  politic  adherent  to  their  former 
unpromising  position*  Lord  Loughborough 
continued  from  this  time  to  act  steadny 
with  the  whig  party,  and  even  so  late  as 
February  1792  supported  Lord  Porchester*s 
motion  censuring  Mr.  Pitt  and  his  col- 
leagues for  their  conduct  with  regard  to 
Russia.   (Pari  Hist,  TKT±&QQ.)  On  Lord 
Thurlow's  dismissal  from  his  office  in  the 
following  June,  and  the  Seal  being  put 
again  in  commission,  his  lordship^s  hopes 
began  to  revive ;  and  advantage  being  taken 
of  a  breach  in  the  whig  ranks,  in  conse- 
quence of  Mr.  Fox*s  opinions  and  conduct 
in   reference  to    the  French   Revolution, 
negotiations  were  opened  by  the  ministers 
which  resulted  in  his  joining  the  seceders 
and  accepting  the  bauole  he  had  so  long 
ardently  desired.    He  became  lord  chan- 
cellor on  January  28,  1793,  and  kept  his 
seat  till  April  14,  1801,  a  month  after  the 
termination  of  Mr.  Pitt's  first  administra- 
tion. 

He  was  now  once  more  called  upon  ne- 
cessarily to  advocate  manv  measures  which 
he  had  before  opposed ;  but,  being  joined 
by  some  others  of  the  alarmist  party,  he 
boldly  performed  the  task,  notwithstanding 
the  vituperation  of  the  Foxites.  He  stimu- 
lated the  national  excitement  caused  by  the 
affidrs  in  France ;  supported,  if  he  did  not 
originate,  the  stringent  Iavts  that  were  en- 
acted ;  and  advised  those  prosecutions  for 
constructive  treaaoiii  ^^^inat  Hardy,  Home 
Tookei  and  ot\i«i%|  ^\i\<c^  -v^t^  i«^  v|^^m- 


WEDDEHBUBB 

nionsly  defeated.  During  the  ughtyeanof 
his  chancellordiip  he  kept  outwaraly  <m 
good  terms  vrith  Mr.  Pitt ;  but  towardi  the 
end  of  them  he  privately  intrisued  for  that 
minister's  dismisBal.  Althoogh  he  had  for- 
merly professed  himself  a  warm  friend  to 
Cathohc  Emancipation,  he  now  Becretlv 
and  artftilly  encouraffed  the  acroples  which 
the  king  entertained  with  regud  to  Ike 
coronation  oath,  hoping  that  he  should  tku 
certainly  secure  himfwlf  in  the  poesesrion  of 
his  office  in  the  event  of  a  ehange.  The 
change  took  place;  but  to  Lord  Loo^- 
borouffh's  infinite  chagrin  and  diarapomt- 
ment  ne  was  himself  superseded.  The  king 
was  too  well  aware  of  hia  preYiona  btriigiKi 
to  have  any  confidence  in  him,  and  wie  ^ 
to  have  the  opportunity  of  availing  hineelf 
of  the  services  of  Lord  EUdon,  as  an  advieer 
whom  he  esteemed  to  be  both  zealoni  asd 
honest. 

The  tenacity  to  ofifice  of  the  disended 
chancellor  was  indecently  exhibited  aftn 
his  dismissal  by  hia  attending  nnsommoecd 
the  meetings  of  the  cabinet,  until  Mr.  Ad- 
din^n  was  obliged  to  give  him  a  femtl 
notice  that  his  presence  was  not  reqiind. 
His  hope  of  restoration  appeared  fronkii 
constant  presence  at  court,  from  his  tikiif 
a  house  m  the  neighbourhood  of  Wiodior 
in  order  to  enjoy  frequent  aeceas  to  hii  ns- 
jesty,  and  also  from  following  the  nnl 
movements  to  Weymoutii.  But  it  aU 
availed  him  nothing;  the  king,  thoagh 
courteous  and  kind  to  his  fallen  miniita^ 
never  really  respected  him ;  and  when,  sAs 
four  years  of  these  fruitlees  attemptiydeith 
tennmated  his  career,  the  king's  real  opoioi 
of  him  is  said  to  have  been  expressed  bf  i 
very  strong  exclamation.  Lord  Lon^ 
borough  was  the  first  chancellor  who  Wk* 
fited  by  the  act  passed  in  178B^  by  whiek 
that  officer  became  entitled  to  an'aoaii^ 
of  4000/.  His  lordship  was  abo  solaeedW 
an  advance  in  the  peerage,  being  cnsn 
Earl  of  Roeslyn,  witn  a  special  remiiDdff 
to  the  heirs  male  of  bia  mster^the  wkb«<tf 
Sir  Henry  Erskine,  in  whose  favour  he  bid 
already  received  in  1796  a  new  patent  of  t^ 
barony  of  Loughborough. 

Whatever  opiniona  may  be  formed  of !)» 
political  conduct,  bia  indicia!  career  w 
free  from  objection.  Tnough  not  regaidfli 
as  very  deep  or  learned  in  hisprofeBflOf 
nor  having  the  credit  of  introdudng  tff 
improvements  in  the  practice  of  the  ooo^ 
he  bad  considerable  reputation  as  an  eij^ 
judge.  Bib  decrees  were  wdl  oonadm 
and  were  seldom  overtnmed;  they  VB* 
always  delivered  in  forcible  and  fkf^ 
language,  and  were  remarkable  for  the  yi^ 
spicuitj  of  the  argument  by  whidi  1 
enforced.  He  used  bis  eccieiir 
tronage  vrith  discrimination  ■ 
Once  when  he  pronounced  ' 
\>2&AU<MaQ  of  Losda,  wbid 


WEDDERBUBN 

taouB  clerj^yman  from  affluence  to  penury, 
be  immediately  walked  to  the  bar^  and,  aa- 
dieesing  the  unfortunate  man,  said,  '  As  a 
judge  I  have  decided  against  you:  your 
virtues  are  not  unknown  to  me :  may  I  beg 
your  acceptance  of  this  presentation  to  a 
vacant  livmg  which  I  happen  fortunately  to 
have  at  my  disposal  P '  It  was  worth  600/. 
a  year.  (B,  Montagu's  Bacon,  xvi.  ccliL 
note  e.^ 

His  Dearing  towards  the  bar  was  cour- 
teous and  gentlemanlike;  and  to  those 
members  of  it  who  assisted  the  profession 
by  their  learning,  but  who  failed  of  success 
in  practice,  he  was  a  kind  and  liberal  patron. 
To  the  suitors  he  was  a  favourite  judge,  for, 
while  they  admired  the  patience  v^th  which 
be  beard  their  cases,  and  the  clearness  of 
statement  by  which  he  proved  that  he  un- 
derstood all  the  circumstances  he  generally 
eontrived,  when  he  had  to  aedde  against 
any  suitor,  to  say  something  to  soften  his 
disappointment  and  to  soothe  his  feelings. 
His  only  contribution  to  le^  literature  was 
a  *  Treatise  on  English  Prisons,'  containing 
many  useful  suggestions  for  their  improve- 
xnenty  which  he  published  in  the  year  he 
became  chancellor. 

Though  his  lordship's  public  career  can- 
not be  regarded  with  more  honour  or  respect 
hy  the  present  ^neration  than  it  was  by 
ma  contemporaries,  yet  in  his  private  liie 
there  was  much  to  extenuate  his  failings. 
In  bis  family  he  yras  amiable  and  affec- 
tionate ;  to  his  friends,  and  he  had  many, 
lie  was  constant  and  true ;  and  to  his  oppo- 
nents, who  varied  with  his  political  changes, 
lie  bore  no  malice.  He  was  munificent  in 
Ilia  charities  at  the  French  Revolution. 
He  gave  Be  Barretin,  the  ex-chancellor,  a 
lioiue  to  live  in,  and  allowed  him  600/L  a 
jmx  till  the  peace  of  Amiens.  He  loved 
bterature  and  the  society  of  literary  men. 
Moouraging  and  awdsting  those  who  needed 
lidlp.  He  procured  the  pensions  that  Dr. 
Johnson  and  Shenstone  enjoved;  he  re- 
commended Gibbon  to  the  place  he  held 
under  government,  and  Maurice  to  a  post 
in  the  jBritish  Museum ;  and  he  overcame 
the  objection  made  by  the  benchers  of  Lin- 
coln's Inn  to  allow  Sir  James  Mackintosh 
to  deliver  bis  lectures  in  their  halL  In 
all  bis  manners  and  actions  he  was  a  com- 

Elete  contrast  to  Thurlow,  who,  though 
ating  his  rival,  was  candid  enough,  on 
hearing  of  his  death,  to  allow  that '  he  was 
m  gentleman.' 

The  earl  died  suddenly  at  his  house  at 
Baylis,  between  Slough  and  Salt  Hill,  on 
January  2,  1805.  Ins  remains  were  de- 
posited in  the  crypt  of  St  Paul's.  Though 
■Mined  twice,  he  left  no  issue.  His  first 
wife  was  Betty  Ann,  daughter  and  heir  of 
John  Dawson,  of  Morley  m  Yorkshire.  His 
•econd  wife  was  Charlotte,  daughter  of 
William,  first  Viscount  Courtenay.    His 


WELLES 


715 


titles  and  estates  devolved  upon  his  nephew,. 
Sir  James  St.  Clair  Erskine,  jBart.,  by  whose- 
grandson  they  are  now  enjoyed.  (Lives  hyi 
Totmsend,  Lord  CampbeU,  &c.) 

WELLETOBD,  Gkoffret  be,  was  a  clerk 
of  the  Chancery  in  86  Edward  I.  (ParL 
WriU,  i.  191.)  When  Walter  Re^mald,, 
Bishop  of  Worcester,  went  to  the  king  at. 
Berwick,  on  December  12, 1310,  4  Edward, 
n.,  the  Great  Seal  was  committed  to  Adam: 
de  Osgodby,  the  keeper  of  the  Rolls,  to  be 
kept  under  the  seals  of  Robert  de  Bardelby^ 
and  Geoflfirey  de  Welleford.  They  retained 
it  till  the  chancellor's  return,  a  week  after- 
wards. He  appears  again,  imder  similar 
circumstances,  on  December  1,  1319.  Th& 
last  record  of  his  acting  as  a  clerk  of  the 
Chancery  is  on  May  20, 1321,  when  he  was 
present  at  the  delivery  of  the  SeaL 

Of  his  ]f rivate  history  little  that  is  cer- 
tain remams,  and  it  is  doubtful  whether 
he  was  connected  with  the  family  of  the 
under-mentioned  Ralph  de  Welleford.  He 
had  a  grant,  in  6  Edward  H.,  of  a  messu- 
age in  the  parish  of  St.  Dunstan's,  near  the 
New  Temple,  at  an  annual  rent  of  forty 
shillings.     (Abb.  JRoL  Orig,  i.  193.) 

WELLSFOBD,  Ralph  be,  in  9  Richard 
and  1  John,  was  among  the  justiciers  be- 
fore whom  fines  were  levied  (Hunter's 
Preface)  \  and  in  3  John  he  was  one  of 
the  justicier  itinerant  into  Gloucestershire. 
(Bat.  CanceU.  42.) 

He  seems  to  have  got  into  disgrace  about 
6  John,  as  he  then  paid  ten  marks  and  a 
Norway  hawk  for  having  seisin  of  his 
lands,  of  which  he  had  been  disseised  by 
the  king's  precept,  for  taking  away  the 
com  '  de  terra  Veile,'  which  was  reserved 
for  the  king.  Geoffrey  Fitz-Peter,  Earl  of 
Essex,  also,  in  the  same  ^ear,  became  his 
surety  for  another  hawk,  m  which  he  was 
fined  for  taking  the  com  of  Dorsington 
contrary  to  the  king's  prohibition.  Both 
these  entries  are  in  Warwickshire,  where 
he  had  some  land  at  Sturton;  and  he  is 
mentioned  as  one  of  the  pledges  for  the 
fine  which  Alicia  Countess  of  Warwick 
agreed  to  pay  for  her  widowhood,  to 
the  extent  of*  200/L,  with  a  further  re- 
sponsibility, in  conjunction  with  Reginald 
Basset,  for  27/.  and  ten  palfreys.  (Bot, 
de  Finibus,  220,  269,  276-7:  Abb.  Placit. 
100.) 

WELLES,  WiLLiAK  DB,  held  either  part 
or  the  whole  of  a  knight's  fee  in  Grimsby 
in  Lincolnshire,  of  the  honor  of  Rich- 
mond. He  was  one  of  the  adherents  of 
the  barons  at  the  end  of  John's  reign,  and 
still  continued  so  at  the  commencement  of 
that  of  Henry  IH.,  for  his  land  was  then 

fiven  to  Fulco  de  Gyri.  Soon  afterwards, 
owever,  it  was  restored  to  him  on  return- 
ing to  obedience ;  and  in  6  Henry  III.  he 
was  employed  as  one  of  the  escheators 
of  his  county.    He  ^%a  u^xX  v^y^vd^^^  ^ 


16 


WELLS 


justice  itinerant  there  in  9  Henry  III. 
{Rot.  Clam.  i.  309-471,  ii.  77;  Mot.  deFxn. 
(y^S),  after  which  his  name  is  not  men- 
tioned till  his  death  in  June  1261,  45 
Henry  111.,  when  his  son  and  heir  Thomas 
(by  his  wife  Emma)  did  homage  for  the 
lands  he  held  of  the  king.  {Excerpt,  e  Rot, 
Fin.  ii.  363.)  His  descendants  were  sum- 
moned to  parliament  from  1299  till  1503, 
when  the  barony  fell  into  abeyance. 
{Raronage,  ii.  10  ;  Nicolas' 8  Synopsis.) 

WELLS,  Hugh  de  (Bishop  op  Lincoln), 
so  called  from  the  place  of  his  birth,  was  a 
brother  of  the  next-mentioned  Josceline  de 
AVells.  He  is  sometimes  corruptly  called 
Wallis.  The  Rot.  de  Oblatis  of  1  John 
shows  that  he  held  an  office  in  the  Camera 
llegis,  as  it  records  several  payments  made 
to  him  there.  In  the  next  year  he  and 
Hugh  de  Bobi  were  appointed  custodes  of 
the  see  of  Lincoln,  then  vacant.  {Rot, 
Chart.  99,  154.)  His  abilities  soon  at- 
tracted such  notice  that  in  5  John  he  was 
sent  into  Normandy  on  the  king's  service, 
a  good  and  secure  ship  being  ordered  for 
the  voyage.  {Rot.  de  Liberat.  71,  81.)  In 
this  mandate  he  is  styled  '  clericus  noster.* 
so  that  he  was  then  one  of  the  king's 
chaplains ;  and  in  April  of  the  same  year, 
1204,  he  was  preferred  to  the  dignity  of 
archdeacon  of  Wells.  Several  other  bene- 
fices were  afterwards  conferred  upon  him, 
nud  grants  were  made  to  him  of  the  manors 
of  Ceddra  and  Axebrige  in  Somersetshire, 
and  of  the  custody  of  the  lands  and  heirs 
of  Geoffrey  de  Evercrez  and  Richard  Cotel. 
(Le  Neve ;  Rot,  Chart,  127.)  Ultimately, 
on  December  12,  1209,  he  was  elevated  to 
the  see  of  Lincoln.  At  this  point  he  lost 
the  royal  favour,  by  disobeying  the  king's 
commands  to  obtain  confirmation  from  the 
Archbishop  of  Rouen.  Instead  of  doing 
this,  he  proceeded  to  Langton,  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  and  received  that  rite  from 
him,  whereupon  the  king  seized  the 
temporalities  of  the  bishopric,  and  detained 
them  for  five  years.  Roger  de  Wendover 
adds  to  this  that  he  was  at  that  time 
chancellor,  and  that  the  king  immediately 
removed  him  from  his  office,  and  delivered 
the  Great  Seal  to  Walter  de  Grey.  This 
relation,  however,  is  altogether  erroneous, 
because  W^alter  de  Grey  had  purchased  the 
chancellorship  in  October  1205,  held  it  at 
this  very  time,  and  continued  to  hold  it, 
with  one  short  interval,  till  July  1214. 
Matthew  Paris,  following  Roger  de  Wen- 
dover, also  calls  him  chancellor  when  he 
was  raised  to  the  episcopal  bench,-  and 
Dugdale,  Philipot,  and  Spelman  all  unite 
in  giving  him  that  title.  Dugdale  quotes 
as  his  authority  a  charter  of  6  John ;  but 
there  is  no  charter  which  so  distinguishes 
him.  There  are,  indeed,  many  charters  of 
that  year  whic\i  are  %vx\ifeci\\sfc^  '  \>«cu.  ^et 
manum  Hugb  de^eWn.  tttc\i\^.^^«via.*J 


WELLS 

but  this  merely  shows  that  he  was  lb? 
official  instrument  for  the  chancellor  of  the 
time ;  and  three  or  four  others  were  em- 
ployed in  similar  duty  at  the  same  period. 
On  the  roll  there  are  several  charters  tbt 
were  so  signed  by  him  and  John  de  Bru- 
cestre  jointly,  as  early  as  2  John ;  and  E^ 
separate  autnentication  of  charters  appear!; 
under  two  successive  chancellors,  Aiefa- 
bishop  Hubert  and  W^alter  de  Grey,  frcHE 
July,  5  John,  1203,  till  April,  10  John. 
1209.  This  long  period  of  nearly  fire 
years,  during  which  he  was  in  constant 
official  attendance  on  the  court,  accooDti 
for  the  mistake  of  the  historians ;  but  the 
antiquary  ought  to  have  known  that  no 
one  record  ever  describes  him  as  chancellor. 
Sir  T.  D.  Hardy  introduces  him  as  keep^of 
the  Seal  under  the  two  above-named  chao- 
cellors ;  but  he  seems  rather,  as  others  tla) 
who  performed  the  same  duty,  to  hare 
been  an  officer  of  the  Treasury  of  the  Ex- 
chequer, where  the  Seal  was  usiuilly  de- 
posited, or  a  clerk  of  the  Chancery,  to  whom 
the  formal  duty  of  affixing  it  on  these 
occasions  was  delegated. 

It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  in  6  Jobs  he 
was  one  of  the  justiciers  at  Worc««er 
before  whom  fines  were  levied,  deacribnl 
by  his  ecclesiastical  title  only,  whiri 
would  not  have  been  the  case  hoh.  be  been 
either  chancellor  or  Tice-chancellor.  So 
also  in  9  and  II  John,  in  the  latter  of 
which  years  he  is  styled  *  Lincolnis 
Electus.'^ 

To  avoid  the  king^s  fury,  the  bishop  had 
fled  from  England,  but  returned  with  hk 
brethren  after  the  removal  of  the  interdict 
Disgusted  with  the  tyranny  of  the  king,  h« 
joined  with  the  barons  who  resisted  it; 
and,  as  his  reward,  was  in  his  turn  excom- 
municated by  the  pope,  w^ho  now  suppoztod 
the  monarch  whom  he  had  forgiven.  He 
could  only  obtain  absolution  by  a  fine  d 
one  thousand  marks  to  the  pontiff,  sod  a 
bribe  of  one  hundred  to  the  legate.  He 
had  the  gratification  of  being  pieeentca 
the  glorious  day  of  Runnymede,  as  Wen- 
dover slyly  adds  '  tpMiOn  ex  parte  reffis.' 

After  the  accession  of  Henry  uL  he 
was  at  the  head  of  the  justices  itinerast 
for  the  counties  of  Lincoln,  Nottinghaic, 
and  Derby,  in  1219  and  1226.  In  1225  he 
was  employed  in  an  embassy  to  France  io 
conjunction  with  the  Bishop  of  London. 

Having  held  the  bishopric  for  neailyi 
quarter  of  a  century,  he  died  on  FebruiiT 
7,  1234.  Roger  de  Wendover  calk  him 
'omnium  virorum  religiosorum  inimicus,' 
meaning  only  that  he  was '  an  enemy  to  all 
monks.'  The  hospital  which  he  and  hu 
brother.  Bishop  Josceline,  built  at  WelU, 
and  his  legacy  of  five  thousand  marks  for 
pious  uses,  prove  that  the  words  do  Di>t 
admit  of  a  more  general  application.  He 
^^aNsKsw^Sxv  Vija  Qwn  cathedral.   (  Godfcn, 


WETXS 

2S8;  2t.de  Wendover,  iii.  228-302,  iv.  324 ; 
Triveltu,  181.) 

WELLS,  JOSCELINE  DB  (BlSHOF  OF  BaTH 

AND  Wblls),  brother  of  the  above  Hugh  de 
Wells,  was  bom  and  educated  at  WeUs, 
from  which  place,  as  was  common  among 
the  clergy,  he  took  his  name,  and  was  a 
canon  of  the  church  there.  By  a  liberate 
(97)  of  5  John.  1203-4,  it  appears  that  he 
had  been  one  ot  the  custodes  of  the  bishop- 
ric of  Lincoln  during  its  yacancy,  from 
which  it  may  be  inferred  that  he  held  some 
office  in  the  Exchequer  or  the  Camera 
Regis.  His  name  is  also  recorded  among 
the  justiciers  before  whom  fines  were 
leTied  at  Westminster,  and  also  in  the 
countiT  when  the  king  was  present.  Sir 
T.  D.  Hardy  introduces  him  at  this  time  as 
keeper  of  tne  Great  Seal,  on  the  authority 
of  a  charter  of  6  John  given  under  his 
hand;  but  it  may  be  questioned  whether 
this  fact  is  of  itself  sufficient  evidence  to 
warrant  such  a  presumption,  as  others  were 
performing  the  same  duty  at  the  same  time, 
and  as  neither  in  the  charter  nor  in  the 
oontempory  fines  is  he  distinguished  by 
that  designation.  His  name  appears  in 
the  same  manner  to  numerous  other  char- 
ters between  February  and  September 
1205,  during  the  greatest  part  of  which 
period  Hubert,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
was  chancellor,  for  whom,  as  an  officer  of 
the  Chancery  or  the  Exchequer,  he  pro- 
bably took  his  turn  of  duty  in  affixing  the 
Seal. 

About  this  period  he  had  various  bene- 
fices conferred  upon  him  {Hat,  Chart,  119, 
142,  161);  and  on  May  28,  1206,  he  was 
consecrated  Bishop  of  "bath  and  Wells,  or 
lather  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Glastonbury, 
for  it  was  not  till  his  time  that  the  contest 
with  the  monks  of  Glastonbury  was  ter- 
minated, and  the  union  of  Bath  and  Wells 
permanently  established.  He,  with  the 
other  bishops,  was  compelled  to  absent 
himself  from  England  during  the  five  years 
which  the  interdict  lasted,  baton  its  removal 
he  returned  to  bis  see.  For  the  remainder 
of  John's  reign  he  attached  himself  to  his 
novereign,  and  was  present  at  the  si^ature 
of  Magna  Charta.  Under  Henry  111.  he 
continued  to  enjoy  the  royal  favour.  His 
signature  to  many  documents  shows  his 
TC^gular  attendance  on  the  court,  and  his 
name  appears  at  the  head  of  the  justices 
itinerant  for  the  counties  of  Cornwall, 
Somerset,  Devonshire,  and  Dorset,  in  the 
third  year  of  that  reign.  {Rot,  Claus,  i. 
887.) 

He  presided  over  his  see  for  thirty-seven 

years,  during  which  he  not  only  united 

,  with  his  brotner,  Hugh,  Bishop  of  Lincoln, 

'  in  foanding  the  hospital  of  St  John  in  his 

native  place,  but  rebuilt  the  beautiful  ca- 

'tiiedral  there,  and  made  several    liberal 

endowments  to  his  church.    He  died  on 


WESTBURY 


717 


November  9,  1242,  and  was  buried  in  the 
choir  of  his  cathedral  under  a  tomb  he  had 
erected  during  his  life,  which  was  orna- 
mented with  a  flat  brazen  figure  of  him- 
self, being  one  of  the  earliest  recorded 
instances  of  that  species  of  memorial  in 
England.  (Oodwin,371:  ArchaoL  Jour- 
nal, i.  199.) 

WELLS.  Simon  db.  See  S.  Fitz-Robert. 

WEL80V,  William  (Bishop  op  Thkt- 
FORD),  is  known  also  by  the  names  of  Gal- 
sagus  and  De  Bellofago,  with  their  varieties 
of  Beaufo  and  Belfagus.  He  was  of  a  noble 
house,  and  was  chaplain  to  William  I. 
He  held  the  chancellorship  probablv  be- 
tween 1083-1085,  after  Maurice,  there 
is  a  charter  (Monast,  iii.  216)  confirming 
the  grant  of  Yvo  Tjdlboys  of  the  manor  of 
Spalding  to  St.  Nicholas  of  Angiers,  to 
which  the  attestation  of  'William  the 
Chancellor'  is  appended,  which  must  have 
been  dated  after  1080,  as  another  of  the 
witnesses  is  William,  Bishop  of  Durham, 
who  was  not  elected  till  November  in  that 
At  Christmas  1085  he  received  the 


year. 


bishopric  of  Thetford,  and  he  was  one  of  the 
most  munificent  benefactors  of  the  see,  by 
enriching  it  with  many  of  the  manors  and 
other  lands  which  he  received  from  the 
royal  bounty. 

He  died  about  1091,  leaving  his  family 
very  rich.  One  of  his  sons  was  Richard 
de  Bellofago,  archdeacon  of  Norwich  in 
1107,  and  another,  Ralph  de  Bellofago, 
sheriff  of  Norfolk  and  Suffolk  in  the  reign 
of  Henry  L  (Godwin,  426:  jBloniekeI<r8 
Norwich,  ii.  465,  531, 638.) 

WEV8LETDALE,  Lord.     See  J.  Parke. 

WESTBUBT,  Lord.    See  R.  Bethell. 

WE8TBUBT,  William  (named  probably 
from  Westbury  in  Wiltshire,  as  he  en- 
dowed a  chantry  there  with  lands  in  that 
place,  and  possessed  the  manors  of  Bores 
and  Lady  Cfourt  and  other  property  in  that 
county),  was  one  of  those  who  refused  n 
Serjeant's  coif,  and  was  called  before  the 
parliament  and  compelled  to  take  it  in  14 1 7. 
(2iot,  Pari.  iv.  107.)  For  ten  years  pre- 
vious to  this  he  had  been  a  practiser  in  the 
courts,  and  in  another  ten  years  he  was 
raised  to  the  bench.  He  was  placed  in  the 
Court  of  King's  Bench  on  February  6, 
1426,  4  Henry  VI.,  and  in  the  same  year 
had  a  licence  to  take  recognitions  where- 
ever  he  might  be.    (Col.  Hot,  Pat.  273.) 

In  consequence  of  riots  in  Norwich  and 
Norfolk  in  21  Henry  VI.,  Sir  John  For- 
tescue  the  chief  justice  and  he  were  sent 
there  to  try  the  delinquents.  They  made 
their  report  to  the  council  on  March  13, 
1443,  and  in  the  following  May  Westbury 
received  10/.  for  his  services.  {Acts  Privy 
Council,  V.  247,  268.)  He  continued  on 
the  bench  certainly  till  the  twentv-third 
year  of  the  reign,  but  did  not  iie  till 
28  Henry  VI.,  when  he  1%  <k«K.tvVi^\  ^ 


718 


WESTBY 


*<  William  Weaibury,  senior.'  The  Williftm 
Weatbury  who  succeeded  Bishop  Wayn- 
flete  in  1448  was  probably  his  aon.  (Col 
Inq.  p.  m.  iv.  241, 303;  Cal.  Rot,  Pat,  291.) 

WS8TBT,  Bajltholombw,  waa  a  member 
of  the  Middle  Temple,  for  the  compli- 
mentary addreaa  to  tne  three  membera  of 
that  houae  who  were  called  aerjeanta  in  19 
Henry  VIL  waa  delivered  by  him.  Three 
years  before,  on  May  12, 1501,  he  had  been 
raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Exchequer  aa 
aecond  baron,  and  he  received  a  new  patent 
on  the  accession  of  Henry  VIIL  In  the 
third  year  of  that  reign  he  and  Sir  Robert 
Southwell  were  appointed  ^end  sur- 
veyors and  approvera  of  the  kmg^a  manora, 
&c.  In  1514  he  waa  made  one  of  the 
'  almeaa '  knighta  of  Windaor,  but  did  not  on 
that  account  vacate  hia  aeat  in  the  Exche- 
quer, no  new  aecond  baron  being  named 
tiU  1521.  (DugdMs  Orig,  113 ;  AthmMt 
Order  of  the  Garter,^.) 

WS8TC0TB,  John  db,  waa  located  in 
Suaaex,  where  he  had  property  in  the 
townahip  of  Leominater,  and  obtained  a 
licence  that  the  abbot  of  Battle  might 
grant  him  the  manor  of  Anatigh  for  the 
term  of  hia  life.  He  waa  an  aavocate  in 
the  courta,  and  hia  name  occurs  in  the  Year 
Booka  in  the  early  part  of  the  reign  of 
Edward  II.  In  the  fourth  year  he  waa 
not  only  one  of  the  three  juaticea  of  aaaize 
appointed  for  Eeaex  and  Hertford,  and  the 
four  neighbouring  countiea,  but  waa  alao  in 
a  commission  in  Hampshire  and  Wiltshire. 
He  is  not  named  in  any  judicial  employ- 
ment later  than  8  Edward  U.,  and  hia 
death  occurred  between  that  date  and  June 
in  the  thirteenth  year,  when  hia  executora 
were  commanded  to  bring  all  proceedinga 
before  him  into  the  Exchequer.  {Ahb,  Rot, 
Orig.  i.  198 ;  Pari  WriU,  ii  p.  ii.  1601  j 
Rot,  Pari,  i.  300.) 

WSSTXIHSTB^  Edwabd  be,  the  aon  of 
Odo  the  goldamith,  having  in  24  Henry 
lU.,  1240,  purchaaed  the  office  of  fuaor,  or 
melter,  of  tne  Exchemier,  for  twelve  marka 
of  silver  which  he  paid  to  Odo,  aon  of  John, 
who  waa  proceedmg  to  the  Holy  Land, 
soon  established  his  character  so  well  that 
in  30  Henry  III.  he  and  the  abbot  of 
Westminster  were  appointed  treasurera  of 
a  new  Exchequer  the  king  had  founded  for 
the  receipt  of  moneya  for  the  fabric  of  the 
church  at  Weatminater,  or,  aa  they  are 
called  in  another  record,  custodes  of  the 
operations  there.  (Madox,  ii.  3,  310 ;  ^- 
cerpl,  e  Rot,  Fin,  i.  449.)  In  1248  Madox 
introduces  him  amon^  the  barons  sitting 
at  the  Exchequer,  and  m  the  same  year  the 
seal  of  the  omce  of  chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer waa  placed  in  his  cuatody.  In  37 
Henry  IH.  he  and  Philip  Luvel  were 
directed  by  the  king  to  remove  all  hia  gold 
and  BilveT  and  Wwft\%  ttom  Westminster 
and  the  New  Tem^^ltt  Vo  \)ti^  Torw^i  qI 


\ 


WESTON 

London,  but  to  leave  the  regalia  at  Wset- 
minster ;  and  two  years  afterwards  the  avoe 
two  had  the  dty  of  London  placed  m  tbeir 
handa  on  occasion  of  a  tnuiagreaaioa  of  tk 
aaaize,  connected  no  doubt  with  the  dtj's 
refuaal  to  be  tallaged.  So  late  aa  48  Heur 
HL  he  ia  deacribed  aa  a  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer in  the  atteatatioQ  of  a  charter; 
but  he  waa  dead  before  51  Heniy  m., 
when  hia  aon  C^do  had  posaeanon  of  bis 
office  of  fiiaor,  and  received  permiaaioii  to 
appoint  a  deputy  for  two  years,  while  Iw 
puraued  hia  atodiea.  ( Madox ^  L  270, 71^; 
u.  62,  248,  265,  310,  318,  319.) 

WESTON,  Richard,  whose  genealogy  ii 
traced  aa  high  aa  Rainaldua  de  Ballida,  ia 
Normandy,  lord  of  Weston,  Berton,  Bk^ 
ton,  and  Newton,  in  StafTo^dahire,  in  ^ 
reign  of  the  Conqueror,  was  the  asoood  mi 
of  John  Weaton,  of  Ldchfieldy  who  wu 
fourth  aon  of  John  Weston,  of  Rugelej,  br 
CedUa,  aiater  of  Ralph  Neyil,  Eari  k 
Westmoreland.  This  mindfiUher  b  ek- 
where  deacribed  as  William  Weston,  d 
Preated  Hall  in  Essex,  and  of  LondoB, 
mercer.  Having  been  entered  of  the  Mid- 
dle Temple,  he  arrived  at  the  rank  of  reader 
in  autumn  1554.  His  name  appears  oca* 
aionally  in  Dyer*a  Reports  as  an  adTocite 
during  the  reign  of  Queen  Mary,  who  oa 
November  20, 1557,  made  him  heraolidfeQ^ 
general  From  thia  office  Queen  EUaabetii 
called  him  to  the  degree  of  the  coif  \tj  i 
apecial  patent  on  January  24,  1550,  ini 
appointed  him  one  of  her  seijeantB  on  the 
13th  of  the  next  month.  This  waa  foUoved 
by  hia  j^romotion  to  the  bench  on  Oetober 
16  aa  a  judge  of  the  Common  Plena,  wkre 
he  aat  for  nearly  thirteen  years  {Ikgidii 
Orig,  4%,  215),  dying  od  July  6,  1672,  in 
poaaeaaion  of  Sprenes,  in  Koxwell,  lid 
other  considerable  property  in  Essex. 

Hia  brother,  Dr.  Robert  Westoo,  dea 
of  Wella,  waa  dean  of  the  Aichea,  and  w 
raised  in  1567  to  the  chancellorahip  of  lie- 
land,  which  he  enjoyed  till  his  oei^  i& 
Mav  1573. 

The  judge  was  thrice  mazried.  Ki  £i^ 
wife  was  Wiburga,  daughter  of  Tboem 
Cateaby,  of  Seaton  in  NorthamptonibiiVi 
and  widow  of  Richard  Jenour,  of  Dobbov 
in  Eaaex ;  hia  aecond  was  Maigaret  tht 
daughter  of  Eustace  Bumeby;  and  Kit 
thiid  waa  Elixabeth,  daughter  it  Tbosf 
Lovel,  of  Aatwell  in  Northamptonahiie^tb 
latter  having  had  two  previooa  hnribaDdt 
(aa  he  had  two  previoua  wives),  nanielyt 
Anthony  Cave  and  John  Newdisats.  S^ 
aon  Hieronymua,  by  his  firat  wife,  wai  tb 
&ther  of  Sir  Richard  Weaton,  who  mu 
made  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  Vr 
Jamea  L,  and  was  created  by  Chailei  1 
Lord  Weaton  of  Neyland  in  1628^  froa 
which  he  was  advanced  to  the  earldoa  of 
PortUind  in  1633,  filling  the  office  of  lord 
V\^  tc^aaurer  till  his  cbatlL    These  titks 


WESTON 

expired  in  1688  by  the  death  of  the  fourth 
ean  without  issue,  i  (ErdesttncWs  Staffordsh, 
136 ;  Moranf$  Essex,  i.  136;  NtchMs  Lei- 
ceOersh,  370;  CoUms's  Peerage,  iv.  401  .J) 

WSSTOVy  James,  was  the  nephew  of  the 
above  Richard  Weston,  being  the  third  son 
of  James  Weston  of  Lichfield  (Uie  judge's 
brother),  who  died  in  1589.  His  mother, 
Margena,  daughter  of  Humfrej  Lowe  of 
Lichfield,  died  in  1587.  He  was  then  very 
young ;  but  three  years  after  his  fathers 
death  he  was  entered  of  the  Inner  Temple, 
where,  having  been  called  to  the  bar  in 
1600,  he  attained  the  post  of  reader  in 
autumn  1618.  He  was  summoned  to  take 
the  degree  of  sexjeant  on  March  19, 1631, 
evidently  for  the  purpose  of  being  made  a 
baion  of  the  Exchequer,  to  which  office  he 
was  appointed  on  the  16th  of  the  following 
May  (jftynMT,  xix.  256,  348),  and  knighted. 
His  career  as  a  judge  was  ot  very  short  dura- 
tion, for  in  the  vacation  between  Wchael- 
mas  1633  and  HHary  1634  he  died  in  his 
chamber  in  the  Inner  Temple,  being  de- 
scribed by  Croke  (Car,  339)  as  a  *  wise  and 
learned  man,  and  of  courage.* 

By  his  wife,  Maria,  daughter  of  William 
Weston,  Escu  of  Kent,  he  had  an  only 
daughter.     (JSrdeswick't  Staffordah,  136.) 

WBSTOV,  RiOHAKD,  of  the  same  family 
as  both  the  above,  was  the  son  of  Ralpn 
Weston  of  Rueeley. 

Like  his  relative,  he  pursued  his  legal 
studies  in  the  Inner  Temple,  where  he  was 
elected  reader  in  1629.  On  May  25,  1632, 
he  became  a  judge  on  the  Welsh  Circuit ; 
and  on  Sir  James  Weston's  death  he  was 
appointed,  no  doubt  hy  the  interest  of  Lord 
Weston,  to  succeed  him  as  baron  of  the 
exchequer,  his  patent  being  dated  April 
SO,  1634.  {Rumer,  xix.  433, 528, 607.)  He 
thereupon  received  the  honour  of  kmght- 
hood.  In  his  argument  in  favour  of  ship- 
money,  which  was  delivered  four  years 
after,  though  it  evinced  some  learning,  he 
was  more  technical  tlian  conclusive.  (State 
Trials,  iiL  1066.^  He  was  consequently 
one  of  the  six  judges  who  were  impeached 
by  the  Long  Parliament  in  1641,  and  though 
be  was  not  brought  to  trial,  he  was,  by  a 
Tote  of  the  Commons  on  October  24, 1645, 
disabled  from  being  a  judge  '  as  though  he 
was  dead.'    (WhUelocke,  47,  ISh) 

He  lived  tUl  March  18,  1651,  leaving  by 

lus  wife,  Katherine,  a  son,  Sir  Richard, 

"who  joined  the  army  of  Charles  I.,  and  was 

alain  in  the  Isle  of  Man.  (Erdesunck^s  Staf^ 

fordsh,  136.) 

WS8T0K,  R10HA.RD,  of  no  known  con- 
nection with  the  above,  entered  at  Corpus 
Christi  College,  Cambridge,  in  1639,  out 
took  no  degree.  He  is  described  in  his 
admission  to  Gray's  Inn  in  1642  as  the 
0on  and  heir  apparent  of  Edward  Weston 
of  Hackney,  and  having  been  called  to  the 
bar  in  1649,  he  arrived  at  the  post  of  reader 


WESTON 


719 


in  1676.    His  arguments  in  court  are  re- 

forted  by  Sir  T.  Raymond  from  the  year 
662,  but  it  was  not  till  1677  that  he 
attained  the  de^ee  of  the  coif.  He  was 
made  king's  serjeant  in  1678,  and  thereupon 
knighted ;  and  on  February/,  1680,  he  was 
raised  to  the  bench  of  the  Exchequer. 

In  the  smnmer  assizes  after  his  appoint- 
ment he  had  occasion  to  show  his  energy 
and  independence  as  a  judge  by  publicly 
checking  the  insolent  forwardness  of  Sir 
George  Jefireys,  at  Kingston,  in  browbeat- 
ing, as  his  manner  was,  the  other  side  in 
their  examination  of  witnesses.    On  being 
told  by  the  judge,  after  some  words  had 
passed  between  them,  to  hold  his  tongue, 
Jefireys  declared  he  was  not  treated  as  a 
counsellor,  being  curbed  in  the  management 
of  his  brief.    'Hal'  returned  the  baron, 
'  nnce  the  king  has  thrust  his  favours  upon 
you  in  making  you  chief  justice  of  Chester, 
you  think  to  run  down  eveiybody ;  if  you 
think  yourself  aggrieved,  make  your  com- 
plaint J  here's  nowdy  cares  for  it'    (  Woolr 
rycKs  Jeffreys,  65.)     This  rebuff  shows 
plainly  how  well  the  bench  and  the  bar 
understood  Jeffreys'  character.    It  is  not 
improbable  that  the  malice  it  engendered 
in  Jeffreys'  mind  was  the  real  cause  of  the 
complaint  made  against  Baron  Weston  in 
the  next  parliament     In  December  the 
Conmions  voted  an  impeachment  against 
him  upon  the  extraordinary  accusation  that 
certain  expressions  used  by    him  in  his 
charge  to  the  grand  jury  at  Kingston  on 
the  same  circuit  were  in  derogation  of  the 
rights  and  privileges  of  parliament    He 
had  inveighed  agamst  Calvin  and  Zuinglius 
and  their  disciples  for  their  fanatical  and 
restless  spirit,  and  had  said  that '  now  they 
were  amusing  us  with  fears,  and  nothing 
would  serve  tnem  but  a  parliament ; '  add- 
ing, '  for  my  part  I  know  no  representative 
of  the  nation  but  the  king  :  all  power  cen- 
tres in  him.     It  is  true,  he  does  intrust 
it  with  his  ministers,  but  he  is  the  sole 
representative ;  and,  i'faith,  he  has  wisdom 
enouffh  to  intrust  it  no  more  in  these  men 
who  have  given  us  such  late  examples  of 
their  wisdom  and  faithfulness.'    The  dis- 
solution of  the  parliament,  however,  took 
place  before  the  impeachment  was  brought 
in,  and  the  baron  died  before  the  next  par- 
liament had  proceeded  to  business.    As  a 
high  prerogative  man,  he  was,  according  to 
Roger  North  (Exanien,  566),  hated  bitterly 
by  the  opposition,  and  was  of  course  a  great 
favourite  with  that  writer,  who  relates  of 
him  that,  while  the  other  judges  looked 
grave  and  solemn  at  this  ternole  sound 
of  an  impeachment,  he  was  as  gay  and 
debonair  as  at  a  wedding,  and  was  only 
sorry  that  he  had  not  an  opportunity  of 
talking  in  the  House  of  Commons,  to  have 
had  his  full  scope  of   arguing  his  own 
case.    Even  Burnet  (1. 4B5^  %i^«9^  ^^  ^\ 


720 


WESTWODE 


his  couraf^  in  granting  an  Habeas  Corpus 
to  Sheridan,  who  had  been  committed  by 
the  House  of  Commons.  His  judicial  ca- 
reer was  a  very  short  one,  as  he  died  on 
March  23, 1G81,  at  his  house  in  Chancery 
Lane. 

Roger  North  gives  some  insisrht  into  his 
personal  character.  He  describes  him  *a 
learned  man,  not  only  in  the  common  law, 
but  in  the  civil  and  imperial  law,  as  also 
in  history  and  humanity  in  general ;  and 
would  often  in  his  charges  shine  with  his 
learning  and  wit/ 

He  married  Frances,  second  daughter  of 
Sir  George  Marwood,  of  Little  Bushby, 
liart, 

WESTWODB,  KooER,  was  made  second 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  March  1,  140^3, 
4  Henry  IV. ;  and  he  was  re-appointed  at 
the  commencement  .of  the  two  next  reigns. 
No  other  fact  is  known  of  him. 

WSTLAHD,  TuoMAS  db,  was  a  younger 
son   of   the    next-mentioned  William  de 
Weyland,  who  possessed  large  estates  in 
the  county  of  Norfolk.    His  mother  was 
Mart«ilia,  who    afterwards    married   John 
Ikandon.      {JSiX'hnan'a    Beliq,    140.)     He 
had    attained    sufficient    eminence  in  60 
Henry  III.,  1272,  to  be  associated   with 
liogeir  de  Seyton  as  a  justice  itinerant  into 
the  coimties  of  Essex  and  Hertford.  He  was 
constituted  a  judge  of  the  Court  of  Common 
Pleas  as  early  as  Michaelmas,  2  Edward 
I.,  some  iines  having  been  levied  before 
him  at  that  date.    From  this  he  was  pro- 
moted to  be  chief  justice  of  the  same  court 
ill  G  I^Mward  I.,  1278  ;  and  fines  continued  to 
be  le\'ied  before  him  till  17  Edward  L,  1280 
( Dtujdales  Orig.  44 ;  MadoXy  ii.  00),  at  the 
close  of  which  year  charges  were  made 
against  him  and  the  rest  of  the  judges  of 
bribery  and  corruption  in  their  office.  All  of 
them  were  convicted,  except  two,  and  were 
subjected  to  large  lines.   Against  Thomas  de 
NVeyland,  however,  a  more  heinous  crime 
was  imputed — that  of  instigating  his  ser- 
vants to  commit  murder,  and  then  screen- 
ing   them    from    punishment     After   his 
apprehension  he  escaped  from  custody,  and, 
diHjTuising  himself,  obtained  admission  as  a 
noviire  among  the  friars  minors  at  St.  Ed- 
mund's Bury.     On  the  discovery  of  his  re- 
treat, the  sanctuary  was  respected  for  the 
forty  days  allowed  by  the  law,  after  which 
the  introduction  of   provi^sions    into    the 
convent  was  prohibited.     The   friars,   not 
inclined  to  submit  to  starvation,  soon  re- 
tired; and  the  fallen  iudge,  finding  himself 
deserted,  was  compelled  to  deliver  himself 
up  to  the  ministers  of  justice,  and   was 
conveyed    to    the    Tower.       The    king^s 
council  gave  him  the  option  to  stand  his 
trial,  to  be  imprisoned  for  life,  or  to  abjure 
tlie  realm.    To  the  latter  he  was  entitled 


WniDDON 

barefoot  and  bareheaded,  with  a  cmdfix  in 
his  hand,  from  hia  prison  to  the  set^df, 
and  being  placed  in  the  vessel  provided  for 
his  transportation.  All  hia  property,  botk 
real  and  personal,  stated  to  have  bem  of 
the  value  of  100,000  marks^  was  forfeited 
to  the  crown.  (Zus^orc/,  lii. ;  Ahh,  JRoL 
Orig,  i.  61-4)  Hia  wife,  Marray  de 
Morse,  had  a  grant  of  her  cloues'  and 
jewels,  and  also  of  601.  out  of  his  landa. 

From  entries  on  the  Parliament  Rolls,  it 
may  be  inferred  that  he  tranafened  to  the 
abbot  of  St  Edmund'a  Bury  two  of  liii 
manors  aa  a  conaideration  for  the  wsfim 
he  sought  there,  and  that  several  othen  d 
his  manors  were  saved  from  the  genenl 
wreck,  by  means  of  hia  wife  and  cmldim 
being  co-feofiees  of  them  with  him.  (Rd. 
Parfi.  48,61,  66.) 

No  account  of  his  future  career  is  ffiven, 
nor  is  the  date  of  his  death  mentioned  lit 
left  three  children,  Thomas,  Richard,  and 
Alienor ;  and  the  family  is  now  represeoted 
hj  John  Weyland,  Esq.,  of  Woodiidog  is 
Norfolk. 

WETLAH'D,  WiLLlAJC  DS,wa8the8onot 
Herbert  de  Weyland,  and  ^satrix  his  ink 
From  September  12C1,  45  Heniy  EL,  he 
was  escheator  south  of  Trent,  and  there  is 
one  instance  of  a  mandate  addiesnd  to 
him  in  that  character  on  April  24,  \il6o.  In 
1272  his  name  is  inserted  in  the  oommisBioD 
directed  to  the  justices  itinerant  to  the 
county  of  Leicester ;  and,  inasmuch  as  the 
roll  of  that  year  contains  an  entry  of  i 
payment  made  in  September  for  an  uazt 
to  be  held  before  him  for  another  coootj 
(Suffolk),  there  is  very  little  doubt  thit 
he  was  then  appointed  a  justicier  at  We^- 
minster  ;   the  more  especially  as  he  ▼»« 
certainly  a  judge  of  the  Conunon  Fleas io 
the  first  year  of  £dward  I.,  his  name  tlieo 
appearing  on  the  acknowledgment  of  a  fine- 
There  is  no  subsequent  mention  of  him  e 
a  judge.    By  his  wife,   Marsilia,  he  left 
three  sons,   Richard,    Nicholas,  and  ik 
above-mentioned  Thomas.  (Ercerpt,  e  SsL 
i^*.  300-486,  680  ;  Dugdak't  Orig,  44) 

WHIDDOV,  John,  whose  family  Vi! 
long  established  at  Chagford  in  Devcmshiit. 
was  the  eldest  son  of  John  Whiddon  <( 
that  place  by  a  daughter  of  —  Rug?-  ^^ 
school  of  law  was  the  Inner  Tempir, 
where  he  was  elected  reader  in  1538  snd 
1536,  three  years  after  which  he  filled  tiie 
oifice  of  treasurer,  lie  was  nominated  >« 
a  Serjeant  at  the  close  of  Henry  VIE's 
reign,  but  the  death  of  that  'mooan-k 
occurring  before  he  was  instituted,  tlN 
solemnity  took  place  under  a  new  writ,  ii 
the  first  week  after  that  event  On  ^ksr^ 
succession  to  the  throne  he  was  one  d  ^ 
first  judffes  she  appointed,  his  paf 
judge  of  the  Queen's  Bench  l 


by  virtue  ot\i\BHtcnct\)L%irj^«c(i<ihft  chose  it.  I  October  4,   1663;    and   he  * 
The   ceremony   cowca^VaiSl  oi  V\&  "v^iS^Y^^  AvQ'Ci^s^a  <ikt  knightfao^ 


WHITCHESTER 

He  is  noticed  as  introducing  the  new  prac- 
tice of  riding  to  Westminster  Hall  on  a 
horse  or  gelding,  instead  of  a  mule  as  was 
the  previous  custom.  (Dugdale^s  Orig.  dS, 
118,  104,  170;  Machyfi,  342.)  In  April 
1557,  when  Thomas  Stafford,  having  sur- 

Srised  and  taken  Scarhorough  Castle,  was 
efeated  hj  the  Earl  of  Westmoreland, 
Judge  Whiddon  was  sent  down  to  try  the 
prisoners,  and  is  said  to  have  heen  clothed 
with  the  commission  of  a  general,  giving 
him  authority  to  raise  forces  to  quell  any 
insurrection  that  might  happen ;  imd  he  is 
even  stated  to  have  sat  on  the  bench  in 
armour  on  that  occasion,  from  the  appre- 
hensions then  entertained  of  a  rising. 

His  patent  was  renewed  on  Queen 
£lizabetn's  accession,  and  during  nearly 
eighteen  years  of  het  reign  he  continued  to 
exercise  his  judicial  duties.  His  death 
occurred  on  January  27, 1675,  at  Chagford, 
-where  he  was  buried^  He  married  twice. 
By  his  iirst  wife,  Anne,  daughter  of  Sir 
William  Hollis,  he  had  one  daughter ;  by 
his  second,  Elizabeth,  daughter  and  heir 
of  William  Shilston,  he  had  a  hirge  fifunily 
of  six  sons  and  seven  daughters,  whose 
posterity  long  flourished  in  hb  native 
place.     {Prince'^  Worthies.) 

WHITCHESTEB,  Kogeb  de,  so  named 
from  that  place  in  Northumberland,  was 
probably  the  son  of  Robert  de  Whitchester, 
inrho  was  sheriff  of  that  county  in  6  and  0 
Henry  HI.  He  was  raised  to  the  bench  at 
least  as  early  as  October  0, 1252,  36  Henry 
III.,  that  being  the  date  of  the  tirst  entry 
of  payments  made  for  assizes  to  be  held 
before  him.  These  entries  continue  till 
August  1258,  42  Henry  HI.  ;  and  be  went 
the  circuit  from  1254  to  1257.  Dugdale 
describes  him  as  a  canon  of  St.  Paulas. 
(Brcerpt.  e  Rot.  Fm.  iL  141-286 ;  DugdMa 
Prig,  21,  43.) 

WHITELOCXE.  James,  was  the  youngest 
of  twin  sons  of  Richard  Whitelocke,  who 
belonged  to  an  ancient  family  seated  at  the 
Beeches,  near  Oakinsrham,  Berkshire,  but, 
beinff  a  younger  son,  became  a  merchant  in 
London,  and  died  at  Bordeaux.  His  mother 
-was  Joan,  the  daughter  of  John  Colte,  of 
Little  Munden,  Herts,  and  widow  of  a 
l^ndon  merchant  named  Brockhurst,  and, 
beinfir  early  left  a  widow,  brought  up  her 
children  carefully,  and  sent  James,  who 
"was  bom  on  November  23, 1570,  to  Mer- 
chant Taylors'  School,  whence  he  was 
elected  a  scholar  of  St.  John*s  College, 
Oxford,  in  1588,  and  eventually  became  a 
fellow.  He  took  the  degree  of  Bachelor  of 
Civil  Law  in  1504,  and  held  his  fellowship 
till  June  1598,  residing  principally  at  the 
university.  During  the  same  period,  how- 
ever, he  kept  his  terms  at  the  Middle 
Temple  (having  previously  spent  a  year  of 
preparation  at  New  Inn),  and  was  called  to 
the  bar  in  1000.     Not  only  did  his  college 


WHITELOCKE 


721 


appoint  him  steward  of  their  lands,  but  he 
soon  obtained  an  honourable  and  profitable 
practice  j  and,  going  the  Oxford  Circuit,  he 
was  elected  recorder  of  Woodstock  in  1606, 
for  which  borough  he  was  returned  mem- 
ber in  1609.   lu  the  same  year  he  was  made 
steward  and  counsel  of  Eton  College,  and 
in  1610  of  Westminster  College  also.    In 
parliament  he  supported  the  argument  that 
the  king  had  not  the  power  to  set  im- 
positions on  merchants*  goods  without  the 
assent  of  parliament,    whereat    the    king 
took  great  offence,  of  which  he  soon  after 
felt  the  consequence.     On  May  18,  1613. 
he  was  summoned  before  the  council  and 
eommitted  to  the  Fleet,  and  kept  in  con- 
finement till  Jane  13.    He  himself  states 
that  the  cause  of  his  commitment  was  that, 
in  a  cause  between  the  College  of  West« 
minster  and  the  Bishop  of  London,  he  had 
been  taunted  and    checked  by  the  lord 
chancellor   (Ellesmere),  who   in  another 
cause,  between  two  members  of  the  College 
of  Arms,  when  Whitelocke  had  occasion  to 
argue  in  opnosition  to  the  power  of  the 
Earl  Marshal's  Court  to  hear  and  decide 
it,  inveighed  against  him  in  open  court, 
and  threatened  to  certify  to  the  king  that 
he  had    spoken    against    the  royal  pre- 
rogative.    The  privy  council  books,  how- 
ever^ found  the  complaint  wholly  on  an 
opinion    Whitelocke    had    given    to    Sir 
Kobert  Mansell  against  the  validity  of  a 
royal  commission  relating  to  the  navy. 

His  *  simply  giving  a  private  opinion  as 
a  barrister,'  as  the  charge  is  thus  represented, 
is  almost  too  incredible  even  for  those 
arbitrary  times.  From  the  whole  tenor  of 
the  Attomev-General  Bacon's  speech  (and 
weak  enough  it  was)  it  would  rather  ap- 
pear that  Whitelocke  had  urged  in  court 
an  elaborate  argument,  contending  that 
some  commission  which  the  king  had  issued 
was  not  strictly  according  to  law — an  ar- 
gument which  any  counsel  might  assuredly 
use,  whether  by  private  opinion  or  in  open 
court,  without  blame,  if  he  did  it  in  a 
decent  and  imobtrusive  manner.  White- 
locke made  his  submission  and  was  dis- 
charged from  custody,  the  king  taking 
'  special  and  good  liking '  of  the  sentence 
from  Tacitus  with  which  he  concluded  his 
submission :  '  Tibi  summum  rerum  im- 
perium  Dii  dederunt,  nobis  obedientiie 
gloria  relicta  est.'  His  son,  in  a  speech  to 
the  Long  Parliament,  publicly  and  ^vitho^t 
contradiction  attributed  his  father's  im- 
prisonment to '  what  he  said  and  did  in  a 
former  parliament.'  (Bacon*8  Works  [Mon- 
tagu], vii.  381 ;  State  Triah,  ii.  705.) 

That  this  incident  had  no  injurious  effect 
on  his  character  is  evidenced  by  the  fact 
that  in  the  short  parliament  that  met  in 
April  1614,  to  be  dissolved  in  June,  he 
was  not  only  returned  for  Woodstock,  but 
for  Corfe  Castle  aho.    Ixith\&  %Wc\»  %ffi^^\i 


722 


WHITELOCKE 


he  was  one  of  those  appointed  to  conduct 
the  conference  with  the  Lords  concerning 
impositions;  and  immediately  after  the 
dissolution  this  most  ridiculous  farce  was 
enacted.  All  the  conductors  were  called 
before  the  council  and  made  to  deliver  up 
the  arguments  they  had  prepared  for  the 
discussion,  to  be  burnt.  This  was  done, 
not  only  in  the  presence  of  the  council,  but 
of  the  king  himself,  whom  Whitelocke  says 
he  saw  ^throughe  an  open  place  in  the 
hangings  about  the  bignes  of  the  nalm  of 
ons  nand.*  The  court  cloud  still  novered 
over  him,  and  prevented  him  from  being 
elected  recorder  in  1G18;  but  in  autumn 
1619  he  was  chosen  reader  in  the  Middle 
Temple,  and  took  for  his  subject  the  Sta- 
tute 21  Henry  VIII.  c  13,  his  reading 
upon  which  is  now  preserved  in  MS.  in  the 
Ashmolean  Museum  at  Oxford.  He  again 
represented  Woodstock  in  James's  third 
parliament,  in  1621. 

In  the  meantime  his  political  offences 
had  been  atoned  for  or  overlooked.  On 
June  18,  1620,  he  was  called  serjeant,  and 
on  October  20  he  was  knighted  and  made 
chief  justice    of  Chester.     He  was  ap- 

Sointed  a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench  on 
October   18,   1624,   a  few  months  before 
King  James's  death. 

His  patent  was  renewed  by  Charles,  and, 
as  junior  judge,  he  had  in  the  iirst  year 
to  adjourn  Michaelmas  Term  to  Reading  on 
account  of  the  plague  then  raging  in  Lon- 
don. The  state  of  that  city,  and  the  terror 
of  those  who  approached  it,  are  depicted 
by  his  son  (Mem.  2)  in  his  description  of 
the  judge  going  from  his  house  in  Buck- 
inghamshire, and  arriving  early  the  next 
morning  at  Hyde  Park  Comer,  '  where  he 
and  his  retinuu  dined  on  the  ground,  with 
such  meat  and  drink  as  they  brought  in 
the  coach  with  them,  and  afterwards  he 
drove  fast  through  the  streets,  which  were 
empty  of  people  and  overgrown  with  grass, 
to  Westminster  Hall,  where  the  officers 
were  ready,  and  the  judge  and  his  com- 
pany went  strait  to  the  King's  Bench,  ad- 
journed the  court,  returned  to  his  coach, 
jmd  drove  away  presently  out  of  town.* 
He  retained  his  place  till  his  death;  and 
in  the  seven  years  that  intervened  the  two 
great  cases  of  Habeas  Corpus  came  before 
the  court.  For  the  iirst  judgment,  which 
was  against  those  who  refused  to  contribute 
to  the  loan,  he  and  the  other  judges  gave 
their  reasons  to  the  Lords  in  the  next  par- 
liament (State  Trials,  iii.  161),  which  led 
to  the  Petition  of  Right.  On  the  second, 
when  the  court  refused  to  discharge  the 
members  imprisoned  for  their  conduct  in 
the  previous  parliament,  without  sureties 
for  their  good  behaviour,  and  afterwards, 
upon  their  refusing  to  plead,  fined  and  im« 
prisoned  them,  the  judges  were  called  to 
account  by  the  I-«ong  Parliament     On  a 


WHITELOCKE 

motion  that  reparation  should  be  made  oat 
of  their  estates,  Judge  Whitelocke,  wbo 
bad  been  long  dead,  on  the  representsUoa 
of  his  son,  confirmed  by  mTeral  otha 
members,  that  he  was  of  the  same  opinioa 
with  Judge  Croke,  was  excused  firom  cen- 
sure.    (Whitehckej  ^.) 

Judge  Whitelocke   died    on  June  S^ 
1632,  at  his  house  at  Fawley  in  Bacb, 
and  was  buried  there  under  a  stately  mooih 
ment  erected  by  his  son.     Though  an  ad- 
vocate for  the  rights  of  the  people,  he  vis 
a  conscientious  supporter  of  the  King's  pre- 
rogative.   King  Cfharles  said  of  him  '  tbt 
he  was  a  stout,  wise,  and  learned  man,  ud 
one  who  knew  what  belongs  to  uphold 
magistrates  and  magistracy  in  their  dig- 
nity,' and  even  designed  him  for  the  plaoe 
of  lord  chief  baron.     All  authorities  allow 
him  to  have  been  an  able  lawyer  and  i 
deeply  learned  man.     Of  his  s^ll  in  the 
Latin  tongue  he  gave  a  remarkable  \itvi 
when  sitting  as  judge  of  assize  atOxfoii 
Some  foreigners  of  distinction  coming  into 
court  while  he  was  addressing  the  gnod 
jury,  ^he  repeated  the  heads  of  his  (£irge 
to  them  in  good  and  elegant  Latin,  and 
thereby  informed  the   strangers,'  his  m 
adds, '  of  the  ability  of  our  iudge^  and  the 
course  of  our  procecnlings  in  Jaw  and  jostiee.' 
(  Whitelocke,  11,  17.)    He  was  an  exoelkot 
genealogist,  and  was  not  only  deeply  veised 
in  Jewish  history,  but  conversant  with  that 
of  his  own  country,  being  one  of  the  earl.T 
members  of  the  Society  of  Antiquaries  in 
the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  to  which  he  ooo- 
tributed    papers    on     the    'Antiquity  d 
Heralds,'  of  '  Places   for  the  Studenti  d 
the   Law,-   and   of  '  lawful   Combats  in 
England.' 

His  wife  was  Elizabeth,  eldest  daoghter 
of  Edward  Bulstrode,  of  Bulstrode  in  Up- 
ton, Esq.,  and  Cecilia,  daughter  of  Sir  Jobn 
Croke,  of  Chilton,  so  that  he  was  doeelT 
connected  with  both  the  Judges  Cv^ 
Besides  two  daughters,  he  had  only  cte 
surviving  son,  the  next-mentioned' Bol-  • 
strode  Whitelocke. 

He  kept  a  record  of  the  principal  emts 
of  his  career,  under  the  title  of  *  Liber 
Famelicus,'  now  published  by  the  Camda 
Society,  under  the  excellent  editorship  d 
the  late  John  Bruce,  Esq.,  F.S.A,  to  iiiwk 
I  am  indebted  for  many  of  the  above  fus^ 

WHITELOCKE,  Bitlstropb,  was  theonlT 
son  of  the  above  Sir  James  Whitelodof. 
and  was  bom  on  August  6,  1605,  io  FleH   f 
Street,  at  the  house  of  the  eminent  Lurrtf    * 
Sir  George  Croke,  the  uncle  of  his  motber,     . 
and    was    christened   with    his    motb«r> 
maiden  name,  she  being  Elizabeth,  daughter 
of  Edward  Bulstrode,  Esq.,  and  sister  d 
the  reporter.    He  received  nis  early  edocs- 
tion  at  Merchfftit  Taylors*  School,  and  ww 
entered  in  1620  as  a  gentleman  comnKVi^     ^ 
at  St.  John's  College,  Oxford.    FrDm  1^-     \ 


WHITELOCKE 

f afterwards  Archbishop)  Laud,  the  then 
president,  who  was  the  intimate  friend  of 
bis  father,  he  received  much  kindness  and 
attention.  Soon  after  Laud^s  promotion 
to  the  see  of  St.  David's  he  left  the  uni- 
versity without  taking  a  degree,  and,  having 
been  admitted  as  a  student  at  the  Middlis 
Temple,  he  was  called  to  the  bar  in 
Blichaelmas  Term  1626.  At  Christmas 
1628  he  was  chosen  Master  of  the  Revels 
by  his  brother  Templars,  and  was  becom- 
ingly proud  on  receiving  a  frolicsome  fee, 
and  a  prophecy  of  future  greatness,  from 
Attomey-Qeneral  Noy,  when  he  attended 
that  officer  on  a  matter  arising  out  of  these 
Cbri8traa<)  revels ;  and  on  the  four  inns  of 
court  joining  together  in  1633  in  perform- 
ing a  masque  before  the  king  and  queen,  he 
was  unitea  with  Mr.  Edward  Hyde  (after- 
wards Earl  of  Clarendon)  to  act  for  the 
Middle  Temple  in  the  committee  of  pre- 
paration. This  probably  was  the  com- 
mencement of  the  intimacy  which  the  earl 
records  as  existing  between  him  and 
Whitelocko,  of  whom  he  always  speaks 
with  kindness;  and  to  the  reminiscences  of 
that  friendship  Whitelocke  was  not  im- 
probably indebted  for  the  impunity  he 
experienced  on  the  restoration  of  Charles 
II.  The  inclination  of  both  of  them  at 
that  time  was  to  the  popular  party,  each 
desiring  to  give  what  assistance  he  could 
to  remove  the  grievances  that  pressed  hard 
upon  the  people. 

Whitelocke's    first    public    display    in 

S:>litic3  was  at  the  quarter  sessions  at 
xford  in  1635,  when  in  his  charge  to  the 
grand  jury  he  ventured  some  allusions  to 
the  power  of  the  temporal  courts  over 
ecclesiastical  matters,  which  had  begun  to 
he  questioned.  He  was  engaged  by  the 
country  gentlemen  to  defend  their  forest 
Hherties  and  privileges,  which  were  at- 
tacked; and  he  was  advised  with  in  the 
defence  which  Hampden  so  nobly  main- 
tained against  ship-money.  These  evidences 
of  his  opinions  resulted  in  his  being  re- 
tamed  as  member  for  Marlow  to  the  Long 
Parliament  in  November  1640.  In  one  of 
the  earliest  debates  he  took  occasion  to 
make  a  spirited  defence  of  his  father,  who 
was  charged  as  being  one  of  the  judges 
-who  had  refused  to  bail  Selden  and  his 
fellow-prisoners,  and  succeeded  in  exone- 
rating his  father's  memory  from  the  impu- 
tation. He  was  chosen  chairman  of  the 
committee  appointed  to  prepare  the  im- 
peachment and  arrange  the  evidence  against 
the  Earl  of  Strafford,  and  at  the  trial  had 
the  charge  of  the  last  seven  articles.  The 
imfbrtunate  earl  gave  Whitelocke  the  cre- 
dit of  having  used  him  like  a  gentleman ; 
md  Whitelocke  seems  evidently  impressed, 
if  not  with  the  earl's  innocence,  with  his 
eloquent  defence  and  his  whole  conduct 
rhefore  his  accusers  and  judges.      (State 


WHITELOCKE 


723 


TriaUf  iii.  14,  38.)  In  the  debate  on  the 
militia  Whitelocke  made  a  compromising 
speech ;  but  on  the  passing  of  the  bill  he 
accepted  the  deputy  lieutenancy  of  two 
counties,  Buckingham  and  Oxford ;  and  in 
the  great  question  of  taking  up  arms  he 
argued  forcibly  against  commencing  a  civil 
war,  but  concluded  by  voting  for  its  adop- 
tion. Actively  engaged  in  his  county  for 
the  parliament,  and  commanding  a  'gallant 
company  of  his  neighbours,'  he  experienced 
the  usual  consequences.  When  the  royal 
troops  marched  towards  London,  his  house 
at  Fawley  Court  became  the  quarters  of  a 
regiment  of  horse,  who  in  the  spirit  of 
destruction  despoiled  it  of  all  that  was 
valuable.  He  was  with  the  army  opposed 
to  the  king  at  Brentford  in  November,  and 
in  the  January  following  was  one  of  the 
commissioners  appointed  to  treat  with  his 
majesty  for  peace  at  Oxford. 

This  negotiation  failing,  Whitelocke  in 
the  next  year  repeated  his  endeavours,  in  a 
speech  recommending  a  renewal  of  pacific 
overtures,  which  was  followed  in  Novem- 
ber 1644  by  a  second  commission  to  Ox- 
ford, partly  English  and  partly  Scotch, 
authorised  merely  to  take  certain  proposi- 
tions of  the  parliament  and  to  obtain  the 
king's  answer,  but  not  to  treat  with  him 
concerning  them.  Whitelocke  details  an 
interesting  conversation  which  the  king 
had  privately  with  him  and  Mr.  Holies  at 
a  complimentary  visit  thev  paid  to  the 
Earl  of  Lindsey,  in  which  they  were  grati- 
fied with  the  royal  acknowledgment  of  the 
sincerity  of  their  wish  to  put  an  end  to  the 
unhappy  dissensions.  The  propositions 
were  such  that  the  king  could  not  with 
honour  accede  to  them ;  but  by  his  answer 
he  suggested  that  persons  should  be  named 
on  both  sides  to  discuss  the  various  subjects 
and  conclude  a  treaty.  It  was  arranged 
that  this  conference  should  take  place  at 
Uxbridge,  where  the  commissioners,  of 
whom  Whitelocke  was  one,  accordingly 
met  on  .January  29,  1645 ;  but  the  same 
fate  attended  it.  After  quarrelling  with 
obstinacy  on  both  sides,  upon  subjects  of 
Church  government  and  the  settlement  of 
the  militia,  the  treaty  was  broken  off  on 
February  22. 

During  the  intervals  between  these 
several  negotiations  Whitelocke  had  the 
courage  to  refuse  to  serve  on  the  committee 
appointed  to  manage  the  charges  a^rainst 
his  early  instructor  and  friend  Archbishop 
Laud,  and  the  house  had  the  grace  to 
admit  his  excuse.  He  was  a  member  of 
the  Assembly  of  Divines,  and  both  there 
and  in  parliament  he  spoke  against  the 
opinion  that  the  government  of  the  Church 
by  presbyteries  was  Jure  Divino,  In  1644 
he  was  made  attorney  of  the  duchy  of 
Lancaster  by  the  parliament;  and  in  the 
next  month  he  and  Sw^'^wiV,  ^w?Ti'M\^^t» 


724 


WHITELOCKE 


placed  in  the  awkward  position  of  being 
called  upon  by  the  Lord  General  Essex  and 
the  ScotB  to  advise  whether  Cromwell,  of 
whom  they  began  to  be  jealous,  could  be 
proceeded  against  as  an  incendiary.  The 
counsel  given  by  the  two  lawyers  was  such 
that  the  charge  was  deferred ;  and  Crom- 
well, to  whom  this  incident  was  soon  re- 
ported, was  of  course  pleased  with  the  two 
advisers,  and  set  himself  to  work  to  coun- 
tercheck his  enemies.  This  he  effectually 
accomplished  by  the  Self-Denying  Oixii- 
nance,  which  resulted  in  the  resignation  of 
Essex.  Whitelocke  made  a  strong  speech 
against  the  ordinance,  but  in  the  end,  ashb 
manner  was,  voted  for  it. 

In  April  1646  he  was  appointed  go- 
venior  of  Henley-on-Thames  and  of  the  fort 
of  Phillis  Court,  with  a  garrison  of  300 
foot  and  a  troop  of  horse  ;  and  in  July  he 
iind  Mr.  Holies  had  to  defend  themselves 
against  a  violent  attempt  of  the  inde- 
pendent party  to  fix  a  treasonable  charge 
upon  them  f^r  their  communication  with 
the  king  at  Oxford.  They  succeeded, 
however,  in  obtaining  a  f\ill  acquittal  by 
the  house,  with  a  permission  to  prosecute 
*.heir  accuser.  Lord  Savile.  C)n  the  ter- 
mination of  the  civil  war  Whitelocke  re- 
sumed his  forensic  duties,  and  was  so  suc- 
cessful that  on  the  circuit  he  was  retained 
in  almost  every  cause.  Nor  was  his  practice 
confined  to  the  "common  law  courts,  but 
extended  to  the  Chancery,  the  House  of 
I^ords,  and  also  the  Court  of  Wards  till  it 
was  abolished  in  the  beginning  of  1646. 
To  the  suppression  of  that  court  he  gave 
his  aid  in  parliament,  and  was  otherv^ise 
serviceable  in  that  assembly,  being  com- 
monly named  on  all  committees  on  foreign 
affairs.  In  May  1647  he  advised  and  spoke 
against  disbanding  the  army,  though  the 
party  to  which  he  was  attached  had  pro- 
posed the  measure.  This  of  course  disposed 
Cromwell  more  strongly  in  his  favour,  and 
saved  him  from  being  included  in  the  attack 
made  by  General  Fairfax  and  the  officers 
against  eleven  of  his  colleagues,  and  from 
the  consequences  to  which  it  led. 

To  his  high  standing  in  his  profession,  to 
his  industrious  laboura  in  parliament,  and 
perhaps  more  than  all  to  the  favour  of  the 
general,  and  to  the  opinion  which  Crom- 
well had  formed  of  his  accommodating  dis- 
position, he  owed  his  elevation  to  the  im- 
portant position  to  which  he  was  next 
niised.  On  March  15,  1648,  the  two  houses 
concurred  in  appointing  him  to  be  one  of 
the  four  commissioners  of  the  Great  Seal 
for  one  year ;  and  in  October  he  was  named 
by  the  parliament  a  serjeant-at-law  and 
king's  Serjeant.  The  latter  appointments 
were,  however,  deferred  in  order  that  as 
lord  commissioner  he  might  swear  in  the 
other  new  Serjeants.  This  he  did  on  the 
ibth  of  the  next  month,  having  three  days 


WHITELOCKE 

before  sworn  in  Chief  Baron  Wilde.  His 
speeches  on  both  these  occaaions,  whidibe 
has  preserved  in  his  Memorials,  are  \<ms; 
and  laborious  dissertations  on  the  antiqaiiT 
of  the  two  courts  and  the  dignity  and  du- 
ties of  the  officers.  He  was  evidentlj  focd 
of  these  antiquarian  displays,  for  he  reports 
two  others  m  1649— one  on  the  appobt- 
ment  of  new  judges ;  and  the  other  addrestifd 
to  the  House  of  Commons  on  a  motion  to 
exclude  lawyers  from  parliament ;  and  i 
third,  still  more  elaborate,  in  16d0,  histori- 
cally vindicating  the  laws  of  England,  io 
Support  of  the  act  which  directed  all  le«?il 
proceedings  to  be  in  the  English  tongue. 

The  commissioners  were  soon  interrupted 
in  their  Judicial  proceedings  at  Westmis- 
ster  by  Pride's  Purge,  when,  in  order  v> 
avoid  the  tumult,  they  were  obliged  to  sit 
in  the  Middle  Temple  Hall.  This  ws 
followed  by  various  conferences  irhidi 
Cromwell  had  with  Whitelocke  and  hb 
brother  commissioner  Widdrington,  iritii 
the  pretended  object  of  settling  the  kins- 
dom ;  while  at  the  same  time  he  was  makififf 
active  preparations  in  the  House  of  Cod- 
mons  for  brining  the  king  to  trial  TV 
two  commissioners  detennined  to  nfasit 
their  countenance  to  the  measure,  and,  cb 
being  sent  for,  escaped  together  to  Whiie- 
locke*s  house  in  the  country,  till  the  C<wr 
mons  had  passed  the  ordinamoe  for  the  trial 
without  the  concurrence  of  the  Loidi 
They  then  returned  to  their  duties,  and 
shortly  afterwards  they  obeyed  an  ordi- 
nance, mode  by  the  same  mutilated  autho- 
rity, to  adjourn  Hihiry  Term,  that  it  ini?ht 
not  interfere  with  the  solemnity  of  ihetiid. 

The  bloody  deed  accomplished,  the  faoc- 
tions  of  the    four   commiasioQers  cetwd. 
The  House  of  Lords  was  next  abuhM 
and  Whitelocke,  though  he  spol^  agiisA 
it,  drew  up  the  ordinance  for  the  pttrpote. 
Whitelocke  justified  bis  accepting  the  Gmi 
Seal  under  the  new  g^ovemment  bv  a  speeci 
in  which,  acknowledging  the  pariiameot  v 
the  only  existing  authority,  he  maintadst^i 
the  absolute  necessity  that  the  place  sboold 
be  filled,  in  order  that  *  right  and  justify ' 
should  be  done  to  men.     He  was  theR/dv 
swoi-n  in,  with  L^Isle  and  Keeble  for  ^ 
colleagues.     He  accepted   a  seat  in  tk 
Council  of  State  also,  and  was  appointed 
high  steward  and    keeper  of  Greeawifl* 
Park,  an  office   which   be   exchanged  fnr 
that     of   constable     of    Windsor    C»tfc 
and  keeper  of  the  fofest      He  »L«o  iwf 
made  high  steward  and  recorder  of  Chtfoii 
and  keeper  of  the  library  and  medals  at  St 
James's. 

Cromwell  was  named  lord  peneial  in 
June  1650 ;  and  in  September  in  that  aod 
the  following  year  he  won  two  great  vic- 
tories, the  first  over  the  Scots  at  Duohir, 
and  the  second  over  the  king's  anay  « 
Worcester.    On  the  latter  occasion  Wiite- 


WHITELOCKE 

locke  was  one  of  the  four  members  deputed 
bjr  the  bouse  to  convey  its  congratulations, 
and  was  rewarded  bj  Cromwell  with  a 
horse  aod  two  prisoners^  to  whom  White- 
locke  immediately  gave  their  liberty,  and 
passed  them  home  to  Scotland.  After  this 
defeat  of  the  royalists,  Cromwell  began  to 
feel  his  way,  how  far  he  was  likely  to  suc- 
ceed in  attaining  absolute  authority  the 
object  of  his  present  aspirations.  Tx)  this 
end  he  called  a  conference  to  consider  the 
settlement  of  the  kingdom.  The  general 
opinion  was  in  favour  of  a  mixture  of 
monarchical  government,  which  accorded 
Tvith  Cromwelrs  wishes ;  but  when,  on  th^ 
question  in  whom  the  power  should  be 
placed,  Whitelocke  and  others  suggested 
one  of  the  sons  of  the  l^te  king,  the  meet- 
ing was  dissolved,  with  no  other  result  than 
a  discovery  of  the  inclinations  of  those  who 
composed  it  Some  months  afterwards  (in 
November  1652)  Cromwell  again  broached 
the  subject,  and  in  a  curious  conversation 
sounded  Whitelocke  as  to  hia  assuming  the 
title  of  king,  and  pressed  for  his  opinion  as 
to  the  best  means  to  obviate  the  existing 
difficulties  and  dangers.  The  recommenda^ 
tion  he  received  from  Whitelocke — that  he 
should  apply  to  Charles,  and,  by  a  private 
treaty  for  his  restoration,  in  which  the 
righto  and  liberties  of  the  people  should  be 
maintained,  and  proper  limitations  placed 
on  the  monarchical  power,  secure  to  the 
nation  all  they  had  been  fighting  for,  and 
to  himself,  his  family,  and  friends,  not 
<Hily  impunity  for  the  past,  but  riches  and 
honours  as  his  reward — he  professed  to  be 
worthy  of  consideration ;  and  they  parted. 
From  this  time  Whitelocke  says  Cromwell 
altered  his  carriage  towards  him,  and 
eASsed  to  advise  vnth  him  intimately.  The 
general  had  before  been  displeased  with 
Whitelocke  for  his  'non-compliance  with 
hia  pleasure  in  some  things,  and  particu- 
larly in  some  Chancery  causes,'  and  was 
auapected  of  an  attempt  to  get  him  out  of 
the  wa^,  by  appointing  him  chief  commis- 
aioner  m  Ireland,  which  he  refused. 

Whitelocke*s  opposition  to  the  dissolu- 
tion of  the  parliament  confirmed  Cromwell's 
4utnist  in  him,  but  did  not  prevent  the 
TioJent  dismissal  of  that  assembly  in  April 
,  1653.     In  June,  Cromwell,  who  now  as- 
)  gamed  the  whole  power,  called  a  sort  of 
f  council  of  120  persons,  afterwards  nick- 
« named  the  Barebone's  Parliament    To  this 
I  Msembly  Whitelocke  was  not  summoned, 
f  and  by  an  early  vote  the  Court  of  Chancery 
j<  was  ordered  to  be  taken  away.    The  ordi- 
^  aanoe  was  however  suspended  before  com- 

getion,  and  never  came  into  operation,  so 
lat  the  existing  commissioners  still  pre- 
aerrcd  some  influence  in  the  state.  The 
IllaaA  which  Cromwell  had  formed  he  was 
%,ware  were  obnoxious  to  Whitelocke,  whom 
fclierefore  he  was  desirous  of  sending  out  of 


WHITELOCKE 


725 


the  way,  in  order  that  no  obstacle  might 
be  raised  to  the  attainment  of  his  ulterior 
designs.  This  could  only  be  safely  effected 
by  an  appointment  to  some  honourable 
trust  which  would  temporarily  exile 
Whitelocke  from  England.  The  pseudo 
parliament  accordinglv,  by  Cromwell's  dic- 
tation, named  him  ambassador  to  the  Queen 
of  Sweden^  aA  office  which,  however  dis- 
tasteful on  many  accounts,  Whitelocke 
deemed  it  prudent  not  to  refuse,  conscious 
of  the  power  of  the  general^  and  doubtful 
of  the  conseauences  of  resistance.  (Burton' a 
jpiart/y  i.)  He  sailed  on  November  6, 1653, 
and  began  his  voyage  gracefully,  by  releas- 
ing a  Dutch  vessel  which  he  took,  with  all 
her  cargo,  to  the  poor  skipper,  wno  would 
have  been  ruined  by  their  detention  and 
loss.  He  was  absent  from  England  till  the 
dOth  of  the  following  Jime,  and  succeeded 
in  efi^ecting  a  treaty  of  amity  with  Queen 
Christina,  the  last  public  act  that  she 
transacted  before  h^r  abdication.  Both  by 
her  and  Prince  Charles  Gustavus,  who  suc- 
ceeded her,  Whitelocke  was  treated  with 
the  greatest  distinction  and  respect.  He 
was  honoured  ^th  her  order  of  Amarantha, 
apd  on  all  occasions  was  admitted  to  pri- 
vate and  famijiai;  conferences.  In  his  voy- 
age out,  as  well  oq,  his  return,  he  kept  a 
daily  journal,  which  is  most  interesting  in 
reference  to  the  description  of  the  country 
through  which  he  passed,  his  manner  of 
travefling,  and  the  detail  of  his  receptions, 
the  progress  of  his  negotiations,  the  con- 
versations which  he  had  with  the  queen 
and  her  ministers,  particularly  the  Chan- 
cellor Oxenstierv,  and  his  tenaciousnesa 
with  the  latter  as  to  all  forma  of  ceremony, 
lest  the  honour  and  dignity  of  the  Com- 
monwealth should  be  compromised.  This 
Journal  ia  more  minu,to  as  to  personal 
matters  than  hjs  Memoricd^^  and,  bating  a 
rather  copious  sprinkliog  of  vanity  and 
ostentation,  impresses  the  reader  with  a 
pood  opinion  of  his  piety  and  judgment 
m  the  ordering  of  his  household,  and  his 
abilities  in  diplomacy.  This  Journal  was 
not  published  till  near  a  century  after  the 
author's  death. 

During  Whitelocke's  eight  months'  ab- 
sence the  little  parliament  had  resigned  its 
power  into  the  hands  of  Cromwell,  who  was 
immediately  inaugurated  protector  of  the 
three  kingdoms.  A  new  commission  for 
the  custody  of  the  Great  Seal  was  issued  in 
April  1654,  in  which  Whitelocke  (though 
absent)  was  the  first  named,  with  his  old 
associate  Widdrington  and  his  later  one 
Lisle.  On  his  return  to  England  he  gave 
an  account  of  his  embassy  to  Cromwell  and 
his  council.  Consenting  to  act  under  the 
new  government,  he  was  sworn  into  his  office 
on  July  14,  and  was  soon  after  made  one  of 
the  commissioners  of  the  Exchequer.  Sueh 
was .  his  po^^vilant^  ?i\.  \Sml\.  >2OTtf!v  \>q»X.\^  ^^, 


726 


WHITELOCKE 


parliament  which  was  summoDed  by  Crom- 
well he  was  elected  by  three  several  con- 
stituencies, the  comity  of  Bucks,  the  town 
of  Bedford,  and  the  city  of  Oxford,  while 
his  son  James  was  returned  for  the  latter 
county.  The  parliament  was  opened  on 
September  4  in  great  state,  when  White- 
locKO  carried  the  purse  before  the  protector, 
and  two  days  after  he  made  a  second  recital 
of  his  negotiation  in  Sweden  to  the  assem- 
bly, and  not  only  received  public  thanks 
from  the  speaker,  but  also  a  vote  of  2000^ 
for  his  services.  This  sum  was  not  how- 
ever piud  to  him  till  the  vote  was  renewed 
in  FeDruary  1657.  Cromwell  dissolved  this 
parliament  on  December  31,  as  not  suffi- 
ciently compliant  with  his  views.  Looking 
with  jealousy  upon  Whitelocke,  whose  as- 
cendency in  the  house  he  thought  too  great, 
and  whose  inclinations  against  his  govern- 
ment he  suspected,  he  soon  foimd  an  oppor- 
tunity of  removing  him  from  office.  He 
caused  an  ordinance  to  be  made  by  the 
council  for  new  regulations  of  the  Court  of 
Chancery,  which  were  so  objectionable  both 
in  matter  and  form  that  Whitelocke  and 
his  colleajf  ue  Widdrington  declined  to  adopt 
them.  They  were  accordingly  deprived  of 
the  Seal  on  June  6,  1655. 

Being  thus  dismissed  from  the  office  which 
he  had  held  for  above  six  year8,1ie  resumed 
for  a  short  time  his  practice  at  the  bar ;  but 
in  the  next  month  he  was  made  commis- 
sioner of  the  Treasury,  with  the  same  salary 
he  had  lost  He  was  subsequently  appointed 
oil  the  committee  for  trade,  and  also  one 
of  the  commissioners  to  negotiate  with  the 
Swedish  ambassador,  with  whom  a  treaty 
was  concluded  on  July  17,  1656.  In  the 
next  parliament,  which  met  in  the  follow- 
ing September,  he  was  again  chosen  for  the 
county  of  Bucks ;  and  upon  the  illness  of 
Sir  Thomas  Widdrington,  the  speaker,  he 
was  elected  to  supply  his  place  till  his  re- 
coverv,  three  weens  afler.  The  important 
question  of  the  settlement  of  the  nation  soon 
after  engaged  the  house,  and,  considering 
the  sentiments  professed  by  Whitelocke,  it 
is  surprising  that  he  was  named  chairman 
of  the  committee  appointed  to  confer  with 
Cromwell  on  the  suoject,  and  still  more  so 
that  he  should  endeavour  to  induce  the  pro- 
tector to  take  the  title  of  king,  and  urge 
arguments  against  his  pretended  scruples. 
The  army  having  remonstrated,  Cromwell 
refused  tne  monarchical  title,  but  accepted 
a  new  instrument  of  government  continuing 
to  him  the  title  of  lord  protector,  and  em- 
powering him  to  declare  his  successor,  and 
to  nominate  seventy  members  of  the  *  other 
house,'  that  being  the  modest  name  imder 
which  an  intended  House  of  Lords  was  de- 
signated. A  solemn  inauguration  followed 
ill  June  1657,  in  which  Whitelocke  took  a 
prominent  part,  and  new  commissions  were 
Idsued  for  aU  the  offices  of  ^tate.  Dissatisfied 


WHITELOCKE 

with  politics,  Whitelocke  soon  after  sought 
for  the  provostship  of  Eton,  then  vacant, 
but  was  disappointed  in  his  application.  He 
was  however  consoled  by  being  created  (ast 
of  the  lords  of  CromwelI*8  *•  other  house,'  in 
preparation  for  the  meeting  of  parliam^t 
m  January  1658.   The  jealousy  of  the  Com- 
mons of  that  *  other  bouse '  caused  a  diaso- 
lution  in  the  course  of  a  fortnight,  and  no 
doubt  had  its  effect  in  disinclining  White- 
locke to  accept  the  title  of  viscount,  inth 
which  Oliver  wished  in  the  following  Ango^ 
to  distinguish  him.    Cromwell's  death  took 
place  on  the  Srd  of  the  next  month,  aodhii 
son  Richard  was  proclaimed  his  successor. 
Whitelocke  was  oonBrmed  in  his  place  in 
the  Treasury  by  the  new  protector  (4  He- 
pari  Pub,  ReCf  App,  198^,  who  on  Jannaiy 
22, 1659,  replaced  him  in  nis  former  nosition 
as  first  commissioner  of  the  Great  Seal,  whiek 
he  retained  for  less  than  four  months.   At 
the  termination  of  Richard's  short  rago. 
and  the  restoration  of  the  Long  Parliament, 
he  was  again  deprived  of  it  on  May  14,  and 
of  course  lost  also  his  shortlived  peenge, 
resuming  his  seat  in  the  House  of  Commoos. 
He  was  however  placed  on  the  Council  of 
State  and  voted  its  president ;  and  whenth« 
subsequent  dispute  with  the  army  ooconed, 
and  the  Long  Parliament  was  a  second  time 
dismissed,  he  was  nominated  one  of  the 
Committee  of  Safety,  which,  after  some 
hesitation,  he  was  induced  to  undertake. 
One  of  the  first  acts  of  that  committee  wi^ 
to  appoint  Whitelocke  sole  keeper  of  the 
Great  Seal  on  November  1 ;  and  on  the  5th 
he  received  a  commission  to  raise  a  neir 
regiment  of  horse  to  oppose  General  Monk, 
who  had  declared  himself  in  farour  of  th« 
discarded  parliament.     Wlien  that  parlia- 
ment was  again  restored,  at  the  end  uf  De- 
cember, Whitelocke,   apprehensive  of  bi» 
being  sent  to  the  Tower  for  acting  on  ^ 
Committee  of  Safety,  concealed  hmuelf  in 
the  countrv,  leaving  the  Great  Seal  with 
his  wife  to  be  delivered  to  the  speaker.  He 
remained  in  retirement  till  the  tinal  diaeolB* 
tion  of  that  parliament  by  its  own  act  fn 
March  16, 1660,  nor  did  he  venture  to  ofe 
himself  as  a  candidate  for  the  ConventioB 
that  succeeded  it.    He  does  not  ajfain  zoes- 
tion  himself  in  his  Memorials  of  the  tisct 
which  terminate  with  Charles's  solemn  e&tiT 
into  London  on  May  29. 

Great  indeed  must  have  been  Wbite- 
locke's  perplexity  in  the  various  changes  cf 
the  last  year ;  and  the  conduct  he  poRO^ 
demonstnites  by  too  conclusive  evideneeBis 
utter  want  of  principle.  The  Protector  Ri- 
chard's entrusted  keeper  of  the  Seal,  he 
became  a  member  of  the  Comicil  of  State  of 
the  party  that  dethroned  him ;  and  wben 
that  party  was  in  turn  dismissed  by  tk 
army  he  a^n  changed  sides,  and  act^  ui 
the  Committee  of  Safety  and  as  keeper  of 
the  Seal  ,*  and,  to  cro^n  all^  though  thepn>- 


WHITELOGKE 

fessed  object  throoghoat  the  yarious  chaDgeiB 
was  the  settlement  of  the  Commonwealth 
'  without  a  king/  yet  he  proposed  to  Qene- 
Tal  Fleetwood  to  go  over  to  Charles  and 
offer  him  the  crown;  not  from  any  loyal 
feelinff,  but  merely,  as  he  himself  acknow- 
ledged, to  forestall  Monk  in  his  supposed 
intentions,  and  to  secure  impunity  lor  the 
past. 

It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  that  many 
who  had  seen  him  acting  in  high  stations 
in  eyery«reyolution  since  the  king's  death, 
always  adhering  to  the  side  that  was  upper- 
most, should  haye  deemed  him  a  person  so 
obnoxious  as  to  be  properly  excepted  from 
the  act  of  pardon  and  obuyion  passed  at 
the  Restoration.  But,  though  his  enemies 
were  bitter,  his  friends  were  stroog  and  nu- 
merous. His  undoubted  merits  and  ability 
pleaded  for  him,  and  particularly  his  mode- 
^1^  when  in  po'^errtood  him  in  great 
stead ;  and  consideration  for  his  numerous 
family  united  with  the  rest  to  preserve  him, 
with  some  difficulty  and  by  a  small  ma- 
jority, from  the  ruin  that  threatened  him. 
He  no  doubt  owed  much  to  lus  old  friend 
Hyde,  now  lord  chancellor,  who  accounts 
for  Whitelocke*s  fluctuating  conduct  by  the 
wreakness  of  his  character.  In  his  domestic 
relations  he  was  kind,  amiable,  and  food- 
bumoured,  and  was  evidently  much  beloyed 
l>y  his  family ;  as  a  lawyer,  if  not  deep,  he 
was  well  read  and  intelligent ;  his  practice 
at  the  bar  was  consequently  very  extensive, 
and  his  decisions  on  tne  bench  were  uncom- 

Eied  of ;  as  a  scholar  the  learned  Selden's 
lent  letters  to  him  would  be  sufficient, 
out  other  evidences  from  his  speeches 
and  writinfi^,  to  prove  him  erudite  in  his- 
torical and  classical  literature;  and  the 
manner  in  which  he  performed  the  duties 
of  the  yarious  employments  in  which  he 
was  engaged  shows  that,  with  whatever 
motive  ne  entered  on  them,  he  exerted  him- 
•elf  strenuously  to  effect  their  object.  His 
xeal  deficiency  was  the  want  of  moral  cou- 
zage,  and  his  great  weakness  was  vanity. 
The  sentiments  of  mankind  with  regard  to 
him  are  a  mixture  of  affection  and  contempt, 
acquitting  him  of  all  the  harsh  feelings  at- 
tributed to  the  leading  opponents  of  the 
monarchy,  but  convicting  him  of  aiding,  by 
his  respectability,  in  their  success.  His  cha- 
racter IS  ably  summed  up  by  Clarendon,  who 
aays  '  he  bowed  his  knees  to  Baal,  and  so 
awerved  from  his  allegiance,  but  with  less 
rancour  and  malice  than  other  men;  he 
never  led,  but  followed ;  and  was  rather  car- 
ried away  with  the  torrent  than  swam  with 
the  stream;  and  failed  through  those  in- 
firmities, which  less  than  a  general  defection 
and  a  prosperous  rebellion  could  never  have 
discovered.' 

He  is  said  to  have  had  an  interview  with 
the  king,  when  the  merry  monarch  good- 
bnmouredly  told  him  to  go  into  the  country, 


WIGHINaHAH 


727 


and  not  to  th)uble  himself  vdth  state  affairs, 
but  to  take  care  of  his  wife  and  sixteen 
children.  He  could  not  expect  any  better 
encouragement,  and  he  wisely  followed  the 
advice.  He  lived  fifteen  years  after  the  Ee- 
storation,  and  dying  in  his  retirement  at 
Chilton  Park  in  Wiltshire,  on  January  28, 
1676,  he  was  buried  at  Fawley  in  Bucks^ 
where  his  family  property  was  situate. 

He  was  thrice  married.  His  first  wife 
was  Rebecca,  daughter  of  Thomas  Bennet, 
Esq.,  an  alderman  of  London ;  his  second 
was  Frances,  daughter  of  Lord  WUloughby 
of  Parham;  and  nis  third,  a  widow  named 
Wilson,  the  daughter  of  —  Carleton,  Esq., 
who  survived  lum.  He  had  children  by 
each,  but  none  of  his  male  descendants  re- 
main. (W7iitelocke*s  Memorials,  and  his 
Embas9u  to  Sweden,  ed.  Henry  Heeve ;  Lord 
Clarendon* s  Life,  &c.) 

WHXTTHrGTOV,  Thomas,  of  the  ancient 
family  of  that  name  long  seated  at  Pauntley 
in  Gloucestershire,  was  grand-nephew  of 
Sir  Richard  Whittinffton,  the  famous  lord 
mayor  of  London,  and  son  of  Sir  Guy  Whit* 
tington,  who  was  high  sheriff  of  the  county 
in  1428  and  1434.  He  himself  tilled  the 
same  office  in  1475;  but  beyond  his  ap- 
pointm^it  as  second  baron  of  the  Exchequer, 
on  February  3,  1481,  20  Edward  IV.,  the 
published  records  of  the  law  are  wholly 
silent  about  him.  He  was  not,  however, 
removed  from  hia  place  under  Edward  V. ; 
but  immediately  on  the  accession  of  Richard 
UI.  Brian  Roucliffe  was  constituted  second 
baron  in  his  place,  the  patent  being  dated 
June  26,  1^3,  the  second  day  of  that 
usurper's  rei^.  He  lived  several  years 
afterwards,  his  will  being  dated  in  14^. 

By  his  marriage  v^th  Margaret,  daughter 
and  heir  of  John  Edwards,  'famosus  ap- 
prenticius  in  lege  peritus,'  he  became  pos- 
sessed of  the  manor  of  Rodmarton  in  Glou- 
cestershire, and  other  large  estates,  which 
devolved  on  his  only  daughter,  Maud,  who 
married  William  Wye,  of  Leppiet  in  that 
county.  (Ex  inf,  of  the  Itev,  Samuel  Lysons,) 

WICHIKGHAM,  William  de,  of  Wich- 
ingham  in  Norfolk,  was  probably  the  son  of 
William  de  Wichingham,  M.P.  for  Norwich 
in  the  reign  of  Edward  U.  He  is  first 
mentioned  as  an  advocate  in  21  Edward  III. 
at  the  assizes,  but  not  till  seven  years  after 
in  the  court  at  Westminster,  he  having  in 
the  meantime  been  employed  as  a  justice 
to  ^x  the  wages  of  labourers  in  his  native 
county.  His  name  appears  as  a  justice  of 
assize  from  34  Edwara  UI.,  and  two  years 
afterwards  he  was  created  a  king's  Serjeant. 
His  elevation  to  the  bench  as  a  justice  of  the 
Common  Pleas  took  place  on  October  29, 
1366,  39  Edward  UI. ;  and  he  continued  to 
act  in  that  court  till  the  end  of  the  rei^, 
but  was  not  re-appointed  on  the  accession 
of  Richard  U.  bpelman  (Icenia,  161)  calls 
him '  clariBsimus  nominis  illiua  YmsR.'csi^\\.-^ 


728 


WICniNTON 


tu8.*     (Rat.  Pari.  ii»  455,  iii.  4;  ZhtgdahiS 
Orig.  43.) 

WICHINTOK,  Henry  le,  w  inserted  by 
Dugdale  as  a  justicier  before  Tvhom  a  fine 
was  levied  at  Westminster  in  0  Kicbard, 
1197-8 ;  but  Mr.  Hunter's  list  notices  bis 
name  as  occurring  only  in  tbe  first  tbree 
years  of  tbe  reign  of  John. 

In  8  Ricbard  I.  be  was  discharged  from 
tbe  sum  of  sixty  marks  which  he  had  fined 
for  tbe  custody  and  marriage  of  the  daughter 
of  Fhdlip  de  Niewebote,  tbe  king  having 
vranted  the  same  to  Ralph  de  Gememue. 
(Madox,  i.  202,  323.) 

WICHnrXOH',  Wuxiam  de,  or  WY- 
^EIKTiniS,  for  the  name  is  spelled  both 
ways,  was  no  doubt  selected  <as  an  itinerant 
Justice  in  tbe  counties  of  Cambridge  and 
iHuntingdon  in  9  Henry  IH.,  1225,  in  con- 
sequence of  his  being  at  that  time  senes- 
.cbsl  or  atewapd  of  the  great  abbey  of 
Ramsey.  In  the  next  year  be  was  one  of 
^ose  appointed  to  assess  and  collect  the 
cquinzime  for  those  counties.  His  property 
lay  in  Northamptonshire,  and  was  seized 
into  tbe  kiog's  nands  at  "the  Matter  end  of 
John's  rei^,  but  restored  to  him  soon  after 
the  accession  of  his  successor.  (Hot,  Claus. 
i.  250,  320,  ii.  77,  146.) 

WIDBXINOTOV,  Thoi£AS,  belonged  to 
A  junior  branch  of  the  Ancient  and  loyal 
family  of  Widdrington,  of  Widdrington  in 
Northumberland,  one  of  whom  was  the 
gallant  squire  renowned  in  tbe  ballad  of 
'*  Chevy  Chase.*  Thomas  was  the  eldest 
«on  of  Lewis  Widdrington,  of  Desboume 
<Grange  in  Norfolk,  and,  after  spending  some 
4ime  at  both  universities,  was  admitted  a 
member  of  Gray's  Inn  in  1618,  where  be 
became  a  bacriater  and  bencher,  and  was 
elected  reader  4a  1641.  (Athm.  Oxon,  iii. 
-661.) 

He  was  recorder  of  Berwick,  and  ad- 
(dressed  King  Charles  in  a  loyal  speech 
when  passing  through  .that  town  on  June  2, 
1633,  in  Jiis  progress  to  Scotland,  conclud- 
ing with  the  aflfectionate  vrish  '  that  the 
throne  of  King  Charles,  tbe  great  and  wise 
-son  of  our  British  Solomon,  may  be  that  of 
King  David,  the  father  of  Solomon,  esta- 
blished before  the  Lord  for  ever.'  Being 
elected  in  1638  to  the  more  important 
office  of  recorder.of  York,  he  had  to^rform 
the  same  duty  on  tbe  king's  anrival  in  that 
<city  tm  March  30,  1639,  when  his  oration 
exceeded  the  former  in  fttlsome  adulation. 
How  lamentable  to  contrast  these  ardent 
epeecbes  with  the  different  langnage  soon 
to  be  common,  and  with  the  recorder's 
Aiture  career !  He  was  rewarded  with  tbe 
honour  of  knighthood.  (Bushioorth,  i.  179, 
ii.  -887 ;  Brake's  York,  368.) 

In  1640  he  was  elected  member  for  Ber- 
wick, and  soon  distinguisbed  himself  as  a 
zealous  Presbyterian  by  taking  a  prominent 
part  in  tbe  violent  proceedings  of  the  time?. 


WIDDRINGTON 

He  prepared  the  impeachment  of  Bishop 
Wren,  and  introduced  it  into  the  H^nt^e 
of  Lords  with  an  intemperate  and  aboave 
speech  {Pari.  Hid.  ii.  861,  886),  tbe  result 
of  which  was  the  bishop's  imprisonment  in 
tbe  Tower  for  ei^bteiui  years.  He  was  ooc 
of  tbe  commissioners  sent  by  tbe  paHia- 
ment  to  the  army  in  June  1647,  to  know 
what  would  satisfy  them ;  and,  tuzning  to 
the  independent  party,  he  received  the  a|>- 
pointment  of  a  commissioner  of  tbe  Greai 
8eal  on  March  15,  1648  {Whitdo(git,%% 
293,  296),  for  which  he  was  probabl?  ia- 
debted  as  much  to  bis  connection  with  tlie 
general  Lord  Fairfax,  whose  sister  be  had 
married,  as  to  his  abilities  in  his  wofessioo. 
In  October  following  he  was  called  to  the 
degree  of  the  coif,  and  by  the  parliamest 
deolased  king's  serjeant.  He  and  White- 
locke,  the  other  commissioner  of  the  Setl 
were  so  determined  against  having  aoj- 
thing  to  do  with  the  trial  of  tbe  kii^  thit 
they  both  retired  to  WhitelociBe's  booae  in 
the  country  to  'avoid  the  bosiness.'  (iUL 
342,  349,  360-566.) 

When  tbe  tragedy  was  over,  Sir  TbomaSv 
though  named  as  conunissioner  by  the  nev 
go^'emment,  declined  to  ^serve;  and  the 
Commons  had  so  much  respect  for  his 
scruples  as  not  only  to  excuse  him,  bat  to 
order  that  he  should  practise  within  the 
bar>  and  have  a  quarter^  wages  more  than 
were  due  to  him.  He,  however,  was  nade 
Serjeant  for  tbe  Commonwealth  on  Jane  d, 
1650,  And  became  member  <of  the  C«uDcil 
of  State  in  February  1651 ;  he  was  prasent 
at  tbe  meeting  at  the  speaker's  houee  ifl 
the  following  December  when  Cromwell 
discussed  witn  those  piesent  what  wts  fit 
to  be  done  for  a  settlement  of  the  nstioB 
after  the  battle  of  Worcester.  Widdriogtoa 
on  that  occasion  advocated  a  mixed  mo* 
narchical  government  as  the  most  suitable, 
and  in  answer  to  the  objection  that  the  lsi« 
king's  leldest  son  had  been  in  arms  agiiitft 
them,  and  bis  second  son  was  their  enemj* 
suggested  that  the  third  son,  the  Duke  d 
Gloucester,  was  still  anxtng  them,  and  w 
too  young  to  be  infected  with  the  princi- 
ples of  their  enemies.  This  hint  was  not 
relished  by  Cromwell,  who  soon  broke  op 
tbe  conference.  Nor  had  Widdringtoo's 
resistance  to  his  proposal  in  April  1658  to 
put  a  period  to  tne  parliament  any  bettef 
efiect,  for  the  day  after  ^e  general  rio- 
lently  turned  the  members  oat  of  doon  \ij 
his  own  authority.  Notwithstanding  thi? 
oppositioni  Widdrimrtcm  was  reinstated  ia 
bis  former  place  of  comnussioner  of  the 
Great  Seal  on  April  6,  1654,  soon  aft«r 
Cromwell  became  protector.  In  JoIt  he 
was  elected  member  for  tbe  city  of  t'ork 
in  Cromwell's  second  parliament,  and  is 
August  be  was  placed  on  the  commueioa 
for  tbe  Treasury,  for  which  he  had  an  addi- 
tional lOOOA  a  year.     He  did  not  enjnj  hit 


WIDDRINGTON 

office  much  aboTe  a  year,  for  Cromwell  and 
bis  coimcil  having  made  '  an  ordinance  for 
the  better  regulating  and  limiting  the  juris- 
diction of  the  Hign  Court  of  Chancery,' 
'which  Whitelocke  and  Widdrington  con- 
sidered injurious  to  the  public,  and  illegal 
in  itself,  both  of  them  renised  to  put  it  into 
execution,  and  were  consequently  dismissed 
on  June  6,  1666.  {Ibid.  378-607,  621- 
627.)  Cromwell  in  discharging  them  ex- 
pressed no  displeasure  at  their  scruples; 
and  before  the  end  of  the  year  Widdring- 
ton was  appointed  chancellor  for  the  county 
palatine  of  Durham,  with  a  salary  of  60/.  a 
year,     (6  Report  Pub,  Bec.j  App,  ii.  263,) 

In  the  new  parliament  of  September 
1656  Widdrington  was  returned  both  for 
the  city  of  York  and  for  Northumberland. 
His  residence  being  at  Chisbum  Grange  in 
that  county,  he  elected  to  sit  for  it,  and. 
Laving  received  the  counciFs  approval,  was 
allowed  to  enter  the  house,  and  was  choeen 
■peaker.  The  first  business  that  devolved 
upon  him  was  the  reception  of  the  spirited 
remonstrance  of  those  members  who  had 
been  excluded  for  want  of  the  council's 
certificate  of  approbation.  (JPotrL  Higt.  iii. 
1484-6.) 

It  became  his  duty  in  March  to  present 
'The  humble  Petition  and  Advice  to  the 
protector,  calling  upon  him  to  take  the 
title  of  king,  wnich  he  introduced  in  a 
speech  showing  the  antiquity  of  the  title, 
and  the  present  convenience  and  necessity 
of  its  being  assumed,  very  ingeniously  but 
somewhat  fancifully  illustrated.  When 
this  was  declined,  and  a  new  constitution 
established.  Sir  Thomas  administered  to 
CromweU  t^e  new  oath  as  lord  protector, 
prefacing  it  by  delivering  to  him  the  robe 
of  purple,  the  Bible,  the  sceptre,  and  the 
sword,  with  a  pithy  comment  on  each* 
{BHrUm'$  Diary,  i.  397,  ii.  613.)  The  par- 
liament was  dissolved  on  February  4, 1668, 
principally  because  the  Commons  wasted 
their  time  in  debating  the  title  to  be 
given  to  the  '  other  house;'  and  Widdring- 
ton, whose  arbitrary  conduct  as  speaker 
bad  been  frequently  complained  of  by  the 
members,  was  rewarded  with  the  vacant 
office  of  lord  chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer 
on  June  26.  (Siderjin,  106.)  The  death 
of  Cromwell,  which  occurred  on  September 
3,  made  no  difi'erence  in  his  position,  the 
Protector  Richard  re-appointing  him  ;  but 
before  Richard  was  dejposed,  Serjeant 
Wilde  petitioned  the  parhament  to  be  re- 
instatea  in  his  former  place  of  lord  chief 
I  baron.  (Burton,  iv.  390,  46a)  The  ser- 
I  jeant's  application  was  not  at  that  time 
successful ;  but  when  the  Long  Parliament 
reassumed  the  government,  Widdrington, 
having  been  appointed  one  of  the  Council 
of  State,  was  transferred  on  January  17, 
1660,  from  the  Court  of  Exchequer  to  be 
principal  commissioner  of  the  Great  Seal 


WIGHTM.\N 


729 


( Whitelocke^  693),  in  which  place  he  con- 
tinued till  the  return  of  the  king. 

In  the  Healing  or  Convention  Parliament 
of  April  1060  Sir  Thomas  was  elected  for 
two  places,  Berwick  and  York,  and  sat  for 
the  latter.  On  the  restoration  of  Charles 
II.  he  had  the  benefit  of  the  Act  of  In- 
demnity,^and  was  the  first  named  of  the 
re-appointed  Serjeants  on  June  1.  (Siderfin^ 
3.)  A  few  davs  after  he  boldly  opposed  a 
pi-oviso,  moved  by  Colonel  Jones  and  Mr. 
Prynne,  compelling  all  officers  during  the 
protectorate  to  refund  their  salaries,  saying 
that  if  he  was  included  in  it  he  had  much 
better  have  been  excluded  firom  the  act. 
The  clause  was  rejected.  In  December  he 
was  confirmed  in  his  previous  appointment 
of  chancellor  of  Durham,  and  in  May  1661 
he  was  again  returned  for  Berwick.  He 
resigned  the  recordership  of  York  in  1662, 
and  dying  on  May  13,  1664,  was  buried  in 
the  chancel  of  St.  GilesVin-therFlelds,  with 
a  handsome  monument  to  his  memorv. 
Though  evidently  an  accomplished  man, 
and  well  versed  in  his  own  profession,  there 
is  much  in  his  cai'eer  to  prove  the  truth  of 
what  was  said  of  his  character,  that  it  had 
'  more  of  the  willow  than  the  o^J* 

He  married  Frances,  daughter  of  Ferdi- 
nand Lord  Fairfax  of  Cameron,  the  father 
of  the  parliamentary  general,  and  had  by 
her  four  surviving  daughters. 

He  left  behind  him  a  '  A  Description  or 
Survey  of  the  City  of  York.* 

WIOHEKHOLT,  Johk  d:^  was  appointed 
in  15  John  constable  of  the  castle  of  Wal- 
lingford,  he  being  then  sheriff  of  Berkshire. 
(Hot,  Pat,  109.)  He  held  both  till  the  end 
of  that  reign,  and  during  part  of  the  next, 
and  in  17  John  was  presented  to  the  church 
of  Stokee  in  the  diocese  of  Lincoln,  and 
became  one  of  the  royal  chaplains.  In  3 
Henry  IJI.,  1219,  he  was  a  justice  itinerant 
in  the  counties  of  Wilts,  Hants,  Oxford, 
and  Berks  (Jbid,  166),  being  probably 
named  as  connected  with  the  latter  county, 
and  because  it  was  usual  to  add  a  clerical 
associate.  In  11  Henry  III.  a  mandate  was 
addressed  to  him  as  a  justice  of  the  forests. 
(Hot.  Claus.  ii.  216.) 

WIOHTHA^,  William,  was  bom  in 
1786  in  Dumfriesshire,  where  his  family 
had  been  long  established. 

After  entering  University  College,  Ox- 
ford, he  wa3  elected  to  a  Michell  fellowship 
at  Queen^s  College,  and  took  his  degree  of 
MA.  Becoming  then  a  student  in  Lin- 
coln's Inn,  he  practised  for  some  years  as  a 
special  pleader  before  he  was  called  to  the 
bar.    0^  taking  that  step  in  1821,  the  re- 

Eutation  he  had  already  acquired  insured 
im  at  an  early  period  a  veiy  considerable 
business.  His  character  for  solid  le^ 
learning  may  be  estimated  by  his  bemg 
employed  for  ten  or  twelve  years  as  the 
aasistimt  of  the  attomey-^nffic^l'^  ^^  ^^^ 


730 


WIGHTMAN 


WIGHTMAN 


day,  m  tli«  office  of  junior  counsel  of  the  I  utility  to  the  public,  was  not  an  eratfid 
Treasury,  a  post  familiarly  designated  as  one :  it  was  a  stream  flowing  on  to  its  dme 
that  oiiicer^s  *  devil,'  and  reauiring  a  quali-  ivith  increA&inflr  vnlum^.  hut  \irithnut  Wflka. 
lication  which  eminently  belonged  to  him 


— that  of  the  most  unerrinfj  accuracy  and 
precision*  This  also  led  to  his  appointment 
as  one  of  the  commissioners  for  enquiring 
iuto  the  practice  and  proceediaffs  of  the 
common  law  courts  in  18;i0,  and  in  1833 
in  another  commission  for  digesting  the 
criminal  law. 

With  such  antecedents  his  ultimate  pro- 
motion was  certain.  It  took  place  in 
February  1841,  wlien  he  was  constituted 
A  }udf^  of  the  Queen's  Bench,  and  was 
thereupon  knighted.  The  selection  was 
more  than  juntitied:  during  the  period 
of  nearly  three-and-twenty  years  in  which 
he  sat  in  that  court,  notwithstanding  his 
exalted  position,  and  the  high  estimation 
in  which  he  must  have  been  conscious  that 
he  was  held^  he  never  lost  that  innate 
modesty  for  which  from  the  first  he  was 
distinguished.  To  his  profound  knowledge 
of  the  law  he  added  those  judicial  qualities 
of  pHtieuce  in  listening,  discrimination  in 
judging,  and  clearness  in  explaining,  which 
are  so  essential  and  becoming  on  the  bench. 

His  labours  and  his  life  were  suddenly 
terminated  at  York  on  December  10,  18C3, 
by  an  attack  of  spoplexj,  while  attending 
the  Northern  Circuit,  being  the  third  judge 
who  has  during  the  reign  closed  his  career 
while  in  the  exercise  of  his  duties  at  the 
assises,  the  two  others  being  Mr.  Justice 
Talfourd  and  Mr.  Baron  Watson. 

He  married  in  1810  the  daughter  of 
James  Baird,  Esq.,  of  Lasswade,  near 
Edinburgh. 

It  is  with  pride  and  pleasure  that  I  am 
permitted  to  append  to  this  slight  memoir 
a  letter  from  one  of  Sir  William  Wights 
man's  former  fellow- labourers  on  the  bench. 
The  elegant  and  affectionate  style  of  the 
writer  will  be  recognised  by  many  of  my 
readers,  who  cannot  fail  to  remark  that  in 
the  amiable  character  and  the  judicial 
excellence  which  he  justly  attributes  to  his 
friend  he  has  unconsciously  delineated 
his  own : — 


•July  25,  1864. 
'  My  deak  Sir, — I  have  delayed  the  ful- 
filment of  my  promise  to  you  respecting 
my  late  colleague  and  friend  Mr.  Justice 
Wightman  longer  than  I  intended — in 
great  measure  because  the  considering  it 
with  a  view  to  its  fulfilment  has  convinced 
me  that  it  was  somewhat  rashly  made. 
Much,  indeed,  might  be  said  respecting 
him  by  one  competent  to  the  task,  and  of 
an  interesting  cnaracter  both  to  lawyers 
and  to  general  readers;  but  it  might  be 
hardly  suitable  to  the  plan  of  your  work ; 
and  his  professional  career,  though  one  of 
uninterrupted  Bueceea,  «xA,\oi  n£i^  ^^^sxt  of 
it  during  YrbicVi^^  -^j^A^L^vsA^^^l^afljaeoX 


with  increasing  volume,  but  without  biealD, 
without  fall^  without  overflowa. 

'  He  and  1  were  not  on  the  same  chcidt, 
when  at  the  bar;  but  we  sate  in  the  atme 
row  in  court,  and  I  had  aufl^ent  oppor- 
tunity to  form  a  high  opinion  of  his  mt 
legal  knowledge  and  practical  ability,  both 
as  a  special  pleader  and  adyocate.  It  so 
happened  that  we  were  engaged  on  ths 
same  side  in  the  nrosecutiona  whidi  grev 
out  of  the  Bristol  Riots,  and  were  con- 
ducted under  a  special  commisdoo;  snd 
also  in  the  informations  a^^nst  the  mayor 
and  aldermen  of  Bristol  which  folWed. 
Qradually  there  grew  up  between  m  s 
^pood  deal  of  friendly  feeling  and  familiir 
mtercourse.  He  was  a  most  agieetUe 
companion.  I  do  not  think  that  he  could 
be  said,  at  the  time  I  speak  ol^  to  have 
done  his  intellect  full  justice  in  the  way  d 
literary  cultiyation.  It  might  be  owiag  to 
his  genuine  modesty  and  yery  undemoostn- 
tive  character ;  he  certainly,  however,  did 
not  show  at  that  time  much  of  gnienl 
reading  or  scholarship  in  his  taUc ;  bat  k 
was  full  of  information  and  anecdote, and  s 
rich  vein  of  humour  ran  through  all  his 
conversation — ^humour,  as  indeecl  it  com- 
monly is,  quite  untranslatable,  which  do 
narrative  can  giye  an  adequate  idea  d,  md 
removed  the  farther  from  common  ip- 
peciation,  but  the  more  racy  to  professioail 
nearers,  from  its  yery  commonly  dothiflg 
itself  in  quaint  professional  diction.  I  vu 
raised  to  the  bench  seme  years  before  hia: 
and  when  I  went  upon  the  Northern  Cimit 
as  judge,  I  found  him  nearly,  if  not  quite, 
the  first  junior  and  enniged  in  nearly  efoy 
important  case.  To  this  position  he  duii^ 
seemingly  having  no  desire  for  the  distinc- 
tion of  a  silk  gown,  and  certainly  ven* 
averse  to  that  which  ambitious  j union  ire 
said  sometimes  to  covet — the  being  calkd 
on  to  lead  a  cause  owinff  to  the  unexpeded 
absence  of  his  leader.  He  desired  no  focli 
opportunities  of  distinction.  I  remembe: 
in  vain  putting  on  him  all  the  ipnssast 
fairly  in  my  power  upon  an  occasioQ  tt 
Liverpool  when  yve  were  dividing  tlhf 
causes,  and  trying  them  at  the  same  txBr 
in  two  courts.  T  yyished  him  to  lesd  t 
cause,  but  he  resolutely  declined.  No  (bk 
doubted  that  in  the  majority  of  cxasa  he 
would  have  led  with  exquisite  judgment, « 
that  he  would  have  exercised  a  powerfilp' 
fluence  over  a  jury.  With  this  diepoiiti* 
and  these  unquestioned  qualificatiooi^  ^ 
did  not  coyet  promotion,  and  remaiaedviih 
a  stuff  gown  on  his  bacl^  until,  in  thsr-^ 
of  1841,  Mr.  Justice  Littledak  f 
and  he  was,  with  the  uniyena) 
of  the  profession,  called  by  L 
Cottenham  to  till  his  pfr* 
.\^i&w^  ^\.  \^At  time  n 


WIGHTMAN 

reckoned  equal  to  the  retiriDg  judge  in  the 
knowledge  of  the  common  law;  but  Wight- 
man  was  a  successful  student  in  the  same 
school,  and  he  brought  with  him  a  greater 
knowledge  of  mankind  and  habits  of  a  more 
prompt  decision.  The  duties  which  he  now 
entered  on  he  continued  to  discharge  to  the 
last  daj  of  his  life ;  and  it  is  not  merely 
the  exag^radon  of  a  friend  to  say  that  he 
did  so  with  ever-increasing  satisfaction  to 
the  public  As  at  the  oar,  so  on  the 
bench,  he  was  never  a  volunteer  of  laboiu: 
which  it  was  not  his  duty  to  undertake, 
nor  covetous  of  any  occasional  distinction ; 
but  he  shrank  from  no  labour  which  the 
discharge  of  his  duty  called  on  him  to 
imdertflJce ;  and  whenever  circumstaoces 
compelled  him  to  be  prominent,  he  was 
found  to  fill  the  post  with  ease  and  dignitv 
of  manner,  as  well  as  simplicity.  He  had, 
of  course,  often  to  prepare  written  judg- 
ments for  himself,  and  not  seldom  for  the 
court:  he  did  this  with  great  care,  in  a 
clear  style,  and  with  a  very  lucid  arrange- 
ment. Generally,  indeed  almost  universally, 
he  commenced  with  a  statement  of  what  he 
considered  to  be  the  facts,  that,  as  he  said, 
it  might  at  all  events  appear  on  what  he 
decided;  he  arranged  his  authorities,  or 
stated  his  principles  of  decision,  and  then 
drew  the  conclusion.  I  have  always  con- 
sidered them  as  models  of  that  class  of  com- 
position ;  and  his  reasoning  faculty  was  so 
sound,  that  he  did  not  often  miss  a  logical 
conclusion  ;  to  use  a  professional  expression, 
he  was  eminently  **  a  safe  judge."  He  never 
exceeded  in  length ;  indeed,  it  might  have 
been  well  if  one  so  competent  had  on  some 
occasions  travelled  wider  afield,  and  illus- 
trated his  decision  of  the  matter  in  hand 
by  analogies,  of  which  his  learning  would 
have  furnished  him  with  apt  and  striking 
instances.  He  served  with  three  chief 
justices  in  succession,  and  I  believe  there 
was  no  one  of  them  who  did  not  feel  and 
gratefully  acknowledge  the  value  of  his 
effective  assistance — always  zealously  and 
never  ostentatiously  rendered. 

*  When  be  sat  alone  at  Nisi  Prius,  or  in 
the  trial  of  criminal  cases,  it  was  in  a  good 
sense  a  great  j  udicial  display — always  care- 
ful as  to  his  appearance  and  dress,  dignified 
without  the  slightest  ostentation,  very 
courteous,  yet  very  firm,  quiet,  saying 
little,  but  that  little  very  pointedly,  in  the 
course  of  the  cause,  very  attentive,  and 
losing  nothing ;  disposing  of  points  as  they 
arose,  shortly,  and  with  ease  and  distinct- 
ness ;  presenting  the  question,  and  the  cir- 
cumstances as  they  bore  on  it,  to  the  jury 
"with  the  greatest  precision,  and  inevitably 
making  them  feel  entire  confidence  in  his 
impartiality.  The  man  who  had  a  good 
cause,  or  the  innocent  prisoner,  rejoiced 
that  he  had  him  for  the  judge ;  while  he 
against  whom  the  verdict  passed,  felt  at 


WIGHTMAN 


731 


least  the  satisfaction  that  no  favourable 
point  had  been  overlooked  or  undervalued, 
nothing  adverse  exaggerated  or  unduly 
pressed.  Yet,  with  ffl  this  mastery  over 
the  position,  what  we  call  anxious  cases — 
cases  of  ^eat  length  or  comf)lication,  or 
those  which  might  end  in  capital  punish- 
ment— did  make  him  very  anxious ;  and  to 
those  who  were  near  him  on  such  occasions 
there  were  sometimes-— outbreaks  they  can 
hardly  be  called,  but  slight  outpourings  of 
queriuousness,  free  from  ill-temper,  and  at 
which  no  one  was  more  ready  to  smile  than 
himself  when  the  cause  had  passed  away. 

*  I  saw  him  for  the  last  time,  I  think,  on 
November  29,  1863,  when  he  called  on  me, 
just  before  he  started  on  that  circuit  from 
which  he  was  never  to  return.  He  had 
walked  a  considerable  distance  from  his 
own  house  in  Eaton  Place;  and  he  was 
about  to  walk  home,  making  other  visits  by 
the  way.  He  had  then  nearly  completed 
his  eightieth  year ;  yet  he  looked  fresh  and 
firm,  walked  uprightly,  saw  and  heard 
perfectly,  and  was  in  the  full  vigour  of  his 
mental  faculties.  As  we  parted,  I  reminded 
him  of  the  last  vnnter  circuit  at  York,  on 
which  we  had  been  together,  and  how  we 
had  then  both  agreed  that  that  should  be 
our  last.  He  only  smiled,  and  we  parted 
without  a  foreboding  on  either  side.  He 
found  at  York  a  heavy  calendar,  and  from 
the  beginning  it  seemed  to  oppress  him 
more  than  was  usually  the  case.  We  are 
apt,  after  an  event  of  importance  has  hap- 
pened, to  recollect  slight  circumstances  and 
casual  expressions  which,  if  nothing  had 
liappened,  we  should  have  forgotten  or 
thought  quite  immaterial.  It  is  remembered 
now  that  the  chaplain  had  omitted  to 
mention  him  in  the  bidding  prayer  before 
his  assize  sermon.  **  There  was  no  one  in 
the  minster,"  said  he  after  the  service, 
**who  more  needed  the  prayers  of  the 
people  than  the  judge  who  has  this  list  of 
prisoners  to  dispose  of 

'On  the  last  day  of  his  life  he  was  in 
court  early,  and  tried  a  complicated  case, 
which  lasted  the  whole  day :  it  was  one 
which  excited  much  interest  in  the  coimty, 
and  the  hall  was  crowded.  He  felt  op- 
pressed; but  this  did  not  appear  to  tne 
audience,  who  listened  with  admiration  to 
a  masterly  summing  up  of  the  long  evi- 
dence— with  admiration  not  unmixed  with 
wonder  to  see  such  vigour  of  intellect  and 
clearness  of  recollection,  supported  by  such 
activity  of  the  bodily  faculties,  at  such  an 
advanced  a^e.  But  it  was  the  bright 
burning  of  the  taper  before  its  sinking  into 
darkness.  He  returned  to  his  lodgings, 
where,  happily  for  himself  and  for  her, 
Miss  Wightman  was  waiting  for  him.  The 
father  and  the  child  passed  the  evening 
quietly  together.  He  complained  a  little 
of  hia  work  o\^T£tom\i^  Vvca.^  ^sv\  ^^j^*^ 


32 


WIGUTMAN 


cheerfully  of  resignation  and  ramblinp:  on 
the  Continent.  He  talked  much  and  with 
overflowing  affection  of  the  different  mem- 
bers of  his  familj.  So  the  evening  passed, 
and  he  retired  to  his  room.  There  was 
just  enough  in  his  tone  and  manner  to 
excite  a  little  uneasiness,  and  it  is  said  that 
Miss  Wightman  made  an  excuse  some  time 
after  to  tap  at  his  door  and  enauire  how  he 
was.  He  answered  cheerfully,  but  he  never 
rose  from  his  bed :  the  old  man's  strength, 
it  flhould  seem,  had  been  too  severely  tned, 
and  he  sank  on  the  following  day. 

*  It  may  well  be  supnosed  how  awfully 
and  sadly  the  news  brolce  on  the  crowded 
city  of  York.  Thf^t  a  man  at  his  time  of 
lite  should  pass  away  without  note  of 
warning  might  seem  not  extraordinary; 
))ut  it  IS  remarkable  that,  old  aa  he  was, 
nothing  in  his  appearance  or  manner  called 
lip  associations  with  the  approach  of  death. 
Kven  to  his  nearest  frienas  and  relations 
the  event  came  with  the  shock  of  surprise ; 
and  here  the  bar,  the  jury,  the  witnesses, 
the  crowd  of  interested  spectators,  had 
seen  him  last,  and  but  the  day  before,  on 
the  judgment-seat,  administering  justice 
with  the  vigour  and  clearness  of  a  man  in 
the  prime  of  life — ^with  the  wisdom  and 
consideration,  but  without  a  shadow  of  the 
weakness  of  old  age.  It  may  be  truly  said 
that  the  feeling  of  surprise  was  not  greater 
or  more  universal  than  that  of  regret 
Not  in  the  first  moment,  but  after  time 
allowed  for  consideration,  which  only  added 
substance  to  the  feeling,  a  meeting  was 
held,  and  it  was  resolved  to  place  a  wmdow 
in  the  minster  in  commemoration  of  his 
public  services,  his  private  virtues,  and  the 
sorrow  of  his  friends  and  the  publiq  for  the 
loss  they  had  sustained. 

'I  am  not  writing  my  ^end*a  eulogy, 
nor  attempting  to  describe  at  full  his 
character ;  nor  mnst  I  venture  to  lilt  up  the 
veil,  which  must  remain  drawn  before  the 
long  happinesses  and  sacred  sorrows  of 
domestic  life,  though  it  shuts  out  from 
respectful  and  loving  admiration  the  best 
parts,  it  may  be,  of  a  good  man's  character. 
It  is  enough  to  aay  that  he  left  a  widow 
who  has  to  be  thankful  for  nearly  half  a 
century  of  unbrol^en  harmony  and  happi- 
ness, and  four  daughters  and  numerous 
grandchildren,  the  objects  of  his  constant 
affection  and  care.  Life  must  to  them  be 
changed  indeed ;  but  it  may  safely  be  hoped 
that  she  and  they  will  all  be  supported 
under  their  ^at  affliction  by  His  hand^ 
who  has  ordamed  it  for  them. 

'  I  am  afraid  I  have  been  led  to  do  what, 
at  the  outset,  I  prepared  you  for  my  care-* 
fully  avoiding ;  and  perhaps  I  have  written 
what  should  have  no  plare  in  your  book  : 
but  you  will  consider  over  how  many  years 
of  friendly  and  intimate  intercourse  my 
memory  wanders,  and  that  he  who  can 


WIGRAM 

look  back  so  far  can  hardly  hare  escsp^ 
the  infirmity  to  which  length  of  days  U 
most  liable. 

'I  sometimes  think,  with  regret,  that 
had  he  timely  snared  the  imusuid  atiengtii 
which  was  voucnsafed  to  him,  and  retired 
some  few  years  since  to  lahoora  leas  ex- 
hausting than  those  of  the  common  kv 
bench,  he  might  now  he  mnong  us,  ooa- 
f erring  happiness  on  his  family,  and  rnil 
benefits  op  the  public.  But  such  regrets 
are  as  unwise  as  they  are  unavailing.  H<s 
lived  happy  in  the  course  he  pursued,  and 
he  died  as  I  think  he  would  nave  wuhed 
to  die — his  loins  girded,  hin  harness  on  bis 
hack,  in  the  faithful  and  conacientioui 
discharge  of  his  duty. 

'I  remain,  my  dear  Sir, 

*  Yours,  &c' 

WIO^AX,  Jaxbs,  waa  of  Irish  extrac- 
tion. His  father  was  Irish ;  his  paternal 
grandfather,  John  Wigran^  of  Wexford, 
and  his  paternal  mindmother,  Marr, 
daughter  of  Robert  Clifford  of  Wexfori 
were  also  Irish.  His  father,  Sir  Robert 
Wigram,  was  bom  at  Wexford,  and,  set- 
tling in  England,  became  one  of  the  meet 
eminent  of  its  merchants.  In  1805  he  was 
honoured  with  a  baronetcy,  which  ^  now 
possessed  by  his  grandson,  whose  father, 
the  second  baronet,  aasumed  the  name  of 
Pltzwygram.  Sir  Robert  Wigram  mamed 
two  wives,  and  was  the  parent  of  twentj- 
three  children,  of  whom  Sir  James,  tLe 
vice-chancellor,  was  hia  third  son  by  his 
second  wife,  Eleanor,  daughter  of  John 
Watts,  Eejii.,  of  Southampton.  He  was 
bom  at  his  (ather*s  seat,  Walthamftow 
House,  Essex,  on  November  6,  1793w 
Feeling  that  the  seven  years  he  spent  at  a 
private  school  had  been  wasted,  he  had  tbe 
couraffe,  at  the  age  of  sixteen,  to  follow 
the  advice  of  the  Key.  Thomas  Bouzdillion, 
of  Fen  Stanton,  with  whom  he  was  tben 
placed  as  pupil,  and  to  b^in  his  education 
again  from  the  beginning.  This  he  did  so 
successfully  that  at  Cambridge  (wheie  he 
began  his  residence  at  Trinity  Collese  ia 
1811,  under  the  private  tutorship  of  the 
Rev.  Charles  Webb  le  Bas,  subeeguentlj 
principal  of  the  East  India  CoUege,  UaileT- 
bury^  he  became  fifth  wrangler  in  1815, 
and  m  autumn  1817  gained  a  fellowship  at 
Trinity,  taking  his  degree  of  RA.  in  1^15, 
and  that  of  J1.A.  in  1818.  In  December 
1818  he  married  Anne,  daughter  of  Richard 
Ark  Wright,  Esq.,  of  Willeraley  in  Derby- 
shire, and  granddaughter  of  Sir  Richard 
Arkwright,  and  in  the  following  year  be 
was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  society  o( 
Itincoln's  Inn.  Attaching  himsdf  to  tb« 
Court  of  Chancery,  he  practised  there  with 
such  success  that  in  1884  he  was  made 
one  of  the  king's  counsel,  having  in  1831 
published  a  treatise  entitled  ^  An  Exami- 
nation of  the  Rules  of  Law  respecting  the 


WILDE 

Admission  of  Extrinsic  Evidence  in*  aid 
of  the  Interpretation  of  Wills,*  which  has 
already  gone  through  four  editions.  This 
treatise  was  followed  in  1836  by  another, 
entitled  *  Points  in  the  Law  of  fiiscovery,* 
which  is  equally  useful  and  highly  esteemed. 
These  publications  led  to  a  very  interesting 
correspondence  ^th  some  of  the  American 
judges,  among  whom  was  Dr.  Story,  the 
celebrated  author  of  the  well-known  Com- 
mentaries. 

While  enjoying  a  distinguished  lead  in 
the  courts  of  equity,  he  entered  parliament 
as  member  for  Leominster  in  June  1841, 
but  had  little  opportunity  of  exhibiting 
any  senatorial  talent,  for  within  font  months 
he  received  the  reward  of   his  forensic 
labours,  and  yacated  his  seat  upon  being 
raised  to  the  bench.     On  October  28  of 
that  year,  on  the  passing  of  an  act  of 
parliament   (6  Vict.  c.  6,  s.   19)  autho- 
rising the  appointment  of  two  rteW  judges 
of  the  Court  of  Chancery,   to  be  called 
vice-chancellors,  Mr.  J.  L.  Knight-Bruce 
and  Mr.  James  Wigram  were  selected  from 
the  equity  bar  to  fill  those  offices.    They 
were  both  knighted  in  January  following, 
and  sworn  in  as  members  oi  the  ptivy 
counciL     Sir  James  Wigram  presided  over 
bis  court  for  nine  years,  his  decrees  being 
remarkable  for  the  lucid  exposition  of  the 
legal  principles  involved  in  the  cases  on 
which  he  had  to  adjudicate.    They  were 
the  subject  of  general  approbation,  and 
were  highly  extolled  by  those  most  com- 
petent to  form  ft  judgment     As  reported 
by  Mr.  Thomas  Hare,  all  of  them  have  the 
special  advantage  of  having  been  seen  and 
approved  by  the  judge  before  publication. 

In  consequence  of  ill-health,  which  re- 
sulted in  total  loss  of  sight,  Sir  James  felt 
himself  compelled  to  resign  his  post  in 
Trinity  Vacation  1850.  Serenely  patient 
under  his  affliction,  he  lived  many  years 
afterwards,  and  died  on  July  29,  1866. 
For  many  of  the  facts  in  this  sketch  I  am 
indebted  to  the  courteous  liberality  of  Sir 
James  Wigram. 

WILDE,  John,  descended  from  a  family 
that  resided  at  Hult  in  the  county  of 
Denbigh  about  the  reign  of  Henry  IV., 
was  the  son  of  George  Wilde,  of  Droitwlch 
in  Worcestershire,  a  serjeant-at-law  in  the 
reign  of  James  I.,  and  of  Frances,  daughter 
of  Sir  Edmund  Hudleston,  of  Sawston  in 
Cambridgeshire.  He  whs  educated  at 
Balliol  College,  Oxford,  where  he  took  the 
degree  of  B.A.  in  1607,  and  of  M.A.  in 
1610.  Following  his  father*s  profession, 
he  entered  the  Inner  Temple,  where  he 
Tvas  elected  reader  in  1631.  (Fasti  Oxon. 
i.  321,  338;  DtigdMs  Orig,  168.)  A 
member  of  Charles's  second  parliament  in 
1626,  he  took  part  in  the  debate  against 
the  Duke  of  Buckingham,  arguing  from 
^racton  that  common  fame  was  a  sufficient 


WILDE 


733 


ground  for  accusation.  {Pari  HtHt.  ii.  63.) 
In  1636  he  was  called  to  the  degree  of 
Serjeant.     (Rt/mer^  xx.  22.) 

In  the  Long  Parliament  he  was  member 
for  Worcestershire,  and  was  a  prominent 
actor  in  its  proceedings.   He  was  chairman 
of  the  committee  appointed  to  prepare  the 
impeachment  against  the  thirteen  bishops 
concerned  in    making    the    new    canons, 
which,  on  August  3,  1641,  he  presented  to 
the  House  Of  Lords.     In  December  he 
presided  over  a  committee  of  enquiry  as  to 
a  plot  to  bring  in  the  army  to  overawe  the 
parliament;,  and  in  January  1642  he  re- 
ported a  conference  With  the  Lords  as  to 
the  attorney-general  (Sir  Edward  Herbert) 
having  impeached  the  five  members,  and 
conducted  the  impeachment  against  that 
officer  which  the  Commons  ordered.    (Pari. 
Hid.  ii.  895,  1039,  1121.)    In  the  same 
year  he  subscribed  twd  korses  and  their 
maintenance  for  the  defence  of  the  parlia- 
ment {Notes  and  Queriei;l%i  S.  xii.  338)  ; 
and  in  February  1643  he  was  recommended 
as  chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer  in  the 
unsuccessful   propositions    made    by    tho 
Commons  to  the  king.   ( Clarendon j iii.  407. ) 
The  parliament  having  ordered  a  new 
Great  Seal  in  place  of  that  which  had  been 
carried  to  the  king  by  Lord  Lyttelton, 
principally  on  the  arguments  of  Mr.  Ser- 
jeant Wilde,  showing  its  necessity,  resolved 
to  entrust  it  to  six  commissioners,  two 
lords  and  four  commobers,  and  on  Novem- 
ber 10, 1643;  the  Serjeant  was  elected  as 
one  of  the  latter.     By  successive  vote's 
these  commissioners,  notwithstanding  the 
Self-Denying  Ordinance,  retained  the  cus- 
tody of  the  Seal  for  thfee  years,  when  on 
October  30,  1646,  they  surrendered  it  to 
the  speakers  of  the  two  houses.     During 
this  time  Serjeant  Wilde  still  kept  his  seat 
in    the   Commons,   and  was    one  of  the 
managers  on  their  part  in  the  impeachment 
of  Archbishop   Laud,   whose    trial  com- 
menced oil  March  12, 1644.     His  speeches 
against  the  primate  were  more  conspicuous 
for  political  and  religious  rancour  tnan  for 
argument  or  good  taste.   When  Mr.  Heme, 
the  archbishop's  Counsel,  argued  that  none 
of  the  charges  amounted  to  treason,  the 
Serjeant  said  it  h^  not  been  alleged  that 
they  did  so,  *  but  we  do  say  that  all  the 
bishop's  misdemeanours  put  together  do, 
by  Way  of  accumulation,  make  many  grand 
treasons.'    Heme  immediately  replied,  ^  I 
crave  your  mercy,  good  Mr.  Serjeant;  I 
never  understood  before  this  time  that  two 
hundred  black  rabbits  would  make  a  black 
horse.'  The  trial  was  superseded,  as  in  the 
Earl    of   Strafford*s    case,  by  a    bill    of 
attainder,    under  which    the    archbishop 
suffered  on  January   10,  1644-5.     Wilde 
was  elected  recorder  of  Worcester  in  July 
1646.      (Joumais;    Whitelocke,   77,  218  •. 
StaU  Trialsy  iv.  aol-^Si'ti>.^ 


734 


WILDE 


After  the  Seal  was  taken  from  the  Ser- 
jeant, he  was  several  times  employed  as 
judge  of  assize,  and  does  not  seem  to  have 
Deen  very  scrupulous  in  his  proceedings. 
He  is  accused  at  one  time  of  hanging  Cap- 
tain John  Burley  at  Winchester  for  causing 
a  drum  to  be  oeaten  for  God  and  King 
Charles  at  Newport  in  the  Isle  of  Wight, 
in  order  to  rescue  his  captive  sovereign ; 
and  at  another,  of  directing  the  grand  jury 
to  ignore  tlie  bill  of  indictment  preferred 
Against  Major  Edmund  Rolph  for  intending 
to  murder  the  king.  The  Commons  voted 
their  thanks  to  him  for  his  great  and  good 
service  done  to  the  parliament  in  that 
circuit,  and  Anthony  Wood  (Fasti,  i.  336) 
states  that  he  received  lOOOiL  for  each  of 
these  tnmsactions,  adding  that  it '  was  all 
one  to  him  whether  he  hung  or  hung  not, 
80  he  got  the  beloved  pelf.* 

On  October  12,  lo48,  the  parliament 
took  upon  them  to  fill  the  vacancies  on  the 
judicial  bench,  and  appointed  Serjeant 
Wilde  to  be  chief  baron  of  the  Exchequer, 
who  was  sworn  into  office  on  November 
16.  He  still  retained  his  position  when 
the  king  was  beheaded,  took  the  new  oaths, 
and  was  placed  on  the  Council  of  State. 
{JfliiteJocke,  343-381.)  When  Cromwell 
assumed  the  protectorate  in  December 
1653,  he  did  not,  for  some  unrecorded 
reason,  continue  Wilde  as  chief  baron,  but 
appointed  William  Steele.  (Hardres'  Re- 
ports,) There  is  a  letter  from  Wilde, 
dated  July  12,  1664,  complaining  that 
after  all  his  services  he  is  removed,  ad- 
dressed to  Whitelocke  (StvedisI^  Emh,  ii. 
461)  on  his  return  from  the  Swedish  em- 
bassy, who  says  that  it  was  '  a  usual  reward 
in  such  times  for  the  best  services,*  and 
adds  that  he  moved  the  protector  on 
Wilde's  behalf,  *  but  to  no  effect,  the  pro- 
tector having  a  dislike  to  the  seijeant,  but, 
the  ground  thereof  I  could  not  learn.' 

Wilde  remained  out  of  employment  during 
the  rest  of  Cromwell's  life,  but  was  elected 
member  for  Droitwich  in  Protector  Richard's 
parliament  of  1558-9.  He  there  presented 
a  petition  from  himself,  praying  a  restora- 
tion to  his  former  office,  and  for  pa3rment 
of  the  arrears  of  1300/.  due  to  him  for  his 
salary.  The  former  was  refused,  but  the 
latter  was  granted.  {Burtons  Dmry,  iv. 
300.) 

On  the  return  of  the  Long  Parliamen  t 
Serjeant  Wilde  resumed  his  place  as  a 
member,  and  on  January  17,  1659-60,  was 
restored  to  his  judicial  seat  by  the  same 

J)ower  that  had  first  appointed  him.  (IVhite- 
ocke,  693.)  Short,  however,  was  his  en- 
joyment of  it.  The  return  of  the  king  in 
May,  and  the  immediate  nomination  of 
Sir  Orlando  Bridgeman  as  lord  chief  baron, 
terminated  the  Serjeant's  legal  career.  In 
consequence  of  his  having  assisted  the 
I-.ord8  in  several  committees  of  the  Conven- 


WILDE 

tion  Parliament,  he  escaped  farther  qi!4- 
tion,  and,  absolved  by  the  Act  of  Indemmty, 
he  retired  to  his  nouse  at  Hampstitti 
There  he  died  about  1669,  and  was  baned 
at  Wherwill  in  Hampshire,  the  seat  <>f 
Charles  Lord  de  la  Warr,  the  husband  of 
his  only  daughter  and  heir,  Anne.  ( CofliWi 
Peerage,  i.  287,  ii.  166,  v.  24.)  His  wife 
was  Anne,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Hir- 
ries,  of  Tonge  Castle,  seijeant-at-law  ud 
baronet. 

Whitelocke  describes  him  as  ^eaniM 
in  his  profession,  but  of  more  reading  tbui 
depth  of  judgment,'  and  as  executing  his 
place  '  with  diligence  and  justice; '  but  Hi^ 
testimony  of  his  other  contemporaries  i« 
strongly  against  him.  Clarendon  calls  bim 
'  an  infamous  judge ; '  and  Archbishop  Liui<i. 
in  the  account  of  his  trial,  883^8,  'I  had  a 
character  given  me  before  of  this  gentleman 
which  I  will  forbear  to  express,  bat  in  thi« 
speech  of  his,  and  his  future  prooeediD«» 
with  me,  I  found  it  exactly  trae;'  and 
Anthony  Wood's  opinion  of  him  has  be€o 
already  stated.  Burton  also  speaks  of  his 
tiresome  speeches. 

WUDE,  William,  bom  about  1611, 
was  the  son  of  William  Wilde,  of  Clifibpi*8 
Inn,  London,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  bj 
the  Inner  Temple  in  1637,  became  a 
bencher  in  1652,  and  was  elected  recorder 
of  London  on  Novemher  3,  1659.  ThiU  be 
was  considered  one  of  the  moderate  ptitr 
may  be  presumed  from  his  being  returned 
as  member  for  that  city  to  the  ConTentioo 
Parliament  that  met  in  April  1660,  from 
his  being  knighted  immediately  on  the 
king's  return,  from  his  being  called  to  the 
degree  of  Serjeant  at  the  second  call  alWr 
the  Bestoration,  and  from  his  being  farther 
dignified  with  a  baronetcy  on  September 
13  in  the  same  year.  As  recorder  he  va9 
of  course  named  on  the  commisgioo  fi>r 
the  trial  of  the  regicides.  On  November 
10  in  the  following  year  he  was  made  one 
of  the  king's  Serjeants,  which  posiUOT. 
with  that  of  recorder,  he  enjoyed  until 
April  10, 1668,  when  he  resigned  the  latter 
office  on  being  appointed  a  judge  of  the 
Common  Pleas.  In  that  court  he  remtinetl 
nearly  five  years,  and  then  on  January  2*2, 
1678,  was  removed  to  the  King*s  Bench, 
where  he  sat  as  judge  above  six  r^^ 
more.  (1  Siderfin,  4  ;  Park  Hid,  if.  4: 
T,  Raymmd,  217  ;  T.  Jones,  43.) 

On  April  29,  1679,  his  patent  was  re- 
voked at  the  same  time  as  tho«e  of  tbr^ 
other  judges— viz.,  Vere  Bertie,  Thurlwd. 
and  Bramston.  Burnet  (i.  450)  says  tbit 
Sir  William  Wilde,  *  a  worthy  and  andect 
judge,*  was  turned  out  for  his  plain  free- 
dom in  telling  Bedlow,  one  of  the  witness^ 
of  the  Popish  Plot,  that  ^  he  was  a  perjured 
man,  and  ought  to  come  no  more  into 
court,  but  go  home  and  repent.'  In  the 
preceding  February,  Green,  Berry,  and  Hill 


WILDE 

were  tried  for  the  murder  of  Sir  Edmnnd- 
bury  Godfrey ;  and  on  April  16  Nathaniel 
Heading  waA  tried  for  tampering  with  the 
king's  evidence;  the  conyiction  on  both 
trials  being  founded  materially  upon  the 
evidence  oi  Bedlow.  Justice  Wilde  took 
an  active  part  in  each,  pronouncing  sen- 
tence of  death  in  the  former,  and  saying 
that  the  conviction  of  the  latter  was  'a 
very  good  verdict.*  So  that  his  discovery 
of  Bedlow's  false  swearing  and  his  use  of 
the  expressions  recorded  oy  Burnet  must 
have  happened  between  April  16  and  26. 
(State  Trials,  vii.  222,  261.)  He  survived 
bis  dismissal  only  seven  months,  dving  on 
November  23, 1679.  He  was  buried  in  the 
Temple  Church. 

He  appears  to  have  been  well  grounded 
in  the  law,  and  an  honest  and  considerate 
judge.  Sir  Henry  Yelverton's  Reports  were 
published  by  him  in  French  in  1661,  when 
be  was  king's  seijeant,  and  in  English  in 
1674,  when  he  was  judge.  His  residence 
when  recorder  was  in  Great  St.  Bartho- 
lomew's Close,  and  afterwards  at  Lewis- 
bam,  Kent,  until  he  purchased  the  manor 
of  Goldston,  or  GoldstantoU;  in  Ash  in  the 
same  county. 

He  married  three  wives.  The  name  of 
tbe  first  is  not  recorded ;  that  of  the  second 
was  Jane,  daughter  of  Felix  Wilson,  of 
Hanwell  in  Middlesex;  and  the  third  was 
Frances,  daughter  of  John  Berecroft,  of 
Chard  in  Somersetshire.  He  had  a  son  by 
each  of  the  two  latter,  but  both  dying  with- 
out male  issue,  the  baronetcy  became  ex- 
tinct. (Add.  MSS.  5607,  65* ;  Hasted^  i. 
503,  xi.  196.) 

WILDE,  James  Plaisted  (Lord  Pen- 
zance), is  the  fourth  son  of  Edward  Archer 
Wilde,  Esq.,  an  eminent  attorney  and  soli- 
citor in  l^ndon,  for  which  city  and  the 
county  of  Middlesex  he  served  the  office  of 
sheriff  in  1828.  His  father  was  the  brother 
of  the  late  Lord  Truro,  who  for  some  time 
was  engaged  in  that  branch  of  the  legal 
profession. 

He  was  bom  in  1816,  and  after  his  pre- 
liminary education  at  Winchester  School 
proceeded  to  Trinity  College,  Cambridge, 
where  he  took  his  degrees  of  B.  A.  in  1838 
and  M.A.  in  1842.  With  so  much  legal 
blood  in  his  veins  he  was  naturally  devoted 
to  the  same  profession,  and,  having  been  en- 
tered of  the  society  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  was 
called  to  the  bar  in  188V).  He  attached 
bimself  to  the  Northern  Circuit,  and  in  the 
next  year  was  appointed  junior  counsel  to 
the  Excise  and  Customs.  Soon  distinguish- 
ing himself  by  his  deep  knowledge  of  mer- 
cantile and  maritime  law,  he  rapidly  ad- 
Tanced  in  professional  reputation ;  in  1865 
beobtainea  an  acknowledged  lead  as  queen's 
counsel,  and  in  1859  he  was  made  counsel 
to  tbe  duchy  of  Lancaster. 

He  was  appointed  a  baron  of  the  Exche- 


WILDE 


735 


quer  on  April  13,  1860,  and  was  thereupon 
knighted ;  and  had  not  sat  in  that  court 
more  than  three  years  and  four  months 
before  the  lamented  death  of  that  excellent 
judge  Sir  Cresswell  Cresswell  occasioned 
a  vacancy  in  the  Court  of  Probate  and  Di- 
vorce. It  speaks  highly  of  the  judicial 
ability  which  Sir  James 'Wilde  had  exhi- 
bited that  he  should  have  been  called  upon 
to  undertake  the  responsible  and  delicate 
duties  attached  to  the  office  of  chief  iudge 
of  the  new  court.  He  was  appointed  to  it 
on  Aujjust  26,  1863,  and  so  satisfactory  has 
been  his  performance  of  its  duties  that  it  is 
the  universal  wish,  both  of  the  bar  and  the 
public,  that  he  may  long  be  able  to  undergo 
the  heavy  and  incessant  labour  that  devolves 
upon  him.  He  was  honoured  with  a  seat 
in  the  privy  council ;  and  on  April  6, 1869, 
he  was  called  up  to  the  House  of  Peers  by 
the  title  of  Lord  Penzance. 

He  has  shown  that  he  is  not  merely  a 
careful  administrator  of  the  law,  but  also 
an  able  analyst  of  its  principles.  In  an  ex- 
cellent address  delivered  by  him  as  presi- 
dent of  the  department  of  jurisprudence  and 
amendment  of  the  law,  in  a  late  meeting 
of  the  Social  Science  Congress  at  York,  he 
^ve  a  rapid  account  of  our  original  social 
institutions,  of  the  gradual  formation  of  the 
laws  that  regulated  them,  of  the  various 
additions  that  the  advances  of  civilisation 
necessitated,  and  of  the  evils  that  arose  from 
the  complication  occasioned  by  the  fidniix- 
ture  of  the  new  enactments  with  the  old, 
which,  though  obsolete,  remained  unre- 
pealed. He  pictured  the  consequent  diffi- 
culties felt  by  the  judges,  which  compelled 
them  frequently,  in  order  to  do  justice,  to 
become  legislators  instead  of  interpreters ; 
and  in  pointing  out  that  the  cases  tney  de- 
cided were  so  numerous,  and  the  decisions 
they  pronounced  were  often  so  conflicting, 
the  learned  lecturer  declared  that  he  could 
see  no  remedy  but  in  a  Digest,  bringing 
together  the  broad  principles  on  which  the 
common  law  reposes,  and  which  tacitly 
guide  the  decisions  of  our  courts. 

He  married  1-iady  Mary  Bouverie,  the 
youngest  daughter  of  William,  third  Earl 
of  Radnor. 

WILDE,  Thomas  (Lord  Truro).  The 
career  of  Thomas  Wilde  afibrds  a  most  un- 
common instance  of  the  rise  from  the  lowest 
to  the  highest  step  in  the  law,  passing 
through  the  different  grades  of  attorney, 
barrister,  seijeant,  king's  serjeant,  solicitor 
and  attorney  general,  chief  justice,  and  lord 
chancellor. 

He  was  bom  on  July  7, 1782,  in  Warwick 
Square,  and  was  the  second  son  of  Mr. 
Thomas  Wilde,  an  attomey-at-law,  by  his 
wife,  Margaret  Anne  Knight,  whose  two 
other  sons  were  brought  up  in  the  same  pro- 
fession ;  the  elder  becoming  a  barrister  and 
ultimately  chief  justice  at  the  Caije  oC  Okoi^i*^ 


r>6 


WILDE 


Hope;  and  the  younger,  Edward  Archer 
Wilde,  holding  a  high  rank  as  an  attorney 
in  London,  the  father  of  the  ahove  James 
Plaisted  Wilde,  Lord  Penzance. 

Thomas  Wilde  received  his  education  at 
St.  Paul's  School,  and  in  after  life  showed 
how  much  be  appreciated  the  advantages 
he  had  derived  from  that  establishment,  dy 
presenting  to  it  1000/.,  the  interest  of  which 
he  directed  to  be  annually  expended  in  prizes 
to  the  best  scholars.  lie  was  admitted  as 
an  attorney  in  1805,  and  continued  to  prac- 
tise with  great  success  in  that  department 
for  nearly  twelve  years.  In  1813  he  married 
Mary,  daughter  of  William  Willman,  Esq., 
and  widow  of  William  Devaynes,  Esq.,  the 
banker.  At  this  time,  dissatisfied  with  the 
limited  sphere  in  which  he  acted,  and  con- 
scious that  his  powers  were  adapted  to  a 
more  extended  range,  he  entered  the  Inner 
Temple,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  on  Fe- 
bruary 7,  1817,  being  then  in  his  thirty- 
iifth  year. 

Overcoming  all  the  obstacles  in  the  way 
of  one  who,  as  it  were,  intrudes  himself  into 
a  higher  branch  of  his  profession,  he  almost 
instantly  acquired  a  considerable  proportion 
of  business.     lie  is  said  to  have  conquered 
an  impediment  in  his  speech,  which  pre- 
vented him  from  uttering  certain  words,  by 
forming  a  list  of  synonymes,  and  substi- 
tuting them  whenever  the  words  occurred 
which  he  could  not  pronounce.     This  per- 
severance was  his  peculiar  characteristic,  and 
exemplified  itself  so  remarkably  in  every 
cause  in  which  he  was  engaged  that  he  won 
general  confidence.    His  tirnmess  and  inde- 
pendence secured  the  attention  of  the  judges; 
and  the  character  he  had  thus  acquired,  with 
his  reputation  for  the  power  of  precise  ar- 
ranffcment  and  for  extraordinary  industry, 
no  doubt  caused  him  to  be  selected,  in  1820, 
when  he  had  been  only  three  years  at  the 
bar,  as  assistant  counsel  in  the  defence  of 
(^ueen  Caroline,  who  was  so  pleased  with 
liis  exertions  on  her  behalf  that  she  ap- 
pointed him  one  of  her  executors.     This 
naturally  raised  Mr.  W^ilde  in  professional 
estimation,  and  his  business  increased  so 
greatly  that  he  felt  warranted  in  accepting 
the  degree  of  the  coif  when  offered  to  him, 
in  Kiustor  1824,  by  Lord  Eldon,  although  as 
a  whig  he  was  opposed  to  that  nobleman's 
political  principles.     In  1827  he  had  a  fur- 
ther advance  in  being  made  king's  seijeant. 
He  attained  so  prominent  a  lead  in   the 
Common  Pleas  that  in  a  short  time  there 
was  scarcely  a  single  cause  tried  in  that 
court  in  which  he  was  not  engaged  on  one 
hide  or  the  other.     Fortunate  were  those 
litigants  who  secured  his  services,  for  inde- 
fatigable were  his  exertions  for  their  suc- 
cess;  and  his  were  not  the  perfunctory 
consultations  too  commonly  granted  for  a 
ehort  ha\£-\\o\iT,  Wt  t^«\  ^W^afidons  into  I 
the  points  to  "be  «i^\x^^^  w^!^  ^^  ^vAwiRfe^ 


WIIJ)E 

to  be  given  in  their  sup^rt.  Lord  Tenter- 
den  is  said  to  have  described  him  as  haiing 
'  industry  enough  to  succeed  without  talent, 
and  talent  enough  to  succeed  without  in- 
dustry.' 

Not  satisfied  with  hifl  forensic  triumphi, 
he  sought  parliamentary  distinction;  and 
in  May  1831,  after  many  previous  stng- 
gles,  he  secured  bia  seat  for  Newark-oQ. 
Trent,  a  borough  which  he  continued  tA 
represent  through  the  subsequent  pailia- 
ments  till  1841,  when  he  was  reUuned 
for  Worcester.  In  the  senate  he  took  tht 
liberal  side  of  politics,  and  was  remaikaUe 
more  for  the  clearness  of  his  statementi 
and  closeness  of  his  arguments  than  ftx 
the  fascination  of  his  eloquence.  His  stetdj 
support  of  the  whig  party,  and  his  com- 
manding position  at  the  bar,  natorallj  if- 
com mended  him  to  the  government  for 
employment,  and  on  February  9, 1640,  be 
WHS  consequently  made  solicitor-geoenl 
and  knighted. 

In  the  following  June  he  lost  his  wife, 
after  a  union  of  twenty-seven  yeai8;iDd 
having  remained  a  widower  for  five  jem, 
he  married  Augusta  Emma  D*£ste,  th« 
daughter  of  the  Duke  of  Sussex  and  Lidr 
Augusta  Murray,  whose  legitimacy  he  hii 
previously  endeavoured  to  establish  b^on 
the  House  of  Lords. 

In  June  1841 ,  for  the  two  months  dniinj 
which  the  administration  of  Lord  Md- 
bourne  was  doomed  to  last,  he  filled  tbe 
office  of  attorney-general,  of  couiso  re- 
tiring from  it  yvi'th  the  minister.  Far  the 
five  following  years  he  remained  out  of 
office,  but  on  the  restoration  of  the  vki^ 
narty  tmder  Lord  John  Russell  in  Joljr 
I84(j,  he  was  replaced  as  attomey-g^enl 
to  be  again  removed  in  three  or  four  dijs, 
on  being  promoted  to  the  office  of  lordcuef 
justice  of  the  Common  Pleas  on  theZtbc/ 
that  month,  a  vacancy  in  that  court  hano^ 
been  occasioned  by  the  death  of  SirMe^ 
Tindal  only  the  day  before. 

When  he  had  presided  in  the  Conusoa 
Pleas  for  four  years,  he  was  comtitattd 
lord  chancellor  of  Great  Britain,  wceim: 
the  Great  Seal  on  July  16,  1850,  t^grthf 
with  a  patent  of  peerage,  by  whidi  1»  *=** 
created  Baron  Truro  of  Bowes  in  Middi^ 
sex.  This  high  dignity  he  heldfcrniBf 
teen  months  only,  the  prime  minister,  LorJ 
John  RusselL  being  compelled  to  rrtiffC 
February  1852,  when  Lord  Truro  vts  m- 
cessarily  superseded. 

It  must  not  have  been  the  least  giatifr- 
ing  circumstance  attending  his  eksnfioB^ 
receive  an  affectionate  address  of  oflC»- 
tulation  from  nearly  hve  hundred  BMSMf 
of  that  branch  of  the  professioo  t» 
ho  had  originally  belonged,  c 
their  strong  appreciation  of  Jv 
conduct  through   life,  of  K 


WILDE 

of  the  unTaryine  courtesy  they  bad  expe* 
lienced  at  his  hands,  'this  address  was 
accompanied  by  a  request  that  his  lordship 
ahould  sit  for  his  portrait,  to  be  placed  in 
the  hall  of  the  Incorporated  Law  Society, 
where  it  now  ornaments  the  waUs^  and 
reminds  the  young  student  that  by  personal 
industry  and  exertion  he  may  raise  himself 
to  the  same  honours 

During  the  short  period  in  which  Lord 
Truro  held  the  Seal  ne  was  deeply  engaged 
in  promoting  various  important  law  rerorms. 
He  appointed  a  commission  to  enquire  as 
to  the  pleading  and  practice  of  his  court, 
and  assisted  Lord  St.  Leonards,  who  suc- 
ceeded him  in  his  office,  in  carrying  into 
efiisct  the  most  important  regulations  in 
the  report  He  established  a  83rBtem  of 
paying  the  fees  of  the  court  by  means  of 
stamps,  and  greatly  reduced  their  amount. 
He  enR&cted  that  most  important  change  in 
the  constitution  of  the  court,  by  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  Court  of  Appeal,  which  at  once 
anemedfed  the  great  evil  of  delay  so  long 
complained  of,  and  relieved  the  chuicellor 
of  one  of  the  most  oppressive  parts  of  his 
duties.  His  exertions  were  not  limited  to 
reforming  the  Court  of  Chancery ;  they  were 
iBXtended  also  to  the  common  law  courts, 
with  regard  to  which  he  originated  many 
important  changes,  which  have  been  greatly 
beneficial  to  the  suitors^  in  preventing  delay 
and  reducing  expense.  Both  as  chief  jus- 
tice and  chancellor  he  showed  the  most 
untiring  patience,  and  the  iudgments  he 
pronounced  have  been  considered  by  the 
profession  to  be  highly  satisfactory.  It  is 
no  small  proof  of  their  value  that  only  one 
was  appealed  from,  though  many  of  them 
were  reversals  of  decisions  of  the  vice- 
chancellors,  and  that  one  was  affirmed. 

His  courtesy  and  kindness  were  not  con- 
fined to  his  professional  clients  nor  to  his 
political  partisans,  but  were  distinctive 
ttiarks  of  nis  general  character.  He  exhi- 
bited a  pleasing  proof  of  his  generous  feel- 
inflT  when  Sir  Frederick  Thesiger  became 
aolicitor-general  in  1644,  and  before  he  had 
acquired  any  experience  in  his  office  had 
the  additional  duties  of  the  attomey<^neral 
thrown  upon  him  by  the  illness  and  con- 
aequent  absence  of  Sir  William  FoUett. 
Though  Sir  Frederick  was  of  the  adverse 
party  in  politics,  and  a  coolness  had  existed 
Detween  them  from  their  having  been 
opposed  to  each  other  in  the  contest  for 
Newark,  Sir  Thomas  Wilde,  as  soon  as  he 
saw  the  difficulty  of  Sir  Frederick's  posi- 
tion, most  liberally  offered  and  gave  every 
aaaistance  and  advice  in  his  power  as  to  the 
professional,  apart  from  the  political,  duties 
of  the  office. 

Lord  Truro  survired  his  retirement  for 
nearly  four  years,  during  two  of  which  he 
anffered  much  from  a  painful  illness,  which 
terminated  in  his  death  on  November  11, 


WILLES 


737 


1855,  at  his  house  in  Eaton  Square.  He 
was  buried  in  the  mausoleum  erected  by 
Sir  Augustus  D'Este,  at  the  church  of  St* 
Lavnrence,  Ramsgate. 

By  his  vdfe  he  had  issue  two  sons  and  a 
daughter,  who  is  married  to  her  cousin 
Charles  Norrls  Wilde,  Esq.,  the  brothel"  of 
Lord  Penzance* 

Lady  Truro,  soon  after  his  lordship's 
death,  gracefully  offered  the  Whole  of  his 
law  books  to  the  library  of  the  House  of 
Lords,  and  must  have  felt  amply  repaid  for 
her  generous  gift  by  the  encomiums  that 
were  uttered  by  every  leading  peer  when 
accepting  it,  on  the  legal  attamments  and 

i'udicial  excellence  of  her  husband,  and  on 
lis  honourable  exertions  for  the  publio 
and  the  disinterestedness  that  characterised 
him. 

WHf  OBD,  GfitiVASfi  DS,  belonged  to  a 
fietmily  who  possessed  the  manors  of  Clif* 
ton  and  Wilford  in  Nottinghamshire,  one 
branch  of  which  used  the  name  of  Clifton, 
and  the  other  that  df  Wilford.  H©  was  of 
the  latter,  and,  having  been  remembrancer 
(JffospitalierB  in  England,  284),  was  made 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  on  January  20, 
1841,  14  Edward  Ut.  He  was  instituted 
to  the  living  of  Barnack  in  Northampton- 
shire, and  in  18  Edward  111.  he  assigned 
various  lands  in  Norfolk  to  the  prior  and 
convent  of  Shouldham  in  the  latter 
county. 

He  became  chief  baron  on  April  7, 1350^ 
and  presided  in  the  cofirt  till  1361.  The 
entry  on  the  roll  states  that  he  was  exone- 
rated, beinff  broken  down  by  age.  In  1359 
he  obtained  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln^s  licence 
*  alere  et  fovere  pueros  sub  virga  magistrx, 
in  lectura,  cantu,  et  grammatica  facultate^ 
ad  augmentumctdtusdiviniin  suaparocbi% 
et  eosdem  inlormare,  clericis  post  pestem 
dlminutis.*  (  /hot^'s  ^^oU8^  i.  105 ;  Cal. 
Inq.  p.  m.  ii.  119  \  Cal,  Rot.  Pat.  138, 169, 
174,  222 ;  m%s'B  Letters^  ^-c?.,  325.) 

WILL£0|  JotrN,was  of  one  of  the  most  an- 
cient families  in  Warwickshire.  They  were 
settled  at  Newbold  Comyn  in  that  county, 
in  the  church  of  which  is  a  memorial  ojf 
one  of  them  in  stained  glass  dated  1577. 
He  was  the  son  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  John 
WiUes,  recto?  of  Bishop's  Ickington  and 
canon  of  Lichfield,  by  Anne,  daughter  of 
Sir  William  Walker,  mayor  of  Oxford : 
and  his  brother  Edward  became  in  1743 
Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells.  {Berry' §  Gene^ 
alagieSf  Berks.) 

He  was  bom  on  November  29, 1686,  and 
received  his  education  at  Lichfield  gram- 
mar school,  and  Trinity  College,  Oxford. 
Entering  Lincoln's  Inn,  he  was  called  td 
the  bar  in  June  1713.  He  then  went  the 
Oxford  Circuit,  and  arrived  at  the  dignity 
of  king's  cotmsel  in  1719.  In  his  early 
life  he  was  much  more  noted  for  hilarity 
and  licentiousnesA  thaxL  t^t  V^src^^^  ^«si^ 


738 


WILLES 


ability,  though  he  was  by  no  means  defi- 
cient in  the  latter.    He  sought  advance- 
ment by  entering  into  the  career  of  politics 
imder  the  patronage  of  Sir  Robert  Wal- 
pole,  and  in  the  parliament  that  met  in 
October    1722    he    procured    a    seat    for 
Launceston.  In  May  1726  he  was  appointed 
second  judge  on  tSe  Chester  Circuit ;  and 
thereupon  vacating  his  seat  for  Launceston, 
he  was  not  re-elected ;  but  a  vacancy  soon 
after  occurring  in  Weymouth,  he  was  re- 
turned for  that  borough.     In  the  parlia- 
ment of  1728  he  represented  West  Looe ; 
and  before  its  close  he  was  obliged  to  un- 
dergo two  re-elections,  one  on  his  being 
promoted  to  the  chief  justiceship  of  Chester 
in  February  1729,  and  the  other  on  being 
appointed  attorney-general  in  January  1734. 
He  was  again  returned  for  W^est  tooe  to 
the  new  parliament  of  1735,  and  sat  for  it 
till  he  was  advanced  to  the  bench.     His 
speech  against  the  repeal  of  the  Septennial 
Act  in  1734  is  the  only  recorded  specimen 
of  his  senatorial  eloquence,  and  appears  to 
deserve  the  praise  it  elicited. 

He  was  Knighted  as  attorney-general, 
and  filled  that  office  exactly  three  years 
when  in  January  1737  he  was  appointed 
lord  chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas. 
Over  that  court  he  presided  for  nearly  tive- 
and-twenty  years,  during  the  whole  of 
which  penod  he  was  hankering  after  the 
Great  Seal,  which,  when  it  was  at  last 
within  his  grasp,  he  lost  by  his  own  folly. 
He  was  in  perpetual  expectation  that  the 
chancellorship  of  Lord  Hardwicke  would 
be  terminated  by  a  change  of  ministry,  and 
took  such  measures  as  ne  thought  would 
secure  him  the  succession.  During  the  re- 
bellion of  1745  he  endeavoured  to  organise 
a  regiment  of  volunteers  among  the  lawyers, 
for  the  defence  of  the  king's  person,  of 
which  he  was  to  be  the  colonel ;  but  if  we 
may  believe  a  satirical  song  of  the  time,  he 
never  got  his  commission  ;  and  the  danger 
being  ended,  his  majesty  declined  their  ser- 
vices. The  poet  slylv  concludes  with  this 
couplet  {Ex  inf,  W,  thirrant  Cooper j  Esq.^ 
KS.A,)  :— 

If  you  ask  why  a  judge  should  attempt  the 

command, 
I'll  tell  you — To  take  the  Great  Seal  sword  in 

hand. 

When  at  last  Lord  Hardwicke  did  re- 
sign. Sir  John  was  designed  to  take  his 
place ;  but  some  objection  being  made  by 
George  II.  to  give  him  the  sole  power,  he 
was  obliged  to  content  himself  with  being 
the  first  of  three  commissioners  to  whom 
the  Great  Seal  was  entrusted.  They  held 
it  for  seven  months,  from  November  19, 
1756,  to  June  30,  1757,  when  the  Duke  of 
Newcastle's  and  Mr.  Pitt's  administration^ 
commenced.  Sir  John  was  then  offered 
the  chancellorship,  which  he  was  willing 


WILLES 

enough  to  accept,  but  stipulated  thit  a 
peerage  should  be  added.  Tnis  was  refisfd, 
and  he,  thinking  to  obtain  his  terms  by 
standing  out,  made  this  a  condition  sm 
qud  non,     (Harris's  Lard  Mardwickej  m. 
139.)     Great  then  was  hia  oonfusion  and 
indignation  on  finding  that  the  mioisters 
had  taken  him  at  his  word,  and  appointed 
the  attorney-general,  Sir  Robert  Henler, 
lord  keeper.     He  lived   four  years  aft^- 
wards,  and  died  at   the  advanced  age  of 
seventy-six  on  December  16,   1761.     He 
was  buried  in  the  family  vault  at  Bishop'» 
Ickington. 

That  in  the  exercise  of  his  judicial  fooc- 
tions,  both  as  chief  justice  and  first  com- 
missioner, he  showed  great  learning  aod 
ability,  the  reports  of  his  decisions  prove; 
but  out  of  court  he  was  ambitious  imd  in- 
triguing, joining  the  different  factions  n 
he  thought  they  would  promote  his  views. 
He  had  a  great  enmity  against  Lord  Hard- 
wicke, whom  he  looked  upon  as  his  riTsl 
and  as  impeding  the  royal  favour ;  and  hk 
lordship  nad  little  respect  for  him,  on 
accoimt  of  his  questionable  morality,  and 
his  indiscreet  involvements.  Horace  Wal- 
pole  (Memoirs,  i.  77),  who  was  inclined  to 
be  one  of  his  admirers,  tells  a  story  whidi 
shows  that  even  when  chief  justice'  he  ^tiU 
pursued  his  old  pro  pensi titles.  *  A  grare 
pei*son  came  to  reprove  the  scandal  he  gsve, 
and  to  tell  him  that  the  world  talked  of 
one  of  his  maidservants  being  with  child. 
Willes  said,  "What  is  that  to  me P  "  The 
monitor  answered,  "Oh  !  but  thev  »y  it  i& 
by  your  lordship."  "  And  what  is  that  to 
you  P  "  was  the  reply.' 

He  married  Margaret,  daughter  and  co- 
heir of  —  Brewster,  Esq.,  of  Worcester, 
and  had  by  her  four  sons  and  four  daugbten. 

WILLES,  Edward,  was  the  second  ton  of 
the  above,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  at  Lin- 
coln's Inn  in  February  1726.     He  is  oftei 
confounded  with   his  nameaake  who  ins 
lord  chief  baron  of  the  Irish  Exchequer  frna 
1767  to  1766,  and  who  died  in  1768.   He 
acQuired  the  rank  of  king^s  counsel  in  17^; 
and  in  1766,  five  years  after  his  father* 
death,  he  was  made  solicitor-general.   Ot 
the  death  of  Lord  Bowee,  chancellor  of 
Ireland,  in  1767,  attempts  were  made  to 
confer  that  appointment  upon  him :  hit  be 
was  obliged  to  content  bimaelf  with  a  sai 
in  the  King's  Bench,  to  which  he  was  fro- 
moted  on  January  27,  1768.     Soon  aft*? 
the  questions  relative  to  Mr.  Wilk«  cbm 
before  the  court,  exciting  the  public  to  « 
intense  degree.     The  judges  were  nnani- 
mous  in  their  opinion  on  the  various  poiot^ 
rfused  in  his  favour,  and,  though  tfaej  wen 
then   charged    with   corrupt   oias.  calmer 
times  have  confirmed  their  judgment    hi 
I  the  dean  of  St  Asaph's  case  Mr.  Justice 
Willes  dissented  from  the  otiier  judges,  and 
his  declaration  that  juries  had  the  rig^^ 


WILLES 

to  give  A  general  verdict  was  one  of  the 
causes  which  led  to  the  passing  of  Mr. 
Fox's  libel  act 

Mr.  Justice  Willes  did  not  accept  the 
usual  honour  of  knighthood.  He  outlived 
all  his  first  colleagues  except  Lord  Mans- 
field, and  after  nineteen  years  of  judicial 
life,  unmarked  by  any  other  peculiar  cha- 
racteristics than  a  certain  flippancy  of 
manner  and  a  neglect  of  costume,  he  died 
on  January  14,  1787,  and  was  buried  at 
Bumham  in  Berkshire.  By  his  wife,  Anne, 
daughter  of  the  Rev.  Edward  Taylor,  of 
Sutton,  Wilts,  he  left  three  sons.  (4  Bw- 
rmc,  2143;  1  Term  Reports,  561;  Stale 
Triah,  xix.  1001,  1123,  xxi.  1040.) 

WILLES,  Jambs  Shaw,  is  one   of  the 

f resent  judges  of  the  Court  of  Common 
*leas.  He  belongs  to  an  Irish  family  of 
English  extraction.  His  grandfather  and 
father,  both  named  James,  were  resident  at 
Cork,  the  former  as  a  merchant,  and  the 
latt«r  as  a  physician.  His  mother  was 
Elizabeth  Aldworth,  daughter  of  John 
Shaw,  Esq.,  mayor  of  Cork  in  1792.  He 
was  bom  m  Cork  on  February  13,  1814, 
and  finished  his  education  at  Trinity  Col- 
lege, Dublin,  where  he  took  his  degree  of 
B.A.  in  1836,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  at 
the  Inner  Temple  on  June  12,  1840.  He 
edited  Smith's  *  Leading  Cases '  in  con- 
junction with  Mr.  Justice  Keating  in  1847, 
another  edition  of  which  was  published  by 
them  in  186(5,  and  in  1860  he  was  selected 
as  a  common  law  commissioner.  His  prac- 
tice was  principally  in  the  Court  of  Exche- 
quer, where  he  filled  the  post  of  tubman 
from  1861  tiU  his  elevation  to  the  bench 
on  July  3,  1866,  as  a  judge  of  the  Court 
of  Common  Pleas,  when  he  was  knighted. 
A  prepnant  proof  of  the  estimation  which 
he  commands  as  a  lawyer  is  afforded  by  his 
being  placed  on  the  Indian  law  commission 
in  1801,  and  on  the  English  and  Irish  law 
commission  in  1802. 

Devoting  his  body  as  well  as  his  mind  to 
the  service  of  the  country,  and  considering 
that  *  the  post  of  honour  is  the  private 
atation,'  he  has  served  in  the  ranks  of  the 
Inns  of  Court  Volunteer  Coros  since  its 
formation  in  1869.  In  1800  the  degree  of 
I-.L.D.  was  conferred  upon  him  by  his 
alma  mater,  *  stipendiis  condonatis.' 

He  married  Helen,  daughter  of  Thomas 
Jen nin jr8,  E»»q.,  of  Cork. 

WILLIAM,  Arcti DEACON  OP  Hereford 
from  1200  to  1221,  was  one  of  the  justiciers 

? resent  with  the  king  at  Bristol  in  10 
ohn,  1208,  when  fines  were  acknowledged 
before  him,  but  I  find  no  other  record  of 
his  performance  of  judicial  duties.  He  had 
A  grant  of  that  portion  of  the  church  of 
Ledbury  which  Henry  Banastre  held.  Le 
J^eve  (118)  thinks  "his  name  was  Fitz- 
"Walter.     (Rot.  ChaH.  80.) 

WHUAX,    ARCnDBACON     OF     TOTKBSS^ 


WILLIAMS 


739 


occurs  with  that  dignity  as  one  of  the 
justiciers  present  in  the  Curia  Regis  at 
Westminster  before  whom  a  fine  was 
levied  in  1189.  He  is  not  mentioned  aa 
archdeacon  of  Totness  in  Le  Neve's  list 

WTTiTiTAM,  David,  seems  to  have  been  a 
native  of  Wales.  Among  the  accounts  of 
the  keepers  of  the  House  of  Converts,  now 
remaining  in  the  records  of  the  kingdom, 
his  commence  in  2  Henry  VH.,  and  refer 
to  his  appointment  on  February  22,  1487, 
that  office  being  then  always  held  in  con- 
junction with  the  mastership  of  the  Rolls. 
He  held  the  first  place  among  the  receivers 
of  petitions  in  the  parliaments  that  met  in 
1487  and  1488,  but  in  that  of  1491  he  was 
absent.  (-Ro^.  Par/,  xii.  386, 409.)  It  is  not 
unlikely  that  this  was  occasioned  by  an 
illness  which  terminated  in  his  death  before 
May  5,  1492,  the  date  of  the  patent  of 
John  Blvth,  his  successor. 

WILLIAMS,  David.  It  was  not  till  the 
reign  of  Henry  VIIL  that  the  Welsh  be- 
gan to  abandon  the  practice  of  changing 
their  names  at  each  generation.  The  son 
had  previously  assumed  the  Christian  name 
of  his  father,  uniting  it  to  his  own  Chris- 
tian name  by  the  word  *ap'  (signifying 
'son  of'^,  in  the  same  manner  that  the 
word  *Fitz'  was  used  by  the  English  in 
earlier  times  before  surnames  were  gene- 


England  that  he  adopted  the  simpler  ap- 
pellation of  David  Williams. 

The  father,  descended,  it  is  said,  from 
Bleddin  ap  Maenvrch,  lord  of  Brecknock 
in  1091,  was  a  substantial  yeoman,  whose 
property  was  situate  in  the  parish  of 
Vstradvelte  in  Brecknock.  By  his  wife, 
Margaret,  daughter  of  Rhys  Griffith  Bevan, 
Melin,  he  had  three  sons,  the  youngest  of 
whom,  this  David,  bom  about  1660,  went 
to  seek  his  fortune  in  England.  Entering 
himself  at  the  Middle  Temple,  he  wa» 
called  to  the  bar  in  1670,  and  arrived  at 
the  post  of  reader  in  1690.  This  honour 
was  repeated  in  Lent  1694,  as  a  customary 
compliment  on  his  taking  the  degree  of  the 
coif,  according  to  his  writ  of  summons 
dated  in  the  previous  November.  (Dug- 
dale's  Orig.  218.)  It  may  be  presumed, 
from  his  name  not  occurring  in  any  of  the 
Reports  till  after  he  became  a  serjeant, 
that  his  practice  was  principally  in  the 
provinces.  That  it  was  considerable  may 
be  inferred  from  his  being  appointed  re- 
corder of  Brecon  in  1687,  and  also  from 
his  acquisition  of  manv  manors  and  lands 
at  Bampton  in  Oxfordshire ;  at  Guemevet, 
near  the  Hay,  in  his  native  county ;  and  at 
Kingston-Bagpuze  in  Berkshire,  where  he 
principally  resided,  and  to  the  church  of 
which  he  gave  a  new  bell-tower. 

3b2 


740 


WILLIAMS 


WnjJAMS 


The  estimation  in  which  his  professional  i  Aberbran  in  the  county  of  Brecon,  £8q.,Vr 


abilities  were  held  appears  from  hb  being 
mentioned  by  Lord  Burleigh  as  a  proper 
person  to  fill  a  vacancy  on  the  Exchequer 
uench ;  and  when  King  James,  soon  futer 
his  accession,  determined  to  add  a  fifth  j  udge 
to  each  of  the  two  superior  courts.  Lord 
Chief  Justice  Popham,  in  a  letter  to  Lord 
Ellesmere,  dated  January  28,  1603-4,  re- 
commended four  seijeants,  Danyell,  Wil- 
liams, Tanfyld,  and  Altharo,  for  the  king  to 
make  choice  of  two.  The  first  two  were 
selected,  and  Williams  received  his  patent 
as  a  judge  of  the  King*s  Bench  on  February 
4,  and  was  thereupon  knighted.  In  1608 
he  coincided  with  the  majority  of  the 
judges  in  the  decinion  pronounced  in  the 
cajw  of  the  post  nati  {litate  Triaby  ii.  576), 
but  his  argument  is  not  reported.  Among 
the  *p]>rerton  Papers  '  (388,  447)  is  a  letter 
from  Archbishop  Abbot  to  I^ord  Elles- 
mere, dated  January  22, 1611-12,  in  which, 
apeaking  of  the  con<lemnation  of  Legat 
and  Wijfhtman  for  imputed  heresy,  he  says, 
'  Mr.  Justice  Williams  was  with  mee  tne 
other  day,  who  maketh  no  doubt  but  that 
the  lawe  is  cleare  to  bume  them.  Ilee 
told  me  al^o  of  his  utter  dislike  of  all  the 
Lord  Coke  his  courses,*  who  seems  to  have 
been  of  a  contrary  opinion. 

lie  died  exactly  a  year  after  the  date  of 
this  letter.  In  his  will,  which  was  exe- 
cuted a  week  before  his  death,  is  contained 
the  following  curious  legacy,  which  shows 
the  friendly  terms  on  whicL  he  lived  with 
his  brethren  on  the  bench  :  *  And  whereas 
it  hath  been  heretofore  agreed  between  my 
good  and  kind  brother  Warburton  and  my- 
self that  the  sur\'ivor  of  us  twayne  should 
have  the  other's  best  scarlet  robes,  now  I 
do  will  that  my  said  good  brother  War- 
burton  shall  have  the  choice  of  either  of 
my  scarlet  robes,  and  he  to  take  that  shall 
best  like  him,  pravin<r  him  that  as  he  hath 
1>cen  H  good  and  "kind  brother  unto  me,  so 
he  will  be  a  good  and  kind  friend  to  my 
children.*  He  likewise  gives  to  the  lord 
chancellor  (Ellesmere)  a  great  m\t  standing 
cup  with  a  cover,  in  token  of  nis  love  and 
afl'ection,  and  begs  him  to  be  overseer  of 
his  will.  A  tablet  in  old  Kingston  church 
records  that  his  bowels  were  interred  there, 
but  his  body  was  removed  for  burial  to  the 
church  of  St  John  the  Evangelist  at  Bre- 
con, where  there  is  a  sumptuous  monument 
to  his  memory,  presenting  his  effigy  in 
judicial  habiliments.  The  inscription  by 
himself  states  that  out  of  nine  sons  and 
two  daughters  only  four  sons  and  two 
daughters  remained,  and  concludes  with 
these  lines : — 

I  Nupor  eram  judex,  nunc  jadicis  ante  tribunal 
Sabsutens  paveo ;  judioor  ipse  modo. 

These  cia\di^Ti'w«t^ iiSl\g\i%%a^^iiVfe^ Id: 
Margaret,  a  daw^\i\iet  ol  X^\fli  Qi^m«^  qIX' 


a  daughter  of  Sir  William  VaughtD,of 
Porthaml.  His  second  wife  was  Dorotiiy, 
daughter  and  coheireaa  of  Oliver  Well-- 
born, of  East  Hanney,  Berks,  Esq.,  tad 
widow  of  John  Latton,  of  Kingston  m  that 
county,  Esq.,  by  whom  be  had  no  children. 
Henry,  the  eldest  of  Sir  David's  surviving 
sons,  received  in  1644  the  dignity  of  baroneL 
He  was  described  of  Guemevet,  where  be 
entertained  King  Charles  when  he  wu  a 
fugitive  after  the  battle  of  Naseby.  Tke 
title  became  extinct  in  1706. 

WILLIAMS,    John    (Bishop   of  Ldt- 
coLN  and  Archbishop  of  York),  was  tiw 
youngest  of  five  sons  of  Edmund  Williamt, 
Esq.,  a  gentleman  of  an  ancient  WeUi 
family,  by  Mary,  the   daughter  of  Owa 
Wynne,  Esq.,  and  was  bom  at  AbereoDwaj 
in    Carnarvonshire,    the   residence  of  loa 
father,  on  March   25,    1582.     fVom  tk 
grammar  school  of  Ruthin  he  was  removed 
in  1598  to  St.  John*8  College,  Cambrid^ 
There  he  pursued  his  studies  so  diligeotlj, 
taking  it  is  said  but  three  hours'  sleep  oot 
of  the    twenty-four,   and   acquired  siidi 
commendation  for  his  proticency,  thatwbn 
he  commenced  bachelor  of  arts  in  1603  be 
was  immediately  elected  fellow  of  hij  op^ 
lege.    His  degree    of  master  he  took  ii 
1005,  and  about  the  same  time  vss  id- 
mitted  into  clerical  orders.     He  sooo  tSds 
was  called  to  preach  before  the  Idn?  it 
Royston,  and  was  so  much  admired  for  Hs 
learning  and  eloquence  that  Lord  Chanoelk* 
Ellesmere  in   161 1    appointed  him  one  of 
his  chaplains.    In  the  next  year  he  beMW 
proctor  to  the  university,  and,  thougfc  te 

Performed  its  duties  with  genend  appliott, 
e  incurred  the  enmity  of  the  vice-chancel- 
lor. Dr.  Gouch,  by  the  activity  and  w»^ 
ness  he  displayed  in  the  elections  of  tke 
headship  of  St  John's  and  the  diaocdkr 
ship  of  the  university,  both  of  whidi  ^ 
came  vacant  in  his  year  of  oflBce.    (Rfifd 
Tribes  of  Wales,   149,   153.)    At  it*  la- 
mination he  resumed  his  position  w  ctii^ 
lain,  and  sat  in  the  convocation  of  161S« 
one  of  the  archdeacons  of  Wale&  1^ 
livings  of  Walgrave   and  Graftan-l'Dd* 
wood  in  Northamptonshire  were  toon  ft 
sented  to  him,   to    which  were  tddail  i 
residentiarvship  in  Lincoln  Cathe^  ^    \ 
a  choral  place  in  those  of  PeterbmM^ 
Hereford,  and  St.  David'a    IncKMK** 
favour,  he  was  treated  with  the  gwi* 
confidence  by  the    lord  chancelloi;  '^ 
frequently  discussed  with  him  Ae  a*? 
before  the  court,  entrusted  him  durinf  * 
illness  with    various    messages  oq  ^ 
affairs  to  the  kin^,  and,  just  prcni** 
his  death  in  1616,  presented  hv*^ 
manuscript  collections  for  tiis 

Sarliament  and  the  council 
ifferent  courts  over  whir* 


WILLUMS 

Williams  soon  learned  the  value.  Bacon 
offered  to  retain  him  in  his  service,  but  he 
declined  the  honour,  and  was  forthwith 
sworn  one  of  the  royal  chaplains.  In  1617 
he  disputed  in  the  schools  for  his  doctor's 
degree,  on  the  occasion  of  the  Archbishop 
of  Spalatro's  visit  to  the  university.  In 
September  1619  he  was  presented  with 
the  deanery  of  Salisbury.  In  his  personal 
attendance  on  the  king,  from  being  at  first 
conversed  with  for  his  learning  and  his 
wit,  he  came  by  degrees  to  be  consulted 
for  the  wisdom  of  his  counsel.  He  ingra- 
tiated himself  with  Buckingham  by  for- 
warding the  favourite's  marriage  with 
Lady  Katherine  Manners,  and  converting 
her  from  the  Romish  faith.  Thus  favoured, 
be  was  advanced  on  July  12, 1620,  to  the 
deanery  of  Westminster;  and  when  the 
parliament  that  met  in  the  following  Janu- 
ary began  to  cry  out  against  the  oppressions 
of  the  people,  and  to  proceed  against  Sir 
Giles  Mompesson  and  other  oifenders, 
Buckingham,  who  feared  that  he  himself 
might  be  hit,  and  the  king,  who  knew  not 
where  the  bolt  might  fly,  appealed  for 
advice  to  the  dean.  He  gave  them  this 
counsel:  ^Swim  with  the  tide,  and  you 
cannot  be  drowned.  .  .  .  Throw  the  cor^ 
morants  overboard  in  the  storm.  .  .  .  Cast 
all  monopolies  and  patents  of  griping  pro- 
jections into  the  Dead  Sea  after  them.  .  .  . 
L>amn  all  these  by  one  proelamation,  that 
the  world  may  see  that  the  king,  who  is 
the  pilot  that  sits  at  the  helm,  is  ready  to 
play  the  pump  to  eject  such  filth  as  grew 
noysome  to  the  nostrils  of  his  people.' 
Acting  on  this  advice,  the  storm  passed 
over  with  only  one  other  victim,  Lord 
Chancellor  Bacon. 

Hacket,  with  regard  to  this  event,  exhi- 
bits a  somewhat  suspicious  reserve,  stating 
merely  the  fact  of  Bacon's  downfall,  and 
the  dean's  surprise  at  his  own  elevation. 
There  seems,  howev^,  to  be  no  sufficient 
ffround  for  chargiuff  Williams  with  assist- 
iDg  in  the  chancellor's  disgrace,  and  still 
less  with  advising  the  kin^  and  Buckingham 
to  prevent  him  from  defending  himself. 
Any  defence  was  hopeless,  and  Williams's 
recommendation  not  to  dissolve  the  pa> 
Bament  for  the  purpose  of  stopping  the 
proceedings  appears  to  have  been  asnonestly 
it  was  wisely  offered.      Ben    Jonson 


WILLIAMS 


741 


id 


(Cftffordy  viii.  452),  whose  partiality  for 
Bacon  is  evident  more  than  once  in  his 
works,  both  in  pi'ose  and  verse,  would 
ai^rceiy  have  addressed  a  complimental 
epigram  to  Williams  on  his  removal  from 
the  Seal,  had  he  been  suspected  of  any 
underhand  or  unfriendly  dealing  towards 
Bftcon. 

The  Seal  for  the  next  two  months  was 
placed  in  the  hands  of  commissioners,  and, 
according  to  Hacket,  the  dean  was  con- 
sulted as  to  the  different  candidates  for  the 


office^  and  was  himself  selected  by  the 
king  and  Buckingham  in  preference' to  all 
of  them  without  any  application   on  his 
own  behalf.    The  latter  fact  is  confirmed 
by  the  record  itself,  which,  in  stating  his 
appointment  on  July  10,  1621,   as  lord 
keeper,  adds, '  prsster  suam  expectationem.' 
In  the  previous  month  he  had  been  sworn 
of  the  privy  council,  and  designated  for  tlie 
bishopric  of  Lincoln.   His  consecration  was 
delayed    by  the    unfortunate    occurrence 
which  happened  to  Archbishop  Abbot  in 
accidentally  killing  a  man  while  aiming  at  a 
buck ;  and  at  last,  in  consideration  of  the 
lord  keeper's  scruples,  that  ceremony  was 
performed  by  four  bishops  on  November 
11.    Being  allowed  to  retain  his  deanery, 
his  canonry  in  Lincoln  Cathedral,  and  his 
living  of  Walgrave,  he  was  fairly  subject 
to  the  remark  made  of  him,  *  that  he  was  a 
perfect  diocese  in  himself,  being  at  the  same 
time  bishop,  dean,  prebendary,  and  pai-son.' 
He  took  his  seat  in  the  Court  of  Chaiicery 
on  October  9,  the  first  day  of  Michaelmas 
Term,  no  ecclesiastic  having  presided  there 
since  Archbishop  Heath  in  the  reign  of 
Queen  Maiy. 

In  the  performance  of  his  legal  functions 
he  supplied  his  want  of  knowledge  of  the 
rules  of  the  court  by  obtaining  the  fre<jueut 
assistance  of  two  of  the  judges.  His  in- 
dustry was  extraordinary,  leaving  him 
scarcely  any  leisure,  and,  though  he  waa 
in  the  habit  of  checking  any  unnecessary 
argument,  he  became  soon  a  general 
favourite  with  the  bar.  At  first  some  of 
the  advocates  endeavoured  to  take  advan- 
tage of  his  inexperience,  and  one  uf  them, 
to  puzzle  him,  Hrouled  out  a  motion 
crammed  like  a  granado  with  obsolete 
words,  coins  of  far-fetched  antiquity,  which 
had  long  been  disused.*  The  lord  keeper^ 
nothing  bafHed,  answered  him  *  in  a  cluster 
of  most  crabbed  notions,  picked  out  of 
metaphysics  and  logic,  as  categorematicnl 
and  syncategorematical,  and  a  deal  of  such 
drumming  stufi','  so  that  the  motioner  waa 
foiled  at  his  own  weapon,  and  well  laughed 
at  by  the  court 

In  the  Star  Chamber  he  was  ever  merci- 
ful in  his  judgments,  and  where  they  were 
heavy  for  the  sake  of  example,  he  inter- 
ceded with  the  king  to  lighten  the  penalty. 
He  would  not  only  with  soft  words  turn 
away  wrath,  but  would  often  venture  on  a 
facetious  jest  to  pacify  the  royal  dis- 
pleasure.  By  his  leniency  he  incurred  by 
turns  the  suspicions  of  the  antagonistic 
religious  parties,  at  one  time  being  stig- 
matised as  a  favourer  of  Roman  Catholics, 
and  at  another  as  one  of  the  Puritans.  The 
former  charge  may  be  answered  by  his 
opposition  to  the  erection  of  titular  Popish 

E relates  in  the  kingdom,  and  the  latter  by 
is  addition  of  four  scholars  to  Westminster 
College,  with  a  liberal  eikiomxsxKctX  \Rk%N.. 


742 


WILLIAMS 


John*R  College,  Cambridge,  and  two  fellow- 
ships to  be  chosen  out  of  them,  with  four 
rich  benefices  for  their  ultimate  nrovision. 
In  the  parliaments  over  whicn  he  pre- 
sided his  speeches  were  marked  with  in- 
genuity and  wit,  the  customary  flattery  to 
the  king  not  being  altogether  omitted,  but 
more  delicately  administered. 

But  the  brightness  of  his  fortune  began 
to  be  obscured.     The  fickleness  of  Buck- 
ingham, and  his  jealousy  of  the  reliance 
shown  by  the  king  on  the  lord  keeper's 
judgment,   with    probably,   too,   his   dis- 
pleasure at  Williams's  occasional  insubjec- 
tion  to  his  will,  were  soon  exhibited  in  his 
attempts  to  sink  the  man  whom  he  had 
aided  to  raise.    His  favour  had  been  trans- 
ferred to  Bishop  Laud,  and,  taking  pre- 
tended offence  at  some  of  the  lord  keeper's 
proceedings,  and  indignant  at  some  expres- 
sions of  confidence  which   the  king  had 
used,   all   the  cunning  of  the  duke  was 
exerted  to  hasten  Williams's  ruin.     It  was 
ineffectual,   however,   during  the    life  of 
King  James,  who,  appreciating  his  keeper's 
loyalty  and  prudence,  and   admiring  his 
learning  and   wit,   acted  steadily   as  his 
friend,  and  preserved  him  in  his  office  to 
the  end  of  his  reign.     But  some  of  the  ill 
effects  of  the  want  of  the  favourite's  coun- 
tenance could  not  fail  to  be  experienced. 
As  soon  as  it  was  perceived  that  Bucking- 
ham's eye  began  to  look  frowningly  on  the 
lord    keeper,    disappointed    suitors    were 
ready   to    complain   of    his   decrees,   and 
accusations  accumulated   against  him   in 
both  houses  of  parliament.    He  triumphed 
over  them  all.     The  Commons  dismissed 
seven-and-thirty  in  one  day,  and  the  Lords 
punished  one  with  the  pillory  for  slander. 
{Pari.  Hist.  i.  131)9.)     King  James  died  in 
March  1625,  and   Williams  preached  his 
funeral  sermon,  drawing  a  parallel  between 
him  and  Solomon. 

Though  King  Charles  retained  Williams 
as  lord  keeper,  the  latter  soon  felt  the 
instability  of  his  position.  Buckingham 
was  more  than  ever  resolved  to  effect  his 
ruin,  and  endeavoured  to  induce  Chief 
Justice  Hobart  to  complain  of  his  unfitness 
for  his  place  on  account  of  his  ignorance 
and  inability.  The  honest  judge,  though 
tempted  witn  the  promise  of  the  post  on 
Williams's  removal,  answered,  *  My  lord, 
somewhat  might  have  been  said  at  first, 
but  he  should  do  the  lord  keeper  gieat 
wrong  that  said  so  now.'  Buckingham  was 
not  easily  thwarted.  The  king  was  already 
prejudiced  against  Williams,  and  the  grave 
advice  which  he  gave  to  his  majesty  and 
the   favourite    not    to    quarrel  with    the 

garliament  completed  his  disfavour.     The 
eal  was  taken  from  him  on  the  25th  of 
October  1626,  and  placed  in  the  hands  of 
Sir  Thomas  Coventry. 
There  was  a  kind  of  reconciliation  with 


WILLIAMS 

Buckingham  just  before  his  aflsaminafioa 
in  1628  ;  but  Bishop  Laud,  whom  WiUiaas 
had  formerly  befriended,  then  became  hii 
bitter  enemy,  xmder  the  suppodtion  that 
he  was  a  promoter  of  the  Petition  of  Right, 
and,  what  was  considered  worse,  an  en- 
coura^r  of  the  Puritans.  Continoii^ 
thus  m  disgrace  at  court,  vexatious  com- 
plaints were  made  against  him,  all  of 
which  failed  in  their  object  ud^  1637,wbeD 
his  enemies  succeeded  in  procuring  a  cod- 
viction  in  the  Star  Chamber  for  a  pretended 
offence  committed  nine  or  ten  years  before^ 
in  having  revealed  the  king's  secrets,  and 
on  a  false  accusation  of  tampering  with  the 
witnesses,  for  which  he  was  sentenced  to 
pay  a  fine  of  10,000/.,  to  be  imprisoned, 
and  to  be  suspended  firom  his  ecclesiastical 
functions. 

This  sentence  was  executed  with  the 
greatest  rigour.  His  property  was  waotoolj 
despoiled  under  pretence  of  raising  bis  fine, 
his  person  was  incarcerated  for  three  v»n 
and  a  half,  and  his  desire  to  offer  submis- 
sion was  met  by  the  demand  of  such 
degrading  and  ruinous  terms  that  he  felt 
compelled  to  reject  them.  He  only  pro- 
cured his  liberation  at  last  by  presenting 
a  petition  to  the  House  of  Ix>rds  in  >'a- 
vember  1640,  detailing  his  grievances  and 
demanding  his  writ.  On  his  discharge  he 
forgot  his  personal  complaints  in  the  dii^- 
tress  of  the  state,  and  boldly  stood  up  for 
his  order  and  the  monarchy.  E[is  condact, 
of  course,  pleased  as  much  as  it  surprised 
the  king,  who  not  only  erased  all  memorial 
of  the  proceedings  against  him,  but  admit- 
ted him  to  his  favour,  took  counsel  of  him 
in  the  difficulties  that  surrounded  th« 
throne,  and  on  De<jember  4,  1(>41,  trans- 
lated him  to  the  archbishopric  of  York. 

The  cry  against  the  bishops  at  that  time 
ran  high,  and  twelve  of  them,  of  whom  the 
archbishop  was  at  the  head,  were  soon 
after  his  translation  committed  to  the 
Tower  under  a  ludicrous  accusation  of  hi^ 
treason  for  presenting  a  petition  to  the 
Peers,  complaining  that  the  mob  prevented 
their  access  to  the  house,  and  declaring 
that  whatsoever  was  done  there  durini 
their  forced  absence  was  invalid  and  d 
none  eflect  The  act  excluding  the  bishop 
from  parliament  having  passed  during  their 
confinement,  the  prosecution  dropptid,  and 
the  archbishop  and  his  colleagues  i^en 
released,  after  being  detained  for  eighteen 
weeks,  in  the  course  of  which  W'lUianu 
was  reconciled  to  Archbishop  Laud,  then 
an  inmate  of  the  same  prison. 

Retiring  to  his  diocese,  the  archbishop 
was  soon  obliged  hurriedly  to  leave  hi 
castle  of  Cawood,  in  consequence  of  the 
advance  of  Sir  John  Hotham*s  son  against 
it ;  and  after  having  supplied  the  king 
with  what  aid  in  men  and  money  he  coold, 
he  fled  to  his  native  country,' where  he 


9 
ES 


_ « 


WILLIAMS 

exerted  himself  to  defend  the  royal  cause* 
After  fortifying  Conway  Castle  at  his  own 
expense,  he  attended  the  king  at  Oxford, 
wheie  he  is  said  to  have  cautioned  his 
majesty  particularly  a^nst  Cromwell, 
and  to  have  urged  his  hemg  either  won  hy 

geat  promises  or  cut  on  hy  stratagem. 
is  subsequent  advice  to  the  king  to 
submit  to  the  parliament  on  terms  not 
being  relished,  ne  returned  to  Conway 
Castle,  in  the  government  of  which  he  was 
superseded  the  year  after  by  Sir  John 
Owen,  under  a  commission  from  Prince 
Rupert.  Those  who  had  deposited  their 
money  and  jewels  there  were  refused  resti- 
tution, and  the  archbishop's  appeal  to  the 
king  on  their  and  his  own  behalf  was 
slighted;  so  that  when  Colonel  Milton, 
with  an  overpowering  force,  came  into  the 
country  on  the  part  of  the  parliament,  they 
represented  their  case  to  the  colonel,  and, 
upon  his  promise  to  restore  to  them  their 
property,  agreed  to  assist  him  in  obtaining 
possession.  In  doing  this  they  were  aided 
oy  the  archbishop,  whose  conduct  on  the 
occasion  subjected  him  to  the  imputation 
of  having  deserted  the  king  and  assisted 
the  rebe£.  He  defended  himself  by  assert- 
ing that,  as  the  king's  cause  in  Wales  was 
past  hope,  he  was  justified  in  obtaining 
the  restoration  of  the  property  of  his 
friends,  and  in  making  the  best  terms  he 
could  for  his  countrymen's  immunities. 

'  From  the  fidelity  of  the  kin?  he  never,' 
says  Bishop  Hacket,  *  went  back  an  inch,' 
and  when  the  last  scene  of  the  tragedy  was 
over,  he  deeply  mourned  his  royal  master's 
death  in  solitary  retirement ;  his  cheerful- 
ness forsook  him,  and  he  seldom  spoke. 
He  survived  the  king  little  more  than  a 
year,  and  died   on    his   birthday,   March 

■  25,  1650,  at  Glodded,  in  the  parish  of 
SglwTsrose,  Carnarvonshire,  the  house  of 
bis  kintswoman  Lady  Most^n.  His  body 
was  removed  for  burial  to  the  church  of 
lilandegai,  where  his  nephew  and  heir. 
Sir  Griffith  Williams,  erected  a  monument 

.  to  him,  to  which  his  former  chaplain, 
JBishop  Hacket,  supplied  the  inscription. 

It  is  difficult  to  form  a  just  estimate  of 
the  character  of  any  individual  who  lived 
in  the  times  during  which  Archbishop 
Williams  flourished.    Men's  passions  were 

.00  strong,  their  prejudices  so  great,  and 
their  animosity  against  opposite  opinions 
•o  violent,  that  acts  in  themselves  indif- 

>  ierent  were  frequently  misinterpreted,  and 
what  was  lauded  by  one  party  was  abused 
by  the  other.  Clarendon  and  Heylin, 
enemies  of  the  archbishop,  look  with  a 
jaundiced  eye  on  his  whole  career;  and 
jDishop  Hacket,  his  chaplain  and  friend, 
and  Wilson  the  historian,  give  perhaps 
too  partial  a  colouring  to  everything  ne 
did;  so  that  entire  reliance  is  not  to  be 
placed  on  either.    The  weight  of  evidence. 


WHJiIAMS 


743 


however,  clearly  preponderates  in  his 
favour,  though  it  must  be  allowed  that,  as 
a  counsellor  of  state,  he  was  too  much  of  a 
tem^riser,  and  no  excuse  can  justify  the 
casuistry  with  which  he  recommended 
Charles  to  consent  to  Strafford's  death. 
But  he  was  honest  and  sincere,  and  gene- 
rally wise,  in  the  advice  which  he  offered ; 
and  to  the  monarchs  whom  he  served  he 
was  faithful  and  true. 

In  person  he  was  dignified  and  comely ; 
in  manner  affable  and  kind;  and  though  in 
temper  he  was  warm,  as  most  Welshmen 
are,  yet  his  anger  whs  quickly  mollified ; 
and,  notwithstanding  the  oppressions  which 
he  suffered,  he  showed  no  wish  for  revenge. 
He  was  laborious  in  the  performance  of  hia 
duties,  both  political  and  clerical,  and 
refined  in  the  choice  of  his  relaxations, 
music,  in  which  he  was  a  proficient,  being 
his  delight.  His  learning  was  undoubted ; 
and  his  eloquence,  according  to  the  fashion 
of  the  times,  was  superior  to  that  of  most 
of  his  contemporaries,  his  allusions  and 
illustrations  being  more  apt  and  ingenious, 
and  his  wit  more  lively  and  delicately 
pointed.  He  was  profusely  hospitable  in 
his  household,  and  liberal  to  learned 
poverty,  and  the  sums  which  he  expended 
m  repairing  Westminster  Abbey,  and  in 
building  the  library  at  St.  John's  College, 
Cambridge,  and  tne  chapel  at  that  of 
Lincoln,  in  Oxford,  witness  his  generous 
munificence. 

His  works  were  principally  on  clerical 
subjects,  but  that  which  excited  the  most 
observation  was  entitled  *  The  Holy  Table, 
Name,  and  Thing,'  published  in  opposition 
to  the  innovations  intrcduced  by  Arch- 
bishop Laud.  {Lives  hy  Bishop  Hacktt 
and  A,  FhUips;  Clarendun;  and  Heylin* s 
Heforwation  LRobertsonl) 

WILLIAMS,  Edwahd  V  aughan,  who  in 
1805  retired  from  the  bench,  having  served 
for  nearly  nineteen  years  as  one  of  the  i  udges 
of  the  Common  Pleas,  during  the  whole  of 
which  time  he  fully  maintained  the  high 
reputation  he  had  previously  earned  by  bis 
useful  and  learned  publications,  was  a  law- 
yer from  his  birth,  his  father,  John  Wil- 
liams, Esq.,  being  the  serjeant  in  the  reign 
of  George  UI.  who  added  valuable  notes 
to  an  edition  of  Chief  Justice  Saunden^'a 
Reports.  Though  of  Welsh  extraction,  he 
was  bom  in  London,  and  was  educated  at 
Westminster  School. 

He  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  society 
of  Lincoln's  Inn  on  June  17,  182;3,  and  na- 
turally chose  the  South  Wales  and  Chester 
Circuit.  In  the  very  next  year  he  com- 
menced his  career  as  an  author  by  publishing 
an  edition  of  Saunders's  Reports,  enriching 
it,  in  conjunction  with  the  late  Mr.  Justice 
Patteson,  with  admirable  notes  to  his 
father's  edition,  bringing  the  history  of  the 
law  dovim  to  liie  da^  of  the  wotk.    "^^^ 


744 


WILLIAMS 


the  twenty-tbree  years  that  he  remained  at 
the  bar  he  varied  ois  forensic  oocupations  by 
issuing  from  the  press  several  other  works, 
among  which  were  a  ^  Treatise  on  the  Law 
of  Executors/  in  1832,  which  is  in  high 
estimation ;  and  an  edition  of  Bum*s  *  Jus- 
tice/ in  1886,  in  conjunction  with  Mr. 
Berjeant  D'Oyley. 

He  served  an  apprenticeship  to  theju-. 
dicial  office  as  recorder  of  Kidwelly,  the 
corporation  of  which  on  his  resignation  ex- 

Fressed  their  high  estimation  of  him  for  his 
undeniable  integrity  as  a  citizen,  and  his 
well^eserved  reputation  as  a  profound 
lawyer.*  He  was  raised  to  the  bench  of  the 
Common  Pleas  in  October  1846,  from  which 
failing  health  obliged  him  to  retire  at  the 
end  of  Hilary  Term  1805,  when  he  was 
sworn  of  the  privy  council. 

He  married  Jane  Margaret,  a  daughter 
of  the  Rev.  Walter  Bago^  of  Pype  Hall  in 
Staffordshire. 

WTLTJIMS,  John,  in  whom  we  had  an- 
other example  of  the  union  of  law  and 
literature,  and  an  additional  proof  that  the 
deepest  scholastic  attainments  are  not  in- 
eompatible  with  professional  success,  was  of 
WeUh  extraction,  being  descended  from  an 
ancient  family  in  Merionethshire,  but  was 
bom  at  Bunbi^ry  in  Cheshire,  of  which  his 
father  was  vicar,  as  well  as  holding  a  living 
in  the  former  county.  He  was  bom  in  Ja- 
nuary 1777,  and  imoibed  his  classical  tastes 
at  the  grammar  school  of  Manchester,  from 
whence  proceeding  to  the  university  of 
Cambridge,  he  gained  a  scholarship  at 
Trinity  College  at  the  age  of  eighteen.  In 
his  progi'ess  he  won  many  priiEes,  and,  gni- 
duating  as  B.A.  in  1708,  ne  succeeded  in 
obtaining  a  fellowship  after  a  strenuous 
conipetition, 

His  legal  school  was  the  Middle  Temple, 
where  he  took  his  depee  of  barrister  in  1804. 
On  the  Northern  Circuit  and  at  the  Man- 
chester and  Chester  sessions  he  made  his 
first  attempts,  where,  though  his  progress 
was  slow,  his  merits  were  so  great,  and 
his  reputation  for  accuracy,  ingenuity,  and 
boldness  became  so  well  established,  that  in 
1820  he  was  selected  to  assist  Mr.  Brougham 
and  Mr.  Denman  in  the  defence  of  Queen 
Caroline,  in  the  course  of  which  he  fully 
confirmed  the  character  he  had  obtained. 
This  naturally  made  him  a  marked  man ; 
but,  though  it  increased  his  professional  em- 
nloyment,  it  delayed  his  acquisition  of  pro- 
fessional rank.  This,  however,  may  perhaps 
be  accounted  for  by  his  attacks  upon  Lord 
Chancellor  Eldon  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
of  which  he  had  been  elected  a  member  for 
Lincoln  in  18^3.  No  sooner  had  parliament 
met  than  Mr.  Williams  commenced  that 
series  of  motions  upon  the  delays  in  Chan- 
cery which  ultimately,  after  some  years, 
led  to  a  commission  of  enquiry  and  the 
introduction  of  hills  for  reforming  the  pro* 


WILLOUGHBY 

ceedings  in  that  court.  Tfaeae  motion  ex- 
hibited undoubtedly  too  much  acerl^,ad 
seemed  to  be  dictated  as  much  by  pcnaoil 
as  they  certainly  were  by  political  feelioits 
against  Lord  Eldon.  In  1827  he  atubed 
a  silk  gown;  and  on  the  aoceeaoQ  of  Wil- 
liam IV,  he  was  appointed,  fint  aolidtor, 
and  then  attorney  generaU  to  Queen  Ade- 
laide, and  on  Februasy  28,  1834,  was  ad- 
vanced to  the  bench  as  a  baron  of  tl^ 
Exchequer.  In  the  foUowiug  term,  howe?tf, 
changing  places  with  Mr.  Justice  Parke, be 
took  his  seat  in  the  Court  of  King's  Beock 
having  received  the  acoustomed  hoooorof 
knighthood. 

During  the  whole  of  this  period  he  wmt 
deserted  nis  classical  favourites,  ccmtRbot- 
ing  several  articles  on  the  Greek  Oratonto 
the  'Edinburgh  Review/  and  tiinslitiB<r 
some  of  their  beat  orations.  He  was  alsou 
adept  in  the  turn  of  a  Greek  epigram,  and 
Loni  Tenterden  speaks  of  sevend  that  he 
had  written  when  queen's  solicitor,  speskinir 
of  him  as  ^  an  admirable  scholar.'  He  d- 
terwards  published  a  collection  under  tbd 
title  of  *  Nug»  Metrice.' 

He  remained  on  the  bench  for  aHttle  \e» 
than  thirteen  years,  when  he  died  on  Sep- 
tember 14, 184o,  at  his  seat,  La vennorsParV, 
near  Bury  St  Edmund's.  At  his  outlet  in 
the  judge's  office  he  was  ignorant  of  tbd 
minor  details  of  practice,  and  many  cnrioiu 
anecdotes  are  told  of  his  perplexing  counfc4 
and  attorney  by  refueinff  to  grant  oiden  of 
course,  which  involved  some  absurd  and 
since  disused  fiction  of  law.  He  sood  over- 
came this  difficulty,  and  became  an  excelkot 
judge.  With  much  eccentricity  of  manner, 
and  a  strong  and  decided  way  of  ezpre«siag 
his  opinions,  he  was  a  great  favounts  both 
with  his  brethren  and  the  bar,  fiom  the 
cordiality  and  kindness  of  his  natuN.  To 
the  lust  he  would  spout  Horace  and  De- 
mosthenes by  the  hour  if  he  could  obtain  an 
audience ;  and  there  was  nothing  so  aanojed 
him  as  to  hear  counsel  perpetrate  a  i^ 
quantity. 

He  married  Harriet  Catherine,  the  dangh- 
ter  of  Davies  Davenport,  Esq.,  of  Cap<»- 
thome  Hall,  Macclesfield,  for  many  Tears 
M.P.  for  Cheshire.  (Zaw  JIfap.  Feb.  1S47.I 

WnXOITGEBT,  Thomas,  was  the  fourth 
son  of  Sir  Christopher  Willougfabv,  whoee 
grandfather  was  the  second  son  of  WilUaD, 
the  fifth  Baron  Willoughby  de  EraibT,  and 
whose  eldest  son,  William,  the  iudge'V  bro- 
ther, succeeded  to  that  title  in  1508,  u 
seventh  baron,  on  failure  of  the  senior 
branch.  Thomas,  aa  vras  common  with 
younger  brothers,  was  destined  to  the  law: 
and  preparing  himself  for  hia  forensic  oarMr 
in  Lmcoln's  ion  (of  which  he  was  admitted 
a  member  on  July  16, 1502),  be  was  nomi- 
nated reader  in  1517.  In  1521  he  becsnw 
a  seneant-at-law,  and  in  1530  was  coonti- 
tuted  king's  Serjeant,    While  holding  that 


WILMOT 

dignity  he  and  John  Baldwin  were  made 
knights  in  1534,  being  the  first  seijeant  who 
had  then  ever  accepted  that  distinction. 

He  was  raised  to  the  benoh  as  a  judge  of 
the  Common  Pleas  on  October  9, 1537,  and 
dyinK  on  September  2Q,  1545^  lies  buried  in 
the  cnurch  of  Ohidingstone,  Kent. 

By  his  marriage  with  Bridget,  or,  as  some 
call  her,  Catherine,  daughter  and  coheir  of 
Chief  Justice  Sir  Robert  Head,  he  acquired 
the  estate  of  Bore  Place,  in  Chidingstone, 
which  devolved  on  his  son  Robert,  whose 
descendant  Francis  was  made  a  baronet  in 
1677,  and  his  successor,  Thomas,  was  in 
1712  created  Lord  Middleton  of  Middleton, 
"Warwick,  a  title  which  still  survives. 

WmCOT,  John  Eardlsy,  the  antiauity 
of  whose  family  extends  beyond  the  Con- 
quest, was  the  son  of  Robert  Wilmot,  of 
Ormaston  in  Derbyshire,  by  Ursula,  one  of 
the  daughters  and  coheiresses  of  Sir  Samuel 
Iklarow,  of  Berkswell  in  Warwickshire, 
Bart ;  and  the  brother  of  Robert  Wilmot, 
who  became  secretary  of  the  lord  lieutennnt 
of  Ireland,  and  was  rewarded  with  the 
baronetcy  of  Ormaston  in  1772. 

He  was  bom  on  August  10,  1709,  at 
Derby,  in  the  free  school  of  which  town 
lie  received  his  first  instruction.  He  was 
then  placed  under  the  Rev.  Mr.  Hunter  of 
Lichfield,  where  he  numbered  Samuel 
Johnson  and  David  Garrick  among  his 
schoolfellows,  and  where  no  les^  than  four 
of  his  contemporary  judges  were  educated. 
He  next  was  removed  to  Westminster 
School,  and  afterwards  to  Trinity  Hall, 
Cambridge.  Hb  great  ambition  was  to 
become  a  fellow  of  that  society,  and  to  de- 
vote himself  to  the  Church ;  but,  in  obedi- 
ence to  his  father's  wish,  he  adopted  the 
profession  of  the  law,  and  in  December 
l72d  was  entered  at  the  Inner  Temple. 

He  was  called  to  the  bar  in  June  1732, 
and  for  many  years  confined  himself  prin- 
cipallv  to  country  practice,  with  occasional 
attendance  on  the  London  courts,  and  in 
the  House  of  Commons  on  contested  elec- 
tions. In  the  latter  arena  Horace  Walpole 
(^Memoirs  of  Geo,  IL  ii.  107)  tells  us  that 
*  he  was  an  admired  pleader,  but  being  re- 
primanded on  the  contested  election  for 
\Vareham  with  great  haughtiness  by  Pitt, 
-who  told  him  he  had  brought  thither  the 
pertness  of  his  profession,  and  being  pro* 
hibited  W  the  speaker  fk>m  making  a  re- 
ply, he  nung  down  hL<)  brief  in  a  passion, 
and  never  would  return  to  plead  there  any 
more.'  The  same  lively  author  describes 
him  as  '  a  man  of  great  vivacity  of  parts, 
and  loving  hunting  and  wine,  and  not  his 
profeasion.'  Though  his  merits  were  so 
conspicuous  as  to  gain  the  esteem  of  Sir 
Dudley  Ryder  and  Lord  Hardwicke,  yet 
public  life  was  so  distasteful  to  him  that  he 
not  only  declined  the  ofier  of  a  silk  gown, 
but  resolved  on  retirmg  entirely  to  hia 


WILMOT 


745 


native  countyi  and  in  1764  made  a  farewell 
speech  in  the  Court  of  Exchequer.  He 
WAS  not  long  however  allowed  to  enjoy  his 
repose.  In  the  next  year,  persuaded  by  his 
friends  and  the  demands  of  an  increasing 
family,  he  was  sworn  in  as  a  judge  of  the 
Kinff  s  Bench  on  February  Il|  1/55,  and 
kniffiited. 

Nothing  can  show  more  clearly  the  high 
estimation  in  which  he  was  held  than  his 
being  appointed  on  the  resignation  of  Lord 
HardwicKe,  although  Uie  junior  judge  upon 
the  benoh,  one  of  the  three  commissioners 
to  whom  the  Great  Seal  was  entrusted  on 
November  19,  1756,  and  who  held  it  for 
upwards  of  seven  months,  till  June  30, 1757. 
So  ably  did  he  perform  his  duties  in  the 
office  that  it  was  confidently  reported  that 
he  was  likely  to  be  appointed  ford  keeper. 
On  hearing  this  rumour  he  expressed  his 
repugnance  to  his  brother  in  these  words : 
<The  acting  junior  in  the  commission  is  a 
spectre  I  started  at ;  but  the  sustaining  the 
oifice  alone  I  must  and  will  refuse  at  all 
events.  I  will  not  give  up  the  peaoe  of  my 
mind  to  any  earthly  consideration  what- 
ever. .  .  .  Bread  and  water  are  nectar  and 
ambrosia,  when  contrasted  with  the  supre- 
macy of  a  court  of  justice.'  While  engaged 
as  lord  commissioner  he  still  went  the  cir- 
cuit, and  in  the  spring  assizes  of  1757  he 
had  a  narrow  escape  of  his  life  by  the  fall- 
ing of  a  stack  of  chimneys  through  the  roof 
of  the  court  at  Worcester.  Several  persons 
were  killed  by  the  accident,  but  the  judge^ 
though  his  clerk  who  was  sitting  under 
him  was  one  of  the  victims,  escaped  with- 
out injury. 

By  an  epitaph  which  he  composed  for 
himself  it  is  evident  that  he  contemplated 
his  retirement  from  Westminster  Hall  after 
a  service  of  ten  years ;  and  when  that  period 
had  expired  he  endeavoured  to  obtain  a  re- 
moval to  the  quiet  post  of  chief  justice  of 
Chester.  The  negotiations  however  failed ; 
but  ere  another  year  had  passed  his  hopes 
of  retirement  were  to  be  severely  tested. 
The  elevation  of  Lord  Camden  to  the  chan- 
cellorship made  a  vacancy  in  the  office  of 
chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  and  the 
government  without  hesitation  offered  Sir 
Eardley  the  place,  feeling  that,  from  hia 
learning,  his  judgment,  and  his  character, 
he  was  the  only  fit  and  proper  person  to 
fill  that  station.  Though  he  endeavoured 
to  divert  the  offer,  and  had  actually  written 
a  letter  declining  it,  yet  at  the  earnest  per- 
suasions of  his  friends  he  was  at  lat^t  induced 
reluctantly  to  give  way ;  and  he  was  sworn 
lord  chiet  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas  ou 
August  21,  1706.  The  appointment  was 
universally  approved,  and  was  especially 
satisfactory  to  the  legal  world,  which  both 
admired  and  respected  his  talents  and 
urbanity. 

The  publication  of  No.  45  oi  the  <  ^<yLt.K 


746 


WILMOT 


Briton '  occurred  during  his  judicial  career, 
and  his  conduct  in  regard  to  it  fully  exem- 
plified his  impartiality.  On  the  part  of  the 
crown,  as  a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench,  in 
pronouncing  judgment  against  John  Wil- 
liains,  the  publisher,  he  unhesitatingly  stig- 
matised the  libel  as  most  scandalous  and 
seditious,  most  mali^ant  and  dangerous  to 
the  state ;  and  as  chief  justice  of  tne  Com- 
mon Pleas,  on  the  appeMal  to  the  House  of 
Ix)rds,  he  delivered  m  a  learned  speech  the 
unanimous  opinion  of  his  colleagues  and 
himself  in  confirmation  of  the  judgment 
and  sentence  pronounced  against  Mr.  Wilkes, 
the  author  ot  the  libeL  {State  TriaU^  xix. 
1127.)  On  the  other  hand,  on  the  part  of 
the  people,  his  summing  up  in  the  action 
brought  by  Wilkes  against  liord  Halifax  is 
a  bold  exposure  of  the  ille^ity  of  general 
warrants,  with  the  expression  of  his  opinion 
that  the  plaintiff  was  entitled  to  liberal 
damages  for  the  injury  he  had  suffered  by 
that  isHued  in  his  case. 

The  Great  Seal  was  pressed  upon  him  on 
the  resignation  of  Lord  Chancellor  Camden, 
and  again  on  the  death  of  the  Hon.  Charles 
Yorke,  and  also  during  the  subsequent  com- 
mission ;  but  he  showed  the  sincerity  of  his 
wish  for  privacy  by  refusing  the  proffered 
honour,  and  took  advantage  of  the  last  op- 
portunity to  tender  his  resignation  of  the 
office  which  he  held.  His  retirement  took 
place  on  January  24,  1771 :  and,  notwith- 
standing his  repugnance  to  a  pension,  the 
king  insisted  thut  he  should  receive  one  of 
2400/.  a  y€»ar  as  a  mark  of  approbation  for 
his  exemplary  services.  In  return  for  this 
liberal  allowance,  he  thought  it  his  duty 
to  assist  in  hearing  appeals  to  the  privy 
council,  till  his  increasing  infirmities  obliged 
him  wholly  to  retire  in  1782.  He  lived  for 
ten  years  more,  and  dying  on  February  5, 
1702,  at  the  age  of  eignty-two,  he  waij 
buried  in  Berkswell  Church  in  Warwick- 
shire. 

The  'Opinions  and  Judgments*  of  Sir 
Eardlev,  and  an  affectionate  memoir  of  his 
life,  were  published  by  his  son,  and  both 
contain  ample  evidence  to  prove  that  the 
judge  was  not  only  an  erudite  lawyer,  but 
a  good  man ;  that  he  was  devoted  to  his 
duties  as  an  advocate,  a  judge,  and  a  Chris- 
tian ;  that  his  merit  solely  raised  him  to 
the  places  which  his  modesty  and  diffidence 
would  have  declined ;  and  that  in  the  pii- 
rate  relations  of  life — as  a  friend,  a  husband, 
and  a  father — he  acquired  the  love  and  vene- 
ration of  all  around  him. 

By  his  marriage  with  Sarah,  the  daughter 
of  Thomas  Kivett,  Esq.,  of  l)erby,  he  had 
issue  three  sons  and  two  daughters.  The 
second  son,  who  was  the  author  of  the 
memoir,  became  a  master  in  Chancery,  and 
was  the  father  of  Sir  John  Eardley  Wllmot, 
who  received  a  batouetcy  (of  Berkswell)  in 
1831, being  t\iot\i\xd\)tccotktd\ic^\TL>^^\va£\^ . 


WILTON 

WILSOV,  John,  is  regarded  as  one  of  ^ 
worthies  of  Winandermere.  He  was  Vn 
on  August  6,  1741,  at  the  Howe  in  Ap^ 
thwaite,  where  his  father,  whose  Chnmaa 
name  he  bore,  retdded.  He  matriciililed 
at  Peterhouse,  Cambridge ;  and  wluk  an 
undergraduate  in  1760  he  diatangaialied 
himself  by  a  Tery  able  reply  to  an  attack 
which  Dr.  Powell,  master  of  St.  John*s.  had 
made  upon  the  '  Miscellanea  Analytica*  of 
Dr.  Waring,  the  Lucaidan  Professor  of 
Mathematics.  (Nicholas  Lit.  Ameed.  vl 
717.)  In  1761  he  was  senior  wrangler,  and 
then  became  a  private  tutor,  one  of  lus 
pupils  being  Dr.  Faley.  He  took  his  legal 
degree  at  the  Inner  Temple  in  Jannuj 
17o8,  and  soon,  by  his  talenta  and  indostiy, 
gained  a  considerable  raactice.  Attendin; 
the  Northern  Circuit.  l)uiming  thought  m 
much  of  him  that  ne  employed  him  t» 
answer  many  of  his  cases,  and  several  of  tbe 
opinions  signed  by  Dunning  were  really  the 
opinions  of  Mr.  Wilson,  who  soon  became  i 
leader  himself ;  and  to  his  encouragemeot, 
and  that  of  Sir  James  Mansfield,  is  to  lit 
attributed  the  continuance  in  Westmiitfter 
Hall  of  that  great  luminary  of  the  law  John 
Scott,  Earl  of  Eldon,  who,  not  succeedini 
so  rapidly  as  he  expected,  had  determined 
in  1760  to  retire  to  the  country,  when  Ml 
Wilson,  earnestly  advising  him  to  gire  up 
the  idea,  generously  offend  to  insure  bin 
400/.  the  next  year.    (  Twiss's  EUtm,  I  m) 

Mr.  Wilson,  keeping  entirely  aloof  froa 
politics,  never  sought  a  seat  in  parliimeot; 
and  for  his  professional  merit  alone  wai  re- 
commended by  Lord  Thurlow,  with  irboa 
he  had  had  no  previous  acquaintance,  to £11 
a  vacant  seat  in  the  Common  Pleas,  to  wbiek 
he  was  appointed  on  November  7, 1780,  re- 
ceiving tne  honour  of  knighthood.  He  v« 
so  highly  respected  aa  a  judge,  and  p^ 
formed  his  duties  with  so  much  patieotf 
and  discrimination,  that  he  was,  on  tbe  re- 
tirement of  Lford  Chancellor  Thurlow,  «p- 
pointed  one  of  tbe  commissioners  of  tbe 
Great  Seal,  from  June  16, 17(>i,  to  JunnuT 
28,  1793.     Before  tbe  end  of  that  yeiri* 
was  seized  with  paralysis,  and  died'on  0^ 
tober  18,  179;^,  at  Kendal,  where,  on  1b? 
tomb,  is  an   inscription  from  the  pen  ** 
Bishop  Watson,  eloquently  de^iripQW  d 
his  merit*  as  a  lawyer,  his  uprightness  c  ■ 
iudge,  and  his  worth  as  a  man.    In  ITc^b* 
becauie  a  fellow  of  the  Royal  Societr.  fl' 
married  the  daughter  of  Mr.  Seije*nt  Adiii 
and  left  a  small  infant  family.   {R  ^' 
stmie,  211;   OefU.  Mag,  Ixii.  9iV>,  Ixir.  105U 

WILTOK,   Richard  db,  was  sheriff  af 
Wiltshire  from  ]0  to  27  Henry  IL   latk* 
19th  year  of  that  reign,  1173,  he  nC*  ' 
assize  as  one  of  the  justices  itiiwni'' 
Deyonshire,  and  in  the  foUowir 
his  own  county.    (Madox,  i.  15 

WHTOH,   LAUBBavCB  BK. 

^  «A&\\^  and  one  of  the  just 


WILTON 

^  Henry  III,  1219^  for  Cumberland,  West- 
moreland, and  Lancashire.  (Rymer^  i.  154.) 
The  only  previous  notice  of  him  is  in  7  John, 
when  he  obtained,  on  a  line  of  two  palfreys, 
.the  king's  charter,  confirming  to  him  a 
certain  otone  House  in  Cunning  Street, 
York,  which  Robert  de  Stuteville  had 
granted  to  him  and  his  heirs  at  the  annual 
rent  of  a  pair  of  gilt  spurs.  (^Rot.  Chart.  163.) 
.  WHTOH,  Williak  de,  had  fines  levied 
l)efore  him  in  Trinity  1247,  31  Henry  HI., 
and  the  two  following  years.  In  1248, 
1248,  and  1250  he  acted  as  a  justice  itine- 
rant,  as  his  brethren  did  {DugdMs  Oi'ig, 
43),  but  from  that  date  till  August  1253 
Lis  name  does  not  occur.  During  the  latter 
and  the  two  next  years  there  are  several 
entries  of  payments  for  writs  of  assize  to 
be  taken  betore  him;  and  then  there  is 
another  omission  of  his  name  for  three  suc- 
cessive years  more.  These  payments  are 
resumed  in  July  1259  {Ahh.  Placit.  134) ; 
and  in  the  next  two  years  he  appears  among 
the  Justices  itinerant,  in  the  last  of  which, 
1261,  he  is  placed  at  the  head  of  three  of 
the  commissions. 

On  December  11, 1261,  he  had  a  grant  of 
lOCM.  per  annum  to  support  him  '  in  officio 
justiciariae,'  being  the  allowance  then  made 
to  those  who  held  the  chief  place.  Whether 
the  court  over  which  he  presided  was  the 
King's  Bench  or  the  Common  Pleas  does 
not  distinctly  appear,  but  there  seem  suffi- 
cient grounds  to  show  he  was  then  chief 
justice  of  the  King's  Bench.  That  at  first 
he  belonged  to  the  Common  Pleas  has 
been  presumed  from  fines  having  been 
acknowledged  before  him.  But,  as  none 
were  so  acknowledged  after  33  Henry  Vil.^ 
be  was  in  all  likelihood,  on  his  restoration 
to  office  (for  that  he  was  twice  removed 
there  is  reason  to  conjecture),  placed  in  the 
King's  Bench,  and  continued  there  till  he 
was  raised  to  the  head  of  it.  Writs  of 
assize  to  be  taken  before  him  were  granted 
up  to  November  1263,  48  Henry  III.  {Ex- 
cerpt, e  Hot,  Fin,  ii.  407.) 

While  some  of  the  judges  of  this  period 
-were  evidently  members  of  the  ecclet*iastical 
body,  others  did  not  consider  military  service 
inconsistent  with  their  judicial  character. 
According  to  a  manuscript  preserved  in 
Iceland's  *  Collections'  (i.  1/5),  William  de 
Wilton  was  killed  at  the  battle  of  Lewes, 
on  May  14,  1264,  fighting  on  the  side  of 
his  royal  master. 

He  and  his  wife,  Koesa,  had  a  charter 
for  a  market  in  an  unnamed  place  in  Kent 
in  1256.     (Excerpt,  e  Hot.  Fin.  ii.  245.) 

WILUGHBT,  Pnnjp  de  (whose  name  is 
Tariously  spelled),  was  appointed  a  baron 
of  the  Exchequer  before  Michaelmas,  3 
Edward  I.,  1275,  when  he  is  mentioned  as 
being  present  with  that  title.  He  soon 
after  received  the  custody  of  one  of  the 
tout  keys  of  the  royal  treasury,  his  annual 


WILUGHBY 


747 


fee  in  the  former  capacity  being  forty  marks, 
and  in  the  latter  10/.  lie  was  raised  to  the 
office  of  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  about 
1283,  and  filled  it  tiU  his  death  in  1305,  a 
period  of  twenty-two  years.  During  this 
time  he  frequently  acted  as  locum  tenens 
of  the  treasurer,  and  seems  to  have  been  so 
indefatigable  in  his  attention  to  the  duties 
of  his  office  that  in  30  Edward  I.  the  kin^, 
taking  into  consideration  the  length  of  his 
service,  gave  him  a  licence  to  attend  at  the 
Excheauer  when  it  suited  his  leisure  and 
convenience.  (Madox,  ii.  54,  06,  &c.,  320- 
325;^66.P/crci^.  281.) 

Like  most  of  the  officers  of  the  court,  he 
was  of  the  clerical  profession,  and  first  ob- 
tained as  his  reward  a  canonry  of  St.  Paul's, 
from  which  he  was  advanced  in  June  1288 
to  the  deanery  of  Lincoln.  (Le  Neve,  145.) 
At  his  death  he  was  possessed  of  the  manor 
of  Byfiete  in  Kent,  and  lands  in  Notts  and 
Middlesex.     (Cal.  Inq.  p.  m.  i.  196.) 

WniTGHBT,  Richard  de,  the  original 
surname  of  whose  family  was  Bugge,  which 
was  changed  to  Wilughby  from  their  lord- 
ship of  that  name  in  Nottinghamshire,  was 
the  son  of  Richard  de  Wilughby,  who  pur- 
chased the  manors  of  Wollaton  in  the  same 
county,  and  Risley  in  Derbyshire.  In  17 
Edward  II.  he  was  substituted  for  his  father 
as  the  representative  in  parliament  for  his 
native  county,  and  was  about  the  same 
time  appointed  chief  justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas  in  Ireland.  (Pari,  WritSy  ii.  p.  ii. 
1616 ;  Cal,  Hot.  Pat.  78,  94,  97.) 

On  the  accession  of  Edward  III.  he  was 
removed  from  this  position,  and  it  would 
appear  that  he  resumed  his  practice  at  the 
English  bar,  as  he  is  mentioned  in  the  Year 
Book  as  an  advocate  in  the  first  year.  On 
March  6,  1328,  in  the  second  year,  how- 
ever, he  was  placed  on  the  bench  of  the 
Common  Pleas  in  England,  and  was  further 
advanced  on  September  2, 1329,  to  be  the 
second  justice  of  that  court.  On  December 
15,  1330.  he  was  removed  into  the  Court 
of  King  s  Bench ;  and  when  Geoffrey  le 
Scrope,  the  chief  justice,  went  abroad  with 
the  king,  Wilughby  occupied  the  chief  seat 
during  his  absence,  at  different  times  from 
1332  till  Geofirey  le  Scrope  ultimately 
resigned  in  the  middle  of  1338.  From  this 
time  there  is  no  doubt  that  Wilughby  pre- 
sided in  the  court  until  he  was  displaced  on 
July  24,  1340,  and  on  the  9th  of  October 
following  he  was  restored  to  the  Common 
Pleas. 

Stephen  Birchington  (Angl.  Sac.  i.  21) 
says  that  he  was  one  of  the  judges  who 
were  arrested  by  the  king  on  his  hasty 
return  to  England  at  the  end  of  November 
1340,  for  some  alleged  misconduct ;  and  it 
is  to  be  remarked  that  neither  in  the  Book 
of  Assizes,  nor  in  the  Rolls  of  Parliament, 
nor  in  any  other  document,  does  his  name 
appear  as  a  judge  till  the  seventeenth  year. 


748 


WIMER 


lie  then  certainly  had  a  new  patent  (Vai, 
Rot,  Pai.  146)^  and  from  that  date  fines 
were  levied  befure  him  till  Trinity,  31 
Edward  UI.  (Dugdale'a  Orig,  46),  when,  as 
the  Year  Book  does  not  record  any  of  his 
judgments  of  a  later  date,  he  probably 
retired  from  the  bench,  though  ne  lived 
for  five  years  afterwards. 

It  is  related  of  him  that  about  Christmas 
1331,  which  was  before  be  was  chief  jus- 
tice,  he  was  attacked  on  his  way  to  Grant- 
ham by  one  Richard  Fulville,  and  forcibly 
taken  mto  a  wood,  where  a  gang  of  lawless 
men,  large  bodies  of  whom  then  infested 
the  countrv,  compelled  him  to  pay  a  ransom 
for  his  life  of  ninetpr  marks.  {Bonuses 
Edw.  III.  62.)  This  violence,  however 
disagreeable  to  its  object,  had  the  happy 
efiect  of  causing  measures  to  be  taken  to 
put  a  stop  to  these  combinations. 

He  died  in  30  Edward  HI.,  possessed  of 
extensive  estates  in  the  counties  of  Notting- 
ham, Derby,  and  Lincoln,  &c.,  besides  a 
great  house  situate  in  '  le  Baly '  in  London. 
(CVi/.  Inq,  p.  m.  ii.  250.) 

He  married  three  wives — 1,  Isabel, 
daughter  of  Sir  Roger  Mortein ;  3,  Joanna ; 
and  3,  Isabella — and  had  several  children. 
Two  of  his  descendants,  Sir  Henry  Willough- 
by  of  Ridley,  and  Sir  William  Willoughby 
of  Selston,  were  created  baronets,  the  former 
in  1011,  and  the  latter  in  1600;  but  both 
titles  became  extinct  on  their  deaths. 

WIlfEB  is  called  Hhe  Chaplain'  in 
every  place  wheie  his  name  occurai,  no 
doubt  as  tilling  that  office  in  the  king's 
court.  He  held  the  sheriffalty  of  Norfolk 
and  Suffolk  for  seventeen  vears  and  a  half, 
commencing  16  Henry  1 1.,  1170.  lie  is 
mentioned  m  the  Chronicle  of  Joceline  de 
Brakelonda  (It))  as  being  present  as  sheriff 
at  the  inauguration  of  Samson  to  the  abbacy 
of  St.  Edmund's  in  1182.  In  the  Ist  year 
of  Richard  I.  {Pipe  Itoll,  44)  he  paid  afine 
of  two  hundred  marks  for  his  quittance 
from  that  sheriffalty,  and  from  all  com- 
plaints against  him  and  his  seijeants  during 
the  time  he  had  held  it ;  offered  probably 
by  the  sheriff  as  an  easy  discharge  of  long- 
continued  accounts,  and  received  by  the 
king  as  a  convenient  addition  to  his  funds 
for  the  crusade. 

His  name  occurs  once  only  as  a  justice 
itinerant  in  1173,  when  he  and  three  others 
assessed  the  tallage  on  the  king's  demesnes 
in  Essex  and  Hertfordshire.  He  also  ac- 
counted for  the  abbey  of  Hulnie,  then 
vacant  and  in  the  king's  hands.  (Madox,  i. 
808,  701.) 

Possibly  he  may  be  the  same  with 
WinemtruSy  mentioned  in  Le  Neve  (153, 
101)  as  subdean  of  Lincoln  in  1185,  and 
archdeacon  of  Northampton  in  1105. 

WIKOH,  HrMFRKY,  of  Everton  in  the 
oounty  of  Bediotd,  \9«a  Wu  about  1545, 
•nd  was  ciAled  V>  ^<^  \^vt  ^X.  Va^^q^^ 


WINCHESTER 

Inn  in  1681,  became  a  bencher  there  m 
1506,  and  reader  in  1598.    He  must  bTe 
acquired  some  character  as  a  lawyer,  for  be 
sat  in  the  last  three  of  Elizabeth's  pufii- 
ments  for  the  town  of  Bedford,  and  wm  in- 
vested with  the  degree  of  the  coif  in  Tiioitj 
Term  1606,  for  the  purpoee  of  taking  anm 
him  the  office  of  chiet  baron  of  the  Ex- 
chequer in  Ireland,  to  which  he  was  ap- 
pointed on   November  8.     He  was  then 
knighted,  and  two  years  afterwards  he  soc- 
ceeded  Sir  James  Ley  as  lord  chief  jostice 
of  the  King's  Bench  in  that  countzy,  with  & 
salary  of  ^DO/.  a  year.     He  only  retained 
that  appointment  from  December  8,  160k, 
till  November  7,  1611  (^SmyOCa  Lmw  Of, 
Irekmdy  88,  140),  during  which  hischan^- 
ter  for  ^  quickness^  industry,  and  dispatch' 
is  recommended  for  imitation  by  Baan,  is 
his  speech  to  Sir  William  Jones,  on  talm^ 
the  same  place.  (Bacon's  Works  [Montaga], 
vii.  2.  64.^    Sir  Humfrey  was  immediateW 
translated  into  England,  and  consthate^A 
judge  of  the  Common  Pleas,  where  he  Mt 
for  the  next  fifteen  years.    In  August  161S 
he  was  sent  into  Ireland  with  three  odier 
commissioners  to  examine  into  the  eoiB- 
plaints  of  the  people.     (Pell  Becordt,  1(9l) 
Three  years  after    he  fell  deservedlj  into 
some  disgrace,  in  consequence  of  cosdeiim- 
ing  and  executing,  at  the  summer  assies 
at  Leieester,  no  less  than  nine  womes  ii 
witches,  on  the  evidence  of  a  boy,  who  pie- 
tended  that  he  had  been  bewitched  and 
tormented  by  them.     The  king,  on  a  fiat 
to  the  town  a  month  after  the  tiial,  po^ 
sonally  examining-  the  boy,  .discoTered  aad 
exposed  the  imposture,  but  too  late  to  s&tc 
the   unfortunate    victims    of   this  absiLtl 
superstition.     (Leicester  Record$,  MSS,) 

He  died  suddenly  while  robing  to  go 
into  court  on  February  4,  1625,  and  «* 
buried  in  the  cloisters  of  PemlffokeHiH 
Cambridge.  His  reports  of  ^Choice  CasM'ia 
his  own  court  were  published  in  1057 ;  aad 
Oroke  {Jac,  700),  his  colleague  on  the  bach, 
calls  him  a  *  learned  and  religiouF judpe.' 

By  his  wife,  Cecily,  daughter  of  Ridufj 
Onslow,  Esq.,  recorder  of  London  aaft 
speaker  of  the  Ilou^e  of  Commons,  he  kn, 
besides  other  issue,  a  son  named  Oa^ 
Winch,  who  was  sheriff  of  Bedfordahuea 
1038  ;  but  his  male  representatives  f«a- 
nated  with  Humfrey  Winch,  of  Hawnefiia 
that  county,  who  was  created  a  baroort  a 
I0()0,  and  died  without  male  issue  in  17ft^ 
(  Wotton's  BaronH.  iv.  476.) 

wnrCH£ST£DS,    John  bs,  stands 
last  of  six  justices  itinerant  before  whoa" 
fine  was  levied  at  Westminster  in  8 
III.,  1219,  but  no  further  mention 
occurs  in  any  of  the  records  of  tha^ 

wnrCHSSTEB^  Eabl  of. 
Qftnct. 

WnrOESBTEB,    Mabuip 


WODEHOUSB 


749 


mKQHAH,    IIenst    sb    (Bibhop    op 

IjONDON),  was  born  at  WisghBin  in  Kent, 
from  whicb  he  took  his  n&me.  Ha  was 
probablj  brougbt  up  in  one  of  the  offices  of 
tbe  Kxchequer,  since  20CU.  was  entrusted  to 
Um  in  30  Henry  III.  to  be  expended  in  tbe 
king's  service,  and  be  was  naaigned  in  30 
Hearj  HI.,  1246,  in  coojanction  with  John 
de  Grey,  ^e  jusUce  of  Chester,  to  Eiseess 
the  tallage  for  that  city.  (PM  Secordi,  iii. 
25;  Madox,  i.  7^)  He  was  then  one  of 
the  king's  escheators  {ExcerpL  e  Rot.  Fin. 
i.  45S-4U4,  ii.  4-36),  snd,  besides  being 
Appointed  chnmberliun  of  Ooaconv,  was 
emplojed  in  two  embnsaies  into  France. 
The  patent,  dated  Jul;  2,  1263,  37  Henry 
Hi.,  'De  provisione facta od  gubemationem  , 
regni,'  when  the  kin^  left  the  government 
in  the  hnnda  of  his  queen  durinfc  his  j 
abaence,  is  signed  'per  nmnus  H.  de  Weng-  ' 
ham,'  showing,  probably,  that  be  was  then  ' 
connected  wita  the  Chancery.  On  January  I 
6,  1265,  tbe  Oreat  Seal  was  delivered  into 
his  custody ;  but  the  title  of  cbaucellor  does  ! 
not  appear  to  hare  accompanied  it.  {Madox,  I 
i.  08,  m.)  In  1257  he  was  collated  to  the  I 
chancellorship  of  Exeter,  and  soon  after-  I 
wards  was  advanced  to  the  valuable  deanery  j 
of  St.  Martin's.  He  was  one  of  the  twelve 
selected  on  tbe  part  of  tbe  king  when  the 
Mad  ParUament  of  Oxford,  in  June  1258, 
Appointed  twenty-four  barons  to  draw  up 
provisions  for  the  goverameDt  of  the  king-  ' 
dom :  and  was  continued  in  his  office  on  , 
rwearinr  not  to  put  the  Seal  to  any  writ  ' 
which  had  not  tbe  approbation  of  the 
council  as  well  as  of  the  hinK-  I 

Soon  after  this,  on  the  ilightof  the  king's 
faaU-brother,  Ethelmar,  who  had  been 
elected  Bishop  of  Winchester,  the  monks  ' 
of  that  church  chose  Henry  de  Winghara 
for  their  bishop;  but  he,  being  unwilling  . 
to  mix  in   tbeiT  dissensions,  and  doubtfuk 

Krhaps  of  King  Henry's  real  anprribfttion, ' 
dined  tbe  proffered  mitre,  alleging  his  , 
insufSciency.  This,  howevnr,  did  not  pre-  | 
Tent  his  acceptance  of  the  bishoprio  of 
Ixindon,  to  which  he  was  shortly  after-  I 
\ntrds  appointed,  and  consecralcd  on 
February  15,  1200.  On  October  18  be 
retired  from  tbe  Chancery,  and  the  king's 


26  Henry  II.,  when  the  kingdom  was  di- 
vided into  four  parts  for  judicial  cirouiia. 
He  was  one  of  tbe  king's  chaplains,  and  no 
doubt  was  selected  on  that  account.  He 
does  not  appear  to  have  acted  in  any  sub- 
sequent year. 

WITKJrXLS,  RoBBRi  SB,  was  a  iusticier 
appointed  bv  the  same  great  council  held  in 
3e  Henry  II,,  1179.  His  prewnce  in  the 
Curia  It^s  when  fines  were  taken  is  also 
noticed  in  tbe  30th,  33rd,  and  35th  Henry 


».) 


wproval  of  his  conduct  was  shown  by 
permission  be  received  to  retain  his  d« 
eriea  and  all  his  other  ecclesiastical  prefar- 
menta,  consisting  of  ten  valuable  prebends 
and  rectories. 

This  discreet  and  circumspect   courtier 

died  on  July  13,  1262,  and  was  buried  in 

his  own  cathedral.      [^Godviin,  182,  221: 

L»  Neot,  88,  177  ;    ICeewr,  359j  Brady'i 

c   Engl.  i.  025-635,  App.  188,  190;  Rapin, 

,  ia.  133.) 

,       WIBBBZC,  REaiHiU)  m,  so  called  pro- 

.    bably  from  having  been  bora  at  'Wisbeach, 

WM  among  the  clergr  named  as  justices 

.    iiiiieraDt  at  the  couocil  held  at  Windsor  in 


In  1  Richard  1.  he  was  associated  with 
other  judges  to  ^d  the  chief  justiciaries  in 
the  government  of  tbe  Idogdooi  during  bis 
absence  (Madox,  i.  34),  and  bin  name  ap- 
pears as  witness  to  a  final  concord  in  3  Ri- 
chard I.     (IMrod.  to  Rot.  Cur.  R^,  cvii.) 

There  are  two  notices  of  his  pleas  among 
those  of  the  reign  of  King  John,  one  in  the 
Grst'year,  and  the  other  without  date ;  but 
they  apparently  refer  to  the  previous  reign. 
(Ahh.  naait.  25,  09.) 

He  was  sbertfi*  of  the  county  of  Glou- 
cester in  tbe  29tli  and  SOth  Heory  U. 

TODEHOVBE,  Robert  db,  was  the  son  of 
Sir  Bertram  de  Wodehou8e,a  Norfolk  knight 
of  great  pos8es.-doDS,  who  is  thus  described 
in  a  rhyming  pedigree  of  the  family.    He 


brother.  Sir  William,  whs  the  a 

thepresentBaron  Wodebouseof  Kimberly, 
Norfolk. 

Being  bronght  up  to  the  Church,  he  be- 
came chaplain  to  Edward  II.,  from  whom 
he  received  the  office  of  escheator.  (Ahh, 
Rot.  Ong.  I  174-104.)  On  July  24,  1318, 
12  Edward  II.,  he  was  constituted  a  baron 
of  the  Exchequer,  and  was  summoned  to 
parliament  amongtbe  judges  as  lat^  as  No- 
vember 1322,  10  Edward  II.,  when  he  pro- 
bably reaifrned  or  was  removed,  as  about 
this  time  ne  became  keeper  of  the  king's 
wardrobe,  an  office  which  be  held  at  tne 
end  of  that  reign,  and  at  the  commencement 
of  the  next.     {Rot.  Pari.  ii.  388.) 

In  1  Edward  III.  he  was  presented  to  the 
archdeaconry  of  Richmond,  and  on  April 
16,  1329,  was  replaced  on  tbe  Exchequer 
bench  as  second  baron  ;  but  again  resigned 
his  seat  on  September  IB,  when  he  was 
made  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  by  which 
title  he  had  a  grant  to  him  in  the  next  year 
of  tbe  manor  of  Ashele,  with  the  bailiwick 
of  the  forests  of  Bere  in  Hampshire.  (Ahb. 
RU.Orig.\i.4:i,li7.)  On  March  10. 1339, 
he  was  promoted  to  the  office  of  treasurer 
of  the  Exchequer,  but  seems  onlv  to  have 
continued  in  it  till  the  following  Ceceraber. 

He  probably  died  in  January  134?,  IS 


750 


WODESTOKE 


Edward  III.,  as  bis  will  was  proved  on  the 
8rd  of  the  following  February,  wherein  he 
ordered  his  body  to  be  buried  in  the  choir 
of  the  Augustine  monks  at  Stamford.     (Le 

W0BE8T0KS,  Jambs  de,  of  Holshute  in 
Hampshire,  was  member  for  the  county  of 
Berks  in  I33C.  He  wore  the  judicial  er- 
mine for  a  very  short  period,  his  patent,  as 
a  judge  of  the  Common  riess,  being  dated 
on  February  4,  1340,  14  Edward  III.,  and 
his  death  occuning  either  at  the  end  of 
that  or  the  beginning  of  the  next  year. 
From  the  eighth  year  of  that  reicfn  his  name 
occurs  in  several  commissions  for  the  trial 
of  offences,  gradually  rising  from  the  lowest 
to  the  highest  step  in  tliem.  His  place  of 
birth  may  be  presumed  from  his  name,  and 
from  his  oeing  empl(»yed  in  0  Edward  III. 
to  raise  money  for  the  king  in  Oxfordshire. 
At  his  death  he  was  in  possession  of  the 
manor  of  Brunes  Norton  in  that  county, 
and  of  that  of  Holshute  and  Appleton  m 
Berkshire.     {^Dugdale's  Orig.  45  ;  Col.  luo. 

S.  m.  ii.  00 ;  Rot.  Pari.  ii.  78,  449 ;  Ahh. 
lot.  On'g.  ii.  J>0 ;  N.  Fcedera,  ii.  875,  807.) 
WOGAK,  Joux,  was  a  referee,  in  conjunc- 
tion with  Hugo  de  Cressingham,  of  the 
dispute  between  the  queen  and  William  de 
Valence  and  his  wife,  the  result  of  which 
was  stated  to  the  parliament  of  18  Edward 
L  At  the  same  parliament  Hugo  de  Cres- 
singham complained  against  him  that  he 
entered  the  queen's  court  at  Haverford, 
and  impeded  the  proceedings,  to  which 
Wogan  answered  tnat  he  did  so  only  to 
prevent  one  of  the  tenants  from  doing  fealty 
to  the  queen  for  a  tenement  he  held  of 
William  de  Valence  ;  and  the  case  was  re- 
ferred for  enquiry,  but  the  decision  does  not 
appear.  {Rot.  Pari  i.  31,  33.)  In  20  Ed- 
ward I.,  1202,  he  was  one  of  the  justices 
itinerant  assigned  for  the  four  northern 
counties ;  and  was  appointed  chief  justice 
of  Ireland  on  October  18,  12^)5  {CaL  Rot. 
Pat.),  continuing  to  hold  that  important 
post  for  the  remainder  of  that,  and  for  the 
tirst  twelve  years  of  the  next  reign,  when 
Koger  de  Mortimer  was  put  in  his  place. 

During  the  whole  of  this  period  he  is 
occasionally  mentioned  in  parliament,  but 
does  not  appear  to  have  acted  judicially  in 
England  in  the  reign  of  Edward  II. ;  for 
though  he  was  named  as  a  justice  itinerant 
into  Kent  on  May  13,  1313,  0  Edward  11., 
he  was  removed  from  the  commission  ten 
days  afterwards,  on  account  of  other  busi- 
ness requiring  his  attention,  and  anotlier 
was  substituted  for  him.  (Pari.  Writs,  i. 
910,  ii.  1031.) 

W0LLAYE8T0K,  or  WOLLAVHTrOH, 
Henry  de,  is  mentioned  imder  the  former 
name  as  a  justice  itinerant,  in  52  Henry  III., 
1268,  into  eleven  counties ;  and  again,  under 
the  latter  name,  m  \^Ti/\ii\»  ¥«&^x.  {Rot, 
Ciam,  1.  AK).")    ¥tom  ISjk^  \^8fe  ^^ts^  Wi 


WOLSELEY 

entries  of  payments  made  for  atsixes  to  be 
held  before  him,  in  each  year,  till  May 
1272,  which  raises  a  question  whether  m 
may  not  be  considered  as  a  regular  jnstider. 
There  are  parishes  of  the  name  of  Wool- 
avington  both  in  Somersetshire  and  SnaKx, 
from  which  the  latter  name  might  have 
been  derived ;  but  if  the  former  is  the  cor- 
rect one,  it  was  probably  taken  from  the 
manor  of  WoUaston  in  Staffordshire,  wliere 
a  family  so  designated  was  seated  at  thii 
period. 

WOLLOSE,  David  de,  named  from  the 
town  of  WoUore  in  Northumberiind,  if 
little  known  before  he  became  master  of  the 
Rolls.  The  only  previous  notice  we  htre 
met  with  is  that  he  was  sent  to  attend  the 
parliament  which  King  Edward  Btliol 
summoned  in  Scotland  in  8  Edward  III, 
that  his  mission  occupied  eighteen  dajB, 
and  that  he  was  allowed  three  shilling*  i 
day  for  his  expenses.  ( JV.  Hotdera,  u.  875, 
897.)  There  is  no  evidence  to  show  that 
he  was  a  clerk  in  the  Chanceiy,  nor  doe* 
the  date  of  his  appointment  as  master  d 
the  Bolls  appear.  He  is  first  mentioned  in 
that  office  on  July  2.  ld4C,  20  Edwaiti UL 
(Ibid.  iii.  86.) 

He  continued  in  that  office  about  five- 
and-twenty  years,  during  which  time  he 
frequently  had  the  custodv  of  the  (intt 
Seal— in  1349, 1351,  and  1^3.  He  wn  re- 
ceiver of  petitions  in  the  parliameDts  frm 
36  to  43  Edward  III.  (Ret.  PdrL  u.  26&- 
299.) 

In  his  clerical  character  he  was  a  eun 
of  St  PauVs  and  rector  of  Bishop's  Wel^ 
mouth,  his  successor  in  which  was  iudiirted 
in  1370,  the  vear  of  his  death.  (SmUa 
Durham,  i.  231.) 

WOLSELEY,  Ralph,  belonged  to  one  rf 
the  most  ancient  families  in  Stafford!^ 
whose  principal  estate  was  called  \M«fa 
He  was  the  son  of  Thomas  de  WoleeleT> 
Margery,  daughter  of  William  Biwtii 
Longdon  in  the  same  county.  Browrhto 
in  the  Exchequer,  he  received  a  pint « 
the  office  of  victualler  to  the  town  d 
Calais.  This  he  surrendered  in  Decente 
14G6,  and  on  the  21>th  of  September  fc^ 
lowing  he  was  raised  to  the  bench  of  tk 
Exchequer  as  a  fourth  haron.  In  the  a* 
year  a  grant  he  had  received  of  aD  * 
wood  and  underwood  called  Hopvashfri 
Staffordshire  was  excepted  out  of  the>rt 
of  resumption  then  passed.  (Rot.  iW^. 
002, 615.)  ^ 

He  was  superseded  as  haron  on  J* 
14,  1470,  10  Edward  T\\  but  was  nf 
pointed  on  March  8,  1478,  18  Edward  In 
and  retained  his  place  on  the  aui/w— tf 
PMward  V.  and  Kichard  IIL  H" 
the  earljrpart  of  the  secouf 
latter  reign. 

He  was  twice  married. 
\  ^\i^  ^^1^  ^  ^Ans^ter  of  Li 


i 


0- 

ri 

m 


WOLSEY 

had  no  issue.  By  his  second,  Margaret, 
daughter  of  Sir  Robert  Aston,  of  Hey  wood, 
knight,  he  left  a  son,  John,  in  whose  pos- 
terity two  baronetcies  now  flourish — one 
created  in  1628,  and  the  other  in  1744. 
(Watty's  Baronet,  ii.  133.) 

WOLBET,  Thomas  (Abchbishop  of 
York  and  Oardikal).  The  events  of  no 
man's  life  have  been  so  frequently  recorded 
as  those  of  Cardinal  Wolsey.  No  history 
of  this  country,  nor  indeed  of  any  other 
European  state  during  the  period  in  which 
he  flourished,  can  avoid  the  introduction  of 
his  name,  or  omit  the  scenes  in  which  he 
acted ;  and  numerous  have  been  the  sepa- 
rate biographies  which  have  described  his 
career.  The  picturesque  memoirs  by  his 
faithful  gentleman  usher  George  Cavendish, 
ably  illustrated  as  they  have  been  by  Dr. 
Wordsworth   and  Mr.   Singer;   the  pithy 

*  Observations*    of   David    Lloyd    in    his 

*  State  Worthies ;  *  the  fearful  folio  of  Dr. 
Uddes,  rendered  valuable  by  his  *  Collec- 
tions *  of  original  documents :  the  earliest 
literary  effort  of  John  Gait;  the  various 
articles  in  biographical  dictionaries;  the 
interesting  summa^  by  Authony  Wood: 
the  able  *  Life  '  in  the  Library  of  Useful 
Knowledge;  and,  lastly,  the  elegant  and 
excellent  contribution  to  Lardner's  Cabi- 
net Cyclopaedia,  render  it  almost  a  work  of 
supererogation  to  repeat  the  oft-told  tale. 
The  following  slight  sketch  is  formed  prin- 
cipally from  the  materials  which  these 
authors  have  supplied. 

Thomas  Wolsey  was  bom  at  Ipswich  in 
March  1471.  The  Christian  names  of  his 
parents  were  Robert  and  Joan ;  and  the 
surname  is  spelled  Wuley  in  the  father's 
"will,  and  so  did  the  cardinal  himself  spell  it 
as  late  as  August  1608,  if  a  bull  of  Pope 
Julius  II.  of  that  date,  confirming  a  dis- 
pensation granted  to  him  by  Pope  Alex- 
ander VI.  in  1501,  in  both  of  which  he  is 
so  called,  may  be  taken  as  authority.  But 
in  letters  of  his  preserved  in  the  State 
Paper  Office  his  signature  is  'Thomas 
Wulcy,'  which  name  is  also  used  in  a  petition 
from  one  of  his  relatives.  Some  error  there- 
fore must  have  crept  into  the  former  docu- 
ments, which  is  not  unlikely  in  the  careless 
-writing  of  the  day ;  and  the  letter  e,  by  an 
easy  mistake  in  reading  or  transcribing,  may 
have  been  substituted  for  c.  The  letters 
are  so  subscribed  as  late  as  September  1513, 
a  few  months  after  which  he  became  Bishop 
of  Lincoln,  when  he  signed  with  his  spiritual 
title.  He  altered  it  in  1509,  when  he  be- 
came almoner  to  the  king.  (Rymer,  xii. 
78a  xiii.  217,  267;  Fidden,  CoU.  i) 

Tradition  states  that  his  father  was  a 
batcher ;  and  the  popular  voice  and  satiri- 
cal song  of  the  time  make  the  tale  probable. 
Some  of  his  biographers  have  given  no 
credit  to  the  story ;  but  it  may  certainly  be 
inferred;  from  the  absence  of  all  mention^ 


WOLSEY 


751 


and  apparently  the  careful  concealment,  of 
his  employment,  that,  if  not  a  butcher,  be 
followed  some  other  obscure  trade,  of  which 
his  son  in  his  pride  did  not  deliirht  to 
speak.  His  first  biographer,  George  (Daven- 
dish,  who  had  been  his  gentleman  usher, 
describes  him  as  '  an  honest  poor  roan*s 
son ; '  and  the  father,  in  his  will,  refrains 
from  introducing  any  designation  of  his 
calling. 

This  will  was  proved  on  October  11, 
1496,  haviug  been  made  eleven  days  pre- 
viously. In  it  he  gives  to  his  son,  who 
was  then  twenty-five  years  old,  ten  marks, 
4f  he  be  a  priest '  within  a  year  after  his 
death,  as  a  salary  for  singing  for  him  and 
his  friends  for  the  space  of  a  year ;  •  but  if 
he  be  not  a  priest,  then  another  honest 
priest '  was  to  have  the  ten  marks  for  the 
same  service.  He  then  devisee  all  his 
lands,  &c.,  in  the  parishes  of  St.  Nicholas, 
in  Ipswich,  and  in  St.  Stoke,  to  his  wife, 
the  extent  and  value  of  which  may  be  fairly 
presumed  not  to  be  larger  in  amount  thfui 
would  be  sufficient  for  her  maintenance,  as 
he  makes  no  provision  whatever  for  his  son. 
Cavendish,  tnerefore,  is  probably  correct  in 
stating  that  he  was  maintained '  by  means  of 
his  good  friends'  at  the  university  of  Oxford, 
to  which  he  was  sent  at  a  very  early  age. 

There  the  first  proof  he  gave  of  his  capa- 
city— as  it  was  perhaps  the  first  incentive 
to  his  ambition — was  the  attainment  of  the 
degree  of  bachelor  of  arts  at  the  early  age 
of  fifteen;  and  in  after  times  he  used  to 

Eride  himself  in  having  been  called  the  boy 
achelor.  Such  an  early  proficiency  soon 
placed  him  as  a  fellow  of  Magdalen  College, 
and  shortly  afterwards  raised  him  to  the 
mastership  of  the  grammar  school  attached 
to  that  foundation.  He  was  bursar  of  the 
college  in  1498,  when  the  great  tower  was 
finished  that  goes  by  his  name.  There  is 
an  idle  story  of  his  having  misapplied  the 
college  funds  towards  its  erection;  but  it 
is  supported  by  no  authority. 

He  could  not  have  availed  himself  of  the 
conditional  legacy,  for  he  was  not  ad- 
mitted into  orders  till  nearly  four  years 
after  his  father's  death.  In  October  1500 
he  was  instituted  to  the  living  of  Lyming- 
ton  in  Somersetshire,  on  the  presentation 
of  the  Marquis  of  Dorset,  not  only  in  grate- 
ful acknowledgment  of  his  pains  and  success 
in  the  education  of  that  nobleman*s  three 
sons,  who  had  been  put  under  his  charge 
at  Magdalen  School,  out  in  admiration  of 
the  agreeable  manners  and  conversational 
talent  which  he  displayed  when  he  accom- 
panied his  three  noble  pupils  to  their  father's 
mansion  in  the  previous  Christmas.  As  if 
it  were  in  anticipation  of  his  future  prefer- 
ments, he  immediately  applied  for  and  ob- 
tained a  dispensation  from  the  pope  (that 
already  referred  to  of  1601)  for  holding 
more  Wnefices  than  one^  «.w.d  ^vs>\  ^^^-\ft»^ 


742 


WILLIAMS 


John*R  College,  Cambridge,  and  two  fellow- 
ships to  be  cDosen  out  of  them,  with  four 
rich  benefices  for  their  ultimate  oro vision. 

In  the  parliaments  over  which  he  pre- 
sided his  speeches  were  marked  with  in- 
genuity and  wit,  the  customary  flattery  to 
the  king  not  being  altogether  omitted,  but 
more  delicately  administered. 

But  the  brightness  of  his  fortune  began 
to  be  obscured.    The  fickleness  of  Buck- 
ingham, and  his  jealousy  of  the  reliance 
shown  by  the  king  on  the  lord  keeper's 
judgment,   with    probably,   too,   his   dis- 
pleasure at  Williams*8  occasional  insubjec- 
tion  to  his  will,  were  soon  exhibited  in  his 
attempts  to  sink  the  man  whom  he  had 
aided  to  raise.    His  favour  had  been  trans- 
ferred to  Bishop  Laud,  and,  taking  pre- 
tended offence  at  some  of  the  lord  keeper's 
proceedings,  and  indignant  at  some  expres- 
sions of  confidence  which  the  king  had 
ut^,  all  the  cunning  of  the  duke  was 
exerted  to  hasten  Williams's  ruin.     It  was 
inefieetual,   however,   during  the    life  of 
King  James,  who,  appreciating  his  keeper's 
loyalty  and  prudence,  and   admiring  his 
learning  and  wit,   acted  steadily   as  his 
friend,  and  preserved  him  in  his  office  to 
the  end  of  his  reign.     But  some  of  the  ill 
effects  of  the  want  of  the  favourite's  coun- 
tenance could  not  fail  to  be  experienced. 
As  soon  as  it  was  perceived  that  Bucking- 
ham's eye  began  to  look  frowningly  on  the 
lord    keeper,    disappointed    suitors    were 
ready   to    complain   of    his   decrees,   and 
accusations  accumidated  against  him  in 
both  houses  of  parliament.    He  triumphed 
over  them  all.     The  Commons  dismissed 
seven-and-thirty  in  one  day,  and  the  Lords 
punished  one  with  the  pillory  for  slander. 
( Purl.  Hist.  i.  l.*{i>l).)     King  James  died  in 
March   1025,  and  Williams  preached  his 
funeral  sermon,  drawing  a  parallel  between 
him  and  Solomon. 

Though  King  Charles  retained  Williams 
as  lord  keeper,  the  latter  soon  felt  the 
instability  of  his  position.  Buckingham 
was  more  than  ever  resolved  to  effect  his 
ruin,  and  endeavoured  to  induce  Chief 
Justice  llobart  to  complain  of  his  unfitness 
for  hit*  place  on  account  of  his  ignorance 
and  inability.  The  honest  judge,  though 
tempted  with  the  promise  of  the  post  on 
Williams's  removal,  answered,  *  Aiy  lord, 
somewhat  might  have  been  said  at  first, 
but  he  should  do  the  lord  keeper  great 
wrong  that  said  so  now.*  Buckingham  was 
not  easily  thwarted.  The  king  was  already 
prejudiced  against  Williams,  and  the  grave 
advice  which  he  gave  to  his  majesty  and 
the  favourite  not  to  quarrel  with  the 
parliament  completed  his  disfavour.  The 
Seal  was  taken  from  him  on  the  25th  of 
October  1625,  and  placed  in  the  hands  of 
Sir  Tliomaa  Co'yfeiv\:t3. 

There  waa  a  ^un^  ol  i^ciisa^\a.>lQ»Ti^^ 


WILLLAHS 

Buckingham  just  before  hia  asstsnoatin 
in  1628 ;  but  Bishop  Laud,  whom  WilHan 
had  formerly  befriended,  then  became  kk 
bitter  enemy,  under  the  supposition  tbt 
he  was  a  promoter  of  the  Petition  of  Rigkt, 
and,  what  was  considered  worae,  an  en- 
coura^r  of  the  Puritans.  Contiiraing 
thus  m  disgrace  at  court,  yexatiocts  eom^ 
plaints  were  made  against  him,  aU  of 
which  failed  in  their  object  until  1637,wliei 
his  enemies  succeeded  in  procuring  a  eoi- 
viction  in  the  Star  Chamber  for  a  preteodsi 
ofifence  committed  nine  or  ten  years  befice, 
in  having  revealed  the  king's  secrets,  lad 
on  a  false  accusation  of  tampering  with  die 
witnesses,  for  which  he  was  sentenced  to 
pay  a  fine  of  10,000/.,  to  he  impiiMoei 
and  to  be  suspended  firom  his  ecclesiairtitti 
functions. 

This  sentence  -was   executed  with  tk 
greatest  rigour.    His  property  was  wanfcoBlr 
despoiled  under  pretence  of  raieuig  Im  fiDe, 
his  person  was  incarcerated  for  three  jwi 
and  a  half,  and  his  deaire  to  ofier  saibmh 
sion  was  met  by   the    demand  of  sud 
degrading  and  ruinous  terms  that  he  feh 
compelled  to  reject  them.    He  only  pio* 
cured  his  liberation  at  last  by  preaeotiBf 
a  petition  to  the  House  of  Lords  in  >> 
vember  1640,  detailing  hisgrievaooeBaDd 
demanding  his  writ.     On  his  discbtige  kc 
forgot  his  personal  complaints  in  tiie  Af 
tress  of  the  state,  and  boldly  stood  uf  iff 
his  order  and  the  monarchy."  His  coodw^ 
of  course,  pleased  as  much  as  it  ^oipM 
the  king,  who  not  only  erased  all  menioiil 
of  the  proceedings  against  him,  bat  admit- 
ted him  to  his  favour,  took  counsel  of  iia 
in    the    difficulties    that  sunound«d  tte 
throne,  and  on   December  4,  1641,  tncs- 
lated  him  to  the  archbishopric  of  Yoik. 

The  cry  against  the  bishops  at  thattiae 
ran  high,  and  twelve  of  them,  of  whom  tbf 
archbishop  was  at  the  head,  mn  ma 
after  his  translation  committed  to  tie  . 
Tower  under  a  ludicrous  accusation  of  hig»  . 
I  treason  for  presenting  a  petition  to  tit 
Peers,  complaining  that  the  mob  preTentdl 
their  access  to  the  house,  and  dedvBtf 
that  whatsoever  was  done  there  duiiae 
their  forced  absence  was  invahd  and  ft 
none  efl'ect.  The  act  excluding  the  \i^ 
from  parliament  having  passed  during  tKi 
contiuement,  the  prosecution  droppel«>^ 
the  archbishon  and  his  collesgne*  ^^ 
released,  after  being  detained  for  eififlt* 
weeks,  in  the  course  of  which  Willks* 
was  reconciled  to  Archbishop  Laad,tk« 
an  inmate  of  the  same  prison. 

Retiring  to  his  diocese,  the  vcUiAf 
was  soon  obliged  hurriedly  to  k^^jj 
castle  of  Gawoody  in  conseqneDOi ''"^ 
advance  of  Sir  John  Hotham*' 
it ;  and  after   having  supp 
with  what  aid  in  men  and 
>si  ^^  \ft  hia  native  o 


WILLIAMS 

exerted  himself  to  defend  the  royal  cuose* 
After  fortifying  Conway  Castle  at  his  own 
expense,  he  attended  tne  king  at  Oxford, 
where  he  is  said  to  have  cautioned  his 
majesty  particularly  a^nst  Cromwell, 
and  to  have  urged  his  being  either  won  by 
great  promises  or  cut  off  by  stratagenL 
HiB  subsequent  advice  to  the  king  to 
submit  to  the  parliament  on  terms  not 
being  relished,  ne  returned  to  Conway 
Castle,  in  the  government  of  which  he  was 
superseded  the  year  after  by  Sir  John 
Owen,  under  a  commission  from  Prince 
Rupert.  Those  who  had  deposited  their 
money  and  jewels  there  were  refused  resti- 
tution, and  the  archbishop's  appeal  to  the 
king  on  their  and  his  own  behalf  was 
idighted;  so  that  when  Colonel  Milton, 
with  an  overpowering  force,  came  into  the 
country  on  the  part  of  the  parliament,  they 
represented  their  case  to  tne  colonel,  and, 
upon  his  promise  to  restore  to  them  their 
property,  agreed  to  assist  him  in  obtaining 
possession.  In  doing  this  they  were  aided 
by  the  archbishop,  whose  conduct  on  the 
occasion  subjected  him  to  the  imputation 
of  having  deserted  the  king  and  assisted 
the  rebels.  He  defended  himself  by  assert- 
ing that,  as  the  king's  cause  in  Wales  was 
paat  hope,  he  was  justified  in  obtaining 
the  restoration  of  the  property  of  his 
friends,  and  in  making  the  best  terms  he 
could  for  his  countrymen's  immunities. 

'  From  the  fidelity  of  the  kinff  he  never,' 
says  Bishop  Hacket,  *  went  back  an  inch,' 
and  when  the  last  scene  of  the  tragedy  was 
over,  he  deeply  mourned  his  royal  master's 
death  in  solitary  retirement ;  his  cheerful- 
ness forsook  him,  and  he  seldom  spoke. 
He  survived  the  king  little  more  than  a 
year,  and  died  on  his  birthdav,  March 
25,  16^,  at  Glodded,  in  the  parish  of 
£glwvsrose,  Carnarvonshire,  the  house  of 
his  kinswoman  Lady  Mostyn.  His  body 
-was  removed  for  burial  to  the  church  of 
LJandegai,  where  his  nephew  and  heir, 
Sir  Qri^th  Williams,  erected  a  monument 
.  to  him,  to  which  bis  former  chaplain, 
Bishop  Hacket,  supplied  the  inscription. 

It  is  diHicult  to  form  a  just  estimate  of 
the  character  of  any  individual  who  lived 
in  the  times  during  which  Archbishop 
Williams  flourished.  Men's  passions  were 
ao  strong,  their  prejudices  so  great,  and 
their  animosity  against  opposite  opinions 
so  violent,  that  acts  in  themselves  indif- 
ferent were  frequently  misinterpreted,  and 
what  was  lauded  by  one  party  was  abused 
by  the  other.  Clarendon  and  Heylin, 
enemies  of  the  archbishop,  look  with  a 
jaundiced  eye  on  his  whole  career;  and 
Bishop  Hacket,  his  chaplain  and  friend, 
and  Wilson  the  historian,  give  perhaps 
too  partial  a  colouring  to  everything  he 
.  did ;  so  that  entire  reliance  is  not  to  be 
placed  on  either.    The  weight  of  evidence. 


WILLLOES 


743 


however,  clearly  preponderates  in  his 
favour,  though  it  must  be  allowed  that,  as 
a  counsellor  of  state,  he  was  too  much  of  a 
temporiser,  and  no  excuse  can  justify  the 
casuistry  with  which  he  recommended 
Charles  to  consent  to  Strafford's  death. 
But  he  was  honest  and  sincere,  and  gene- 
rally wise,  in  the  advice  which  he  offered ; 
and  to  the  monarchs  whom  he  served  he 
was  faithful  and  true. 

In  person  he  was  dignified  and  comely ; 
in  manner  affable  and  kind ;  and  though  in 
temper  he  was  warm,  as  most  Welshmen 
are,  yet  his  anger  was  quickly  mollified ; 
and,  notwithstanding  the  oppressions  which 
he  suffered,  he  showed  no  wish  for  revenge. 
He  was  laborious  in  the  performance  of  his 
duties,  both  political  and  clerical,  and 
refined  in  the  choice  of  his  relaxations, 
music,  in  which  he  was  a  proficient,  being 
his  delight.  His  learning  was  undoubted ; 
and  his  eloquence,  according  to  the  fashion 
of  the  times,  was  superior  to  that  of  most 
of  his  contemporaries,  his  allusions  and 
illustrations  being  more  apt  and  ingenious, 
and  his  wit  more  lively  and  delicately 
pointed.  He  was  profusely  hospitable  in 
his  household,  and  liberal  to  learned 
poverty,  and  the  sums  which  he  expended 
in  repairing  Westminster  Abbey,  and  in 
building  the  library  at  St.  John's  College, 
Cambridge,  and  the  chapel  at  that  of 
Lincoln,  in  Oxford^  witness  his  generous 
munificence. 

His  works  were  principally  on  clerical 
subjects,  but  that  wnich  excited  the  most 
observation  was  entitled  '  The  Holy  Table, 
Name,  and  Thing,'  published  in  opposition 
to  the  innovations  introduced  by  Arch- 
bishop Laud.  {Lives  by  Bishop  Hacktt 
and  A,  Philips;  Clarendon;  and  Heylin^ s 
Mefonnation  [Robertsonl.^ 

WILLIAMS,  Edward  VArenAN,  who  in 
1865  retired  from  the  bench,  having  served 
for  nearly  nineteen  years  as  one  of  the  j  udges 
of  the  Common  Pleas,  during  the  whole  of 
which  time  he  fully  maintained  the  high 
reputation  he  had  previously  earned  by  his 
useful  and  learned  publications,  was  a  law- 
ver  from  his  birth,  his  father,  John  Wil- 
liams, Esq.,  being  the  seijeant  in  the  reign 
of  George  UI.  who  added  valuable  notes 
to  an  edition  of  Chief  Justice  Saunders's 
Reports.  Though  of  Welsh  extraction,  he 
was  bom  in  London,  and  was  educated  at 
Westminster  School. 

He  was  called  to  the  bar  by  the  society 
of  Lincoln's  Inn  on  June  17,  1823,  and  na- 
turally chose  the  South  Wales  and  Chester 
Circuit.  In  the  very  next  year  he  com- 
menced his  career  as  an  author  by  publishing 
an  edition  of  Saunders's  Reports,  enriching 
it,  in  conjunction  with  the  late  Mr.  Justice 
Patteson,  with  admirable  notes  to  his 
father's  edition,  bringing  the  history  of  the 
law  down  to  tJie  date  of  the  work.    "^^^ 


754 


WOLSEY 


WOLSEY 


appointment  as  lord  chancellor,  which  is    moyal — ^when  the  perplexities  of  the  fi- 
dated  on  December  22,  1515,  affords  an  ^^-  ^^    ^     i  •  »-   —    ^» 

instance  of  his  fondness  for  Tain  display, 
and  of  his  desire  to  depreciate  others.  In- 
stead of  the  simple  manner  in  which  former 
transfers  of  the  Great  Seal  were  senerallj 
made,  he  has  caused  all  his  titles  to  be 
written  at  length,  even  that  of  *  Primate 
of  England/  while  Archbishop  Warham 
is  described  in  the  same  instrument  in  the 
most  curt  manner,  and  is  docked  of  his  title 
of  <  Primate  of  all  England.'  The  same 
ostentation  is  visible  in  all  the  numerous 
documents  which  are  contained  in  Rvmer's 
'Foedera.*  Even,  to  patifv  this  love  of 
show,  the  simple  bag  in  which  the  Great 
Seal  was  deposited,  which  for  centuries 
before  had  been  composed  of  linen  or  of 
leather,  and  which,  when  delivered  to  him, 
was  *  a  bag  of  white  leather,*  was  trans- 
formed to  a  magnificent  purse,  something 
like  that  which  is  now  carried  before  the 
chancellor,  being  described  as  'a  bag  or 
purse  of  crimson  velvet,  ornamented  with 
the  arras  and  emblems  of  England.'  The 
present  practice  also  of  bearing  a  silver  gilt 
mace  before  the  chancellor  is  supposed  to 
have  originated  with  him. 

The  description  given  by  Cavendish  (in 
Wordsworth,  i.  486)  of  his  daily  processions 
to  Westminster  Ilall,  besides  showing  the 
studied  formality  of  his  household,  anords 
another  specimen  of  his  love  of  ostentatious 
display. 

For  the  manner  in  which  he  exercised 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  Chancery  during  the 
fourteen  years  he  presided  in  it  his  repu- 
tation stands  high.  Nowitbstanding  the 
perpetual  and  varied  demands  on  his  time, 
ana  the  importance  of  his  political  duties, 
his  attendance  on  the  court  was  regular 
and  punctual,  and,  whatever  opinion  may 
be  formed  by  different  writers  of  his  cha- 
racter as  a  statesman,  his  decrees  as  chan- 
cellor are  acknowledged  to  have  been 
equitable  and  just 

Holinshed  says  (iii.   615)    that,  being 

tired  of  hearing  so  many  causes  himself. 

Wolsey,  by  the  king's  commission,  erectea 

four  * under-courts  to   hear  complaints;' 

and  Lord  Campbell,  in  his  recent  work, 

has  at  once  designated  these  as  '  four  new 

courts  of  equity .°    For  this  there  exists  no 

authority  whatever.    The  only  other  court 

in  which  causes  in  Chancerv  were  heard 

was  that  of  the  master  of  the  Rolls,  and 

that  was  by  no  means  newly  introduced 

by  Wolsey,  the  ancient  records  proving 

that  bills  in  Chancery  were  addressed  to 

and  suits  heard  by  the  master  of  the  Kolls 

separately,  as  now,  so  early  as  the  reign  of 

Henry  \I.    The  only  proof  of   Wolsey 

requiring  assistance  in  the  court  of  equity 

is  a  commission    from   the  king,  issued 

shortly  before  lYie  cV»a  c^  Vsaa  career— only 

four  months^  in  iact,  igiWvo\a  \ft  \aA  ife- 


yorce  case,  the  trial  of  which  was  tks 
proceeding,  were  added  to  his  ote 
anxieties.  This  patent  was  dated  on  June 
11, 1529,  and  it  authorised  the  master  of 
the  Rolls,  three  of  the  judges,  nx  of  tke 
masters  in  Chanoeiy,  and  ten  other  po^ 
sons,  to  hear  all  causes  in  Chancery,  not 
less  than  four  being  present,  of  whom  two 
were  to  be  of  the  first-named  ten.  (i^ner, 
xiv.  299.) 

The  other  courts  referred  to  by  Hofin- 
shed  were  probably  the  Star  Chamber,  in 
which  he  usually  presided,  the  legaatine 
courts,  which  he  neld  under  the  pope'i 
authority,  and  other  minor  courts  connected 
with  the  various  offices  he  held. 

The  powers  granted  him  by  the  pootiiF 
were  most  oxtensiye^  and  the  manner  in 
which  he  used  them  was  the  subject  of 
universal  complunt.  Had  he  confined 
himself  to  the  enforcement  of  a  more  stiiet 
discinline  and  morality  among  the  ckigr, 
which  at  that  time  was  sufficiently  lax, 
he  might  have  expected  and  desiHsid 
the  enmity  of  those  whose  actions  were 
subjected  to  his  censure;  but  he  is  chined 
witn  employing  under  him  a  judge  of  bid 
character,  who  took  bribes  to  stifle  ex- 
posure, with  arrogating  an  aothori^  in 
reference  to  wills  and  administrations  which 
was  beyond  his  commission,  and,  what  wu 
far  worse  in  the  estimation  of  the  hiihop 
and  nobles,  with  encroaching  on  thdr 
general  patronage.  When  these  arbitniT 
proceedings  came  to  the  king's  ear.  Arch- 
bishop Warham  was  ordered  to  admooifh 
him— an  infliction  we  may  suppose  not 
very  grateful  to  the  proud  cardmal,— ud 
the  king  himself  afterwards  found  it  n^* 
cessary  to  administer  a  rebuke. 

The  account  given  of  him  by  Sehistian 
Giustinian,  ambassador  from  the  SeignioiT 
of  Venice  from  1516  to  1519,  describes  him 
as  subject  to  violent  fits  of  bad  temper. 
He  would  sometimes  keep  the  ambsssidor 
waiting  for  an  audience  for  three  homit 
though  he  admitted  others.     Nor  was  thi« 
indignity  peculiar  to  the  representitiTe  of 
a  powerful  state,  for  such  Venice  then  was: 
even  the  pope's  nuncio  did  not  escape  his 
indecent  violence.      When    irrititea,  he 
would  keep  gnawing  with  his  teeth  on  i 
little  cane  which  it  was  his  custom  to  ont 
in  his  hand,  and  the  ambasMdor  deckra 
himself  unable  to  convey  an  idea  of  hii 
rabid  and  insolent  language  during  these 
paroxysms,  but  he  adds  that  he  souetimM 
nad  the  good  sense  to  retire  to  hit  hed 
when  these  mad  fits  of  rage  came  spoa 
him,  and  not  to  see  any  one. 

Notwithstanding  these  failings, 
were  of  course  kept  out  of  the  lo* 
the  fivonr  with  which  W^oImv 
regarded  by  the  king  befo* 
\€QA3^<()«^kR  ^notiiiued  to  in 


WOLSEY 

was  possessed  of  the  Great  Seal.  The  mo9t 
unbounded  reliance  was  placed  on  his 
judgment^  and  no  transaction  in  the  state 
of  the  slightest  importance  was  decided 
without  his  adyice  and  concurrence.  The 
multitudinous  series  of  documents  in  the 
thirteenth  and  fourteenth  volumes  of  Ry- 
mer*s  'Foedera'  give  some  idea  of  the 
variety  and  extent  of  his  labours,  and 
plainly  prove  the  consideration  in  which 
ne  was  held,  not  only  in  this  country,  but 
b^  all  the  foreign /potentates  of  the  ace. 
The  estimation  of  the  importance  of  his 
services  was  not  merely  expressed  in  letters 
of  complimental  flattery,  wnich  were  nume- 
rous and  fulsome,  but  in  the  more  sub- 
stantial form  of  pensions  from  the  difier- 
ent  contending  powers  in  Europe,  from  the 
pope,  from  Castile,  from  the  emperor,  and 
from  France.  So  lar?e  a  space  aid  he  filL 
so  great  an  influence  did  he  exercise  in  all 
the  events  of  the  time,  that  a  detail  of  the 
political  occurrences  of  his  life  would  com- 

Srehend  the  history  of  the  civilised  world 
uring  the  period  of  his  unbounded  power. 
For  his  successi  ve  negotiations  with  the  Em- 
peror of  Germany  and 'the  King  of  France, 
and  the  motives  that  dictated  his  change- 
able policy  with  regard  to  those  two  great 
antagonists, — ^for  the  splendour  of  his  em- 
bassies to  both  powers,  and  the  extra- 
ordinary consideration  with  which  he  was 
treated  by  each, — ^for  a  description  of  the 
Field  of  the  Cloth  of  Gk)ld,  arranged  under 
his  sole  direction,  and  of  the  alternate 
meetings  of  King  Henry  with  these  princes, 
— and  for  the  varied  transactions  with  the 
minor  governments  of  Europe,  reference 
must  be  made  to  those  historical  works 
-where  they  have  been  gracefully  and  phi- 
losophically treated. 

The  income  of  Wolsey  must  have  been 
enormous  in  amount,  and  is  said  to  have 
even  exceeded  the  royal  revenue.  Besides 
the  proceeds  of  the  archbishopric,  of  the 
Chancery,  and  of  the  legantine  commission, 
the  various  pensions  he  received  from  foreign 
crowns,  and  the  profits  derived  from  nume- 
rous grants  of  lands  and  offices,  he  secured 
to  himself  the  abbacy  of  St.  Alban's,  and 
was  allowed  to  hold  the  bishopric  of  Bath 
and  Wells  m  eommendam  in  1518.  This  he 
afterwards  resigned  for  that  of  Durham  in 
1522,  which  in  1529  he  again  changed  for 
the  still  more  valuable  see  of  Wincmester. 
His  expenditure  was  on  a  proportionate  scale. 
The  Venetian  ambassador  says, '  He  always 
has  a  sideboard  of  plate  worth  25,000  du- 
cats, wherever  he  may  be,  and  his  silver  is 
estimated  at  150,000  ducats.  In  his  own 
chamber  there  is  always  a  cupboard  with 
vessels  to  the  amoimt  of  80,000  ducats,  this 
being  customary  with  the  EnffUidi  nobility.' 
Cavendish  delights  in  detailing  Hie  state 
and  magnificence  of  his  household,  the 
number  and  rank  of  his  attendants,  the 


WOLSEY 


755 


sumptuousness  of  his  banquets,  and  the 
glonee  of  his  masques.  Nobles  were  proud, 
or  professed  to  be  proud,  to  wait  on  him, 
and  their  sons  were  sent  to  be  educated  in 
his  palace.  Such  universal  homage  made 
him  ioTget  his  original  littleness,  and 
prompted  him  to  yet  higher  aspirations. 
The  popedom  was  the  object  at  which  he 
now  aimed ;  and  twice  did  it  seem  within 
his  grasp,  supported  as  he  was  by  the  hearty 
wishes  of  his  own  sovereign,  and  by  the  ap- 
parently as  hearty  promises  of  the  emperor. 
But  on  both  occasions  was  he  doomed  to 
disappointment— in  1522  by  the  election  of 
Adnan  VL,  and  two  years  afterwards  by 
that  of  Clement  VH.  According  to  the 
report  of  the  Venetian  ambassador  four  years 
before,  one  would  have  supposed  that  he 
might  well  have  been  satined  with  his 
actual  position ;  for  he  is  described  as  '  in 
very  great  repute,  seven  times  more  so  than 
if  he  were  pope,'  and  as  ruling  both  the  king 
and  the  kingdom.  He  relates  that  on  his 
first  arrival  tne  cardinal  used  to  say  to  him, 
'  His  majesty  will  do  so-and-so ;'  that  sub- 
sequently by  degrees  he  went  fo]|;etting 
himself,  and  commenced  saving, '  W  e  shall 
do  so-and-so ; '  but  at  last  he  reached  such 
a  pitch  that  he  says, '  I  shall  do  so-and-so.' 
In  the  deference  paid  to  one  thus  invested 
with  almost  absolute  authority,  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  distinguish  between  flattery  and 
truth.  It  is  impossible,  however,  not  to  see 
that  the  r^]^t  shown  to  Wolsey  by  both 
the  universities,  in  submitting  their  statutes 
to  his  correction  and  amendment,  was  dic- 
tated as  much  by  a  sincere  appreciation  of 
his  vnsdom  as  by  a  consideration  of  his 
power ;  and,  besides  other  evidences  before 
adverted  to,  the  ascendency  he  acquired 
over  such  a  man  as  Henry  Vin.,  enabling 
him  to  resist  so  long  the  machinations  of 
those  who  were  disgusted  with  his  pride 
and  jealous  of  his  greatness,  could  not  nave 
been  attained  without  the  possesion  of 
mental  powers  and  personal  qualities  which 
would  warrant  the  expression  of  unsuspected 
admiration.  That  he  was  too  fond  of  adu- 
lation was  one  of  his  foibles,  and  that  he 
was  jealous  of  any  attempt  to  turn  him  into 
ridicule,  or  to  derogate  from  his  high  repu- 
tation, was  a  natural  consequence.  This 
feeling  he  exhibited  by  imprisoning  Serjeant 
Roe,  ihe  author  of  a  masque  performed  by 
the  students  of  Gray's  Inn,  in  the  allegory 
of  which  he  discovered,  and  not  perhaps 
without  some  cause,  an  attack  upon  himself 
and  his  government.  His  anger  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  lon^  in  appeasing,  and 
the  punishments  he  inflicted  on  other  occa- 
sions were  in  no  instance  accompanied  by 
personal  cruelty.  The  only  chai^  to  the 
contrary  is  the  trial  and  death  of  the  Duke 
of  Buckingham ;  but,  in  the  total  absence 
during  the  cardinal's  ministry  of  any  other 
evidence  of  a  sanguinary  difi!gQ«&.tiQPCk^  M&a^. 


756 


WOLSEY 


execution  may,  with  greater  justice  and  pro- 
bability, be  attributed  to  the  jealoua  suspi- 
cions of  the  king,  and  the  imprudent  bearing 
of  the  duke. 

He  preserved  the  reputation  of  a  scholar 
which  he  had  attained  in  the  commence- 
ment of  his  career.   He  encouraged  learning 
and  learned  men«    He  was  long  the  corre- 
spondent of  Erasmus,  and  in  the  universi^ 
where  he  was  educated  he  established  and 
endowed  various  lectures,  and  otherwise  pro- 
moted classical  studies,  which  were  ]^u- 
Itarly  obnoxious  to  the  bigotry  of  the  times. 
As  a  more  lasting  record  of  his  fame,  he 
founded  two  colleges,  one  at  Oxford  and  the 
other  at  Ipswich — the  latter  being  a  sort 
of  nursery  to  the  other — thereby  imitating 
the  two  similar  establishments,  by  William 
of  Wykeham,  of  New  College  and  Win- 
chester.   To  the  college  at  Oxford,  for  the 
erection  of  which  several  priories  and  smaller 
houses  were  dissolved,  was  given  the  name 
of  *  Cardinal  College,'  whicn,  on  Wolsey's 
iall,  the  kinff,  to  deprive  him  of  the  merit 
of  the  estaUishment,  refounded  under  the 
name  of  King's  College.   A  few  years  after- 
wards, however,  when  the  episcopal  see  was 
translated  to  Oxford,  its  name  was  again 
changed  to  its  present  designation,  Christ 
Church  ;  Ipswicn  fell  with  its  founder. 

The  fall  of  Wolsey  was  as  sudden  as  his 
elevation.  The  efforts  of  his  enemies  proved 
unavailing  until  the  resentment  of  Anne 
Boleyn  at  his  sunposed  opposition  to  her 
advance  was  added  to  tne  scale.  Her 
charms  formed  the  weight  that  pulled  him 
down ;  their  power  suggested  the  first  doubt 
in  the  king's  mind,  whether  real  or  pre- 
tended, as  to  the  legality  of  his  union  with 
Queen  Catherine.  Wolsey  could  not  but 
see  the  difficulties  that  surrounded  the 
question,  nor  overlook  the  political  dangers 
which  it  involved ;  but  knowing,  as  he  did, 
the  wilfulness  of  his  royal  master,  he  was 
obliged  to  qualify  his  real  sentiments.  The 
consequence  was  that  he  wavered  in  his 
proceedings,  appearing  now  to  encourage 
enquiry,  and  now  to  delay  the  decision,  so 
that  he  made  both  the  queen  and  the  in- 
tended usurper  of  her  bed  equally  doubtful 
of  his  sincerity.  The  enmity  of  the  latter 
was  the  most  dangerous,  and  was  finally 
eflective.  The  pretended  trial  before  him 
and  Cardinal  Campeggio  was  scarcely  over 
before  Wolsey  found  that  his  power  was 
slipping  away:  and  although  m  his  last 
audience  with  the  king  at  Grafton  on  Sep- 
tember 19,  1629,  the  friendly  manner  in 
which  he  was  treated  gave  him  hopes  that 
the  royal  displeasure  was  abated,  within  a 
little  month  tnose  hopes  were  entirely  dis- 
sipated. 

On  the  first  day  of  Michaelmas  Term 
legal  proceedings  were  commenced  against 
him,  on  the  fi\ia\ix^  c^isx^s^  oil  Wnii^>  by  the 
ftxerciee  o{  \i\B\eg«xv\\n&  y^m^t^  x^tA^t  ^^ V^ Nsi^^i^Kt  %nd.  the  abbsii 


WOLSEY 

pope's  bull,  transffreased  an  old  statute  of 
the  reign  of  Richard  IL     Although  tvo 
days  afterivarda  he  received  the  royal  autho- 
rity to  appoint  two  attorneys  to  appear  (or 
him,  under  which  he  selected  John  Scom 
and  Christopher  Jenney,  the  future  judge 
(JtymeTf  xiv.  348,  350),  and  although  he 
had  a  complete  defence  to  the  indicUneDt, 
in  the  royu  licence  confirming  the  authoritT 
under  which  he  acted^  be  at  once  saw,  in 
this  revival  of  an  obsolete  statute,  wloch 
had  been  vidated  in  numberless  pieriow 
instances  with    inipunity,  a  preconcerted 
determination  to  effect  bia  ruin.    Feding, 
therefore,  the  inutility  of  resistance,  and 
hoping  to  mitigate  the*  royal  diaplearaTebT 
submission,  he  not  only  allowea  the  jodf 
ment  to  ffo  against  him,  but  gave  up  all  k 
had  to  the  king.    The  Great  Seal,  which 
he  surrendered  on  October  17,  was  ilmoit 
immediately  placed   in   the   hands  of  Sir 
Thomas  More,  who,  after  a  few  yesni,  fell 
also  a  victim  to  the  cruelty  of  his  capiieioos 
master. 

Wolsey  was  commanded  to  retire  toEdier, 
an  unfurnished  house  belon^g  to  his  bi- 
shopric of  Winchester :  and,  though  IoikI 
messages  from  the  king  bad  been  praentod 
to  him,  both  in  his  way  thither  and  ift^ 
wards,  and  letters  had  been  even  isnied  oo 
November  18  taking  him  under  the  rofil 
protection,  he  soon  found  that  his  tnib 
were  not  terminated.  In  the  parlitiDeBt 
then  sitting  a  bill  of  impeachment  wts  d- 
troduced  by  his  enemies,  consisting  of  fortr- 
four  mostly  frivolous  articles.  It  wasdstedm 
December  1,  and  was  signed  bySirThoiB« 
More,  the  new  chancellor,  ana  by  fooiteeB 
peers  and  two  judges  ;  but  howfaritv*? 
approved  by  the  long  may  be  questiosed, 
since  Cromwell,  who  bad  been  in  Wdser* 
service,  and  was  either  then  or  soon  a&r 
admitted  into  that  of  Henry,  was  tSUoml 
to  oppose  its  adoption  in  the  House  </ 
Commons.  There  nis  zealous  and  doqoeot 
advocacy  of  his  old  master's  cause  ww  9^ 
effective  that  the  bill  was  rejected,  a  coane 
upon  which  neither  Cromwell  nor  the  Cob- 
mons  would  have  yentured  without  xei 
assurance  of  his  new  master*s  approbttio!). 

There  are  manvproofe  that,notwithrttt3- 
in^  the  efforts  of  his  enemies,  the  hii&i^ 
tained  much  affection  for  his  fallen miai^O' 
He  sent  his  own  phyncian,  Dr.  Batt&  to 
Esher,  when  the  cardinal  was  fll;  hepa^ 
mitted  him,  when  convalescent,  to  reivH* 
to  a  more  commodious  and  healthv  itf- 
dence  at  Richmond ;  and  eventoalljr  ^ 
February  12, 1530,  he  granted  to  hixna^ 
pardon  m  the  fullest  terms.  In  conaiaa* 
tion  however  of  these  favours,  the  wMirf 
Wolsey's  personal  property  was 
except  6374/.  3«.  9|dL,  wfiidi  I 
back  in  money  and  goods  as  f 
the  king.    The  revenuea  of  * 


WOLSEY 

were  given  up,  except  an  annuity  of  1000 
marks  from  the  former ;  and  from  the  arch- 
bishopric of  York,  which  alone  he  was  per- 
mitted to  retain,  he  was  compelled,  by  an 
illegal  grant  to  the  king,  to  dismember 
York  Place,  which  had  been  the  London  re- 
sidence of  his  predecesAors  for  three  cen- 
turies. When  urged  to  do  this  by  Judge 
Shelley,  after  a  long  resistance  he  at  length 
consented,  but  said,  *  I  say  unto  you  in  this 
case,  although  you  and  other  oi  your  pro- 
fession perceive  by  Uie  orders  of  the  lawe, 
that  the  king  may  lawfully  doe  the  thing 
which  ye  require  of  me ;  how  say  you,  Mr. 
Shelley,  may  I  doe  it  with  conscience,  to 
give  that  away  which  is  none  of  mine,  from 
me  and  my  successors?'  He  was  obliged 
to  submit ;  and  the  king,  having  obtained 
possession  of  this  magnificent  palace,  changed 
its  name  to  WhitehalL 

In  the  foUowing  April,  Wolsey  was  re- 
quired to  go  to  his  diocese ;  but  even  this 
command  was  accompanied  by  proofs  of  the 
king's  consideration  for  him,  in  royal  letters 
warmly  recommending  him  to  the  attention 
of  the  Northern  nobibty.  There  he  spent 
six  months,  and  so  ingratiated  himself  with 
all  ranks  by  his  piety,  courtesy,  and  hospi- 
tality that  when  he  was  taken  from  nis 
palace  at  Cawood  on  a  charge  of  high 
treason  he  was  accompanied  by  the  tears 
and  the  blessings  of  the  people. 

His  increasing  popularity  in  the  North 
excited  his  enemies  at  court  by  the  fear 
that  he  would  in  time  re-establish  his  for- 
mer ascendency  and  they  took  their  steps 
accordinffly.  He  had  never  visited  his 
cathedral,  and  by  the  custom  of  tbe  place 
be  could  not  do  so  without  being  installed 
as  its  archbishop.  Preparations  were  there- 
fore made  for  the  ceremony,  when,  three 
days  before  it  was  to  take  place,  he  was 
arrested  by  the  Earl  of  Northumberland 
on  November  4,  1530.  The  charges  then 
made  against  him  have  not  been  recorded, 
find  it  is  difficult  to  imagine  what  they 
could  be,  after  the  ^neraf  pardon  he  had 
received  from  the  king. .  He  was  allowed 
to  travel  towards  Lonoon  by  easy  journeys, 
which,  indeed,  the  state  of  nis  health 
rendei^ed  necessary.  At  Sheffield  he  was 
entertained  by  the  Earl  of  Shrewsbury, 
with  whom  he  remained  a  fortnight,  at  the 
end  of  which  a  violent  dysentery  had  re- 
duced his  strength  so  much  that  on  his 
arrival  on  the  26th  at  the  monastery  of 
Leicester  he  was  so  conscious  of  his  ap- 
proaching end  that  he  said  to  the  abbot, 
'  Father  abbot,  I  am  come  to  lay  my  bones 
among  you.'  There  he  died  on  the  morn- 
ing of  the  20th,  closing  his  life  with  the 
well-known  and  deeply  suggestive  address 
to  Sir  William  Kingston,  the  governor  of 
the  Tower : 

*  I  do  assure  you,  I  have  often  kneeled 
before  the  king,  sometimes  for  three  hours 


WOLSEY 


757 


together,  to  persuade  him  from  his  will 
and  appetite,  but  could  not  prevail  And, 
Master  Kingston,  had  I  but  served  my 
God  as  diligently  as  I  have  served  my 
king.  He  would  not  have  given  me  over  in 
my  grey  hairs.  But  this  is  the  iust  reward 
that  I  must  receive  for  my  diligent  pains 
and  study,  not  regarding  my  service  to 
God,  but  only  to  my  prince.' 

He  was  buried  in  the  abbey  with  decent 
solemnity,  but  no  monument  covered  his 
remains. 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  king's  divorce 
from  Queen  Catherine,  and  his  marriage 
with  Ajone  Boleyn,  the  cause  of  Wolsey's 
fidl,  were  not  completed  till  two  years  and 
a  half  after  his  death. 

Altogether,  Wolsey  was  certainly  the 
most  extraordinary  man  that,  as  favourite 
or  minister,  ever  ruled  the  destinies  of  this 
kingdom.  By  his  own  abilities  he  raised 
himself  from  a  humble  origin  to  a  position 
of  respectability  and  character  in  the  uni- 
versity ;  by  his  patient  wisdom  he  counter- 
acted an  early  disgrace;  and  by  his  assidiuty 
and  willingness  to  assist  those  whom  he 
served,  he  attained  the  stepping-^tone  firom 
which  he  was  to  spring  almost  at  once  to 
his  topmost  height.  Tbe  first  matter  with 
which  he  wsb  entrusted  so  fully  manifested 
his  activity  and  political  dexterity  that  he 
secured  the  approbation  not  only  of  an 
aged  and  vrise  monarch,  but  also  of  a 
young  and  ambitious  prince.  Over  the 
latter,  almost  from  the  moment  of  his  ac- 
cession, Wolsey  acquired  such  an  influence 
as  to  set  fdl  other  favourites^  and  almost 
all  other  counsellors,  aside,  and  to  engross, 
solely  and  singly,  the  whole  government  of 
the  realm.  Suring  his  sway,  which  ex- 
tended over  nearly  twenty  years,  there  are 
no  such  instances  of  cruel^,  or  of  oppres- 
sion, or  even  of  caprice  on  lus  part,  as  too 
often  disgraced  the  career  of  powerful 
fitvourites  in  former  reigns  ^  the  interior  of 
the  kingdom  was  peaceful,  its  commerce 
flourishing,  and  its  wars  triumphant;  it 
assumed  a  higher  rank  in  the  scale  of 
nations  than  it  had  before  attained,  and  its 
aid  and  alliance  was  sought  by  popes,  em- 
perors, and  kings.  To  conclude  with  the 
summary  of  the  historian  Lingard:  *The 
best  eulogy  on  his  character  is  to  be  found 
in  the  contrast  between  the  conduct  of 
Henry  before  and  alter  the  car^Unal's  fall 
As  long  as  Wolsey  continued  in  favour,  * 
the  royal  passions  were  confined  within 
certain  bounds ;  the  moment  his  influence 
was  extii^^ttished,  they  burst  through  every 
restraint,  and  by  their  caprice  and  violence 
alarmed  his  subjects  and  astoniahed  tbe 
other  nations  of  Europe.' 

Yet,  notwithstanding  these  undoubted 
daims  to  our  admiration,  there  is  some- 
thing about  Wolsey's  character  that  pre- 
cludes the  possibilitY  of  t^i^gwAasa^^^-^^fi^ 


758 


WOOD 


entire  respect.  There  was  too  much  of 
statecraft  in  his  policy,  too  great  an 
absence  of  straightforward  dealing,  and  too 
little  regard  for  the  sacred  obli^tion  of  an 
oath  in  the  treaties  he  negotiated.  His 
personal  vanity  and  pompous  assumption, 
nis  greediness  in  accumulating  wealth,  his 
delight  in  the  obsequiousness  of  those 
around  him,  the  arrogance  of  his  demeanour 
and  his  fondness  for  parade  and  ostentatious 
display,  all  exhibit  a  littleness  of  mind 
which  it  is  very  distasteful  to  contemplate. 
He  was  too  proud  in  his  prosperity,  too  ab- 
ject when  misfortune  overtook  him.  During 
his  lon^  career  there  is  a  total  absence  of 
any  striking  personal  incident  or  noble  act 
on  which  we  can  delight  to  dweU,  all  the 
transactions  in  which  he  was  engaged 
seeming  to  be  tinged  with  an  attempt  to 
glorify  and  benefit  nimself.  Even  his  mag- 
nificent erection  of  Hampton  Court  Palace, 
and  the  foundation  of  his  two  colleges  at 
Oxford  and  Ipswich,  are  disfigured  by 
marks  of  vainglory  and  a  disregard  to  the 
property  of  others. 

It  is  a  remark  of  Bacon,  that '  prosperity 
doth  best  discover  vice,  and  adversity  doth 
best  discover  virtue.'  The  truth  of  this 
apophthegm  is  exemplified  in  Wolsev's 
career.  If  his  faults  and  frailties  clouded 
the  day  of  his  success,  his  excellences  shone 
the  more  brightly  in  the  evening  of  his 
downfall.  The  only  part  of  his  life  in 
which  an  undivided  interest  can  be  felt  for 
him  are  the  six  months  of  his  exile  in  the 
North.  His  whole  conduct  in  those  his 
last  days  was  so  exemplary  that  he  becomes 
the  object  of  our  commiseration,  and  we 
cannot  but  exclaim  with  our  poet — 

Nothing  in  his  life 
Became  him  like  the  leaving  it. 

WOOD,  Thomas,  is  said  (LywtCs  Cheshire^ 
601)  to  have  built  Hall  o'  Wood,  in  Bal- 
terlev,  which,  though  now  occupied  as  a 
&rmliouse,  was  the  seat  of  the  family  for 
many  generations. 

His  appearance  in  court  as  an  advocate 
is  first  noticed  in  the  Year  Book  of  Trinity 
Term  1477,  and  he  was  included  in  the 
first  call  of  Serjeants  by  Henry  VII.  in 
1485.  He  received  a  patent  as  ting's  Ser- 
jeant on  June  3,  1488,  and  was  elevated  to 
the  bench  as  a  judge  of  the  Common  Pleas 
on  November  24,  1495.  After  sitting  in 
that  court  for  about  five  years,  he  was 
advanced  to  its  head  on  October  28,  1500, 
and  presided  there  till  his  death,  which 
occurred  in  1502.     {KeUtoey^s  ReporUj  46.) 

He  married  a  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  de 
la  More,  and  Sir  Henry  Wood  of  Lowd- 
ham  Hall  in  Suffolk  is  stated  by  H. 
Phillips  to  have  been  his  descendant  in 
1684.     (Grandeur  of  the  Law  ^6841.) 

WOOD,  George,  was  a  native  of  Roy- 
atone,  near  Bani&VfiY,  Vcl  XQ'dKiSc&s^  Vv\% 


WOOD 

was  bom  in  1740,  and,  being  intended  for 
the  junior  branch  of  the  legal  profeasioD, 
was  articled  to  Mr.  West,  an  attorney  at 
Cawthome.  He  was  so  assiduous  id  Ids 
studies,  and  showed  so  much  alnlity  dming 
his  articles,  that  at  the  end  of  them  his 
master  urged  him  to  try  his  fortune  at  tbe 
bar.  This  advice  he  fortunately  took,  and, 
entering  the  Middle  Temple,  he  conmieDced 
as  a  special  pleader  on  his  own  account 
He  soon  got  into  full  practice,  and  esta- 
blished such  a  reputation  tnat  pnpik 
flocked  to  him.  Among  them  he  gave  tbe 
initiatory  instructions  to  Mr.  Law,  after- 
wards Lord  Ellenborough,  in  1773,  to  Mr., 
afterwards  Lord  Erskine,  in  1779,  and  to 
Mr.  Abbott,  afterwards  Lord  Tenterden,  in 
1787,  besides  many  others  of  the  most 
eminent  lawyers  of  the  day.  So  great  was 
his  celebrity  as  a  master  of  the  sdeoee 
that  when  he  was  called  to  the  bar  he  was 
engaged  on  the  part  of  the  crown  in  all  the 
state  prosecutions  commencing  in  December 
1792.  He  joined  the  Northern  Circuit,  azni 
was  as  successful  in  hia  practice  in  tbe 
country  as  he  was  in  Westminster  HalL 

On  one  occasion  he  was  the  cause  d  a 
special  pleading  joke  from  the  hencb.  He 
had  bought  a  norse  with  a  warranty  that 
it  was  *  a  good  roadster,  and  free  from 
vice;'  but  when  he  attempted  to  leare 
the  stables  nothing  could  inauce  the  bone 
to  move.  On  hearing  this  evidence  at  tbe 
trial,  Lord  Mansfield  gravely  exdained, 
<Who  would  have  thought  tbat  Mr. 
Wood's  horse  would  have  demurred,  when 
he  ought  to  have  $^one  to  the  cctodryt' 
This  excellent  joke,  in  the  changes  of  tbe 
art  of  pleading,  may  possibly  soon  hecom 
unintelligible. 

A  character  so  distinguished  for  legal 
erudition  was  not  likely  to  be  long  De- 
lected by  those  whose  duty  it  was  to  supplj 
the  vacancies  on  the  bench.  Mr.  ^od 
accordingly  received  his  promotion  as  a 
baron  of  the  Exchequer  in  April  1807,  and 
was  knighted.  He  performed  his  judicial 
functions  for  nearly  sixteen  years,  witi 
great  advantage  to  the  community,  aDd 
with  all  the  credit  to  himself  whicb  was 
anticipated  from  his  previous  career.  In 
February  1823  he  resigned  his  seat,  aad 
lived  little  more  than  a  year  afterwards 
His  death  occurred  on  Jufy  7, 1824,  at  bl* 
house  in  Bedford  Square,  and  he  vi8 
buried  in  the  Temple  Church. 

He  printed  for  private  circulation  na» 
valuable  'Observations  on  Tithes  and  Htfe 
Laws,'  discussing  the  subject  with  gmt 
shrewdness  and  abilitj.     This  tieatiae  W 
afterwards  published,  and  the  piiDd|ilfiki 
recommended  for  the  arrangemep*^  **  ^ 
charge  was  partially  adopted  • 
for  the    commutation    of  ^ 
TtiaUy  xxiL-xzix. ;  Ijgm 


Bujue,   near    DuxuBiieiy,  lu    x^stkikoxc^   iv\«  y  x  rTocv,  xxu.~2jux.  \   x*mp  e 

fiither  residing  wi  \\ift  det^-jmwii^^^  l^ftX*^ A^N  ^3«^  ^^^  Au^.  1 


WOOD 

WOOD,  William  Page  (Lord  Hathsb-. 
lbt),  the  present  Lord  Chancellor  of  Eng- 
land, is  descended  from  a  branch  of  ancient 
family  of  some  note  in  the  counties  of 
Cornwall  and  Devon,  called  by  the  names 
of  Att-wood  and  Wood.  (C^Uberfs  Com- 
toaliy  iL  832.^  One  of  his  immediate  an- 
cestors actea  as  squire  at  the  funeral  of 
Catherine  Countess  of  Devon,  sister  of 
Edward  IV. ;  but  the  family  gradually  be- 
coming reduced  in  circumstances,  his  grand- 
£ither,  who  carried  on  the  business  of  a 
serge  manufacturer,  was  incapable  of  making 
any  nrovision  for  a  numerous  progeny. 
The  eldest  of  his  children,  Matthew  Wood, 
by  his  persevering  industry  and  conmiercial 
integrity  as  a  hop-merchant  in  Falcon 
Square,  London,  restored  the  fortunes  of 
the  house,  first  becoming  a  common  coun- 
cilman and  then  an  alderman  of  the  city  of 
London.  Extremely  popular,  from  the 
liberal  opinions  he  entertained,  he  was  re- 
turned member  for  the  city  in  1815,  and 
retained  that  honourable  post,  through  nine 
successive  parliaments,  to  the  end  of  his 
life — a  period  of  28  years.  In  the  same 
year  he  was  elected  lord  mayor,  and  in 
the  next  year,  such  was  the  activity  and 
intelligence  he  displayed  that  he  had  the 
honour,  which  for  centuries  had  been  un- 
known, of  beine  elected  a  second  time. 
Uniformly  liberal  in  politics,  he  was  vehe- 
mently opposed  to  the  Cora  Laws  and  to 
the  Test  and  Corporation  Acts,  and  a  firm 
advocate  for  Catholic  emancipation  and 
parliamentary  reform ;  and  before  his  death 
he  had  the  satisfaction  of  seeing  both  the 
latter  effected,  and  all  the  former  repealed. 
He  took  a  most  prominent  part  in  support 
of  Queen  Carolme  on  the  accession  of 
George  IV.,  and  was  created  in  December 
1837  a  baronet  by  Queen  Victoria.  It  was 
owing  to  his  recommendation  to  the  Duke 
of  Kent,  for  whom  he  acted  as  trustee, 
that  the  duke  returned  to  England  from 
Brussels,  in  order  that  his  eldest  child 
might  be  bora  a  Briton.  He  married 
Maria,  daughter  of  John  Page,  of  Wood- 
bridffe  in  Suffolk,  surgeon,  and  upon  his 
death  in  1843  he  left  five  surviving  chil- 
dren— two  daughters,  both  married ;  and 
three  sons,  the  eldest  of  whom.  Sir  John 
Page  Wood,  the  present  baronet,  is  rector 
of  St  Peter's,  Corahill,  and  vicar  of 
Crepingin  Essex ;  the  youngest,  Westera 
Wood,  Esq.,  died  recently  as  representative 
of  the  city  of  London ;  and  the  second  is 
the  subject  of  the  present  memoir.  Sir 
Matthew's  brother,  Benjamin  Wood,  Esq., 
successfully  contested  a  seat  in  parliament 
for  the  borough  of  Southwark  vrith  the 
late  Mr.  Walter,  proprietor  of  the  *  Times,' 
and  represented  that  borough  till  his  death. 

William  Page  Wood  was  bom  on  No- 
Tember  29. 1801,  and  was  named  after  his 
uncle  William  Woods  Page,  to  whom  is  to 


WOOD 


759 


be  attributed  the  early  taste  he  acquired 
for  literature.  Spending  his  infancy  at  his 
grandmother's  at  Woodoridge,  he  received 
the  rudiments  of  his  education  at  the  free 
^nmiar  school  of  that  town.  After  stay- 
mg  there  for  a  year,  he  went  to  Dr.  Lind- 
say's at  Bow  for  three  years.  In  1812  he 
was  removed  to  Winchester  College,  where, 
under  the  able  instruction  of  Dr.  (Cabell 
and  Dr.  Williams,  head  master  and  second 
master  of  the  school^  he  acquired,  besides  the 
complete  mastery  of  the  usual  branches  of 
learning,  thatclearaessand  precision  of  state- 
ment which  is  his  peculiar  characteristic.  In 
May  1818,  beinff  uien  a  prefect^  he  was  en- 
gaged in  the  rebellion  wnich  was  organised 
against  the  master,  and  which  was  not  sup- 
pressed without  theaid  of  the  military.  When 
taken,  he  refused  an  escape  from  expulsion, 
to  which  the  other  prefects  were  subjected, 
which  was  offered  mm  on  account  of  the 
&vour  which  he  had  acquired  with  the 
master  by  the  general  regularity  of  his 
conduct,  and  his  success  m  gaining  the 
prize  in  every  class  through  which  he  bad 
passed.  The  lord  chancellor  must  look 
back  to  this  period  of  his  life,  notwithstand- 
ing its  unfortunate  termination,  with  pecu- 
liar pleasure,  not  only  for  tiie  learning  and 
experience  he  acquired^  but  still  more  for 
the  Listing  Mendsbip  which  he  formed  at 
school  with  Dr.  Hook,  the  present  dean  of 
Chichester,  who,  besides  the  excellence  of 
his  literary  compositions,  is  deservedly  re- 
nowned for  his  untiring  energy  and  extra- 
ordinary success  in  his  former  mcumbencies 
of  Coventry  and  Leeds.  To  his  appoint- 
ment to  the  latter  parish  the  lord  chan- 
cellor had  the  delisiit  of  being  accident- 
ally, or  rather  providentially,  instrumental ; 
and  it  is  worthy  of  record  that  during 
each  of  the  twenty-three  years  of  his 
ministry  there  he  procured  the  erection  of 
a  diurcn,  a  school,  and  a  parsonage ;  and 
so  effective  was  his  influence  with  the  in- 
habitants that  he  was  able  to  levj  10,000/. 
a  year  among  them.  The  calamity  which 
lately  befell  Chichester  Cathedral  has  now 
made  a  new  demand  on  his  exertions, 
which  have  been  equally  successfuL 
With  this  remarkable  man  the  lord  chan- 
cellor united  in  forming  among  their 
schoolfellows  an  order  of  Shakspeare  and 
Milton  knighthood,  thev  beinp^  of  course 
the  first  members.  Their  readmg  was  not 
confined  to  those  authors,  but  extended  to 
all  the  Elizabethan  classics,  the  study  of 
which  was  much  encouraged  by  Dr.  GaoeU. 
During  the  vacations  the  lord  chancellor 
obtained  his  first  experience  of  law  by  ac- 
companying his  father  the  alderman  to  the 
Old  Bailey  sessions,  and  took  an  early  dis- 
gust at  the  proceedings  there,  especifdly  at 
the  wholesale  sentences  of  death  then  pro- 
nounced against  prisoners,  few  of  whom 
were  intended  to  suffer  the  ei.tx^^vt.^  ^1 


760 


WOOD 


the  law.  In  accompanjine  his  father  to 
the  House  of  CommoDS  also  he  had  the 
advantage  of  hearing  all  the  principal 
parliamentary  orators ;  and  during  the  two 
years  of  his  father's  mayoralties  his  mind  was 
hirther  opened  hy  association  with  the  great 
men  of  all  parties,  who  were  entertained  at 
the  Mansion  House ;  and  in  a  short  visit  to 
Paris  at  the  conclusion  of  the  mayoralty 
he  was  admitted,  whilst  yet  a  hoy,  into  the 
highest  French  society.  Such  intercourse 
formed  an  important  pirt  in  young  Wood's 
education,  and  he  naturally  imbihed  hia 
father's  political  sentiments,  then  enter- 
tained hy  a  comparativelv  small  but  in- 
creasing class,  which  suDJected  him  to 
much  ndicnle  among  his  church-and-state 
contemporaries  at  Winchester. 

After  leaving  Winchester  College  he 
spent  the  next  two  years  at  Geneva,  profit- 
ing greatly  under  the  excellent  lecturers  of 
that  university,  among  whom  was  the 
eloquent  and  learned  Rossi,  who  was  after- 
waixls  murdered  when  minister  to  Pope 
Pius  IX.  From  his  instruction  voung 
Wood  acquired  a  knowledjB^  of  the  Roman 
law ;  and  from  the  association  with  Genevan 
society,  and  that  of  the  variety  of  foreigners 
of  all  nations  who  flocked  there,  he  gained 
such  an  acquaintance  with  their  several 
languages  as  gave  him  ^preat  advantages  in 
liis  future  intercourse  with  the  world.  He 
passed  his  fi»t  year's  examinatioii  with 
great  credit,  but  unfortunately  was  pre- 
vented taking  his  degree  in  the  second  year, 
by  being  obliged,  by  direction  of  his  father 
a  fortnight  before  the  examination  took 
place,  to  come  to  England  in  the  suite  of 
t^ueen  Caroline.  Being  then  in  his  nine- 
leenth  year,  he  was  naturally  much  em- 
ployed in  the  previous  negotiations,  and 
tieepiy  interestc^i  in  the  subsequent  pro- 
tfTess,  of  the  lamentable  proceedings  against 
ner ;  accompanying  from  June  tiU  October 
the  persons  aent  to  Italy  to  collect  evidence 
on  her  behalf,  and  occasionally  acting  as 
translator  of  the  necessary  documents,  and 
as  interpreter  on  the  examination  of  the 
various  witnesses.  The  result  upon  his 
mind,  from  their  testimony,  from  his  own 
observation,  and  from  the  esteem  with 
which  many  Italian  families  of  the  highest 
respectability  regarded  her,  was  that  she 
was  wholly  innocent  of  ihe  charge  brought 
against  her,  and  guilty  of  nothiiLg  beyond 
imprudence. 

In  October  1820  he  joined  his  brother 
at  Trinity  College,  Cambridge,  where  he 
obtained  a  scholarship  on  his  first  trial, 
nnd  was  always  in  the  first  class  at  the  ex- 
aminations. In  the  second  year  he  gained 
one  of  the  declamation  prizes,  the  question 
Iwing  *  Whether  the  Revolution  or  the 
Restoration  had  conferred  the  greater 
benefit  on  our  country,'  he  arguing  in 
Cavour  of  the  former.   Notwithstanding  the 


WOOD 

rank  he  had  earned  in  his  college  by  bis 
attainments,  yet,  owing  to  a  serious  illoes, 
occasioned  by  too  laborious  an  applicatioa 
to  his  studies,  he  failed  in  obtaining  & 
higher  place  in  the  list  of  honours,  in 
January  1824,  than  that  of  twenty-fourtk 
wrangler.  In  October  of  that  year,  how- 
ever, he  stood  for  a  fellowship  in  iiis  college, 
and  succeeded  in  obtaining  it,  though  neari? 
rejected  by  the  veto  of  the  master  and  one 
fellow,  in  consequence  of  the  supposed 
radicalism  of  his  prize  declamation.  The 
threatened  veto  was,  however,  withdrawn, 
and  as  a  Cambridge  University  commit 
sioner  he  has  since  assisted  in  abolishiog 
this  power  on  the  part  of  the  master,  li 
the  previous  Trinity  Term  he  had  been 
entered  at  Lincoln's  Inn,  having  alreadj 
placed  himself  under  the  late  Master 
Roupell  for  Instructions  in  equity  drawing. 
During  his  Cambridge  career  he  promi- 
nently assisted  in  his  father's  eneigetic 
measures  on  behalf  of  the  Spanish  and 
Italian  refugees,  then  flocking  to  this  coim- 
try  in  extreme  destitution,  by  which  a  sub- 
scription of  above  I00,000iL  was  collected 
for  their  support. 

While  studying  for  the  bar  he  placed 
himself  as  a  nupu  under  that  great  master 
of  the  law  of  real  proper^,  John  Tyrrell 
Esq.,  when  that  brancn  of  learning  was  in 
a  transition  state  between  the  mass  of  verbi- 
age that  had  disgraced  the  conveyances  of 
land,   and  the  more  simple   forms  which 
were  then  in  a  gradual  course  of  adoption. 
By  Mr.  Tyrrell  s  careful  mode  of  instruc- 
tion and    indefatigable    attention    to  his 
youn^   pupils,    Mr.   Wood  acquired  that 
deep  insight  into  English  law  which  he  ex- 
hibits on  the  bench.    Our  student*s  labours 
in  this  period  were  relaxed  by  another  Tisit 
to  Italy,  where  he  was  inti{)duced  to  th«t 
eztraoixiinarv  linguist  Cardinal  Mezzofanti. 
and  by  associating  with  many  celebrities  oif 
the  time,  among  whom  wera  Irving,  Csr- 
lyle,  Procter  (iSiny  Cornwall),  and  Cole- 
ndge.     Most  of  these  he  met  at  the  hoow 
of  IBasil  Montagu,   for  whose  edition  nf 
Bacon^s  Works  he  translated  the  '  Novum 
Organum,'  which  has  been  since  separate]? 
printed,  and  is  described  in  the  late  Oxford 
edition  as  the  best  rendering  of  that  wonder- 
ful work,  and  is  now  used  in  that  univenitT. 
Just  before  his  call  to  the  bar,  after  the 
battle  of  Navarino,  he  vnrote  n  long  letter, 
which  was  first  published  in  the  '  Times ' 
and  afterwards  m  the  'Pamphleteer,*  re- 
commending an  alliance  between  France 
and  Enfflaoa  for  the  purpose  of  strengthen- 
ing Turkey  against  Russia ;  in  consequence 
of  which  he  was  oflered  by  the  then  editor 
of  that  influential  paper  fuU  employment 
if  he  would  undertake  to  write  for  the 
press.      Mr.  Wood,  however,  feeling  thst 
It  would    interfere   with   his  professioiial 
prospects,  declined  the  flattering  proposal 


\o6D 

Mr.  Wood  was  called  to  the  bar  on 
November  27, 1827,  and  established  him- 
self in  the  same  chambers  with  a  learned 
and  in  tellectual  barrister,  William  Lowndes, 
£sq.^  afterwards  a  jadge  of  the  local  court 
at  Liverpool.  He  was  soon  well  employed 
as  an  equity  draftsman  and  conveyancer, 
and  when  engaged  in  court  experienced 
the  different  but  characteristic  treatment 
of  the  two  principal  judges,  being  visited 
by  one  of  tne  usual  rebu£&  of  Sir  John 
lieach,  and  beinff  encouraged  by  the  natural 
courtesy  of  Lord  Lyndhurst.  On  the  in- 
troduction in  the  next  year  of  the  railway 
system  he  was  fortunate  in  obtaining  a 
large  share  in  the  new  business  then 
brought  before  the  committees  of  the 
Houses  of  Commons  and  Lords,  as  either 
the  supporter  or  opposer  of  the  various 
speculations  to  whicn  it  gave  rise.  In 
January  1830  he  married  Charlotte,  the 
only  d[auffhter  of  Major  Edward  Moor, 
F.H.S.,  of  Great  Bealings,  near  Wood- 
bridge,  the  author  of  the  'Hindoo  Pan- 
theon,^ and  of  various  other  works  on 
interesting  Indian  subjects.  In  1834  he 
was  himself  elected  a  fellow  of  the  Royal 
Society,  and  has  since  served  as  a  member 
of  the  council  and  as  a  vice-president  of 
the  society.  Although  largely  engaged  in 
parliamentary  practice,  he  did  not  neglect 
nis  business  in  Chancery,  and  both  mlly 
employed  him.  In  the  year  1841,  how- 
ever, uie  increased  labour  and  demand  on 
his  time  consequent  on  the  appointment  of 
two  additional  vice-chancellors  compelled 
him  to  confine  himself  to  one  or  the  other 
practice.  He  wisely  selected  the  latter, 
though  then  infinitely  less  profitable ;  and, 
attaching  himself  to  Vice-chancellor  Wi- 
gram's  court,  found  his  account  by  the 
encouragement  he  received  in  a  great 
accession  of  business.  About  this  time  the 
long  litigation  relative  to  the  will  of  Mr. 
James  Wood  of  Gloucester  was  terminated, 
by  which  Sir  Matthew  Wood's  right  to  a 
very  large  portion  of  the  testat(Mr  s  estate 
was  fully  established,  and  his  son's  pro- 
Kpects  materially  benefited.  In  February 
1845  he  was  appointed  queen's  counsel, 
and  in  1847  was  returned  to  parliament  as 
member  for  the  city  of  Oxford,  which  he 
continued  to  represent  till  his  elevation  to 
the  bench.  In  parliament  he  took  a  veij 
prominent  part,  advocating  the  admissi- 
oility  of  Jew  members  on  tfUdng  a  modified 
oath,  and  introducing  bills  to  allow  the 
testimony  of  scrupulous  persons  to  be 
received  on  such  declarations  as  would 
bind  their  own  consciences,  but  under  the 
usual  penalties  for  perjury.  He  was  a 
friend  to  reform  in  the  representation,  and 
even  to  vote  by  baUot ;  but,  though  advo- 
cating these  liberal  views,  he  avowed  him- 
self a  firm  supporter  of  the  Church  esta- 
blishment, and  resisted  the  motion^  for  the 


WOOD 


761 


abolition  of  church-rates  and  for  legalising 
marriages  with  a  deceased  wife's  sister. 

In  May  1849  he  accepted  the  ofiice  of 
vice-chancellor  of  the  county  palatine  of 
Lancaster,  offered  to  him  by  Lord  Camp- 
bell, then  the  chancellor  of  the  duchy,  on 
condition  that  a  bill  should  be  passed  for 
the  reform  of  the  court  there,  which  from 
its  antiquated  proceedings  was  then  nearly 
useless;  and  ne  had  tne  satisfaction  of 
obtaining  the  desired  enactment,  by  which 
the  jurisdiction  has  been  since  rendered 
higmy  effective. 

On  March  28,  1861,  Mr.  Wood  was 
selected  by  Lord  John  Kussell  for  the 
office  bf  solicitor-general,  and  was  soon 
afterwards  knighted.  He  was  then  ap- 
pointed one  of  the  commissioners  for  re- 
lorming  the  Court  of  Chancery,  the  result 
of  whose  labours  was  that  the  master's 
offices  were  abolished,  and  the  expense  and 
delay  of  the  proceedings  materially  dimi- 
nished. This  and  other  improvements, 
proposed  while  Lord  John  Russell  was 
prime  minister,  were  so  much  approved  by 
the  succeeding  government  that  they  were 
at  once  adopted  and  passed  the  legislature. 
The  act  for  the  appointment  of  the  lord 
justices  of  appeal  was  passed  while  Sir 
W.illiam  Page  Wood  was  solicitor-general, 
and  Lord  Chancellor  Truro  then  offered  Sir 
Williun  the  post  of  vice-chancellor,  which 
at  the  request  of  Lord  John  Russell  he 
declined.  In  1851  the  university  of  Oxford 
conferred  on  him  the  honorary  degree  of 
D.C.L.  He  of  course  retired  from  office 
on  the  resignation  of  Lord  John  in  Fe- 
bruary 1862,  when  Lord  Derby  succeeded 
and  remained  minister  till  December.  The 
government  being  then  surrendered  to 
Lord  Aberdeen,  and  Sir  George  Turner 
being  soon  after  constituted  one  of  the 
lords  justices,  the  vacant  vice-chancellor- 
ship was  offered  to  Sir  William  Page 
Wood,  who  was  appointed  on  January  10, 
1863. 

Both  before  and  after  his  elevation  his 
services  were  put  into  active  reauisition  on 
numerous  commissions  connected  both  with 
the  Church  and  the  law,  which  involved 
him  in  perpetual  labour.  But  he  felt 
himself  repaid  by  the  knowledge  of  the 
benefits  produced  by  the  legislature's  adop- 
tion of  many  of  the  recommendations  con- 
tained in  their  reports.  He  was  selected 
by  Lord  Chancellor  Cranworth  to  act  with 
lird  Wensleydale  and  Sir  Lawrence  Peel 
as  arbitrators  between  her  majesty  and  the 
King  of  Hanover  with  reference  to  certain 
crown  jewels  claimed  by  that  king.  A 
decided  and  conscientious  Churchman,  he 
has  actively  assisted  the  exertions  of  seve- 
ral societies  for  the  promotion  of  Church 
objects  and  the  instruction  of  the  people. 
In  his  own  district,  that  of  St.  Margaret's 
and  St.  John's,  Westminster,  where^  wb^xs^ 


762 


WOTTON 


he  first  knew  it,  there  were  only  two 
churches,  a  dilapidated  chapel  of  ease,  and 
live  clerg}'men,  with  little  more  than  two 
hundred  children  at  school,  there  are  now 
ten  churches,  twenty-six  clerffy,  and  more 
than  ten  times  the  original  number  of 
j4chools.  To  this  amendment  Sir  William 
Page  Wood  greatly  contributed  by  his 
personal  activity  and  eztensiye  influence ; 
and  he  had  the  satisfaction  of  materially 
aiding  in  the  establishment  in  his  district 
of  the  only  free  library  under  Mr.  Ewart's 
act  in  the  metropolis,  the  benefit  of  which 
is  proved  by  its  being  visited  by  8000 
persons  every  month^  and  by  4000  books 
being  lent  for  reading  dunng  the  same 
time.  In  184)7  he  published  'The  Con- 
tinuity of  Scripture,'  a  most  valuable  work, 
which  has  passed  through  several  editions. 

On  Marcn  6, 1868,  he  was  promoted  to  the 
office  of  lord  justice  of  the  Court  of  Appeal 
in  Chancery,  when  his  colleague  Lord  j  us- 
tice  Selwyn,  though  previously  appointed, 
frracofully  gave  up  to  him  the  seniority,  in 
deference  to  his  long  services  and  greater 
experience.  But  ere  that  year  had  ended 
he  was  called  upon  to  vacate  this  high 
position,  in  order  to  fill  one  of  more 
elevated  rank.  On  Mr.  Gladstone's  ap- 
pointment as  prime  minister,  Sir  William 
Page  Wood  was  selected  as  lord  chancellor 
on  December  9,  1868,  and  was  called  up 
to  the  House  of  Peers  by  the  title  of  Lord 
Ilntherlev,  in  both  which  characters  he 
now  retains  that  deserved  estimation  which 
he  had  attained  in  all  his  previous  judicial 
career. 

Of  the  manner  in  which  he  has  exercised 
his  judicial  functions  for  the  seventeen 
years  during  which  he  has  presided  in  his 
ditferent  courts,  it  would  be  imbecoming 
to  say  more  than  that  while  he  was  vice- 
chancellor  litigants  were  generally  desirous 
of  having  their  causes  set  down  in  his 

Imper.  lie  is  in  the  habit  of  pronouncing 
lis  judgments  ore  tetius,  not  from  prepared 
notes,  and,  notwithstandingthe  discourteous 
and  somewhat  indecorous  reflections  made 
upon  the  practice  by  Lord  Chancellor 
Campbell,  he  still  continues  it,  satisfied 
with  revising  his  judgments  before  they 
are  printed  by  the  regular  reporters  of  his 
court,  and  iustifying  himseli  by  the  con- 
sciousness tnat  so  much  writing  IS  injurious 
to  his  health,  and  by  the  conviction  that 
the  delay  the  preparation  of  them  would 
occasion  would  be  much  more  detrimental  to 
the  suitor  than  could  be  compensated  by  any 
supposed  clearness  in  the  composition. 

WOTTON,  William,  was  probably  of 
Norfolk  extraction,  as  in  1510  he  was 
placed  on  the  commission  of  the  peace  for 
that  county,  and  on  that  for  gaol  delivery 
for  the  citv  of  Norwich.  {CaL  St,  Papers 
[1609-14]",  19\-l^ft.^    \l^  ^%A  admitted  a 


WRAY 

appointed  to  read  there  in  antonm  150B, 
23  Henry  VII.,  his  name  appearing  amoiig 
the  governors  of  the  house  as  late  as  1537. 
He  was  appointed  second  baron  of  the 
Exchequer  on  July  10,  1521,  and  in  No- 
vember 1623  he  acted  as  collector  of  flie 
anticipation  of  the  subsidy  assessed  on  the 
judges  and  barons,  his  ownjproperty  bdng 
valued  at  200^  (S  BepaH  Pub.  Bee,  Apf, 
iL68.) 

WRAT,  Chbistophsb.  Various  are  the 
accounts  of  the  lineage  of  Sir  Christopber 
Wray,  but  three  of  them  agree  that  he  wts 
bom  at  Bedale  in  Yorkshire.  (I^Mert 
Worthies,  11.506;  WotUm'n  BanmeLl^x 
Howdeti's  Beports,  342.)  As  to  his  paieit- 
a^,  the  tales  are  so  different  and  coatn- 
dictory  that  it  would  be  absurd  to  judge 
which  of  them  is  the  most  probable  one; 
enough  is  shown  from  all  of  them  to  indi- 
cate the  humble  state  of  the  family,  till  tlie 
chief  justice  by  his  honourable  exartiom 
raised  it  from  obscuri^. 

The  unquestioned  part  of  the  stcnyii 
that  he  was  a  student  at  Buckingham  Col- 
lege, Cambridge,  which,  during  his  resi- 
dence, was  refounded  as  Magdalen  College, 
to  which  he  was  afterwards  a  great  bene- 
factor; and  that  he  remored  thence  to 
Lincoln's  Inn,  where  he  was  called  to  the 
bar  on  Februar^r  2,  1550.  He  attained  the 
rank  of  reader  in  1562,  and  again  in  1567, 
when,  according  to  I^owden,  he  dwelt  at 
Qlentworth  in  Lincolnshire,  as  a  oomvli- 
ment  then  fre(]^uently  paid  wnen  a  member 
was  called  seneant,  to  which  degree  he  wu 
admitted  in  Easter  Term,  and  was  fortba 
honoured  by  being  appointed  queen's  ee^ 
leant  on  June  18.  (ihtgdaU's  Ori^.  253.) 
That  he  was  a  favourite  with  his  brethiet 
at  the  bar  appears  from  the  following  order 
in  Chancery  in  the  suit  '  Brind  r.  Hjl- 
drache,'  on  April  27, 1662  :  *  Foiasmuch't* 
it  is  informed  that,  becaose  the  matter  in 
question  toucheth  Mr.  Wray,  of  Lineoln's 
Inn,  the  plaintiff  cannot  get  any  to  be  of 
counsel  with  him,  therefore  Mr.  BeU  sad 
Mr.  Manwood  are  appointed  by  this  cout 
to  be  of  coimsel  with  the  s^d  plaintiff'  fij^ 
eminence  in  the  profeesicm  is  evinced  by  bfi 
being  returned  as  member  for  Boro^ 
bridge,  or  Grimsby,  or  LudgeishaU,  in  ^ 
the  parliaments  during  Mary's  reign,  as  veil 
as  in  those  of  Elizabeui  up  to  the  tlurteait}i 
year,  when  he  was  chosen  speaker  (A  tbtf 
which  assembled  on  April  2,  157L  Hi^ 
speech  to  the  queen  on  the  oecasioii  is  le- 
markable  :for  nothing  but  its  length  ;it» 
delivery  is  said  to  have  occu{»edtwDboai& 
This  parliament  waa  dissolved  in  lea  th0 
two  months,  and  wna  the  last  in  w* 
Wray  had  a  seat.    (JViril  JKj<.  L  75ft  "•* 

On  May  14,  1572,  he  was  i 
the  bench,  not,  as  stated  by 
judge  of  the  Common  Plea 


member  of  LAncoVn*  %  Ixiu  vi  ^\i\^  \^^^«x^\q*1  Vck^  ^^)^fi»&!%^Qnfih^  a  ap 


WBAY 

preserred  in  the '  Bagade  Secretis/ and  dated 
the  same  day  as  his  patent,  distinctly  calling 
him  '  another  justice  of  the  Queen's  Bench/ 
(4  RejHyrt  Pub.  Hec.j  App,  ii.  270.) 

He  was  raised  to  the  nead  of  the  Queen*s 
Bench  on  Novemher  8,  1674 ;  and  he  pre- 
sided there,  heinfip  then  knighted,  ahove 
sixteen  years,  with  a  character  which  Sir 
£dward  Coke  (3  Beports^  26)  sums  up  hy 
describing  him  as  'a  most  reverend  judge, 
of  profound  and  judicial  knowledge,  accom- 
panied with  a  ready  and  singular  capacity, 
grave  and  sensible  elocution,  and  continual 
and  admirable  patience.'  A  letter  of  his  to 
the  Bishop  of  Chester,  relative  to  an  appli- 
cation from  the  prelate  and  the  Earl  of 
Derby  to  dissolve  a  prohibition  to  the  ec- 
clesiastical commissioners  granted  by  the 
Court  of  Queen's  Bench,  affords  a  proof  of 
the  manliness  and  independence  of  nis  cha- 
racter.    (Peck* 8  Dend,  Cur.  b.  iii.  36.) 

His  judgments  in  the  Queen's  Bendi  are 
reported  by  D^er,  Flowden,  and  Coke ;  and 
the  *  State  Tnals  *  contain  some  over  which 
he  presided.  Whatever  may  be  thought  of 
the  criminal  judicature  of  the  period,  it 
must  be  acknowledged  that  Chief  Justice 
Wray  not  only  abstained  from  all  intempe- 
rance and  partiality,  but  exhibited  great 
calmness  and  forbearance.  He  was  present 
during  the  proceedings  against  the  Scottish 
queen,  but  does  not  appear  to  have  taken 
any  part  in  them;  and  in  the  farcical 
arraignment  of  Secretary  Davison  in  the 
Star  Chamber  for  sending  down  the  warrant 
for  Mary's  execution,  the  chief  justice  (in 
consequence  of  the  illness  of  Lora  Chancel- 
lor Bromley)  presided  in  the  temj^rary 
character  of  lord  privy  seal.  It  is  ludicrous 
to  note  how  on  tnis  latter  occasion  all  the 
commissioners  in  turn  be^an  by  praising  the 
secretary's  intent,  but  finished  by  punishing 
him  for  his  act ;  a  chorus  which  was  wound 
up  by  the  chief  justice's  well-known  dis- 
tinction, '  Surely  I  think  you  meant  well, 
and  it  was  bonumj  but  not  bene,*  (State 
Trials,  i.  1049-1239.) 

He  performed  his  duties  so  much  to 
Queen  Elizabeth's  satisfaction  that  she 
granted  to  him  the  profits  of  the  coinage 
till  he  had  built  his  noble  house  at  Glent- 
worth  ;  and  he  retained  her  &vour  till  his 
death,  which  occurred  on  May  7,  1692.  He 
"was  buried  in  the  chancel  of  Glentworth 
Church,  under  a  magnificent  monument,  on 
which  he  is  represented  in  his  robes. 

He  was  as  exemplary  in  his  private  as  in 
his  judicial  life ;  and  he  appears  to  have 
been  fond  of  putting  his  rules  of  conduct 
into  pithy  forms.  He  is  said  by  David 
Lloyd  (^ate  Worthiest  680),  who  wrote  in 
the  next  «entury,  to  have  been  '  choice  in 
live  particulars :  1,  his  friend,  which  was 
always  wise  and  equal ;  2,  his  wife  |  3,  his 
book ;  4,  his  secrets ;  6,  his  expression  and 
garb.    By  four  things  he  would  say  an 


WRIGHT 


763 


estate  was  kept :  1,  bv  understanding  it ; 
2,  by  spending  not  till  it  comes ;  3,  by 
keepmg  old  servants  j  and  4,  by  a  quarterly 
audit.  He  was  mindful  of  what  is  past, 
observant  of  things  present,  and  provident 
of  things  to  come.'  By  his  will,  in  which 
his  servants  and  the  poor  are  charitably  re- 
membered, besides  fi:iving  directions  for  the 
maintenance  by  his  heirs  for  ever  of  six  poor 
persons  in  the  almshouse  at  Glentworth,  he 
orders  that  they  shall  have  their  dinner 
every  Sunday  at  Glentworth  Hall,  and  in 
case  of  default  he  authorises  the  dean  and 
chapter  of  Lincoln  to  distrain  upon  the  land. 

By  his  wife,  Anne,  daughter  of  Nicholas 
Girlmgton,  of  Normanby,  Yorkshire,  Esq., 
he  haa  a  son,  William,  who  was  created  a 
baronet  in  1612,  as  was  his  grandson  in 
1660,  but  both  tiie  titles  have  become  ex- 
tinct.    (  WottorCs  Baronet,  i.  242-249^ 

WBIOHT,  Robert,  was  the  son  of  Jer- 
myn  Wright,  settled  at  Wangford  in  Suf- 
folk, by  his  wife,  Anne,  daughter  of  Richard 
Bachcroft,  of  BexwelL  He  was  educated 
first  at  the  free  school  of  Thetford,  and 
then  at  Peterhouse,  Cambridge,  where  he 
took  the  degrees  of  B.A.  inl658,and  of  M.A. 
in  1661.  Previously  to  his  admission  to  the 
Inner  Temple  he  had  been  included  in  the 
list  of  those  who  were  qualified  to  be  made 
knights  of  the  intended  order  of  the  Royal 
Oak,  with  an  estate  in  Norfolk  of  the  value 
of  1000/.  a  year.  (Blomefield's  Norfolk,  i. 
368  ;   Wott(m*s  Baronet,  iv.  372.) 

Roger  North  informs  us  in  his  life  of 
Lord  Keeper  Guilford  (p.  247)  that  Wright 
went  the  Norfolk  Circuit,  and  that  by  his 
marriage  with  Susan,  one  of  the  daughters 
of  Bishop  Wren,  he  was  '  set  in  credit  in 
the  country.  .  .  Of  a  comely  person,  airy 
and  flourishing  in  his  habits  ana  manner  of 
living,'  he  for  some  time  commanded  a 
greater  share  of  business  than  his  companion 
Mr.  North,  but  '  was  so  poor  a  lawyer  that 
he  could  not  give  an  opinion  on  a  written 
case,  but  used  to  bring  his  cases  to  his  friend 
Mr.  North,  who  wrote  the  opinion  on  a 
paper,  which  Wright  copied  and  signed  as 
if  it  were  his  own.  This  practice  he  con- 
tinued even  when  Mr.  North  was  in  London, 
and  put  off  his  clients  upon  pretence  of 
taking  more  consideration.  His  deficiency 
could  not  be  long  concealed ;  and,  not  getting 
much  by  the  law,  he  *  by  favour  was  made 
treasurer  of  the  chest  at  Chatham,  and  by 
his  voluptuous  imthinking  course  of  life ' 
became  embarrassed  to  so  considerable  a 
decree  that  his  friend  North,  from  whom  he 
had  occasionally  borrowed  money,  paid  off 
his  other  debts  and  took  a  mortgage  of  his 
estate  for  1500/.  The  author  adds  the  dis- 
graceful {jEu;t  that  some  years  afterwards  ho 
obtained  of  Sir  Walter  Plummer  600/. 
more  upon  an  original  mortgage  of  the  same 
estate,  and  made  an  affidavit  that  it  was 
dear  from  all  incumbtaneea. 


764 


WRIGHT 


In  tho  meantime  his  name  appears  as 
representing  King's  Lynn  on  a  vacancy 
diirin^r  the  second  parliament  of  Charles  II. 
In  1078  he  wns  appointed  counsel  for  the 
university,  and  in  August  1070  was  elected 
deputy  recorder  of  the  town  of  Cambridge. 
Having  contracted  a  close  friendship  with 
Sir  Qeorge  Jefireys,  he  had  been  m  the 
Easter  preceding  raised  to  the  coif  and 
kni*4^htea,  and  was  further  promoted  to  be 
king's  Serjeant  on  May  17,  1080.    In  the 
next  year  he  was  made  chief  justice  of 
Glamorgan,  and  on  October  30,  1084,  was 
appointed  a  baron  of  the  Exchequer.     (T, 
liaymond,  431.)     Koger  North  relates  that 
Wright,  being  on  the  brink  of  ruin,  applied 
to  Jeffreys  (then  chief  justice)  to  rescue 
him  by  getting  him  made  a  judge.    On 
the  king  suggesting  his  name,  Lord  Keeper 
North  answered  that  *  he  knew  him  but 
too  well,  and  was  satisfied  that  he  was  the 
most. unfit  man  to  be  made  a  judge.'    It 
WHS  therefore  for  some  time  delaved,  but 
upon  being  again  pressed  the  lord  keeper 
detailed  what  he  Knew  of  him — ^that  he 
was  a  dunce,  and  no  lawyer,  of  no  truth  or 
honesty,  guilty  of  perjury,  and  not  worth 
a  groat,  havmg  spent  all  his  estate  in 
debauched  living.     Having  thus  done  his 
duty,  the  lord  keeper  left  the  decision  to 
the  King,  who,  urged  by  Jefireys,  at  last 
gave  way,  and  sent  his  warrant  for  the 
appointment 

lie  was  elected  recorder  of  Cambridge 
on  February  10,  1086,  four  days  after  the 
accession  of  James  II.,  who  not  only  re- 
newed his  patent  as  judge,  but  selected 
him  to  accompany  his  patron  Jefireys  on 
the  bloody  western  assize,  and  on  October 
11,  immediately  after  his  return  there- 
from, removed  him  to  the  King's  Bench. 
Eighteen  months  afterwards  he  was  further 
})romoted  to  the  chief  justiceship  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  on  Apnl  10, 1087.  This 
ofiice  he  held  only  five  days,  during  which 
tiie  case  of  the  deserter  came  beK>re  the 
Court  of  King's  Bench,  when  Chief  Justice 
Herbert,  having  given  an  opinion  adverse 
to  the  king's  claim  to  exercise  martial  law 
in  time  of  peace,  was  removed  to  the 
Common  Pleas  to  make  way  for  Sir 
Bobert  Wright,  as  more  willing  to  forward 
the  king's  designs.  He  was  therefore 
appointed  chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench 
on  April  21,  and  the  first  proof  of  his 
servility  was  to  grant  the  order  for  hanging 
the  poor  soldier,  which  his  predecessor  was 
dismissed  for  refusing.  The  next  was  in 
fining  the  Earl  of  Devonshire,  who  had 
always  distinguished  himself  by  his  oppo- 
sition to  the  court,  for  an  assault  on  Colonel 
Culpepper  in  the  king's  presence-chamber, 
in  the  exorbitant  sum  of  80,000^,  and 
committing  him  to  prison  till  it  was  paid, 
the  chief  ^ualiee  ^Ai^vcl^  t3^^t.  the  ottence 


WBIGHT 

his  throne/     Next   he  was  cme  of  tb 
ecclesiastical  commiasioners,  and  was  sent 
down  with  Bishop  Cartwright  and  Baron 
Jenner  on  the  famous  visitation  of  Maf;- 
dalen  College,  Oxford,  when  the  preddent 
and  all  the  feUows  except  three  PamftB 
were  expeUed.    (Aihen,    Oxom.  iy.  505; 
8Ude  TrtaU,  ix.  1354,  xiL  26.)    From  \a& 
bein^  selected  as  a  member  of  that  eom- 
mission,  from  hia  saying  to  one  of  the 
fellows,   'Your  Oxford  &w  ia  no  better 
than  your  Oxford  divinity,'  and  from  King 
James   granting    him    dispensation  from 
taking  the  oaths  and  subscribing  the  test, 
it  would  seem  not  improbable  that  he  had 
been,  or  was  willing  to  be,  converted  to 
the  religion  of  the  court.    In  the  following 
June  he  presided  at  the  trial  of  the  sevea 
bishops,  when,  though  he  so  £sr  acoommo* 
dated  himself   to  uie  king's  anxiety  to 
condemn  them  as  to  declare  Uieir  petitua 
to  be  a  libel,  he  was  at  the  same  time  lo 
evidently  awed  by  the  general  y<noe  in 
their  favour  as  to  conduct  the  proceedings 
with  great  apparent  decency  and  impar- 
tiality.     (Branigton's  Autob.  283;   StaU 
Triala,  xii.  42.) 

Within  six  months  from  this  time,  when 
the  king  deserted  the  throne,  the  chief 
justice,  conscious  of  his  danger,  retired  to 
some  place  of  concealment.  The  character 
he  bore  among  his  contemporaries  ma?  le 
judged  from  the  following  lines  in  a  hua- 
poon  of  the  time  : — 

Farewell  Brent,  farewell  William, 
Farewell  Wright,  worae  than  TruUim; 
Farewell  chancellor,  farewell  maoe^ 
Farewell  prince,  farewell  race. 

His  retreat  was  discovered  on  Jannsij 
16,  1689,  by  Sir  William  Waller,  who 
took  him  before  Sir  John  Chapman,  the 
lord  mayor,  by  whom  he  was  committed 
to  Newgate  on  a  charffe  '  that  hee,  beii^ 
one  of  the  judges  of  tne  Court  of  King's 
Bench,  hee  had  endeavoured  the  suhver- 
sion  of  the  established  government  hv 
alloweing  of  a  power  to  dispence  with  the 
laws ',  and  that  nee  was  one  of  the  comml^ 
sioners  for  ecclesiastical  affidrs.'  {Je»' 
CouH  of  England^  iv.  419 ;  Bramdan,  ^) 
He  was  brought  before  the  House  of  L^ 
on  May  6,  in  relation  to  the  case  of  tiK 
Earl  of  Devonshire,  livhen,  thoiu^  the 
committing  of  the  earl  was  declared  i 
manifest  breach  of  privilege,  and  the  fi>e 
of  dO,000/L  to  be  excessive  luid  exorbitni. 
no  further  proceedings  appear  to  haie  hed 
taken  against  the  judges.  On  the  18th  flf 
the  same  month  Sir  Robert  died  in  Nev- 
gate  of  a  fever,  and  thus  escaped  hM 
excepted  from  the  Act  of  Indemnity.  A 
the  debate  on  June  18  it  was  reeolvi'  ' 
he  should  be  excepted,  thoug)* 
in  the  act  itself,  wnich  was  * 
May  1690.  his  name  was  < 


was  '  next  dooi  U>  \:u\^^  ^^  >»si^  q\)X  ^*l\  ^^OkS^  ^1  \i»!l  Ohanoelki 


WRIGHT 

deceased)  was  retained.     {State  Trials,  ix. 
1367 ;  Pari  Hist,  v.  339.^ 

He  was  thrice  marriea.  His  first  wife 
was  Dorothy  Moor,  of  Wiggenhall  St. 
Germans ;  ms  second  was  Siisan,  daughter 
of  Matthew  Wren,  Bishop  of  Ely;  and  his 
third  was  Elizaheth,  daughter  of  Chief 
Justice  Scrogfi;8y  hj  the  two  latter  of  whom 
he  had  several  children. 

WBIOHTy  Nathan,  was  the  son  of  Dr. 
Ezekiel  Wright,  rector  of  Thurcaston  in 
Leicestershire,  and  Dorothy,  sister  and  co- 
heir of  Sir  John  Onehye.  Two  haronetcies 
granted  to  the  elder  branches  of  the  family 
are  now  extinct. 

He  was  bom  in  1653,  and  was  educated 
at  Emmanuel  College,  Cambridge,  but 
took  no  degree,  and  becoming  a  student  at 
the  Inner  Temple,  was  called  to  the  bar  on 
November  29, 1677;  but  more  than  a  year 
before  had  married  Elizabeth,  daughter  of 
George  Ashbj,  of  Quenby,  who  had  been 
sheriff  of  Leicestershire.  In  1679  he  was 
enabled  to  purchase  the  estate  of  the  Earl 
of  Stamfora  at  Broughton  Astley  (Nichols's 
Leicester^,  and  thus  obtained  sucn  an  in- 
fluence m  his  native  county  that  he  was 
chosen  recorder  of  Leicester  in  1680.  He 
held  the  office  (with  a  short  interval  when 
the  town  was  deprived  of  its  charter)  tiU 
he  was  made  loni  keeper.  On  his  resig- 
nation he  presented  to  the  corporation 
what  was  long  after  known  as  '  the  loving 
cup  of  Leicester,'  which  was  sacrificed 
under  the  Municipal  Corporation  Act  of 
1836,  but  preserved  by  a  private  gentle- 
man and  exhibited  to  the  Society  of 
Antiquaries  in  1851.  {Proceedingsj  ii. 
147.) 

In  the  trial  of  the  seven  bishops  in  1688 
Mr.  Wright  was  engaged  for  the  prosecu- 
tion, and  Luttrell  then  calls  him  '  Young 
Mr.  Wright.'  He  was  the  junior  counsel 
and  only  opened  the  proceedings,  taking  no 
other  part  ill  the  discussion.  In  1692  he 
was  called  to  the  degree  of  the  coif,  and 
in  January  1697  he  was  made  king's 
Serjeant,  and  knighted.  Luttrell  states 
that  he  received  these  honours  for  his 
learned  arguments  in  the  House  of  Lords 
in  support  of  the  bill  of  attainder  against 
Sir  Jonn  Fen  wick;  and  Speaker  Onslow  in 
his  notes  on  Burnet  says  that  he  managed 
the  business  so  well  as  to  raise  his  character 
very  much  at  the  time.  Unfortunately  his 
speech  is  not  reported  in  the  '  State  Trials,' 
but  that  collection  contains  those  made  by 
him  as  counsel  for  the  crown  against  the 
Earl  of  Warwick  for  murder,  against  Mr. 
Buncombe  for  falsely  indorsing  Exchequer 
bilh),  and  against  Mary  Butler  for  forging 
a  bond  for  40,000/. ;  and  also  when  em- 
ployed .in  1700  for  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  in 
support  of  the  bill  for  dissolving  his  mar- 
riage. Luttrell  also  frequently  notices  his 
leg^  engagements.    (LuttreU,  i.  446,  iv. 


WRIGHT 


765 


164  J  Burnet,   v.   219;    State  Trials,  xiii. 
964,  &c.) 

When  King  William  in  1700  took  the 
tory  party  into  power  and  dismissed  Lord 
Chancellor  Somers  on  April  17,  he  must 
have    been    somewhat    surprised    at    the 
difficulty  he  found  in  filling  the  vacant 
office.    The  two  chief  justices  and  other 
great  lawyers  of   the  time    declined    to 
accept  the  Seal.    Easter  Term  was  then 
about  to  commence,  and  the  business  of 
the  Chancery  could  not    be    interrupted 
without  great    inconvenience.    The   oeal 
was  therefore  temporarily  placed  on  May  5 
in  the  hands  of  the  chiefs  of  the  three 
other  courts,  together  with  the  master  of 
the  Rolls,  and  in  the  meantime  negotiations 
were  going  on,  which  were  at  last  ended 
by  Sir  Nathan  Wright  accepting  the  re- 
sponsible office  of  lord  keeper  on  May  21. 
In  the  next  parliament  he  presided  on  the 
trial  and  pronoimced  the  acquittal  of  his 
predecessor,  and  at  the  end  of  the  session 
ne  was  appointed  one  of  the  lords  justices 
during  the  king's  absence  abroad.    A  new 
parliament  met  in  December  1701,  but 
Wore  the  termination  of  its  first  session 
the  king  died  on  March  8,  1702.    Queen 
Anne  confirmed  the  tories  in  the  ministry, 
retaining  the  lord  keeper.    The  only  sub- 
sequent proceedings    connected  with  his 
name  of  any  imp<xrtance  are  his  acting  on 
a  commission  for  the  union  with  Scotland, 
which  owing  to  the  difficulties  raised  bv 
the  Scots  was  not  at  that  time  successful, 
and  his  retumingthe  thanks  of  the  House 
of  Lords  to  the  Duke  of  Marlborough  on 
the  close  of  the  campaign  of  1704,  which 
was  signalised  by  the  battle  of  Blenheim. 
(1   Lord  Raymond,  667;    Pari,  Hist,  v. 
1313,  vi.  27,  374.) 

In  the  following  year,  the  whigs  having 
regained  their  ascenaency.  Sir  Nathan,  who 
had  failed  to  acquire  the  respect  of  either 
party,  was  obliged  to  retire.  Though  ho 
was  a  good  common  lawyer,  he  was  ac- 
counted a  weak  and  inefficient  keeper ;  but 
still  there  was  no  complaint  of  his  decisions 
in  equity.  Burnet,  with  no  friendly  feeling 
towards  him,  though  he  says  that  money 
did  everything  with  the  lord  keeper,  who 
was  sordidly  covetous,  yet  acknowledges 
that  he  never  heard  him  charged  with 
bribery  in  his  court  A  storv  is  told  of  a 
watchmaker,  a  day  or  two  be&re  the  hear- 
ing of  a  suit  in  which  he  was  a  party,  send- 
ing a  very  fine  timepiece  to  the  lord  keeper, 
who  returned  it  with  a  message,  '  That  he 
had  no  doubt  of  the  goodness  of  the  piece, 
but  it  had  one  motion  in  it  too  much  fo 
him.'  Burnet  alludes  to  a  '  foul  rumour ' 
of  livings  bein^  set  up  for  sale  by  the 
officers  under  him;  ana  Speaker  Onslow 
adds  in  a  note  that  in  Baron  Bury's  book 
of  accounts  it  appeared  that  the  baron  had 
given  the  lord  Keeper  IQQQi,  fet  \si'«J8^'^ 


766 


WIIIOIIT 


him  a  judge.  Whatever  truth  there  may 
be  in  ttiis  scandal,  there  is  no  doubt  that 
he  became  extremely  rich,  that  he  ob- 
tained a  valuable  ol&ce  for  his  son,  and 
bestowed  the  best  livings  on  his  poor  re- 
lations. He  survived  his  removal  uom  the 
Seal  for  sixteen  years,  and  died  on  August 
4, 1721,  at  Cancot  Ilall  in  Warwickshire. 
His  remains  were  removed  to  a  manor  he  had 
purchased  at  Gothurst,  near  Newport  Pag- 
nell,  in  the  church  of  which  there  is  a  monu- 
mcnt  with  his  effigy  in  white  marble.  His 
wife  was  Elizabetn,  daughter  of  George 
Ashby,  by  whom  he  left  several  children. 
( )ne  of  his  sons  was  clerk  of  the  crown, 
another  was  recorder  uf  Leicester,  and  a 
third  was  a  clergyman,  and  married  a  grand- 
daughter of  the  Marauis  of  Winchester. 
( Jiumetf  V.  l:tt),  218 ;  Maxby'n  Secret  Sercice, 
41 ;  Xohie'ti  Granger,  i.  85;  Eveiyti,  iii.  382.) 

WBIOHT,  Martin,  is  believed  to  have 
been  of  a  Hampshire  family,  his  posses- 
sions and  his  purchases  being  principally 
in  that  county.  He  was  bom  on  March 
24, 1001,  and  'was  the  younger  brother  of 
Thomas  Wright,  Esq.,  whose  daughter 
Elizabeth  married  Sir  John  Guise,  of  High- 
nam,  lUrt.  He  received  his  legal  education 
at  the  Inner  Temple,  and  was  called  to  the 
bar  in  June  1718. 

His  publication  in  1730,  'An  Intro- 
duction to  the  Law  of  Tenures,*  which 
went  through  many  editions,  no  doubt  as- 
8ivsted  his  elevation  to  the  bench  of  the 
Exchequer  in  November  1739,  and  his 
removal  to  the  Court  of  King's  Bench  on 
November  28,  1740.  He  was  not  knighted 
till  November  2.3,  1745,  when  he  went  up 
with  the  judges'  address  on  the  rebellion; 
and  after  being  nearly  sixteen  years  on  the 
bt'ncli  he  resigned  his  seat  on  February  1, 
1755.  He  lived  more  than  twelve  years 
after,  and  died  at  Fulham  on  September 
20,  1707,  leaving  by  his  wife,  J^hzabeth, 
daughter  and  coheir  of  Ilujrh  Willoughby, 
K-^^,  M.D.,  of  Barton  Stacey  in  Hamp- 
shire, two  sons  and  two  daughters,  who 
all  died  without  issue.  The  youngest  son, 
nn  eccentric  cliaracter,  on  his  decease  in 
1814,  at  the  ageof  eighty-seven,bequeathed 
his  estates,  amounting  to  3000/.  a  year,  to 
Lady  Fninces  Wilson,  the  wife  of  Sir 
Henry  Wilson  of  Chelsea  Park,  with  whom 
he  was  totally  unncauainted,  but  had  seen 
and  admired  fier  at  the  opera  nearly  twenty 
years  before,  when  she  was  Lady  Frances 
bruce.  {Stran(/e,  1148;  Gent.  Afa^.  vols. 
Lx.  X.  XV.  xxxvii.  Ixxxiv.) 

WBIOTHEBLEY,  Thomas  (Lord  Wrio- 
TTiESLKY,  Earl  of  Southampton),  be- 
longed to  a  family  of  heralds.  His  grand- 
father Sir  John,  first  noticed  as  Faucon 
herald,  was  advanced  successively  in  the 
reijm  of  Edward  IV.  to  the  offices  of  Nor- 


roy  and  Gartei  \^^  at  arms.    Both  the 
sons  of  S\r  3o\iii^wft  ^st^>3^^^.>si\i^^'^^ 


WRIOTHE&LEY 

same  study — the  elder,  Thomas^  beeoming 
Garter;  and  the  younger,  William,  being 
York  herald,  and  the  &ther  of  the  chan- 
cellor, by  his  wife  Agnes  Drayton.  He 
was  bora  at  Garter  Court  in  Aufoican,  and 
educated  at  St  John's  College  or  Trinitr 
Hall,  Cambridge.  (JFuUer*8  Wortkiet^i 
70;  Atken.  Cantab.  I  98.^  In  1529  he  ap- 
pears in  the  position  of  clerk  to  the  oofierar 
of  the  housenold  (Trevefyan  Fapert,  160), 
and  in  1530  he  obtained  the  plaoe  of  deik 
to  the  Signet  under  Henry  VIH. ;  tod  it 
was  probably  in  the  latter  character  that 
he  accompanied  Mr.  Brereton,  one  of  the 
gentlemen  of  the  priyychamber,  on  a  mea- 
aage  firom  the  kin^  to  Wolsey  at  Southwell, 
when  Cavendish  intimatea  that  they  were 
not  friends  to  the  cardinal  and  diadsiofullT 
accepted  his  reward.  According  to  Dag- 
dale,  he  was  entered  at  Gray*a  Inn  in  15S4: 
but  he  does  not  appear  to  have  taken  anr 
office  in  that  aocie^,  nor  does  his  nanie 
occur  in  any  law  repeat.  In  1637,  howew, 
he  was  appointed  coroner  and  attoner  in 
the  Court  of  Common  Pleaa,  and  in  1538 
he  was  placed  in  the  responsible  poet  of 
one  of  the  king's  secretariee,  and  kniffhted. 

Attached  to  the  prindplea  of  the  old  re- 
ligion, he  had  already  secretly  favciiRd 
those  who  were  devoted  to  it,  by  changing 
the  rigours  with  which  the  Fnazs  Oheei^ 
vants  were  pursued,  into  banislmient  fraa 
our  shores.  Yet  he  bo  accommodated  him- 
self to  the  king's  caprices  that  he  wm  em- 
ployed on  several  important  missioiia,  (ne 
of  which  was  the  negotiation  of  a  treat?  of 
marriage  between  Henry  and  Christiana 
Duchess  of  Milan,  the  second  daughter  of 
the  king  of  Denmark,  in  which  he  &i1ed. 
{KeHn9t  8  Hist,  ii.  214.)  He  was  afterward? 
one  of  the  special  council  assigned  to  re- 
ceive the  declaration  of  Anne  of  CleTee, 
by  which  she  abandoned  her  matrimonial 
nghts.     (Kal,  Exch.  i.,  Introd,  di.) 

In  1540  he  was  made  constable  of  Soath- 
ampton  Castle,  and  two  years  afterwards  of 
that  of  Porchester ;  and  to  these  honour- 
able appointments  was  added  the  profiuUe 
one  01  chamberlain  of  the  Exchequer.  In 
1545  he  acted  as  one  of  the  conunimoneff 
for  managing  the  treaty  of  league  with  the 
Emperor  Charles,  and  on  January  1,  loU 
was  raised  to  the  peerage  by  tte  title  cS 
Baron  Wriothelsey  of  Tichtield  in  Hants, 
the  monastery  of  which  had  been  granted 
to  him.  The  sickness  of  Lord  Audler 
quickly  following,  the  Great  Seal  wv 
placed  in  Wriothesley's  hands  on  April  2i 
as  keeper,  a  title  which  was  changed  oa 
May  3  to  that  of  lord  chancellor,  on  Aai- 
ley  s  death.  Before  the  end  of  the  jm 
he  was  installed  a  knight  of  the  Girt» 

The  change  from  Lord  Chanoalk- 
to  Lord  Chancellor  WriothealiM 
one  to  many  of  thoae  who  w 
\a  "t^ift  new  religioaa  tea 


WiaOTHESLEY 

having  publicly  exhibited  bis  own  senfi- 
ments,  by  passing  the  act  of  the  Six  ArtideSy 
"Wriothesley,  always  a  secret  supporter  of 
these  extreme  doctrines,  now  pursued  to 
extremity  those  who  impugned  them.  His 
zeal  even  attempted  to  prejudice  the  king 
against  his  new  wife,  Catherine  Parr,  whose 
attachment  to  the  reformed  opinions  he 
dreaded  as  dangerous  to  himself  and  whose 
imprudence  in  disputing  on  the  subiect 
with  her  opinionatiTe  husband  gave  him 
too  easy  a  handle.  Had  it  not  been  for  her 
ready  wit^  she  would  perhaps  have  followed 
her  predecessors  to  the  scaffold ;  but  by  an 
artful  submission,  she  foiled  her  malicious 
foe,  who,  having  prepared  articles  against 
her,  when  he  came  to  take  her  into  custody, 
instead  of  receiving  his  intended  victim, 
w^as  met  by  reproaches  from  her  pacified 
lord.  (Keimet.  ii.  233.)  Connected  with 
this  was  the  charge  against  Anne  Askew, 
for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  from  whom 
matter  to  implicate  the  queen,  Wriothesley 
is  (perhaps  wrongfully)  accused  of  having 
himself  applied  the  torture,  when  the 
common  executioner  appeared  to  com- 
passionate the  sufferer.   tLmgardf  vi.  353.) 

By  the  will  of  Henry  Vni.,  Lord  Wrio- 
thesley (with  a  legacy  of  600/.)  was  made 
one  of  the  sixteen  •  executors  of  it,  and 
'  councilors  of  the  privy  council  with  our 
c>on  Edward,  both  in  his  private  and  pub- 
lic affairs.*  (Testam,  Vetugt,  ^\,^  Imme- 
diately after  the  accession  of  Eaward  VI. 
the  Earl  of  Hertford,  the  king's  uncle. 
was  appointed  protector  of  the  realm  ana 
^ardian  of  tne  king's  person,  notwith- 
standing the  warm  opposition  of  Wriothes- 
ley, who  contended  that  under  the  will  all 
the  executors  were  invested  with  equal 
power.  His  resistance  was  the  more  ear- 
nest because  Hertford  was  a  known  sup- 
porter of  the  new  doctrines ;  but  he  was 
quieted  by  being  elevated  within  three 
weeks  of  the  king's  death  to  the  earldom 
of  Southampton,  and  by  having  an  addi- 
tional income  granted  to  him  for  the  sup- 
port of  his  new  dignity.  This  title  had 
not  been  long  extinct ;  and  it  is  curious 
that  the  late  earl,  the  great  naval  com- 
mander, left  Wriothesley  by  his  will  the 
best  of  his  gilt  cups.  {Ibid,  708.)  At  the 
same  time  the  £arl  of  Hertford  became 
Duke  of  Somerset. 

The  majority  of  the  council  of  regency 
were  reformers.  Wriothesley  was  impe- 
rious and  dogmatical,  and  so  troublesome 
in  his  intercourse  with  his  brethren  that 
every  endeavour  might  be  expected  to  put 
an  end  to  his  power.  Bv  his  own  in- 
advertence he  soon  gave  them  an  oppor- 
tunity. On  February  18  he  put  the  Great 
Seal  to  a  commission  empowering  the 
master  of  the  Rolls  and  three  masters  in 
Chancery  to  hear  causes  and  pronounce 
decrees  m  his  absence.    Although  this  was 


WRIOTHESLEY 


76r 


a  mere  renewal  of  a  commission  issued  to 
the  same  parties  for  the  same  purpose  in 
1644,  it  was  immediately  seized  hold  of  as 
an  illegal  act,  inasmuch  as  he  had  no  licence 
for  it,  either  from  the  king  or  the  regency,, 
while  for  the  former  he  had  the  late  kinff's 
authority.  The  judges,  who  were  formally 
appealed  to,  gave  this  as  their  decision, 
and  that  the  offence  was  punishable  with 
the  loss  of  office  and  fine  and  imprisonment 
at  the  king's  pleasure.  The  coimcil  hastened 
to  act  on  this  opinion,  and,  after  an  ineffec- 
tual resistance,  Wriothesley  was  obliged  on 
March  6, 1547,  to  give  up  the  Seal  to  Lord 
St.  John,  and  to  remain  a  prisoner  in  hia 
house  in  Ely  Place  till  June  29,  when  he 
was  discharged  on  entering  into  a  bond 
to  pay  any  fine  the  king  might  impose 
upon  him. 

Though  thus  deprived  of  his  office,  he 
was  not  excluded  from  the  council;  but, 
cautioned  by  what  had  passed,  and  intimi- 
dated by  the  severity  with  which  Somerset 
enforcea  his  absolute  sway,  he  was  obliged 
to  submit  to  those  active  measures,  so  re- 
pugnant to  his  known  sentiments,  by  which 
the  Reformation  was  advanced.  The  pro- 
tector's turn  of  unpopularity  at  length 
arrived,  and  Wriothesley^  as  might  bo 
expected,  joined  the  Earl  of  Warwick  in 
the  proceedings  which  hastened  Somerset's 
ruin.  The  satisfaction  of  his  revenge,  how- 
ever, was  unaccompanied  by  any  restora- 
tion of  his  own  power;  for  Warwick  as 
well  as  Somerset  looked  with  suspicion  on 
his  intriguing  spirit,  and  passed  him  over 
in  the  distriDution  of  office.  Wriothesley 
withdrew  from  the  court  a  disappointecL 
man,  and  within  a  few  months  his  vexation 
at  the  slight  thus  put  upon  him  produced 
the  illness  which  terminated  in  his  death. 
That  event  occurred  on  July  30,  1660,  at 
his  house  in  Holbom,  then  called  Lincoln 
Place,  but  afterwards  from  him  Southamp- 
ton House.  He  was  buried  in  St.  Andrew  s 
Church,  but  his  body  was  removed  thence 
to  a  chapel  in  the  parish  church  of  Tich- 
field,  where  a  sumptuous  monument  still 
exists. 

Few  persons  who  have  held  a  prominent 
position  in  the  state  have  had  so  little  said  to 
their  credit  as  Wriothesley,  Earl  of  South- 
ampton. He  seems  to  have  been  looked 
upon  as  haughty  towards  his  inferiors,  and 
slavishly  suoservient  to  those  who  were 
above  him.  When  advanced  to  high  office, 
his  conceited  opinion  of  his  own  superiority 
made  him  treat  with  disdain  those  who 
differed  from  him,  and  this  disposition  ope- 
rated with  peculiar  force  against  those 
who  advocated  the  reformed  doctrines.  His 
severity  and  cruelty  towards  them,  even  if 
they  could  be  ascribed  to  the  dictates  of 
his  conscience,  necessarily  raised  a  pre- 
judice against  him  in  all  moderate  minds ; 
and  not  naving  the  wisdom  to  modify  Vk^ 


7!i8 


WIlOTllAM 


TibWB  vrhcro  he  must  hftve  seen  that  hia 
party  wu  powerluw,  the  mtijoritj  of  the 
coiiucil  ligkcA  do  toss  of  pomilarity  by 
ailenciur  so  intrai-Uble  >  meiuber  of  their 
body.  Thoujth  devotedly  attached  to  the 
Itoniinh  reli^un,  he  showed  no  scruples  in 
BhsriDfc  the  iiIuihUt  ariBing-  from  its  destruc- 
tion, and  nut  onlv  enriclied  himself  with 
(tmnts  from  KiiifC  Ilvnrv,  but  even  Accepted 
others  frooi  the  couiu'A  that  vae  planning 
lliH  diBf^race. 

By  his  wife,  June,  the  heireas  of  William 
Cheney,  of  Oheehnmboys,  Itucka,  he  bad  ' 
one  son  and  fiio  dnupliters.  His  titles  were  | 
held  after  hiin  by  three  succeeding  frenera' 
liunx,  wht'O  they  all  bt'csme  extinct,  t^tber 
with  the  earldum  of  Chichester,  which  tlie 
fourth  Karl  of  Southampton  had  acquired 
hy  a  special  remainder  on  the  death  of  that 
nobleman  in  IftU7  with  no  other  iwue  than 
liaohel  hiH  dniiffhter  and  heiress,  whiwe 
iiuiiie  has  biicn  handed  down  to  us  as  the 
derotud  wife  of  the  illustrinus  but  unfor- 
iiikii!  Wiiliani  I^rd  Itu^sell,  and  as  the 
author  of  letters  which  still  continue  tii 
delight  all  virtuous  minds.  (SaroHagr,  ii. 
IW:!;  Haytrntrd;  Unpin;  Lingard.) 

TSOraAX.  WiLLiAV  DB,  was  the  grand- 
s^)n  of  ( ieoirrey  de  Wrutham,  of  Iladenville, 
near  ■\Vn>thaiii,  in  Kent,  who  had  been  a 
douiertlie  servant  of  several  Archbishops  of 
CiLnterbury,  and  whose  son  William,  by 
his  wife,  Maud  de  Comhill,  was  the  fiitlier 
of  the  judjre.  ((.W/i'imon'"  Somertel,  iii.  IIJI, ) 
As  both  William^  father  and  son,  held 
simihir  otiices.  some  of  the  following  entries 
niBV  applv  to  the  elder,  f»r  the  name  fre- 
iin<'ntly  occurs  in  the  Curia  ReRis.  In  10 
fiiihavd  I,,  and  in  S  and  10  John,  Knes 
were  eeknowled^rcd  before  him  at  West- 
minster; and  tliere  arc  entries  on  the  rolls 
showii))r  that  he  acted  as  a  juAtlcierinsome 
(if  the  inlervening  yeare. 

His  career  was  bd  active  one,  aiid  he 
filled  ninny  oHlces  of  responsibility  and 
trust.  He  was  for  a  Inn);  periixl  custos  of 
the  stannaries  of  Devonshire  and  Cornwall, 
his  acciumts  for  the  issues  of  the  mines  there 
in'pciirin).'  on  the  nitls  from  10  Itichard  I., 
ll'.nt.  to  It  Jnhn,  131;t.  {R«t.  C'uniW.  28; 
Mailor,  ii.  l:t-*.)  Iiitheiarly  part  of  John's 
rt'itni  he  wa'«  evidently  iu  great  favour, 
both  with  his  Noveri'i^n  and  the  people, 
tor  lie  had  grnnls  of  Xuwenton  and  Linta- 
niore,  with  other  privileices  from  the  king 
{Jlut.  Chart.  >tl);  and  the  inhabitants  of 
Dorset  and  Somi-rjiet  paid  a  fine  of  100(. 
tor  his  appointment  as  forester  for  those 
counties.  In  the  same  year  he  was  con- 
stituted sheritt'  of  Devonshire,  and  four 
year^  aftemards  he  appears  aa  one  of  the 
n>llei'tor3  of  the  quiuiinie  of  merchandise 
l.Mirttox,  i.  m.J  He  is  mentioned  in  fi 
John  as  one  of  the  canons  of  ^^'ells,  and  in 
tho  followin);  ^le  ^ia  i;«iwd  to  theiuvh- 
deiiconry  of  'rtwnVoYi,  ai\i  -wa*.  wma  ».l\*« 


further  grati 
churches  of ' 
Mailing  ID  1 
Ita.  69,  06 ; 
By  an  en 
(«2),  it  apj 
for  the  kmg  I 
Were  it  nc 
honour and  g 
distinguisbei 
the  other  r 
year  show  t 
of  the  royal 

tlie   king's  i 

to  the  king  a 

acknowledgi 
In   n  nni 


the  It 


f>hip  to  Wi 
s«n-ice.  (ii 
Misn  of  11 . 
14  John,  eh< 

an  additions 
irnmt  of  a  I 
ings.  He  it 
dover  (iii. 
advisers  du: 
In  the  wai 
quitted  the 
quenre  of  h 

17  John  Ml 
mitting  him 
in  safelv.  i 
His  (feath 
Clam.  i.  36i 

terbury  in  1 
entry  on  the 


live  days  alt 
title  of  arc 
bable  that  I 

ingjoranen 

the  usual  at: 

WTEEHJ 

WlHCIIESTE 

Wykeham  i 

cular  of  his 
classes  of  so 
his  works  oi 

nary  degree 
exercised  in  I 
thing  that  a 
results  exhil 
ciipied ;  an  < 


WYKEHAM 

'in  the  developmenti  and  an  union  of  jud^ 
ment  and  taste  in  the  execution  of  his 
works ;  an  absence  of  all  arrogance  tHrough- 
out  bis  rapid  advance  in  clerical  honours ; 
and  that  discreet  exercise  of  political  power 
which  enabled  him  to  hold  the  first  place 
in  the  royal  counsels  without  incunring  the 
jealousy  of  the  people.  Few  men  have 
lived  whose  career  has  displayed  such 
continued  exertions  for  the  public  good,  and 
none  have  left  so  many  examples  of  prac- 
tical wisdom  and  well-applied  munificence. 
He  was  bom  at  Wykeham  in  Hamp- 
shire between  July  and  September  132^, 
18  Edward  11. ;  and,  notwithstanding  some 
doubts  which  had  been  expressed  on  the 
subject,  the  evidence  that  has  been  col- 
lected supports  the  presumption  that  the 
name  of  his  birthplace,  by  which  he  is 
known,  was  not  that  of  nis  family. 

His  father  and  mother,  accordmg  to  that 
evidence,  were  John  and  Sybil  Longe,  who 
were  of  ^ood  reputation  and  character,  but 
not  suifiaently  prosperous  in  their  circum- 
stances to  be  able  to  advance  the  education 
of  their  son.  His  mother  was  of  gentle  ex- 
traction,  being  the  daughter  of  William 
Bowade,  whose  wife  was  the  daughter  of 
"William  and  Amicia  Stratton,  of  Stratton, 
near  Selbome.  They  and  his  sister  were 
buried  in  the  church  of  SutJiwyk  Priory, 
not  far  from  Wykeham.  (Archaol.  Joum, 
iii.  221.) 

Tradition  says  that  Nicholas  de  (Jvedale, 
lord  of  the  manor  of  Wykeham,  and  go- 
-vemor  of  Winchester  Castle,  was  the  bene- 
iactor  who  sent  him  to  school  at  Win- 
chester ;  and  it  is  reconied  that  he  after- 
wards acted  as  the  governor's  secretary. 
There  is  no  evidence  whatever  of  his  having 
studied  at  either  university,  although  some 
writers  have  stated  that  he  was  at  Oxford 
for  nearly  six  years.    The  presumption  is 
strongly  m  oppositionjto  this  assertion ;  but 
whatever  he  Ickii  of  scholastic  knowledge 
by  the  want  of  that  advantage  was  more 
tnan  compensated  by  the  zeal  and  industry 
with  which  he  pursued  the  sciences  which 
were  more  practically  useful,  in  the  acquisi- 
tion of  which  he  evinced  so  much  masterv, 
and  in  their  application  so  much  taste,  that 
he  was  soon,  by  the  recommendation  of  his 
first  patron,  dii^tinguished  by  the  notice  of 
William    de  Edington,  Bishop  of   Win- 
chester, who,  finding  his  personal  merits 
equalled  the  talents  he  exhibited,  employed 
him  in  his  service,  and  availed  himself  of 
his  architectural  talents  in  the  improve- 
ments he  projected  at  W^inchester. 

As  Bishop  Edington  had  not  possession 
of  his  see  till  February  1346,  20  Edward 
III.,  Wykeham  was  then  Httle  more  than 
twenty-one  years  of  age.  There  is  a  record 
of  a  beneficial  grant  to  him,  in  1360,  of  the 
custody  of  the  manor  of  Rokeford,  in  his 
native  county,  at  a  small  annual  rent,  until 


WYKEHAM 


769 


the  heir  of  Sir  William  Bottreaux  attained 
his  majority  (Abb,  Rot,  Orig,  ii.  200), 
which  he  probaolv  owed  to  the  intercession 
of  his  patron  the  bishop. 

There  is  no  record  of  his  actual  emplov- 
ment  for  the  next  six  years,  except  that  be 
was  attorney  for  the  bishop  in  1352,  in 
taking  possession  of  certain  lands )  but  it  is 
suggested  that  he  probably  assisted  in  the 
erection  of  the  great  tower  at  W^indsor 
Castle,  called  the  Tabula  Botunda,  about 
which  the  king  was  then  engaged.  His 
merits  must  have  been  prominently  di»- 

E laved  at  an  early  period,  as  on  May  10, 1350, 
e  had  advanced  so  far  as  to  be  placed  in  the 
responsible  position  of  clerk  of  all  the  king's 
works  in  his  manors  of  Henle  and  Yestamp- 
sted.  There  is  a  curious  entry  on  August 
20  in  that  vear  of  an  allowance  to  him  of 
2/.  10«.  for  the  keep  of  the  king's  eight  dogs 
at  Windsor  for  nine  weeks,  ti3(ing  for  each 
dog  three-farthings  a  day,  and  twopence  a 
day  for  a  boy  to  keep  them.  {Peil  Records^ 
iii.  163.)  In  the  following  October  he  was 
appointed  surveyor  of  the  works  at  the 
castle  and  in  the  park  of  Windsor,  with 
power  to  press  artincers  and  provide  mate- 
rials and  carrisges,  and  with  the  then  libe- 
ral payment  of  two  shillings  a  day  besides 
extra  allowances.  In  the  next  year  the 
sale  of  all  the  beasts  in  Windsor  Park  was 
committed  to  him  and  two  other  persons 
(^Ibid.  244) ;  and  in  1354  he  had  another 
royal  patent^  constituting  him  chief  custos 
and  supervisor  of  the  castles  of  Windsor 
and  Ledes,  and  of  the  manors  and  parks 
belonging  to  them.  During  this  period  he 
projected  and  aceomplished  those  splendid 
works  at  Windsor  Castle  which  at  this  da^v 
give  celebrity  to  his  name.  Q.ueenborough 
Castle,  erected  under  his  direction  between 
1361  and  1367,  showed  his  extraordinary 
skill  and  abilities  as  an  architect,  but  no 
longer  exists  as  an  example  of  them. 

This,  however,  is  not  tne  place  to  enlarge 
on  his  architectural  excellences,  although 
to  them,  and  bis  readiness  in  executing  the 
king's  magnificent  projects,  he  no  doubt 
primarily  owed  his  future  fortunes.  But 
we  know  too  much  of  Edward's  character 
to  suppose  that  these  alone  would  have 
been  sufiicient;  and  it  is  evident  that 
Wykeham  mu^t  have  exhibited  other  quali- 
fications of  greater  weight  to  have  sug- 
gested his  employment  in  the  important 
offices,  both  lay  and  ecclesiastical,  which 
he  was  called  upon  to  fill. 

It  seems  probable  that  Bishop  Edington 
induced  him  to  take  the  clerical  tonsure ; 
for  he  is  called  '  clericus '  as  early  as  1352, 
and  in  1350  the  kin^  describes  him  as 
'  clericum  suum/  showmg  he  was  then  one 
of  the  royal  chaplains.  He  was  not  or- 
dained priest  till  June  12,  1362.  Before 
this  he  nad  received  in  succession,  from  the 
king's  presentation,  tbA  t^RX&v)  <(:2l  ^>S^<«5^ 


i 


il  ■' 


770 


WYSEHAM 


in  Norfolk  in  1357;  the  prebend  of  Fliz- 
toD,  in  Lichfield  Cathedral,  in  13G9;  and 
in  the  next  jeta  tie  deeneir  of  St  MartinV  I 
le-Oraod  in  London.  Tbe  Inttor  he  re- 
tained for  three  years,  Aunna  which  he  g«ve 
the  firet  proof  of  his  liberwity  by  lebuild- 
ing  the  doisters  of  the  cbapter-houee  and 
the  body  of  iii6  church.  (Montutiam,  vi. 
1323.)  In  1363  he  became  srchdeacon  of 
Northampton,  which  he  exchanged  for  Ihnt 
of  Lincoln,  and  according;  to  Le  Neve  (156, 
16^,  167)  was  also  archdeacon  of  Suck- 
ingbam.  In  addition  to  these  beneficeB  he 
received  several  other  prebend*  and  livinirs, 
the  list  of  which  is  contained  in  the  certifi- 
cate delivered  in  October  1366,  by  virtue 
of  the  pope's  bull  requiring  a  return  of  all 
pluralities.  Tbe  Talue  of  the  whole  is 
stated  to  hare  amountsd  to  the  gnwa  sum 
of  S73f.  6s.  8d.,  an  enormous  provinon  in 
those  days,  even  on  the  assumption,  sug- 
gested by  Dr.  Lowtb,  that  he  held  high 
offices  in  the  state,  and  was  designed  for 
the  eftrliest  vacancy  on  the  episeopsl  bench. 
But  it  is  truly  said  that  he  only  received 
the  revenues  of  the  Church  with  one  hand 
to  expend  them  in  her  service  with  the 

During  this  period  he  had  been  appcouted, 
in  1361,  custoe  of  the  forests  south  of  the 
Trent,  in  conjunction  with  Peter  Attewode 
(Abb.  Sot.  Otig.  ii.  263):  and  on  April  2, 
1364,  he  is  described  as  holding  the  office 
of  keeper  of  the  privy  seal.  {Pdi  Recordt, 
iii.  182.)  Although  the  pope  addressee  him 
in  the  following'  June  sa  the  king's  secre- 
tary, be  did  not  fill  that  position  till  two 
years  afterwerda,  haldinff  it  with  the  privy 

seal,  which   he   retained  till   hr — 

pointed  chancellor.  In  186G  he 
the  commissionera  to  treat  of  the  ransom 
of  the  King  of  Scotland,  and  the  prolonga- 
tion of  the  truce  with  that  country;  and, 
besides  many  records  of  his  presence  in  the 
king's  council,  his  influence  with  hia  royal 
master  is  evidenced  by  the  expresuon  of 
Protssart,  that  at  this  time  '  everytbing  was 
done  by  him,  and  nothing  was  done  with- 
out him.'  In  bis  letters  of  pardi 
liichard  II.  he  is  described  as  being  at  that 
period  '  clericus  privati  Mgilli,  et  capitalis 
secret!  couailii,  «c  guberuator  magni  con- 
silii.'    (Jfo(.  P«W.  iii.  38».) 

The  death  of  Bishop  Ediogton  on  Octo- 
ber 7,  1366,  enabled  Kmg  Edward  to  gra- 
tify his  wishes  by  rewarding  Wykebam 
with  the  vacant  see  of  Winchester.  Before 
liis  consecration,  which  did  not  take  pli 
till  October  10,  1367.  he  was  constituted 
chancellor  in  the  place  of  Simon  Langham, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  The  date  of 
his  appointment  does  not  appear;  but  on 
September  l(i  ha  ia  so  called  in  a  grant  of 
free  warren  to  Archbishop  Islip. 

He  held  this  high  dignity  fur  three  years 
and    a.   half.     During    bis    -^— -■■'-- 


EingEdwar 
France,  whi 
years,  and  re 
advantage, 
opening  the 
by  the  omis 
ture,  which 
tbehabit  of  i 
and  by  his  i 
and  bunneai 
ment  of  the 
lucid  ezpoail 
sembling. 


of  the  kini; 
government 
flie  Church; 
for  a  lay  ehi 
by  redgning 
He  still, 
dence  of  hii 
with  him  it 
Duke  of  L« 
taking  advs 
suming  the 
When  the 
desperate  si 
effort  in  the 
break  this  p 
counril  then 
and  on  the  j 

Nosoonei 
than  the  du 
their  power, 
of  their  rese 

on  which  th 
proof  in  the 
as  to  cancell 
IromSM.  to 
Ketherfeld. 
temporal]  tie 
ir.tobeaei 
he  was  fort 
miles  of  the 
ing  thereon 
yO,  1377,  b' 
hearing,  altl 

bis  eiceptio. 
granted  to  a 
1  ubilee  of  th 
1  lament  the 
the  convoci 
Hummoned  l 
Archbishop 

which  the 
The  duke  i 
complying  " 
grant  the  ta 
the  Prince  o 


WYKfiHAM 

so  little  satiBfied  with  these  proceedings 
that  they  attacked  the  duke's  palace  and 
insulted  his  person,  refusing  to  desist  unless 
he  would  suffer  the  bishop  to  he  brought  to 
his  answer,  and  be  judged  according  to  law. 
The  effect  of  this  was  tne  restoration  of  the 
temporalities  on  June  18,  for  which,  how- 
ever, a  contribution  to  a  considerable 
amount  in  ships  and  men,  towards  the 
defence  of  the  kingdom,  was  demanded 
from  him.  The  totel  extent  of  his  dis- 
grace, therefore,  did  not  exceed  seven 
months. 

Three  days  afterwards  King  Edward 
died,  and  one  of  the  earliest  acts  of  the 
new  reign  was  to  pronounce  the  bishop's 
pardon  in  the  fullest  and  most  extensive 
terms,  declaring  him  wholly  innocent  and 

guiltless  of  all  the  matters  alleged  against 
im,  and  remitting  the  burdens  to  which 
he  had  been  subjected  {Rymar^  vii.  163),  a 
proceeding  which  was  ratified  and  confirmed 
Dv  the  petition  of  the  Commons  in  the  next 
parliament 

The  confidence  of  the  parliament  in  the 
bishop's  integrity  was  still  further  evinced, 
in  1380,  by  nis  being  appointed  one  of  the 
commissioners  to  enquire  into  the  abuses 
of  the  late  and  the  present  reigns,  and 
afterwards  to  investigate  the  causes  of  the 
great  insurrections  which  had  recently  dis- 
turbed the  kLngdom.  Indeed,  fais  influence 
with  both  the  Lords  and  the  Commons  is  ap- 
parent by  their  frequent  recurrence  to  him  on 
points  of  difficulty,  availing  themselves  of 
nis  wisdom  and  experience,  and  giving  to 
his  advice  that  weight  and  authority  which 
in  such  times  could  have  been  only  secured 
by  the  complete  reliance  they  had  on  lus 
honesty  and  prudence. 

Although  avoiding  as  much  as  possible 
any  unnecessary  interiference  in  state  affairs, 
0uch  was  his  reputation  that  in  the  sub- 
sequent contests  occasioned  by  the  extra- 
yagance  and  weakness  of  the  king,  the 
bishop  was  always  one  of  the  persons 
appointed  by  the  popular  party  to  check 
the  royal  prerogative  ana  control  the 
government  expenditure.  Yet  no  proof 
can  be  stronger  tbat,  in  the  exerclHe  of 
these  dutieB,  his  conduct  was  tempered 
with  mildness  and  moderation,  than  the 
fact  tliat  when  King  Kichard,  claiming 
the  rights  of  hia  majority,  took  the  govern- 
ment into  his  own  hands,  and  discharged 
the  officers  who  had  been  imposed  upon 
him,  he  compelled  the  bishop,  much  against 
his  inclination,  to  accept  the  office  of  chan- 
cellor, and  he  accordingly  received  the 
Great  Seal  for  a  second  time  on  May  4, 
1380. 

I  lis  first  step  was  to  quiet  the  appre- 
hensions which  naturally  arose  in  the 
People's  minds  on  the  hazardous  course  the 
ing  had  taken.  He  obtained  a  confirma- 
tion of  all  the  pardons  granted  for  the  late 


WYKEHAM 


771 


disturbances,  and  a  suspension  of  the  press- 
ing subsidies  that  had  been  imposed.  He 
announced  to  the  parliament  the  kmg's 
desire  to  preserve  peace,  to  secure  to  every 
rank  the  enioyment  or  its  privileges,  to 
cause  all  evils  to  be  redresseo,  and  justice 
and  right  to  be  administered  as  well  to  the 
poor  as  to  the  rich ;  and  he  acted  with  so 
much  caution  and  forbearance  that  the 
Commons,  on  his  resigning  the  Seid  into 
the  king's  hands,  expressed  their  appro- 
bation of  his  fidelity  and  good  conduct, 
upon  which  he  immediately  resumed  his 
functions. 

During  the  two  years  and  a  half  that  he 
retained  the  Great  Seal  he  had  the  happi- 
ness to  restore  the  public  tranquillity  so 
effectually  that  the  parliament  thanked  the 
kinff  for  his  good  government ;  and  could 
he  have  been  induced  to  remain  in  office, 
it  is  probable  that  his  wise  counsels  might 
have  checked  the  king's  intemperance,  and 
prevented  the  fatal  consequences  that  fol- 
lowed. He  finally  gave  up  the  Seal  on 
September  27,  1301,  and  never  appeared 
prominently  in  any  subsequent  political 
transaction  of  the  reiffn.  He  seems  to  have 
been  still  treated  with  respect  by  the  king, 
although  the  party  with  whom  he  had 
acted  incurred  the  royal  vengeance ;  but  as 
a  payment  for  this  escape  from  the  reaction 
by  which  his  friends  were  sacrificed,  a  loan 
of  1000/.  was  extorted  from  him,  which  he 
was  not  in  a  condition  safely  to  refuse. 

Kichard  II.  resigned  his  crown  on  Sep- 
tember 30,  1399,  and  Wykeham,  being 
then  very  far  advanced  in  years,  seems  no 
further  to  have  interfered  in  public  affairs. 
His  coming  infirmities  had  warned  him  to 
procure  a  bull  from  the  pope,  enabling  him 
to  appoint  one  or  more  coadjutors  to  per- 
form the  duties  of  his  diocese  when  he 
found  himself  incapable,  and  of  this  he 
occasionally  availed  himself  during  the  last 
two  years  of  his  life.  Still,  however,  he 
continued  to  transact  business  till  within 
four  days  of  his  death,  which  occurred  at 
South  vValtham  on  September  27,  1404, 
when  he  had  attained  the  full  age  of  eighty 
years.  He  was  buried  in  the  splendid 
oratory  in  the  cathedral,  which  he  had 
erected  in  the  very  place  where  he  had 
been  accustomed  to  perform  his  daily  de- 
votions in  his  youth. 

He  had  presided  over  the  see  of  Win- 
chester for  thirty-seven  years,  and,  notwith- 
standing his  almost  constant  employment 
in  the  public  service,  he  had  bevn  unre- 
mitting in  his  attention  to  his  episcopal 
duties,  and  in  preserving  the  rights  of  bis 
church.  He  lost  no  time  in  putting  all  the 
episcopal  buildings  into  substantial  repair, 
expending  therein  above  20,000  marks. 
He  corrected  the  abuses  of  the  various  re- 
ligious houses  in  his  diocese,  and  introduced 
a  complete  reform  in  the  hospital  of  St. 

3d2 


I 


772 


WYKEHAM 


CroM.  The  other  houses  Bubject  to  hiB 
TiBitation  submitted  to  bis  witlioiity,  snd 
gupprcssad  the  irregularities  which  he  di*- 

But  the  great  and  noble  object  of  bis  life 
was  to  found  sn  institution  for  the  educa- 
tion of  jouth,  with  the  intent  of  eupplyina 
the  defiL-ieticy  in  the  priesthood  occasioned 
by  the  Teceot  plagues,  which  were  etai  to 
have  swept  away  nine  parts  out  of  ten  of 
the  clergy.  The  earlier  jeare  of  his  pre- 
lacy were  occupied  in  a  careful  formation 
of  hie  pUns,  and,  having  fully  arranged 
them,  he  proceeded  to  take  measures  '* 
secure  their  execution.  He  determined 
erect  two  colleges — one  at  Wincheater,  the 

Iilace  of  his  own  education,  for  elementary 
earning ;  and  the  other  at  Oxford,  for  the 
completion  of  the  studies  and  for  the  pro- 
vision of  the  scholars.  He  commenced  the 
first  in  1373  by  establishing  a  temporary 
ecbool  at  Winchester  for  such  poor  scholars 
as  he  chose  to  send  there ;  and  he  prepared 
for  the  Ifist,  not  only  by  making  a  similar 
arrangement  at  Oxfonl  by  forming  a  society 
there  under  a  warden,  and  lodging  them  in 
various  parts  of  the  city,  but  by  gradually 
making  such  purchases  as  would  eventually 

Eut  him  in  poesession  of  the  site  which  be 
ad  tesolvea  on,  so  that  from  the  very  out- 
set he  was  devoting  his  income  to  this  wise 
and  charilable  punMse,  and  raising  a  supply 
of  occupnots  for  nis  Oxford  College  when 
it  was  finished. 

The  erection  of  the  latter  was  his 
care.  The  foundation  stone  of  New 
lege,  or  more  properly  of  St  Mary  College 
of  Winchester,  m  Oxford,  was  laid  on 
March  5,  13S0,  and  the  building  was 
finished  for  occupation  on  April  14,  1380. 
The  society  consisted  of  a  warden  and 
seventv  poor  scholars,  whose  studies  were 
speciaUy  regulated  by  statutes,  on  the  pre- 
{uration  of  which  he  bestowed  the  greatest 
attention  and  care.  These  were  aiuended 
by  him  at  various  subsequent  periods,  the 
last  of  which  was  in  1400,  and,  as  then 
enlarged,  they  still  remain  in  force. 

On  the  completion  of  this  building  be 
began  that  at  Winchester,  on  the  very  spot 
where  he  had  received  bis  own  education. 
The  first  stone  of  Si.  Mary  College  there 
was  laid  on  March  SC,  1387,  and  full 
possession  was  taken  on  March  28,  1383. 
ll  afforded  instruction  to  seventy  poor 
scholars,  and  was  governed  by  a  wanlen, 
wilh  ten  fellows,  and  other  officers  and 
masters.  The  stalutee  were  formed  in 
accordance  with  those  at  Oxford,  and  re- 
ceived similar  corrections  from  his  hand. 

Ilia  laws  were  found  so  practically  use- 
ful that  they  were  adopted  by  Henry 
Chicheley,  Archbishop  of  Canterburr,  one 
of  his  own  iK^holars,  in  the  foundation  of 
All  Souls'  College  at  Oxford,  and  after- 
Warda  by  K-ing  l^^^r^  ^'t-  in  the  colleges 


of  Eton  mi 
self  had  th< 
neasing  the 
both  his  ei 
from  those 

in  his  husi 

the  prefem 

leges,  whi( 
than  he  m 

necessary  ti 
magniGcenI 
remaining  I 
there  are  m< 
Willis  and 
of  the  An 
Chester,  1&! 
His  wiU 
ment,  and  i 
last  that  I 
anangemei 
able.  It  ii 
legacies  b* 
and  liberal. 
bad  a  claim 

meoibered, 
emplified  \ 
on  hia  beh 

In  this  dis] 

life,     Durii 

ing  his  ti 
relieving  th 
nificent  hoa 
repair  of  ch 
It  seems 

William  of 
doubt  soon 
prosperity- 


It  is  dilBcu 
seriously  bt 

worldly  ini 
elegant  bet 
or  that  he 
to  hold  hit 
truth  of  th 
the  questio) 
interpretati' 
in  which  th 
the  word  '  i 

at  the  ohsc 
could  not  hi 
dence  that 
the  active  i 


WYMBURN 

ment  of  his  earlier  jrears,  and  considering 
the  sacredness  of  his  profession,  and  the 
freauent  and  ostentatious  use  of  this  motto 
in  nis  educational  colleges — whether  it  is 
not  palpable  that  it  was  his  intention,  by 
its  aaoption,  to  inculcate  the  principle  that 
man's  success  and  estimation,  even  in  this 
world,  depended  not  on  his  birth,  or  his 
fortune,  or  his  talents,  but  on  his  conduct 
and  moral  worth.     {Life  by  Dr.  Lotcth,) 

WYXBUBK,  Walteb  db,  is  called  in  46 
Henry  III.,  1261,  the  king's  clerk,  but 
whetner  civil  or  ecclesiastic  is  uncertain. 
He  had  then  a  grant  of  the  king's  year  and 
a  day  on  some  land  which  had  been  es- 
cheated. (Excerpt,  e  Rot.  Fin,  ii.  363.) 
In  4  Edward  I.,  1276,  he  was  appointed  a 
judge  of  the  King's  Bench,  and  we  find 
nim  acting  in  the  same  character  as  late  as 
October  1288.  Spelman  {Gloss.  342)  erro- 
neously states  that  during  the  tenth  and 
thirteenth  years  of  the  reign  he  was  chief 
justice. 

wxkumDHAM,  Thomas  de,  was  ordered 
to  be  paid  thirty  shillings,  for  writing  thirty 
pair  of  statutes,  '  triginta  paria  statutorum,' 
to  be  sent  to  all  the  justices  in  eyre  and 
sheriflEs  throughout  the  realm,  and  also  four 
shillings  and  sixpence  for  the  parchment 
on  which  they  were  written.  (4  Report 
Pub.  Rec.,  App.  ii.  152.)  In  42  Henry  III., 
1258,  he  is  inserted  in  Madox's  fist  of 
barons  of  the  Exchequer,  and  Dugdale 
mentions  his  appointment  as  treasurer  of 
the  Exchequer  m  the  same  year.  In  50 
Henry  IH.  ne  was  addressed  oy  that  title, 
and  the  king  granted  to  him  the  first 
wardship  that  should  fall  in  worth  60/.  a 
year,  together  with  the  marriage  of  the 
heir,  unless  he  should  first  provide  him 
with  some  dignity,  prebend,  or  benefice  of 
the  annual  value  of  200  marks.  In  less 
than  two  years  he  accordingly  received  the 
precentorship  of  Lichfield,  being  first  so 
called  in  a  record  of  52  Henry  III.  This 
is  the  last  year  in  which  he  is  described  as 
treasurer,  but  according  to  Le  Neve  (128) 
he  was  alive  in  1275,  3  Edward  I.  (5 
Report  Pub,  Rec.,  App,  ii.  63 ,  Madox,  ii. 
42,  48,  52, 186,  307,  319.) 

WYAHHAM,  Francis,  belonged  to  a 
branch  of  an  ancient  family  which  took  its 
surname  from  the  town  so  called  in  Norfolk, 
and  which  have  been  distinguished  from  the 
reign  of  Edward  II.  both  in  the  council  and 
the  field.  Sir  Thomas,  of  Felbrigge  and 
Crounthorpe,  the  grandfather  of  the  judge, 
was  vice-admiral  to  Henry  VIIL ;  and  Sir 
Edmund,  his  father,  while  sheriff  of  Norfolk 
in  2  Edward  VI.,  was  active  in  suppress- 
ing Ket's  insurrection.  His  mother  was 
Susan,  daughter  of  Sir  Roger  Townsend,  of 
Raynham. 

After  an  education  at  Cambridge  he  pro- 
secuted his  legal  studies  at  Lincoln's  Inn, 
and,  becoming  a  bencher  there  in  1569,  was 


WYNDHAM 


773 


appointed  a  reader  in  1572,  in  which  year 
he  represented  the  county  of  Norfolk.  He 
was  elected  recorder  of  Norwich  in  1576, 
and  in  Michaelmas  Term  of  the  following 
year  was  called  to  the  degree  of  the  coIl 
The  precise  date  of  his  becoming  a  judge  of 
the  Common  Pleas  is  not  stated,  but  tiie 
first  fine  acknowledged  before  him  as  a 
judge  is  dated  in  October  1579.  (IhigdMs 
Grig.  48,  253.) 

He  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the  judges 
in  the  commission  for  hearing  causes  in 
Chancery  in  the  interval  between  November 
1591  and  May  1592. 

His  death  occurred  at  hi?  house  at  Nor- 
wich in  July  1592.  Over  his  remains,  in 
the  church  of  St.  Peter's  Mancroft  in  that 
city,  was  erected  a  stately  monument,  on 
which  he  is  represented  in  his  j  iidge's  robes, 
and  in  the  Gold-hall  of  that  city  there  is  a 
picture  of  him  as  recorder. 

By  his  wife,  a  daughter  of  Sir  Nicholas 
Bacon,  the  lord  keeper,  he  left  no  issue. 
(Biomefieid's  Norwich,  i.  369,  ii.  221  j  4  Re- 
poH.  Ab.  Rec.,  App.  i.  272,  273.) 

WYNDHAM,  Hugh.  SirJohn  Wyndham, 
the  unde  of  the  aboye  Francis  Wyndham, 
was  not  only  the  progenitor  of  this  and  the 
next-named  judge,  but  also  of  three  baro- 
netcies, all  of  which  are  now  extinct. 

Hugh  Wyndham  was  the  sixth  son  of  Sir 
John,  of  Orchard- Wjmdham  in  Somerset- 
shire, and  of  Felbrigge  in  Norfolk,  knight, 
by  Joan,  the  daughter  of  Sir  Henry  Port- 
man.  He  was  bom  about  1603,  and  re- 
ceived his  legal  education  at  Lincoln's  Inn, 
where  he  was  called  to  the  bar  on  June  16, 
1629.  Though  his  practice  as  an  advocate 
is  not  recorded,  he  had  acquired  in  1654 
sufiicient  reputation  as  a  lawyer  to  be  dig- 
nified with  the  coif,  and  to  be  sent  as  a 
temporary  judge  on  the  Northern  Spring 
Circuit,  ana  afterwards  to  be  raised  to  the 
bench  of  the  Common  Pleas  by  Cromwell, 
notwithstanding  his  objection  to  act  under 
the  protector's  commission.  Whitelocke 
states  that  he  was  appointed  on  May  30, 
1654,  and  was  re-appointed  on  November  27, 
1658,  on  the  accession  of  Richard  Cromwell 
to  the  protectorship.  In  July  1669  and  in 
January  1660  Whitelocke  again  records  his 
appointment,  the  former  being  at  the  re- 
sumption of  the  Long  Parliament,  and  the 
latter  after  the  dissolution  of  the  committee 
of  safety  and  the  rearrangement  of  the  courte 
in  consequence  of  the  resignation  of  Chief 
Justice  Glynne.  (  Whitelocke, 591, 676, 681, 
693 ;  Burt<m,  ii.  340,  438.) 

The  restoration  of  Charles  of  course  put 
an  end  to  Wyndham's  judicial  functions; 
but  he  was  immediately  confirmed  in  his 
degree  of  seijeant-at-law.  In  this  cha- 
racter he  resumed  his  practice,  until  eighteen 
months  after  the  death  ot  his  voungep 
brother,  the  next-noticed  Judge  Wadham 
Wjmdham,  when,  on  June  20,  1670,  h© 


774 


WYNDHAM 


wft8  promoted  to  the  bench  as  baron  of 
the  Lxchequer,  and  received  the  customs^ 
honour  of  Knighthood.  On  January  22, 
1673,  he  was  removed  to  the  Common  Pleas. 
In  neither  court  did  he  particularly  distin- 
guish himself,  not  interfering  much  in  those 
trials  arising  out  of  the  Popish  Plot  in  which 
he  was  among  the  presiaing  judges.  He 
died  at  Norwich  while  engaged  on  the  cir- 
cuit on  July  27, 1084,  in  his  eighty-second 
year,  having  sat  on  the  bench,  during  the 
Commonwealth  and  since  the  Restoration, 
for  twenty  years.  His  monument  at  Silton 
in  Dorsetshire  records  the  names  of  his  three 
wives — viz.,  Jane,  daughter  of  Sir  Thomas 
"Wood house,  of  Kimberley,  Norfolk,  Bart. ; 
Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Sir  William  Minn, 
of  Woodcott,  Surrey,  and  widow  of  Sir 
Henry  Berkeley,  of  Wimondham,  Leicester- 
shire, Burt ;  and  Katherine,  daughter  of 
Thonins  Fleming,  of  North  Stoneham,  Hants, 
and  widow  of  Sir  Edward  Hooper,  of  Bove- 
ridge,  Dorsetshire.  By  the  iirst  of  these  only 
he  left  issue.  (1  Siderfin^  3, 466 ;  Hutchinis 
Dorset,  ii.  145,  324.) 

WTHDHAM,  Wadham,  the  younger 
brother  of  the  above,  received  his  baptismal 
name  from  his  grandmother,  Florence, 
daughter  of  John  Wadham,  Esq.,  of  Merri- 
field  in  Somersetshire,  descended  from  the 
before-mentioned  judge  of  the  Common 
Pleas  of  that  name  in  the  reign  of  Richard  U. 

He  was,  like  his  brother,  a  member  of 
Ijincoln*8  Inn,  and  was  called  to  the  bar  on 
May  17, 1(>3(>.  His  name  appears  in  several 
law  reports  during  the  time  of  the  Com- 
monwealth, and  he  was  one  of  the  advocates 
who  were  imprisoned  for  pleading  the  cause 
of  Cony,  as  related  in  the  life  of  Judge 
Twisden,  and  who,  like  him,  could  not  pro- 
cure his  release  until  he  had  petitioned  the 
protector.  Not  receiving  the  coif  under 
Cromwell's  government,  he  was  selected  as 
one  of  the  fourteen  who  were  summoned  to 
be  Serjeants  a  month  after  the  Restoration, 
having  been  previously  called  upon  to 
consult  with  the  judges  at  Serjeants'  Inn, 
Fleet  Street,  with  respect  to  the  proceedings 
against  the  regicides,  he  being  one  of  the 
counsel  engaged  in  the  prosecution.  (\  Sider- 
Jin,  4 ;  Kelyng,  7 ;  State  Triais,  v.  1023.) 

At  the  end  of  these  trials  he  was,  on  No- 
vember 24,  1660,  promoted  to  be  a  judge  of 
the  King's  Bench^  in  which  court  he  sat  for 
eight  years.    During  the  whole  of  that  time, 
according  to  the  evidence  of  his  contem- 
poraries, he  maintained  a  high  character  for 
leaminff  and  impartiality.     Siderfin  (393) 
says  of  him  that  he  was  of  'great  discretion, 
especially  in  his  calm  and  sedate  temper 
upon  the  bench ; '  that  he  was  '  in  fdl  re- 
spects well  qualified  for  the  place ;'  and  that 
he  held  it  for  several  years  'to  the  great 
satisfaction  of  those  at  the  bar  and  others.* 
Sir  Thomas  BAymon^  ^14^  calU  him  a 


WYTHENS 

Hawlea,  solicitor-general  in  the  reign  of 
William  III.,  speucs  of  him  as  the  ^  aeoond 
best  jadge  which  sat  in  Westminster  Hsll 
since  the  king's  restoration.'  {State  Tnakj 
ix.  1008.) 

He  died  on  December  24, 1668,  at  which 
time  he  was  seated  at  Norrington  in  Wilt- 
shire. By  his  wife,  Barbara,  daughter  of 
Sir  Qeoi^  Clarke,  of  Watford,  North- 
amptonshire, he  left  a  large  family,  whoee 
descendants  still  flourish  in  various  counties 
and  promise  a  long  continuance  of  the  name. 
Thomas,  one  of  his  grandsons,  was,  like  him, 
a  distinguished  lawyer,  and  being  made, 
first,  chief  justice  of  the  Common  Pleas  in 
Ireland,  ana  then  lord  chancellor  there,  vafl 
raised  to  the  peerage  of  that  kingdom,  hy 
the  title  of  Baron  Wyndham  of  fln^lasfi,  in 
1731,  but,  leaving  no  children  at  his  death 
in  1745,  the  title  oecame  extinct. 

WTHFOBD,  Ix)RD.     See  W.  D.  Best. 

WYHTOH,  Eli  AS  de.  The  error  i^hich 
Dugdale  has  committed  in  introducing  him 
as  a  baron  of  the  Engliah,  instead  (^  the 
Irish,  Exchequer,  is  expUoned  under  the 
name  of  Richard  de  Saham. 

WTTHSH8,  Frakcis,  was  of  a  familjr 
originally  settled  in  Cheshire,  but,  migrating 
to  uie  south,  one  of  them,  Robert  W jthena, 
became  an  alderman  of  London.  His  elde^ 
son,  Sir  William,  was  sheriff  of  Kent  in 
1610,  and  dying  in  1630,  his  residence  tt 
Southend  in  the  parish  of  Eltham  wis  in 
the  possession  of  this  judge  at  the  time  of 
his  death  in  1704 ;  but  whether  he  inhefited 
it  as  the  son,  or  grandson,  or  nephew  of  Sii 
William  is  uncertain.  (Hatted,  L  SOI, 
478.) 

The  earliest  notice  of  him  is  as  high 
steward  of  the  Franchise  Court  of  West- 
minster, and  as  a  successful  candidate  for  that 
city  in  October  1679,  but  the  opening  of  pu^ 
liament  was  deferred  by  seven  prarogttioos 
to  October  in  the  following  year,  when  his 
return  was  disputed  by  Sir  William  Waller 
and  Sir  William  Pulteney.    In  the  inteml 
numerous  petitions  having  been  presented 
to  the  king  praying  for  the  meeting  of  pu- 
liament,  which  were   met  by  counters- 
dresses  expressing  abhorrence  of  the  pr•^ 
tices  of  the  petitioners  as  inteorferingwith 
the  king^s  prerogative,  Wythens  tM  an 
active  part  m  getting  up  the  latter,  and  oa 
presenting  one  from  the  grand  inqoest  of 
the  city  of  Westminster  ne  recared  the 
honour  of  knighthood  on  April  18,  161^ 
As  soon  as  the  parliament  met  in  Octohef; 
Sir  Francis,  as  a  member,  was  the  fint 
who  was  charged  with  the  fact  as  an  oSea» 
against  the  rights  of  the  people ;  and  nfm 
evidence  taken  and  his  own  cunfean  hi 
was  ordered  to  be  expelled  the  hMK  ■! 
to  receive  his  sentence  on  his  kv* 
bar.     The  speaker  accoidinff** 
him  in  these  terma :  *  Ton,  b 


good   and  prudent  maii;  vxi^.  ^Vt  ^^\i\\iw^  ^SSss^^  a^ujist  yoor  c 


WYTHENS 

you  have  offended  against  yourself,  your 
own  right,  your  own  liberty,  as  an  Eng- 
lishman. This  is  not  onl^  a  crime  against 
the  living,  but  a  crime  against  those  unborn. 
You  are  dismembered  from  this  body.'  This 
castigation  must  have  been  doubly  painful 
to  the  recipient,  inasmuch  as  only  a  few 
days  after  the  committee  on  the  petition 
against  his  return  reported  that  he  was  not 
duly  elected.  {LtdtreU,  i.  41 ;  Commoru* 
JournaU.) 

Soon  after  his  election  for  Westminster 
he  was  engaged  as  counsel  to  defend  Thomas 
Knox  on  an  indictment  against  him  and 
John  Lane  fur  a  conspiracy  to  defame  the 
notorious  witnesses  to  tne  Popish  Plot,  Titus 
Oates  and  William  Bedlowe,  when,  though 
his  client  was  not  acquitted,  he  was  let  off 
with  a  more  merciful  judgment  than  Chief 
Justice  Scroggs  was  accustomed  to  pro- 
nounce. Sir  Francis  also  assisted  in  the 
prosecution  of  Henry  Carr  for  a  libel  in  pub- 
lishing *  The  Weekly  Packet  of  Advice  from 
Kome,'  exposing  some  of  the  tricks  of  Popery. 
The  chief^  justice  was  called  to  account  by 
the  parliament  for  his  conduct  on  both  of 
these  trials,  and  was  removed  from  his  office. 
Under  his  successor,  Sir  Francis  was  em- 
ployed bv  the  crown  in  the  cases  of  Edward 
Fitzharris,  the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury,  and 
Count  Coningsmark  (^State  Trials^  vii.  801, 
1 126,  viii.  269, 1125,  ix.  16).  and  on  all  these 
occasions  he  acted  the  part,  if  not  of  an  able, 
of  an  intelligent  advocate. 

He  was  made  a  judge  of  the  King*s 
Bench  on  April  23,  1G83,  and  concurred  in 
the  following  term  in  the  judgment  against 
the  charter  of  the  city  of  London.  In  the 
other  prosecutions  during  the  life  of  King 
Charles  in  which  he  acted  as  one  of  the 
judges,  though  there  is  nothing  harsh  or 
violent  in  his  observations  or  his  language 
towards  the  parties  on  their  trials,  he  was 
evidently,  as  Roger  North  describes  him, 
so  weak  and  timid  a  man  that  he  had  not 
the  courage  to  differ  from  his  more  resolute 
chiefs.  Consequently  he  assented  to  all  the 
iniquitous  judgments  that  disgraced  that 
penod,  and  incurred  a  larger  share  of 
odium  than  the  other  judges,  from  his 
being,  according  to  the  form  of  the  court, 
the  mouthpiece  which  pronounced  most  of 
the  sentences.  Evelyn  (iii.  104)  is  indig- 
nant that  Sir  Francis  was  at  a  city  wedding 
on  December  6,  1083,  when  he  and  Chief 
Justice  Jeffreys  danced  with  the  bride  and 
were  exceeding  merry,  spending  '  the  rest 
of  the  afternoon  till  eleven  at  night  in 
drinking  healths,  taking  tobacco,  and  talking 
beneath  the  gravity  of  judges  who  had  a 
day  or  two  before  condemned  Mr.  Algernon 
Sidney.'  But,  instead  of  *  a  day  or  two,'  the 
trial  had  taken  place  a  fortnight  before  this 
time,  and  it  is  most  probable  that  Evelyn's 
disgust  at  the  verdict  influenced  his  opi- 
nion as  to  the  private  conduct  of  the  judges. 


WYTHER 


775 


Without  approving  the  prevalent  levity  of 
the  time,  we  must  think  it  rather  hard 
upon  judges  to  expect  that  they  should 
assume  a  solemn  aspect  because  they  had 
presided  at  a  capital  conviction  a  fortnight 
before. 

On  Charies's  death,  in  February  1686,  Sir 
Francis  received  a  new  patent,  and  in  the 
following  November  was  elected  recorder 
of  Kingston-on-Thames.  He  accompanied 
Chief  Justice  Jeffreys  in  his  bloody  cam- 
paign after  the  Duke  of  Monmouth's  rebel- 
lion, and  continued  for  two  years  to  exercise 
his  judicial  functions  with  his  accustomed 
pliancy,  till  a  sudden  boldness,  or  a  pro- 
phetic pohcy,  prompted  him  to  unite  with 
Chief  Justice  Herbert  in  denying  that  the 
king  could  exercise  martial  law  in  time  of 
peace  without  an  act  of  parliament.  The 
consequence  was  his  immediate  discharge 
from  his  office  on  April  21, 1087,  the  punish- 
ment usually  inflicted  by  King  James  on 
the  slightest  non-compliance  with  his  will. 
Shower  reports  (ii.  408)  that  on  the  next 
day  he  came  to  Westminster  Hall  and 
practised  as  a  Serjeant,  which  seems  to  evi- 
dence his  reliance  on  the  popularity  of  his 
decision. 

As  this  sole  instance  of  his  insubordina- 
tion was  too  great  to  be  overlooked  by 
James,  so  it  was  too  little  to  plead  in  his 
favour  in  the  next  reign,  for  he  was  one  of 
the  thirty-one  persons  who  were  excepted 
out  of  the  Act  of  Indemnity.  Before  this 
bill  was  passed  there  had  been  yarious 
debates  in  the  House  of  Commons  {Pari, 
Hist,  y.  388)  relating  to  trials  in  which 
Judge  Wythens  had  been  concerned  as  one 
of  the  judges,  and  many  of  the  iud^ments 
and  decisions  had  been  declared  arbitrary 
and  illegal ;  but  the  principal  matter  urged 
against  him  was  his  concurrence  in  the 
opinion  in  favour  of  the  king's  dispensing 
power.  Beyond  the  insertion  of  his  name 
in  the  act,  it  does  not  appear  that  he  was 
visited  with  any  penalty,  except  removal 
from  the  recordership  of  Kingston.  He 
survived  his  discharge  till  1704,  when  he 
died  at  his  family  seat  at  Eltham,  and  was 
buried  in  the  church  there  on  May  12. 

Sir  Francis  married  Elizabeth,  sbter  of 
Sir  Thomas  Taylor,  of  Parkhouse,  Bart., 
who,  if  the  account  given  by  Mrs.  Manley 
in  the  ^  New  Atalantis '  (ii.  267)  is  to  be 
credited,  though  clever  and  witty,  brought 
no  comfort  to  her  husband,  and  acquired 
for.  herself  a  very  bad  reputation.  That 
she  involved  him  in  expenses  for  the  pur- 
pose of  putting  him  in  prisoc  appears  from 
an  action  brought  against  him  in  1093  for 
extravagant  outlay  in  dresses,  &c.,  which 
he  was  obliged  to  pay.  After  his  death 
she  married  Sir  Thomas  Colepeper,  of  Ayles- 
ford,  Bart.  (jyoUons  Baronet,  i.  218. 
Skinner,  348  )  ' 

WTTHEB,  William,  seems  to  have  been 


776 


WYVILLE 


merely  a  justice  itiDerant  for  pleas  of  the 
forest  in  Liucashire  in  16  Edward  L,  1287. 
The  only  legal  or  judicial  character  in  which 
he  afterwards  appears  is  as  the  last  named  ' 
of  four  commissioners  appointed  in  35  Ed- 
ward I.  to  hear  and  determine  a  cause  in 
North  Wales  between  the  Earl  of  Arundel 
and  others.     (Rot.  Pari,  i.  206.) 

WYVILLB,  John  db,  is  placed  by  Dug- 
dale  among  the  barons  of  the  Exchequer 
in  37  Henry  III.,  1253 ;  but  he  perhaps  sat 
there  as  one  of  the  justices  of  tne  Jews,  in 
which  character  he  is  named  by  Madox 
(ii.  318)  among  the  barons  two  jears  pre- 
viouflly.  He  was  constituted  a  justice  (of 
the  Common  I^leaA  according  to  Dugdale) 
on  February  1,  1256,  from  which  time  till 


YATES 

ft 

February  1263  he  was  present  at  the 
acknowledgment  of  fines.  In  an  undated 
letter  he  begs  the  king  to  excuse  him  from 
the  office  of  justice  of  Oyer  and  Terminer 
on  account  of  his  bodily  infirmity  and  po- 
verty ;  but  he  acted  on  the  iters  m  4D,  44, 
and  47  Henry  UL  (DuffdaleU  Grig.  43 ; 
Excrn^.  e  Rat.  Fin.  iL  280^391 ;  bRefui 
JM.  Kecy  App.  ii.  75.) 

His  death  may  be  fixed  aboat  the  Istter 
year.  His  property  was  in  Hampshire.  If 
the  baronetcy  of  Wyville  in  lorUiire 
(extinct  in  i774)  was  derived  from  his 
bneage.  the  family  still  survives  at  Burton 
Constable,  tracing  its  descent  from  Hum- 
phrey de  W^U,  of  Slingsby  Castle,  who 
came  over  with  the  Conqueror. 


Y 


TATS8,  Joseph,  descended  from  an  old 
ci>unty  family  of  Ijancashire.  His  grand- 
father and  father,  both  named  Joseph 
Yates,  resided  at  Stanley  House  in  that 
county,  in  which  the  former  was  a  magis- 
trate, and  the  latter  high  sheriff  in  1728. 
In  1730  he  became  possessed,  under  the 
will  of  a  relation,  of  the  estate  of  Peel 
Hall,  near  Manchester,  with  its  large  beds 
of  coal,  involving  so  great  an  expenditure 
that  his  means  were  eventually  reduced, 
and  his  affairs  seriously  embarrassed.  By 
his  marriafre  with  £llen,  daughter  of  Wil- 
liam Maghull  of  Maghull,  he  had  two  sons, 
the  younger  of  whom  was  the  future  judge. 

Joseph  Yates  was  bom  in   1722,  and 
from  tne  grammar  school  of  Manchester 
he  went  to  Queen^s  College,  Oxford,  where 
he  could  not  have  continued,  owing  to  his 
father's  difficulties,  had  it  not  been  for  the 
timely  assistance  of  his  relative  Mr.  Ser- 
jeant Bootle,  who  generously  stepped  for- 
ward and  enabled  him  to  finish  his  course 
at  the  university,  and  to  pursue  his  legal 
studies.   For  this  purpose  he  entered  Staple 
Inn,  on   the  south  window  of  the  hall  of 
which  society  his  arms  may  still  be  seen. 
From  Staple  Inn  he  removed  to  the  Inner 
Temple,  and  practised  as  a  special  pleader 
from  Michaelmas  1748  till  July  1753,  when 
he  was  called  to  the  bar.     Here  he  rapidly 
rose  in  reputation,  and  acquired  a  practice 
eo  large  that  his  fee-book  records  a  profit 
of  2318/.   in  one  year.    He  had  general 
retainers  for  the  corporation  of  Liverpool, 
for  Greenwich  Hospital,  and  for  the  East 
India  Company,  and  was  employed  by  the 
crown  in  the  militia  riots  ot  1758,  and  in 
the  proceedings  against  John  Wilkes  in 
1763.     But  the  only  legal  rank  which  he 
received  before  his  elevation  to  the  bench 
was  that  of  king's  counsel  for  the  duchy  of 
L#ancaster  in  June  1761.    His  labours  re- 


quired fre<}uent  and  intense  applicsfion, 
and  when  it  became  burthensome  he  was 
in  the  habit  of  relieving  himself  by  read- 
ing a  few  pages  in  Dean  Swift*s  works, 
which  always  sent  him  back  cheerfully  to 
his  studies.  On  some  extraordinary  suc- 
cess in  1760  he  was  presented  with  a  silver 
vase,  now  preserved  in  the  fiuuily,  bearing 
the  following  inscription  : — '  Junsooosolto 
perito,  Jose^o  Yates,  ob  auxilium  insigne 
legum  cognitoribus  prsestitum,  Grati  Ch- 
entes  D.D.D.' 

So  remarkable  were   his   lesal  sttsin- 
ments  that  when  he  bad  been  little  more 
than  ten  years  at  the  bar  he  was  offered  a 
judgeship  of  the  King*8  Bench,  which  with 
considerable  reluctance  he  was  prevailed  on 
to  accept  on  January  23,  17o4,  when  he 
receiveu  the  custonuuy  honour  of  knijjht- 
hood.    In  February  1766  the  chancellor- 
ship of  Durham  was  added.     He  ventured 
sometimes  to  differ  from  his  noble  chief. 
Lord  Mansfield,  who  chafed  so  much  under 
any  opposition  of  opinion  that  Sir  Josenh, 
to  avoid  his  lordship's  covert  sarcasms,  de- 
termined to  take  the  first  opportunitr  to 
leave  his  court.   This  resolution  is  the  snb- 
ject  of  strong  observation  in  Juniu8*8  £nt 
letter  to  Lord  Mansfield.     On  the  respiA- 
tion  of  Mr.  Justice  Clive  in  Februsiy  1770 
he  induced  Sir  William   Blackstone,  for 
whom  the  place  was  designed,  to  exchso^ 
it  for  the  King's  Bench.     He  thus  obtained 
his  removal  to  the  Common  Pleas  on  Fe- 
bruary 16,  1770,  preferring  the  quiet  of  a 
junior  seat  in  that  court  to  the  uoeeeBlf 
contests  in  which  bis  continuance  in  tki 
senior  place  in  the  King*s  Bench  seeai^ 
likely  to  involve  him.     Not  kog  ^  ^ 
enjoy  the  benefit  he  antidpatad 
four  months  his  mortal  carp<^ 
nated.    He  died  on  June  7,  "^ 
lected  cold  fiJling  on  hii 


YATTINDEN 

buried  at  Cheam  in  Surrey,  where  he  had  a 
house.  {Blackdone's  IteporU,  450, 681, 714.) 
He  was  universally  acknowledged  to  be  a 
most  able  and  learned  judge ;  and  the 
points  on  which  he  didered  from  Lord 
Mansfield  were  subsequently  recognised  as 
ffood  law.  and  confirmed  by  the  House  of 
Lords.  Of  his  inflexible  integrity  a  story 
was  circulated,  that  he  returned  a  letter 
brought  to  him  from  the  king  unopened, 
the  minister  having  already  tamperea  with 
him  in  vain  previous  to  some  trials  involv- 
ing the  rights  of  the  crown.  Though  the 
Erecise  details  of  this  transaction  are  not 
nown,  there  seems  too  good  reason  to  be- 
lieve that  the  fact  occuired,  as  it  was  pub- 
licly stated  in  parliament  by  Alderman 
Townshend  soon  after  the  judge's  death, 
and,  though  repeated  by  another  speaker, 
remained  uncontradicted'  by  anv  member  of 
the  administration.  (Pari,  Hut.  xvi.  1228, 
1296.)  It  teUs  well  however  for  Lord 
North,  that  soon  after  the  death  of  Sir 
Joseph  he  called  on  Lady  Yates,  and,  after 
saying  much  that  was  most  gratifying  to 
her  and  complimentary  to  the  deceased, 
delicately  enquired  into  her  circumstances. 
The  visit  concluded  by  his  saying  that  *  the 
widow  of  so  great  a  man  ought  not  to  be  left 
with  so  small  a  provision,'  and,  regretting 
that  the  funds  at  his  disposal  would  not 
admit  of  his  offering  more,  asked  whether 
a  pension  of  200A  a  year  would  be  worth 
her  acceptance — ^a  graceful  act  in  the  go- 
vernment, and  a  flattering  testimony  of  the 
estimation  in  which  he  was  held  b^  a  court 
whose  temptations  he  had  the  virtue  and 
the  courage  to  resist  Another,  less  deli- 
cate, but  more  significant,  proof  of  his  gene- 
ral reputation  appeared  at  the  time  in  the 
following  lines : — 

Hadst  thou  bbt  t«*eii  each  other  Jodge, 

Grim  Death,  to  Pluto*8  gates. 
Thou  niight*8t  have  done  't  without  a  grudge, 

Hadst  thou  but  left  ua  Yates. 

In  his  private  life  he  was  most  amiable  and 
considerate.  He  commenced  his  career 
under  great  pecuniary  difficulties,  and  con- 
siderable feebleness  of  constitution,  but 
from  the  time  of  his  leaving  college  he  was 
able  by  his  industry  to  contribute  largely 
to  his  father's  comfort,  and  the  advance- 
ment of  his  brother's  children.  One  of  his 
weaknesses  was  a  great  attention  to  his 
dress,  by  which  he  acquired  the  character 
of  being  'a  fine  gentleman,'  and  was  the 
subject  of  some  ludicrous  stories. 

At  his  father's  decease  he  succeeded  to 
the  estate  of  Peel  Hall ;  and  at  his  own  he 
left  one  son  and  one  daughter,  by  his  wife, 
Elizabeth,  daughter  and  coheir  of  Charles 
Baldwyn  of  Munslow  in  Shropshire,  a  lady 
of  very  ancient  Scotch  descent 

YATTIHDEK,  Nicholas  de,  had  writs  of 
assize  addressed  to  him  from  September 
1270,  to  August  1271,  54  and  56  Henry 


YELVERTON 


777 


HI, ;  and  in  the  next  year  a  record  of  a  trial 
before  him  '  et  sociis  suis '  occurs,  in  which 
he  is  called  'justic.  domini  regis.'  In  30 
Henry  IH.  he  was  pardoned  5o«.  2^d.  out 
of  the  issues  of  the  lands  of  Stephen  de 
Hampton,  the  custody  of  which  he  had  till 
the  heir  was  of  age ;  and  in  53  Henry  III. 
the  castle  and  forest  of  Windsor  with  other 
manors  were  placed  in  his  charge.  He 
married  Aliva,  the  widow  of  Henry  de 
Bathonia,  and  died  in  1  Edward  L  pos- 
sessed of  considerable  property  in  Berksnire 
and  Norfolk.  (Eji'cerpi,  e  BoL  Fin,  ii.  141, 
522^546;  Abb.  FiacU,  183;  Blame/Ufid's 
Norfoik,  i.  186  ;  Cal,  Inq.  p.  m.  i.  48,  61.) 

TELYEBTOH,  William,  belonged  to  an 
ancient  family  established  in  the  reign  of 
Edward  U.  in  Norfolk,  but  apparently 
previously  settled  in  Dorsetshire.  He  wns 
the  son  of  John  Yelverton,  of  Rackheath 
in  the  former  county,  recorder  of  Norwich 
in  1403,  by  his  second  wife,  Elizabeth, 
daughter  and  heir  of  John  Bead,  of 
Bougham,  and  widow  of  Robert  Clere,  of 
Stokesby.  He  is  stated  to  have  been  a 
reader  in  Gray's  Inn,  and  was  called  to  the 
degree  of  serjeant-at-law  in  Michaelmas, 
18  Henry  VI.,  1439.  In  1427  he  was  one 
of  the  justices  of  the  peace  in  Norwich ; 
and  he  held  the  office  of  recorder  of  that 
city  from  1433  to  1460. 

In  the  parliament  of  14  Henry  Vl.  he 
was  returned  as  member  for  Yarmouth ; 
but  after  his  attainment  of  the  coif  it  does 
not  appear  that  he  was  again  elected. 

He  was  appointed  a  judge  of  the  Kincr's 
Bench  some  time  in  1443,  21  Henry  Vl. 
(CW.  Rot,  Pat.  286),  and  sat  there  till  the 
deposition  of  that  monarch.  Edward  IV. 
not  only  continued  him  in  his  place,  but 
created  him  a  knight  of  the  Bath  previous 
to  the  coronation. 

It  seems  probable,  indeed,  that  soon  after 
Edward's  accession  he  was  suspected  of 
some  implication  in  the  late  king's  affairs, 
as  we  are  told  by  one  of  the  Paston  lettero 
(i.  131,  160,  172)  that  a  privy  seal  had 
come  to  him  requiring  his  presence  at  court, 
and  that  he  refused  to  go ;  and  in  a  subse- 
quent letter  we  hear  that  he  and  Jenney 
'  are  like  for  to  be  greatly  punished,  for  be- 
cause they  came  not  to  the  idng.'  He  how- 
ever must  have  succeeded  in  excusing  him- 
self, since  he  still  remained  on  the  bench 
when  Henry  VI.  was  replaced  on  the  throne. 
Although  that  luckless  kin^  included  him 
in  the  new  patents  appointing  the  judges 
on  October  0,  1470,  Yelverton  appears  to 
have  again  fallen  under  suspicion,  as  Sir 
John  Paston,  on  November  15,  desires  his 
brother  to  tell  him  '  that  he  may  not  appear 
of  a  while  in  no  wise,'  and  promises  to  send 
him  word  when  he  may.  (Ibid.  iL  57.) 
The  Year  Book,  however,  proves  that  he 
acted  as  a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench  dor* 
ing  some  part  of  the  short  restoration. 


778 


YELVERTON 


Whether  he  died  or  not  in  that  hrief  in- 
terval is  uncertain ;  but  on  the  return  of 
Edward  IV.  hiB  name  was  omitted  from  the 
list  of  the  King's  Bench  judges  then  ap- 
pointed, and  no  subsequent  mention  of  him 
occurs.  Weever  (821)  gives  the  inscription 
on  his  monument  at  Kougham,  but  unfor- 
tunately the  date  of  his  death  is  omitted. 
On  it  he  is  described  '  quondam  Justic  dum. 
Regis  de  suo  Banco/  wliich  would  seem  to 
implv  that  he  was  not  so  at  the  time  of  his 
death. 

The  brave  and  slandered  knight  Sir  John 
Fastolf  was  Sir  William  Yelverton*s  early 
natron  and  lasting  friend  till  his  death. 
There  is  a  letter  from  Sir  William  to  him, 
praving  his  interference  with  the  king,  the 
loni  chancellor,  and  other  lords,  in  case  any 
attempt  to  injure  the  jud^  should  be  mode 
by  certain  parties  in  opposition  to  him,  *  that 
no  credenct^  be  given  to  mine  hurt  in  mine 
absence.*  He  was  one  of  Fastolfs  executors 
in  14iiQf  and  was  engaged  in  the  violent  con- 
troversy which  arose  out  of  the  will.  Another 
letter  records  the  curious  and  scarcely  cre- 
dible fact  that  in  one  of  the  proceedings  he 
'  came  down  from  the  bench  and  plete  the 
matter.'    {Paston,  i.  12,  149.^ 

During  the  progress  of  tne  controversy 
he  is  described  as  *  the  cursed  Norfolk  jus- 
tice ; '  but  as  thin  is  the  expression  of  an 
antagonist,  it  decides  little  as  to  his  cha- 
racter. That  seems  to  have  been  remark- 
able for  it^  energy;  and  mention  is  made  of 
the  '  thank  he  haiid  of  the  king  (Edward,  in 
1402),  at  Cambridge,  for  cause  ne  declared 
so  well  the  charge  of  extortion  done  bv 
sheriifs  and  other  officers,  &c.,  for  the  which 
declaration  the  king  took  him  by  the  hand, 
and  said  he  cowde  him  great  thanks,  and 
prayed  him  so  to  do  in  tliis  country  (Nor- 
folk).' An  earlier  letter  shows  that  he  was 
tainted  with  the  superstitious  credulity  of 
the  time.  Speaking  of  Our  Ladv's  house 
at  Walsingham,  he  says,  *  for  truly  if  I  be 
drawn  to  any  worship  or  welfare,  and  dis- 
charge of  mv  enemies*  danger,  I  ascribe  it 
unto  Our  I^y.'    {Ibid.  10,  151.) 

He  married  Agnes,  daughter  of  Sir  Oliver 
le  Gross,  of  Crostwick,  Norfolk,  and  appa- 
rently widow  of  John  Rands,  and  was  the 
progenitor  of  the  two  next-named  judges. 
{Blomefield:s  Norwich,  i.  126-166.) 

YELYEBTOH,  Christopher,  was  the  son 
of  William,  who  came  in  direct  descent 
from  the  above  Sir  William  Yelverton,with 
four  generations  between  them,  enjoying 
the  same  property  in  Norfolk,  and  pursuing 
the  same  profession.  He  held  the  office  of 
reader  in  Grav's  Inn  in  1636  and  1642,  and 
it  was  probably  he  whose  name  appears  in 
the  debates  in  the  parliaments  of  1671  and 
1672.  (ParL  im,  i.  747,  762,  779.)  He 
died  in  1686,  leaving,  by  his  marriage  with 
Anne,  daugVitet  aiv^  Vva  ol  ^\x  Henry 


YELVERTON 

large  family.  Henry,  his  eldest  son,  soe- 
ceeded  to  the  estates,  and  was  father  to 
Sir  William,  who  obtained  a  baronetcj 
(of  Rougham)  in  1620,  which  expired  in 
1649. 

Christopher  was   the    third  son,  who, 
entering  nimself  in   1652  at  Gray's  Imi, 
relieved  his  le^l   studies    there   by   an 
occasional  offering  to  the  Muses.    When 
'  Jocasta,'  a  tragSy  translated  from  Euri- 
pides by  George  Gascoigne  and  Francis 
kynwelmen^,  was  performed  there  in  15611, 
the  epilogue  was  supplied  by  Yelverton 
(Aihen,  Oxon,  i.  436},  and  he  assisted  in 
other  devices  and  shows  of  the  society. 
He  became  reader  in  1574,  and  again  in 
1683,  and  in  1689  he   was  called  to  the 
degree  of  the  coif,  and  made  queen's  9e> 
jeant  in  1698.    {Dugdale'$  Orig.  296,  298.) 
In  the  parliament  of  October  1597  he 
was  electea  speaker.     Uia  disabling  speech 
on  that  occasion  gives  a  description  of  hl^ 
person  and  position  ;  and  the  prayer  which, 
according  to  the  custom  of  those  times,  he 
composed  and    read  to   the  house  eTery 
morning,  has  much  devotional  beaut>'.    In 
this  parliament,  which  was  dissolved  in  the 
following  February,  it  is   observable  that 
the  queen  *  refused  or  quaahed  fortv-eigbt 
several  bills  which  had  passed  both  teaser.' 
{ParL  ma.  i.  897,  006.)     His  conduct  in 
the  house  was  so  satisfEictory  that  his  mo- 
motion  to  be  queen's  seijeant  took  place 
three  months  after  the  dissitlution.    In  thia 
character  he  opened  the  indictments  a^^ainst 
the  Earl  of  Essex  and  the  other  conspira- 
tors in  1600,  but  the  principal  dutv  of  urg- 
ing the  evidence  fell  on  Coke  and  iHeniing, 
the  attorney  and  solicitor  generaL    {^^^ 
Trials,  i.  1J«6, 1419.) 

Lord  Burleigh  thought  very  highly  of 
him,  and  on  February  2,  1602,  he  was 
nominated  a  judge  of  the  King's  Bench. 
On  the  accession  of  James  I.  in  the  foUow- 
ing  year  his  patent  was  renewed,  and  he 
received  the  honour  of  knighthood.  It  fell 
to  his  lot  to  pronounce  sentence  of  death 
upon  Robert  Greighton,  Lord  Sanquire.  for 
procuring  the  murder  of  Robert  Tuiutf, 
a  fencing  master,  who  had  by  migchance 
struck  out  his  eye  while  playing  with  the 
foils.    (Ibid.  ii.  752.) 

Sir  Christopher  died  in  November  1612, 
at  Easton-Mauduit,  an  estate  he  had  pur- 
chased in  Northamptonshire,  which  hn 
remained  the  seat  of  his  family  up  to  the 

S resent  time.  About  two  years  before  his 
ecease,  Robert  Cecil,  Earl  of  Sali«bai7> 
gave  this  character  of  him  to  hia  JOi 
Henry :  '  He  is  a  gentleman,  a  learned  oaif 
and  a  lawyer;  one  that  wiU  delinr^ 
mind  with  perapicuoua  reason  aodfi^ 
comeliness.*     {ArcHutoloffia^  zr.  ^^ ' 

His  wife,  Margaret,  daughtr 
Catesby,  of  Ecton  and  WhI 


Fermor,  of  Eaat  T\KK^\iwii  Vn  '^on^^^^  ^Xvm.'^gcsQsfiE&E^Eaii^^  bioagkl 


YELVERTON 

and  four  daughters.    One  of  his  two  sons 
was  the  next-noticed  Ueniy. 

TSLYEBTOHy  HsNRY^  was  the  eldest 
son  of  the  above,  by  his  wife,  Margaret, 
daughter  of  Thomas  Oatesby,  Esq.,  and 
was  bom,  as  some  say,  at  his  father's  seat 
at  Easton-Mauduit  in  Northamptonshire, 
or,  as  others  assert,  at  Islington,  near  Lon- 
don, on  June  29,  1566.  He  was  educated 
in  the  university  of  Oxford,  but  Anthony 
Wood  does  not  state  at  what  college,  and 
then  became  a  member  of  Gray's  Inn,  where 
his  ancestors  had  pursued  their  legal  stu- 
dies. Having  been  in  due  course  called  to 
the  bar,  he  was  appointed  reader  in  1607. 
(Dugdale'a  Orig,  296.)  But  long  before 
that  time  he  had  been  elected  recorder  of 
Northampton. 

To  the  first  parliament  of  James  I.  he 
was  returned  as  member  for  Northampton, 
and  as  a  representative  of  the  people  he 
took  an  independent,  but  not  a  factious, 
part.  He  supported  the  subsidy,  but  advo- 
cated its  gradual  instead  of  its  immediate 
payment,  and  in  all  questions  brought  before 
the  house  he  freely  expressed  his  real  opi- 
nions, without  considering  whether  they 
were  acceptable  to  either  party,  and  with- 
out weighing  oveiHiicely  the  expressions 
with  which  ne  urged  them.    But  he  was 

nular  as  an  advocate,  and  consequentlv 
professional    enemies   jealous  of  his 
fame.     His  plain  dealing  and  the  freedom 
of  his  language  were  accordingly  misrepre- 
sented at  court,  and  phrases  were  singled 
out  of  his  speeches  to  prove  that  he  hated 
the  Scotch,  and  had  no  respect  for  the 
king.     These  reports  gradually  made  their 
way  to  James's  ear,  and  Yelverton  found 
after  some  time  that  he  was  looked  upon 
with  a  suspicious  and  unfriendly  eye,  not 
only  by  his  sovereign,  but  by  the  Scotch 
nobles  around  him.    George  Hume,  Earl 
of  Dunbar,  the  lord  treasurer  of  Scotland, 
took  offence,  when  a  question  arose  in  par- 
liament as  to  the  confirmation  of  certain 
land  granted  to  the  earl  on  the  confines  of 
Scotland,  contiguous  to  Lord  Hume's  land 
on  the  confines  of  England,  at  Yelverton's 
using  the  cumulative  words  '  humus  mper 
kumuniy'  conceiving  they  were  intended  as 
a  personal  reflection.    The  king  also  felt 
himself  grievously  offended  because  one  of 
Yelverton's  arguments  for  the  naturalisa- 
tion of  Lord  Kmloss  was  that  he  was  not  all 
Scot,  but  half  English ;  and  he  was  *  much 
enraged'  that  on  another  occasion  Yel- 
verton had  said  '  that  he  would  weiffh  the 
king's  reasons  as  he  did  his  coin.'    It  was 
natural,  therefore,  that  a  man  all  whose 
intentions  were  loyal  should  be  desirous  of 
understanding  and  explaining  the  charges 
made  against  him ;  and  Yelverton  took  the 
straightforward  course  of  seeking^  an  inter- 
view both  with  the  earl  and  the  king.  This 
he  e£^ed  through  the  means  of  the  Lady 


YELVERTON 


779 


Arabella  and  the  lord  chancellor  of  Scot- 
land, the  Earl  of  Dunfermline,  and  he  gives 
a  very  intei-esting  and  curious  account  of 
his  interviews,  in  which  he  was  successful 
in  satisfying  both.  He  stated  that,  so  far 
from  opposing  the  union,  he  refused  the 
employment  when  assigned  to  argue  the 
case  of  the  post  nati  on  the  part  contrary 
to  his  majesty's  desire.  The  whole  trans- 
action of  the  reconciliation  is  very  credit- 
able to  all  the  parties.  The  ^rounds  of 
complaint  are  openly  avowed,  ana  the  inge- 
nious j  ustification  generously  admitted.  No 
unfair  compromise  of  principle  is  demanded 
or  promised,  and  on  a  subsequent  visit  to 
Kooert  Cecil,  the  lord  treasurer,  that 
nobleman  says  that  he  shall  assure  him- 
self that  Yelverton,  to  please  the  king,  will 
not  speak  against  his  conscience.  {Archaic 
oloffiay  XV.  27-52.)  The  argument  attri- 
buted to  him  in  the  *  State  Trials'  (vol.ii.  p. 
476;  against  the  impositions  of  the  crown 
on  merchandise,  and  not  published  till  1641, 
eleven  years  after  his  death,  was  really  the 
speech  of  James  Whitelocke,  afterwards  a 
judge.  (Notes  and  Queries,  2nd  S.  ix.  383, 
X.  39 ;  Pari.  Debates  m  1610,  86,  103.) 

Yelverton  had  to  wait  nearly  four  years 
before  he  reaped  any  fruits  of  his  recon- 
ciliation with  the  king.    His  father,  the 
judffe,  died  in  1612,  and  on  October  29, 
161^,  he  was  made  solicitor-general,  and 
knighted.    In  little  more  than  two  years 
his  patron  the  Earl  of  Somerset  was  in- 
dicted for  the  murder  of  Sir  Thomas  Over- 
bury;  but  Sir  Henry,  though  this  was  a 
state  prosecution  and  he  held  an  office 
under  the  crown,  is  said  to  have  declined 
to  appear  against  his  patron,  and  he  is  not 
recorded  as  having  taken  any  part  in  the 
trial.   Bacon,  who  was  the  attorney-general 
at  the  time,  must  have  felt  this  courageous 
refusal  as  a  reflection  on  his  own  conduct 
with  regard  to  the  Earl  of  Essex,  especially 
as  it  was  not  visited  by  any  evil  conse- 
quences, such  as  he  had  pretended  to  fear. 
Yelverton  had  always  acted  a  friendly  part 
towards  Bacon.    When  the  House  of  Com- 
mons showed  some  hesitation  in  allowing 
the  attorney-general  to  sit  as  a  member, 
Yelverton  came  to  the  rescue  and  Bacon 
was  admitted ;  and  when  Bacon  had  become 
lord  keeper,  and  had  got  into  temporary 
disgrace  Iboth  with  the  king  and  Bucking- 
ham for  his  interference  in  respect  to  the 
marriage  of  Sir  John   Villiers  with   Sir 
Edwaid  Coke's  daughter,  Yelverton,  who 
had  succeeded  as  attorney-general  on  March 
7,  1617,  wrote  him  a  letter  of  excellent 
advice  how  to  act  under  the  circumstances. 
But  whether  Bacon  was  offended  at  Sir 
Henry  for  not  following  his  example  in 
pleadmg  against  the  Earl  of  Somerset,  or 
for  his  presumption  in  offering  counsel  to 
his  superior,  or  more  probably  because  he 
wished  to  ingratiate  nimaelf  witk  B^^sk- 


780 


YELVERTON 


YELVERTON 


diced  Against  him  from  his  connection 
with  Somerset,  from  his  being  suspected  of 
implication  in  Bacon's  interference  m  regard 
to  the  marriage,  and  particularly  from  his 
declared  independence  of  the  duke*s  pro- 
tection. Judge  Whitelocke  (Liber  Fatne- 
UcuSy  55)  gives  a  curious  account,  which 
he  had  from  Yelverton*s  own  mouth,  of  the 
*  manner  of  his  coming  to  the  place '  of 
attomey-yfencral.  Though  pressed  by  the 
courtiers  to  npply  to  Buctdngham,  who 
'  was  agent  to  another,  and  did  crosse  him,* 
he  refused  to  *  deal  with  him  about  it  nor 
speak  to  him,'  but  protested  'he  would 
leave  it  to  the  king,  who  he  knew  had 
judgment  enough  to  chuse  his  own  ser- 
vants.' At  last  Buckingham  sent  to  him 
to  bring  his  warrant,  and  expostulated  with 
him  that  he  had  not  used  his  help,  telling 
him  that  he  looked  not  for  any  recompense, 
though  Sir  James  Ley  had  offered  10,000/. 
for  the  place.  Yelverton  protested  to 
Whitelocke  'that  he  neither  gave  to  the 
erl,  or  to  any  other  subject  in  the  kingdom, 
one  farthing  to  cum  to  the  place,  .  .  .  but 
when  the  ousincsse  was  done,  he  went 
privately  to  the  kin?,  and  told  him  he  did 
acknowledge  how  like  a  good  master  aud 
worthve  prince  he  had  dealte  with  him; 
and  although  there  was  never  mention, 
speech,  or  expectation  of  anything  to  be 
had  for  his  having  of  this  place,  i)ut  he 
came  to  it  freely,  yet  out  ol  his  duty  he 
wolde  give  him  4000/.  reddy  money.  The 
king/  proceeds  the  relation,  *  tooke  him  in 
his  armes,  thanked  him,  and  commended 
him  muche  for  it,  and  told  him  he  had 
need  of  it,  for  it  must  serve  even  to  buy 
him  dishes.' 

One  of  the  first  public  duties  Yelverton 
was  called  upon  to  perform  was  to  pray  an 
order  of  the  court  for  execution  of  Sir 
"Walter  Raleigh,  on  the  judgment  pro- 
nounced against  him  fifteen  years  before; 
and  the  language  in  which  he  did  it  forms 
ft  strong  contrast  with  that  adopted  by  Sir 
E.lward  Coke  on  his  trial.  (/W^te  Trials, 
ii.  33.) 

He  held  his  oflice  for  three  years,  sup- 
ported by  the  favour  of  the  king;  but 
Buckingham,  whom  he  further  displeased 
by  his  opposition  to  some  of  the  illegal 
patents  which  were  afterwards  the  subject 
of  enquiry,  was  resolved  to  remove  him. 
An  opportunity  was  at  last  found.  A  new 
charter  had  been  granted  to  the  city  of 
1-iondon,  into  which  the  attorney-general 
was  charged  with  having  introduced  cer- 
tain clauses  not  comprehended  in  the  king*8 
warrant.    Yelyetlotf  a  «w\)m\KioTi not  being 


ingham,  he  freouenUy  speaks  injuriously  of  i  recommended  that  he  should  be  sequestered 
Yelverton  in  his  correspondence  with  that  and  proceeded  against  in  the  Star  Chamber, 
nobleman.  (Bacon's  iVorks  [Montagu],  He  was  accordingly  superseded  on  June  27, 
xii.  L>(53-5,  331,  387.)  Yelverton  was  no  1620,  and  the  proceedings  in  the  Star 
favourite  with  the  diike,  who  was  preju-  '  Chamber  commenced,  in  which  Yelvertna 
"     '         •     .    1-       -         ..  .    _    cleared  himself  of  any  corruntion,  but  ac- 

knowledged himself  guilty  tnrough  igno- 
rance ;  and  Bacon  making  a  jesoiticsd  speech 
against  him,  and  Coke  pressing  him  hard, 
he  was  sentenced  to  impriaonment  daring 
pleasure,  and  to  a  fine  of  4000/.  Baoon's 
letters,  and  his  expreetdon  '  how  I  stirred 
the  court  I  leave  it  to  others  to  epeak,^ 
show  his  mean  endeavours  to  aid  Bucking- 
liam's  inveteracnr*  (Bacon's  Works,  xn. 
200,  446-0.)  1  lelverton  was  committed  to 
the  Tower,  and  while  there  the  parliament 
by  which  Bacon  was  condemned  met.  In 
the  course  of  their  investigations  into  the 
grievances  of  patenta  the  (Jommons  impli- 
cated Yelverton,  who,  in  his  answer  to  the 
Lords,  cleared  himself  from  the  charge, 
boldly  asserting  his  innocence,  and  attribu- 
ting bis  present  imprisonment  to  the  cooise 
which  he  had  taken  in  the  Patent  of  Imui. 
The  king  thereupon  t>ok  the  matter  up, 
and,  though  in  his  speech  he  acquitted  Sir 
Henry,  who  he  acknowledged  disliked  and 
resisted  the  proceedings  intended  against 
the  innkeepers,  yet,  because  in  his  defence 
he  had  inferred  that  'all  the  punishment 
upon  him  was  for  hia  good  service  done  to 
his  majesty,'  he  called  upon  the  Lords,  'who 
are  able  to  do  him  justice,  to  punish  Sir 
Henry  Yelverton  for  his  slander.  Yelye^ 
ton,  on  being  afterwards  brought  up  again, 
made  this  inference  more  clear,  by  directly 
charging  Buckingham  with  being  *  ready, 
upon  every  occasion,  to  hew  him  down/ 
and  with  threatening  that  he  '  should  not 
hold  his  place  a  month  if  he  did  not  con- 
form himself  in  better  manner  to  the  Patent 
of  Inns,'  and  by  roundly  asserting  '  th.it  he 
sutlered  unjustly  by  his  lordship^s  meaiiA.* 
This  was  naturally  deemed  an  aggravation 
of  his  offence,  and  on  May  16,  1021,  he  was 
sentenced  to  be  imprisoned,  and  to  pay 
10,000  marks  to  the  kin^,  and  5000  to 
Buckingham,  who  immediately  remitt«d 
his  part  of  the  fine,  and  the  prince  and  the 
Loros  agreed  to  move  his  majesty  to  miti- 
gate the  other.  (ParL  Hid.  i  1232-5, 
124*^,  1256-9.) 

He  did  not  long  continue  a  captive  in 
the  Tower.  It  is  related  that  Buckingfa«Di 
came  to  him  there  in  disguise,  and  froai  tbe 
result  of  the  interview  (the  very  improbaWiJ 
details  of  which  Sir  Anthony  WeWoo 
(Court  of  Jamesy  157)  professes  to  give),!* 


made  his  peace^  and  procured  his  imiiK- 
diate  release.     He  resumed  his  practieB  tf 
the  bar  in  the  following  Michaeloua  TtfSi 
when  his  name  appears  in  Crok»'«  ^ 
and  for  the  remainingfouryean' 
That  the  reconciliatioir 


considered  satiatM^toi^  \)i^  \)^<b  ^x)xiss\^V2ti^^\  v^j^a»fi&.ti»m.the  ^M^tha^i 


YONOE 

after  King  Charles  came  to  the  crown, 
Buckinghftm  procured  for  him  a  seat  on  the 
bench  of  the  Common  Pleas,  not  to  supply 
any  vacancy,  but  in  addition  to  the  court 
as  a  fifth  judge.  He  received  his  patent  on 
May  10,  1625;  and,  according  to  Bishop 
Racket  (ii.  19),  there  were  rumours  of  his 
being  made  loiti  keeper  by  the  removal  of 
Lord  Coventrv,  whicn  was  only  prevented 
by  the  assassination  of  the  duke,  within 
eighteen  months  of  which  Sir  Henry's  own 
career  was  closed  by  his  death  on  January 
24,  1630,  at  his  house  in  Aldersgate  Street. 
His  remains  were  removed  for  interment  in 
the  church  of  Easton-Mauduit,  where  a 
monument  is  placed  with  recumbent  effi- 
gies of  himself  and  his  lady. 

He  was  much  respected  and  admired  by 
his  contemporaries  for  his  eloquence,  his 
courage,  his  integrity,  and  his  learning. 
His  reputation  as  a  lawyer  was  very  great, 
and  was  not  diminished  by  the  subsequent 
publication,  by  Sir  W.  Wylde,  of  his  *  Re- 
ports of  Special  Cases.'  Cecil  Earl  of 
SalisbuiT,  at  an  early  period  of  his  career, 
gave  this  testimony  of  him  to  his  face : 
'  Indeed,  I  must  say  your  father's  education 
of  you,  that  have  made  you  so  lively  resem- 
ble himself,  for  you  have  good  elocution 
and  sound  reason,  whereby  the  apprehen- 
sion of  them  that  hear  you  is  made  more 
active,  and  so  hath  your  father,  which  is  a 
great  merit  in  the  professors  of  the  law.' 
(Arclueolofftaj  xv.  61.) 

He  married  Margaret,  daughter  of  Robert 
Beale,  Esq.,  clerk  of  the  council  to  Queen 
Elizabeth,  who  had  the  unpleasant  duty  of 
reading  the  warrant  for  the  execution  of 
Mary  Queen  of  Scots  at  the  scaffold  on 
which  she  suffered.  He  left  several  chil- 
dren, the  eldest  of  whom,  Christopher,  was 
created  a  baronet  in  1641,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded in  the  title  by  his  son,  Sir  Henry, 
who  married  Susan,  in  her  own  right 
Baroness  Grey  de  Ruthyn.  This  title  (after 
the  extinction  in  1799  of  two  others  sub- 
sequently granted)  survived,  and  has  been 
since  borne  by  many  generations,  and  is 
now  in  abeyance.  (Athen,  Oxon.  ii.  476 ; 
Collinses  Peerage,  vi.  624.) 

TOHOE,  Thomas,  several  of  whose  an- 
cestors were  jnerchants  of  Bristol,  in  such 
high  estimation  as  to  be  elected  repre- 
sentatives of  that  city  from  the  reign  of 
Edward  III.,  was  the  son  of  Thomas 
Yonge,  who  was  mayor  of  Bristol  in 
12  Henry  IV.  The  maiden  name  of  his 
mother,  Joan,  is  not  known.  He  was  the 
elder  of  two  brothers,  the  younger  of  whom, 
John,  was  member  for  London  in  38  Henry 
VI.,  lord  mayor  in  4  Edward  IV.,  and 
knighted  in  11  Edward  IV. 

He  was  a  member  of  the  Middle  Temple, 
and  represented  his  native  city  in  seven 
parliiunents  from  the  thirteenth  year  of  the 
reign  of  Henry  VI,    In  that  of  the  thirty- 


YONGE 


781 


third  year  he  moved  that,  as  Henry  was 
without  children,  the  Duke  of  York  should 
be  declared  heir  presumptive  to  the  crown. 
The  time,  however,  had  not  arrived  for  the 
duke's  partisans  to  speak  out ;  and  the  in- 
discreet member,  for  this  premature  exhibi- 
tion of  his  zeal,  was  straigntway  committed 
to  the  Tower.  (Lingard,  v.  141.)  His 
party  having  shortly  afterwards  gained  the 
ascendency,  he  petitioned  the  parliament 
for  damages  on  account  of  his  imprisonment, 
which  he  laid  at  one  thousand  marks  ;  and 
the  king  was  compelled  to  assent  to  the 
prayer,  referring  it  to  the  lords  of  his  coun- 
cil to  provide  what  should  be  thought  con- 
venient and  reasonable.  {Rot.  Pari,  v.  837.) 

His  attendance  in  parliament  did  not 
prevent  hie  practising  at  the  bar,  and  the 
Year  Book  records  his  name  from  27  Henry 
VI.  The  accession  of  Edward  IV.  insured 
him  legal  honours,  and  accordingly  he  was 
summoned  to  take  the  degree  of  the  coif  on 
November  7,  1468,  and  was  appointed  one 
of  the  king's  Serjeants  on  the  very  next 
day.  On  the  first  opportunity  he  was  raised 
to  the  bench,  being  constituted  a  judge  of 
the  Common  Pleas  about  November  1467. 
The  first  fine  levied  before  him  was  in  the 
following  February.     (Dugdale's  Orig.  46.) 

Notwithstanding  his  known  attachment 
to  the  Yorkists,  he  was  not  removed  from 
his  seat  when  Henry  VI.  was  restored  to 
the  throne  in  October  1470,  the  advisers 
of  that  unfortunate  monarch  probably 
deeminjr  it  politic  to  make  as  little  change 
as  possible  m  the  administration  of  the  law. 
But  when  Edward  IV.  returned,  at  the  end 
of  six  months,  Yonge  was  superseded,  or 
at  least  was  not  re-appointed.  That  this 
was  more  the  result  of  his  own  choice  than 
of  any  displeasure  felt  against  him  by  the 
king  may  be  presumed  from  the  fact  that 
in  the  act  of  resumption,  passed  two  years 
afterwards,  the  grant  of  an  annual  tun  of 
wine  which  had  been  made  to  him  for  his 
life  in  9  Edward  IV.  was  excepted  from 
its  operation.     {Rot  Pari  vi.  82.) 

He  however  resumed  the  judicial  ermine 
in  15  Edward  IV.,  being  constituted  a 
judge,  not  of  his  old  court,  but  of  the 
King's  Bench,  on  April  29,  1476.  He  died 
in  the  following  year,  1476,  and  was  buried 
in  Christ  Church,  I^ndon.  {Stow's  London 
[Thorns],  120.)  By  his  wife,  Joan,  he  left 
several  sons,  one  of  whom  is  believed  to 
have  been  the  under-mentioned  John  Yonge. 
One  of  the  descendants  of  the  judge's  eldest 
son,  Thomas,  was  in  1661  honoured  with 
a  baronetcy,  which  became  extinct  in  1810. 

TOHOE,  JoHur,  whom  Fuller  in  his 
^  "Worthies '  has  mistaken  for  a  John  Young 
who  was  made  Bishop  of  Cnllipoli  in 
Thrace  in  1617,  a  year  after  this  John 
Yonge's  death,  is  beiieved  to  have  been 
one  of  the  sons  of  the  above  Thomas  Yonge, 
I  and  to  have  been.  bQt\\.  ^\»  "\k^^^\^^>ivoss'^ 


782 


YORK 


his  education  flret  at  Wykeham's  college 
at  Winchester,  and  then  at  New  Collefre, 
Oxford.  lie  graduated  as  doctor  in  hoth 
laws,  and  practised  as  an  advocate  in  the 
ecdenastical  courts,  taking,  as  was  then 
usual,  holy  orders  also.  In  March  1602 
he  was  presented  to  the  church  of  St 
Stephen,  Walhrook;  in  March  1604  to 
that  of  St  Mary  le  Bow ;  and  in  July  1613 
to  tiiat  of  Chertield  in  the  archdeaconiy  of 
Huntinffdon,  the  latter  of  which  was  given 
to  him  by  Cardinal  Wolsey,  whom  he  suc- 
ceeded on  May  17,  1614,  as  dean  of  York, 
when  he  resigned  his  other  preferments. 

The  first  mention  of  him  in  connection 
with  polities  is  on  May  16, 1603,  as  a  wit- 
ness to  the  enrolment  of  the  bull  relating 
to  the  chapel  of  Windsor.  In  August  he 
was  at  the  head  of  the  commissioners  to 
negotiate  a  mercantile  treaty  with  Philip 
Duke  of  Burgundy;  and  in 'May  1606  he 
was  employed  to  treat  for  the  marriage  of 
the  king  with  Margaret  Duchess  of  Savoy 
(Hytner,  xiii.  01, 106, 128),  an  object  which 
was  subsequently  relinquished.  Yonge's 
exertions  were  not  overlooked,  the  office 
of  master  of  the  Rolls  being  given  to  him 
on  January  22,  1608,  28  Ileniy  VII. 

On  the  accession  of  Henry  VIII.   Dr. 
Yonge*s  appointment  was  renewed ;  and 
his  diplomatic  services    were    afterwards 
occasionally  demanded.     {Ungard,  vi.  9.) 
He  retiuned  the  mastership  of  the  Polls 
till  his  death,  which  happened  on  April  26, 
1610,  two  years  after  he  had  become  dean 
of  York.    Ihi  his  monument  in  the  Rolls 
Chapel,  the  work  of  Pietro  Torregiano,  a 
very  eminent  Florentine,  he  is  represented 
in  a  scarlet  robe  with  a  four-cornered  cap. 
Besides  the  fiivour  of  Wolsey,  he  has 
the  credit  of  having  been   the* friend  of 
I)eRn  Colet  and  the  patron  of  Erasmus. 
{Athen,  Oxm,  ii.  727 ;  Ihtijdales  Oi-ig.  336.) 
TOBX,  William  of  (Bishop  op  Salis- 
bury), was  brought  up  as  an  ecclesiastic 
and  a  lawyer,  and  in  1220, 10  Henry  HI., 
was  granted  10/.  for  his  expenses  on  an  iter 
into  I^incoln«hire.     {Rot,   Claii».  ii.   119.) 
His  name   occurs  as  justice   itinerant  in 
Cumberland  and  the  liberties  of  the  bishop- 
ric of  Durham,  in  11   and  12  Henry  III. 
(//m/.  218),  about  which  time  he  was  j)ro- 
bubly  appoint**d  one  of  the  regular  justiciers 
at  Westminster.     Fines  were  levied  before  i 
him  from  1281  to  128i).     (DwjMes  Orig, 
48.)     On  July  0,  1284,  on  the  nomination 
of  three  judges  of  the  Common  Pleas,  they 
were  directed  to  be  admitted  by  Robert  de 
Lexinton  and  William  of  York,  who  were 
most  likely  the  two  senior  judges,  and  per- 
haps presided  in  the  two  branches  of  the 
court.      Tliis  receives  some  confirmation 
from  the  fact  that  the  former  was  placed  at 
the  head  of  the  justices  assigned  for  the 
northem   coui\t\e«,  w\^  V^^  va^xxet  %.\.  iVv^ 
head  of  tho&e  ioT  lih^  aoxAViwa.  toAaa^i^^-vVvi 


YORKE 

were  sent  throughout  England  in  1240, 
under  the  pretence  of  redressing  grievances 
and  easing  the  people,  but  with  the  real 
object  of  collecting  money  for  the  roytl 
treasury  bj  means  of  fines  and  confiscationa 
About  this  time  he  was  made  provost  of 
Beverley,  was  subsequently  rector  of  Eton 
and  of  Gatton,  and  in  December  1246  wu 
elected  Bishop  of  Salisbury.  His  elevation 
to  the  episcopal  bench  does  not  appear  to 
have  removea  him  from  his  judicial  duties, 
as  in  36  Henry  III.  be  stands  at  the  head 
of  a  commission  to  hear  the  pleas  of  the 
city  of  London,  which  were  wont  to  be 
decided  before  the  justices  itinerant 
Matthew  Paris  mentions  him  as  most 
learned  in  the  laws,  and  a  great  £avounte 
with  the  king. 

He  died  on  January  31,  1250,  and  wu 
buried  in  his  own  cathedral.  {Gvdvin, 
844;  Lb  Neve,  267  ;  Excerpt,  e  UoL  fik  L 
292, 431 ;  Ahb,  Hack,  106-120.) 

TOBKB,  Philip  (Earl  of  Habdwicu). 
The  character  of  this  great  man  and  dii^tin- 
guished  judge  has  ha^  scanty  iustioe  done 
to  it  by  his  biographers.      Livinff  when 
party  spirit  ran  extravagantly  high,  it  is 
not  surprising  that  the  estimate  formed  of 
it  by  the  opposing  factions  should  be  u 
wide  apart  as  their  political  opinions ;  bat 
even  his  greatest  vituperators,  while  criti- 
sing,  and  perhaps  condemning,  his  proceed- 
ings as  a  statesman,  are  forced  to  acknow- 
ledge his  transcendent  abilities  as  a  magis- 
trate.    It  is,  however,  curious  to  see  two 
of  his  opponents  diflfer  widely  in  their  re- 
marks.   Lord  Chesterfield  says  that  Lord 
llardwicke  *  was  never  in   the  least  sa^ 
pected  of  any  kind  of  corruption ;'  that '  bd 
was  an  agreeable  eloquent  speaker  in  pu^ 
liament;   and  that  '  he  was  a  cheerful  in- 
structive companion,  humane  in  his  nature, 
decent  in  his  manners,  and  unst^ed  bj 
any  vice  (except  avarice).'     Horace  Wil- 
pole,  to  whom  he  'was  a  subject  of  personil 
aversion,  on  the  contrary  insinuates  the  re- 
verse of  all  this,  speaking  of  '  the  extent  of 
his  baseness,'  and  asserting   that  ^in  the 
IIouiH)  of  Lords  he  was  laughed  at,  in  \h 
cabinet  despised,'  thus  carrying  hi*  invete- 
racy to  so  absurd  a  degree  that  no  r»?lianc« 
can  bo  placed  on  anything  that  he  reUt-!< 
The  bt»8t  memoir  is  the  one  in  Mr.  Welsb/* 
collection  J  but  both  that  and  Lord  CaaiV 
bell's  give  too  much  weight  to  the  *8kftfli* 
published  by  Mr.  Cooksey  in  171>Land  t^ 
the   gossiping  and  malicious  stories  c«-d- 
tained    in    the   letter    introduced  in  tfe 
sketch  from  an  anonymous  correspocdent, 
who  vents  the  most  virulent  abu«,  t>4 
even  commits  the   gross  extravagance  rf       j 
charging  Lord  Hardwicke  with  o    *  """ 
nephew  to  be  sent  on  a  fatal  exp 
oraer  that  by  his  death  he  m 
to  his  property — in  short,  a^ 
^  «:nii!i»^vcv5^  \K^  '^^Maeder.     L 


YORKE 

though  of  the  Bame  party  and  approving 
his  political  principles,  and  of  the  same 
profession  and  cogmisant  of  the  veneration 
wiUi  which  his  memory  is  regarded  b^  its 
members,  seems  to  gmdge  the  encomiums 
he  is  obliged  to  bestow,  attenuating  them 
by  so  many  qualifications  that  the  reader 
cannot  but  regret  that  his  lordship  did  not 
recollect  his  own  remark,  that  *  historians 
and  biographers  make  sad  mistakes  when 
they  begin  to  assign  motives — which  how- 
ever they  often  do  as  peremptorily  as  if 
they    lived    in    familiar    confidence  with 
those  whose  actions  they  narrate/    A  sub- 
sequent life   has  been  published  by  Mr. 
George  Harris  in  three  volumes,  which  is 
written  in  so  lengthy  and  uninteresting  a 
style,  and  interlarded  with  so  much  extra- 
neous matter  and  so  many  insignificant  de- 
tails, that  it  has  not  met  with  the  favour 
to  which  it  would  have  otherwise  been  en- 
titled, for  the  valuable  materials  and  au- 
thentic documents  which  the  author  has 
had  an  opnortunity  of  furnishing. 

Simon  Yorke,  the  grandfather  of  Lord 
Hardwicke  (descendea,  according  to  the 
inscription  on  his  grave  in  St.  Jameses 
Church,  Dover,  from  the  ancient  family  of 
Yorke  long  settled  in  North  Wiltshire), 
left  his  native  county  at  the  time  of  the 
Great  Kebellion,  and  established  himself  as 
a  merchant  at  Dover.  By  the  council 
books  of  that  corporation  it  appears  that 
at  the  Restoration  he  was  restored  to  the 
office  of  common  councilman.  At  his  death 
in  1682  he  left  several  sons,  one  of  whom, 
Philip,  pursued  the  profession  of  the  law 
with  gpreat  success  in  the  same  town,  where 
lie  filled  the  office  of  town  clerk,  and  occu- 
pied one  of  the  handsomest  houses,  the  an- 
tique beauty  and  great  extent  of  which  are 
remembered  by  some  of  its  present  inha- 
bitants. This  Philip  married  Elizabeth, 
daughter  and  heir  of  Richard  Gibbon  of 
Dover,  and  widow  of  her  cousin  Edward 
Gibbon  of  Westcliffe,  near  that  town,  whose 
namesake  and  descendant  became  illustri- 
ous in  literature  as  the  historian  of  the 
*  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire.' 
Of  the  numerous  family  he  had  by  her  only 
three  survived  him— one  son,  the  subject  of 
the  present  sketch,  and  two  daughters. 
That  his  death  did  not  occur  till  June 
1721  is  a  pregnant  refutation  of  the  report 
that  he  was  distressed  in  his  circumstances 
and  died  in  despair,  inasmuch  as  his  son 
had  long  before  that  date  gained  an  emi- 
nent position  at  the  bar,  had  for  the  seven 
previous  years  been  a  member  of  parlia- 
ment, and  for  more  than  a  year  had  held 
the  prominent  and  profitable  post  of  solici- 
tor-general. This  report  originated,  as  far 
aa  I  can  trace  (for  no  allusion  is  made  to 
the  alleged  indigence  of  the  fieither  by  any 
of  the  son's  contemporaries),  in  the  anony- 
mous letter  before  mentioned,  which  Mr. 


YORKE 


783 


Cooksey  thought  fit  to  publish,  although 
containing  a  variety  of  frivolous  details  not 
tending,  as  the  writer  candidly  professes, 
'to  flatter  his  lordship's  memory.'  The 
tale,  without  any  better  authority,  has  been 
subsequently  repeated ;  and  Lord  Campbell 
perpetually  harps  upon  the  penury  under 
which  the  chancellor  commenced  his  career. 
Its  improbability  is  apparent  from  the  fact 
that  several  estates  belonging  to  the  fieither 
have  remained  in  the  family  till  the  present 
generation  ;  and  it  is  contrarv  to  all  likeli- 
hood that  a  prosperous  son  who  inscribed  a 
tablet  in  St  James's  Church,  Dover  (stiU 
existing),  to  the  memory  of  his  parents 
at  the  death  of  his  mother  in  1727,  con- 
cluding with  the  expressive  line 

QnoB  amor  in  vit4  coDjanxit,  non  ipsa  mors 
divisit, 

would  suffer  poverty  to  overtake  them 
during  their  lives. 

Philip  Yorke  the  son  was  bom  at 
Dover  on  December  1,  1690,  and  received 
his  education  at  a  school  of  considerable 
reputation  at  Bethnal  Green,  kept  by  Mr. 
Samuel  Morland,  a  man  of  great  classical 
attainments.  He  continued  there  till 
Christmas  1706,  having  by  his  diligence, 
his  talents,  and  general  behaviour  earned 
the  affection  of  nis  master,  who  for  some 
yeai-s  afterwards  kept  up  a  Latin  corre- 
spondence with  him.  Two  of  Mr.  Moriand's 
letters  are  preserved.  The  first  is  dated  in 
February  1706-7,  written  soon  after  Yorke 
left  the  school,  in  which  the  proud  tutor 
not  only  predicts  his  pupil's  niture  cele- 
brity, but  declares  that  he  reputes  that 
the  happiest  day  of  his  life  on  which  he 
was  entrusted  with  his  education.  The 
other  is  dated  October  1706,  and  addressed 
to  his  pupil  at  Mr.  Salkeld's  in  Brooke 
Street,  Hoibom,  to  whom  his  father  had 
sent  him  for  his  elementary  legal  studies. 
Mr.  Salkeld  was  not,  as  some  biographers 
have  stated,  the  learned  serjeant  of  that 
name  (a  natural  mistake,  as  he  was  then 
in  full  practice,  and  lived  for  several  years 
after,  and  as  his  well-known  Reports  were 
first  published  under  the  care  of  Lord 
Hardwicke);  but  he  was  the  Serjeant's 
brother,  and  an  eminent  attorney,  who  must 
have  held  a  high  rank  among  his  brethren, 
since  in  his  office  Viscount  Jocelyn,  lord 
chancellor  of  Ireland,  Sir  Thomas  Parker, 
lord  chief  baron,  and  Sir  John  Strange^ 
master  of  the  Rolls,  besides  Lord  Hard- 
wicke, the  most  eminent  of  all,  were  at 
different  times  seated  as  pupils. 

That  Mr.  Salkeld  was  Mr.  Yorke's 
London  agent,  or  that  he  received  the  son 
as  his  *  gratis  clerk,'  there  is  no  other 
authority  than  the  gossip  of  Mr.  Cooksey 's 
anonymous  correanondent.  The  improba- 
bility, if  not  the  falsehood,  of  both  stories 
I  is  evident  from  th^^  twi\.  N3a3^\.^^^x.X^^^> 


784 


YORKE 


two  months  before  his  son    left  school, 
comniisHioned  a  relative  in  liOndon  to  find 
an  eminent  eittomey  with  whom  to  place 
his  son,   which   would  have  been  quite 
unnecessary  had  he  had  any  previous  con- 
nection with  Mr.  Sfllkeld ;  and  in  the  same 
letter,  so  far  from  alluding  to  his  supposed 
poverty,  or  intimatincr  a  wish  to  avoid  tlie 
expense,  he  desires   nis  friend  *  to  learn  ' 
the  termes  on  which  he  may  be  disposed  | 
of.*    Neither  does  it  appear  at  all,  though 
generally  as>^rted,  -that  the  son  was  in- 
tended for  his  father's  branch  of  the  pro- 
fession; but,  on  the  contrary,  the  expression 
used  by  his  father  in  the  above  letter  is  , 
that  he  is  *  desirous  to  place  him  with  an  j 
eminent  attorney  in  the  Common  Pleas /or  I 
three  years,  that  by  the  practis  of  the  lawe  ; 
he  may  be  better  quulitied  for  the  study  of 
it.*    l^his  term  was  not  a  sufficient  service 
then,  any  more  than  it  is  now,  to  enable  a 
clerk  to  be  admitted  an  attorney,  and  the 
father's  expression  seems  clearly  to  show  ' 
his  inclination  to  bring  his  son  up  to  the 
bar.    Jeremy  Bentham  also,  in  a  letter  to 
Mr.  Cooksey  (54,  72),  states  expressly  that  j 
the  fathtir,  *  intending  him  for  the  bar,  very 
judiciously  placed  him  with  Mr.  Salkeld* 
{Jlurrutf  i.  2/ ,  29^ ;  and  that  he  did  so  in- 
tend is  contirmea  by  the  fact  that  before 
the  young  student  had  been  two  years  with 
Mr.  Salkeld  he  was,  on  November  29, 1708, 
actually  admitted  a  member  of  the  Middle 
Temple. 

The  anecdote  told  of  Mrs.  Salkeld  send- 
ing him  on  family  errands,  and  to  fetch  in 
little  necessaries  from  the  markets,  and  of 
the  ingenious  mode  he  took  for  putting  a 
«*top  to  the  practice  by  charging  Mr  Sal- 
keld with  coach-hire  for  the  carriage,  has 
little  bearing  on  the  question.  Besides  the 
recollection  that  youth  was  not  so  tenacious 
and  dignified  as  in  the  present  age,  it  proves 
m)thin/  more  than  that  the  lady  took  too  ■ 
great  advantage  of  the  extreme  good-nature  I 
tor  which  the  young  pupil  wils  no  doubt 
then  as  famous  as  he  was  in  after  life. 

Soon   after   his  admission   he   left  Mr. 
Sulkeld's,    and    took   chambers  in   Pump 
Court  in  the  Temple,  where  he  not  only 
pursued  with   assiuuity  his  legal  studies, 
attending  the  courts  and  noting  cases,  but 
employed  his  leisure  hours  in  polite  litera- 
ture  and   philosophical  enquiries.     There 
he  composed,  there  is  little  reason  to  doubt, 
though   it  has  been  disputed,   the   letter 
which  appeared  in  the  *  Spectator '  of  April 
IM,  1712,  under  the  signature  Philip  Home- 
bred,  ridiculing  the   common  practice   of 
sending  unfledged  youth  on  foreign  travel ; 
the  only  literary,  not  legal,  performance  on 
which  he  ever  ventured.     About  this  time 
he  was  introduced  to  Lord  Macclesfield, 
lord  chief  justice  of  the  King's  Bench, 
cither  (for  tVve  TvwcttNXKwv^  "^w^)  by  Mr.  I 
Scilkeld,  or  "Mr.  Va^ot^^  \?wt\«t^  >^^  Ow^sd^ 


YORKE 

justice's  son,  or  by  Mr.  Thomas  Parker,  the 
chief  j  ustice's  nephew.  The  latter  was  a  clerk 
in  Mr.  Salkeld's  office,  but  prolMiblv  not  at 
the  same  time,  as  he  was  five  years  Yorite's 
junior;  so  that  if  he  was  the  introducer, 
It  would  appear  that  Yorke  frequented  Mr. 
Salkeld's  office  after  his  admission  to  the 
Middle  Temple,  and  also  was  a  brother- 
student  with  Parker  in  that  societv.  What- 
ever was  the  object  of  the  introduction,  it 
led  to  an  intimacy  most  beneficial  to  the 
young  man  when  he  went  to  the  bar.  It 
turned  out,  however,  very  injurious  to  the 
peer,  as,  it  is  asserted,  the  favour  he  showed 
to  Yorke  in  the  Court  of  Chancery  excited 
the  jealousy  of  some  of  his  seniors  so  much 
that  it  gave  additional  inveteracy  to  the 
earl's  prosecution. 

YorKe  was  mlled  to  the  bar  on  May  6, 
1715,  and    almost    immediately  obtafned 
considerable  employment.     That  for  this 
success  he  was  partly  indebted  to  his  legil 
connection,  and  partly  to  the  influence  of 
his  patron,  there  can  be  no  doubt;  but 
neither  would  have  availed  him  had  he 
not  shown  himself  competent  to  improve 
the  opportunities  thus  put  in  his  way.  His 
superiority  of  talent  was  soon  recognisrf, 
and  that  it  procured  him  a  large  accesdoo 
of  busmess  is  proved  by  the  anecdote  re- 
lated in  the  memoir  of  Sir  Littleton  Powji 
Other  and  better  testimonies  of  the  eii- 
mation  in  which  he  was  regarded  are  to  lie 
found  in  the  two  following  facta.    Before 
he  had  been  four  years  at  the  bar  he  w« 
sent  down  by  the  government  to  supjrfj  a 
vacancy  in  the  borough  of  Lewes,  and  was 
returned  its  member  on  May  2, 1719.  And, 
secondly,  his  marriage  later  in  the  same 
month  with  Margaret,  the  daughter  of  Mr. 
Charles  Cocks  of  Worcester,  by  the  sister 
of  Lord  Somers,  and  the  young  widow  itf 
Mr.  William  Lygon  of  Maddresfield.  This 
lady  he  had  met  at  her  uncle's,  Sir  Jo«pa 
Jekyll,  whose  strong   recommendation  i>f 
him  and  his  future  prospects  oyercame  the 
objections  of  the  father  to  a  suitor  who  hd 
no  present  means  of  making  a  settlement. 

He  kept  up  constant  intercourse  with  iii? 
family  and  friends  at  Dover,  and  was  i> 
pointed  recorder  or  steward   of  that  «^ 
poration.     Nothing  appears  in  this  iiit»^ 
course  that  gives  tlie  slightest  insinuaic 
of  the  iiuDuted  penury  of  his  father.  The 
correspondence  to  which  Mr.   Harris  b» 
had  access  contains  the  strongest  prooi*'' 
Yorke's  affection  for  both  his  parents,  ad 
of  his  kindness  to  his  sister,  and  libenStr 
to  her  and  her  unfortunate  husband,  wh<i 
indigence  was  caused  by  his  dissipation  «i 
misconduct    It  also  aflbrds  ample  erida* 
that  throughout  Yorke's  career  id  B* 
never  deserted  the  friends  of  hii  v 
did  what  he  could  to  advance 
manifestly  showing  the  maUo' 
%fc>i'%  ^oa^mous  oonespondr 


YORKE 

tales  of  a  contrary  tendency,  which  it  is  to 
be  regretted  have  been  too  easily  repeated 
by  Lord  Campbell,  without  sufficient  en- 
quiry into  their  truth.  Ilis  father  lived  to 
see  the  first  fruits  of  his  son's  success,  and 
died  in  June  1721,  fifteen  months  after  his 
iirst  promotion. 

Thiett  promotion  took  place  in  less  than 
two  years  after  hi.  marriage,  when  he  was 
appomted  solicitor-general  on  March  22, 
1720,  being  knighted,  and  soon  after  be- 
coming bencher,  treasurer,  and  reader  of 
his  inn.  On  January  31, 1724,  he  succeeded 
to  the  office  of  attorney-general,  and  thus 
within  nine  years  after  hi^  coll  to  the  bar, 
and  before  he  had  attained  thirty-four  years 
of  age,  he  had  outstripped  all  his  colleagues 
and  become  the  leader  m  Westminster  Hall. 
If  be  had  been  a  scion  of  nobility,  or  sur- 
rounded with  the  highest  connections,  it 
would  be  idle  to  suppone  that  he  could 
have  attained  this  eminence  by  means  of 
mere  patronage. 

He  filled  this  office  for  above  ten  years, 
four  under  George  1.  and  six  under  George 
II.,  and  his  excellence  both  as  an  advocate  and 
as  a  public  prosecutor  was  acknowledged  as 
weU  oy  his  political  opponents  as  his  friends. 
The  first  is  evidencea  by  the  frequent  re- 
currence of  his  name  in  the  Reports  of  the 
time,  and  by  the  anxiety  expressed  in  many 
private  letters  from  parties  desirous  of  his 
aid.     The  last  is  proved  by  his  speeches, 
z     remarkable   at  the  same  time  for    their 
humanity  and   temperance  and  for  their 
force  and  efiect,  ana  is  unmistakably  con- 
m    finned  by  the  applause  of  both  sides  of  the 
. '    House  of  Commons  on  an  accidental  allu- 
r    lion  by  bim  to  his  conduct  while  in  office. 
^  A.  magistrate  against  whom  he  was  engaged 
"  as  counsel  thought  proper  to  challenge  him, 
:z2  And  was  obliged  to  ask  his  pardon  in  open 
«^  conrt  in  order  to  prevent  a  criminal  intor- 
.-  uation.     {Gent.  Mag,  i.  20.)     His  general 
s  success  is  manifested  by  his  being  enabled 
"   to  purchase  in  1725  the  manor  and  estate 
-    of   Hardwicke  in  Gloucestershire,  which 
.   cost  him  about  24,000/. 

He  continued  in  parliament  from  his  first 
:  Section  for  Lewes  in  1719  till  he  was  pro- 
Xnoted  to  the  upper  house  in  1733,  being 
S^tumed  for  Seaford  in  the  two  intervening 
^larliaments  of  1720  and  1727.  Each  of 
^hese  seats  he  owed  to  the  patronage  of  the 
^Jiike  of  Newcastle,  who  from  the  first  saw 
^UB  merit,  and  to  the  last  never  deserted 
"With  whatever  disregard  the  cha- 
of  hi»  grace  may  be  treated,  he  cannot 
refused  t^e  credit  of  diacriniiuation  in 
"Uiui  early  recognition  of  the  talents  of  a 
^onng  man  who  became  one  of  the  most 
^ifllcSent  supports  of  his  administration. 
ilr  Philip*8  reported  speeches  as  a  com- 
euiibit  that  power  of  argument 
Indd  ananflement  for  which  he  was 
remarkaUei  and  folly  justify  the 


YORKE 


785 


respect  and  deference  which  were  paid  to 
his  opinion  in  the  house.  To  this  feeling  on 
the  part  of  his  senatorial  colleagues  may  be 
attributed  his  being  excused  from  taking 
any  part  in  the  impeachment  of  the  Earl  of 
Macclesfield,  on  account  of  the  close  friend- 
ship that  existed  between  them.  That  he 
tooK  no  more  steps  in  the  earFs  behalf  than 
by  speeches  in  his  place  in  parliament  has 
been  unjustly  made  the  ground  of  animad- 
version, without  a  suggestion  of  what  more 
he  could  have  done,  and  without  consider- 
ing that,  being  a  member  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  he  could  not  take  a  professional 
part  in  the  defence  of  one  whom  that  house 
had  chosen  to  prosecute.  It  is  rather  laugh- 
able that,  more  than  a  century  after  the 
earVs  death,  he  should  be  pitied  for  the  de- 
sertion of  a  friend — of  which  he  himself 
was  never  conscious — with  whom  he  kept 
up  a  cordial  intercourse  from  the  time  of 
his  trial  to  his  death,  and  to  whom  in  his 
last  letter  he  describes  himself  as  his  ^  most 
affedionats  and  most  faithful  humble  ser- 
vant.'    (Harris,  i.  179,  222.) 

In  1727  he  published  anonymously  a 
work,  which  has  been  erroneously  fathered 
on  Sir  Joseph  Jekyll,  entitled  '  A  Discourse 
on  the  Judicial  Authority  belonging  to  the 
Master  of  the  liolls  in  the  High  Court  of 
Chanceiy.'  It  was  apparently  in  answer  to 
*  The  History  of  the  Chancery,*  published 
the  year  before  by  Mr.  Samuel  Burroughs, 
whom  Lord  Chancellor  King  rewarded  with 
a  mastership  in  Chancery.  Sir  Philip's  book 
evinced  great  learning  and  research,  and  on 
being  answered  by  Burroughs,  with  the  as- 
sistance of  Warburton,  afterwards  Itirthop 
of  Gloucester,  in  a  work  called  '  The  liegul 
Judicature  in  Chancery  Stated,*  was  re- 
published in  a  second  eaition  with  a  preface 
containing  an  elaborate  reply  to  all  the  op* 
po^nng  arguments.     (Ibid,  105.) 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Raymond  died  on 
March  19,  1733,  and  his  place  in  the  Court 
of  King*s  Bench  remainea  vacant  for  nearly 
eight  months,  although  Sir  Philip  Yorke 
was  regarded  as  the  onlv  competent  suc- 
cessor, and  although  the  "Duke  of  Someritet 
was  assured  by  the  Duke  of  Newcastle  that 
it  was  at  his  own  choice  to  succeed.  (Hid. 
130.)  It  is  not  unlikely  that  there  was 
some  prudent  he.Mtation  on  his  own  part  to 
leave  the  profitable  positir>n  of  attomf;y- 
general,  for  he  says  to  the  Duke  of  Somer- 
set, *  I  am  doubtful  how  suitable  the  office 
of  chief  jufltice  of  the  King*H  Ik'uch  may  lie 
to  my  circumstances  at  this  time  of  iif*;, 
and  with  a  numerous  family.*  Some  time 
probably  elapsed  in  overoomingr  that  hesi- 
tation, and  tne  rest  may  be  well  account/^ 
for  in  arranging  the  means  of  doing  so.  It 
was  at  last  effected  bv  increasing  the  salary 
of  2000/.  to  4000/.  a  year,  which  Sir  Philip 
insisted  should  not  be  for  himself  «Jbc>r\«t^Vv\X 
for  hlA  ftttCCfcSfcOIs  vX*<».    W:  H*^^  ••^•*>  V>\*i 

Ay. 


786 


YORKE 


raised  to  the  peerage.  He  was  accordingly 
appointed  chief  justice  on  October  31, 17o3, 
and  created  Lord  Hardwicke  on  Novem- 
ber 23. 

Much  credit  cannot  be  placed  on  the 
statement  made  by  some  that  he  aimed  at 
the  Seals,  but  gave  way  to  his  friend  the 
Solicitor-General  Talbot;  and  still  less  to 
the  assertion,  made  by  others,  that  thev 
were  actually  offered  to  him  and  declined. 
In  1734  he  was  elected  recorder  of  GIoh- 
eester,  and  continued  to  hold  the  ofHce  tiii 
his  death,  when  he  was  succeeded  in  it  by  I  in  which  they  were  delivered,  we  have  onlr 


YORKE 

respect  and  deference  by  all  parties  in  the 
senate.  He  seems  to  have  excited  the  ani- 
mosity of  no  one  except  Horace  Walpole, 
who,  for  some  cause  or  other,  takes  even 
opportunity  to  vilif  v  him  by  putting  {sL< 
constructions  on  his  actions  and  false  co- 
louring to  his  opinions.  For  his  character 
as  a  judge,  whetner  estimated  by  hig  deci- 
sions, or  by  the  arguments  by  which  he 
supported  them,  or  by  the  principles  on 
which  they  were  founded,  or,  to  take  a 
lower  standard,  by  the  unadomcNl  eloquence 


his  son  Charles  Yorke. 

During  the  three  years  and  a  half  that 
he  presided  over  the  Kiag^s  Bench  he  more 
than  satistied  the  expectations  of  those  who 
had  formed  the  most  favourable  opinion  of 
him.    His  legal  knowledge,  his  nabitual 
caution,  his  firmness  and  discrimination, 
gave  weight  to  his  decisions,  and  excited 
unquestioned  admiration  from  even  those 
to    whom    they    were    adverse.     In    the 
House  of  Lords  also  he  shone  with  equal 
brilliancy.     In  the  speeches  he  delivered 
there  was  so  much  solidity,  argument,  and 
eloquence  that  his  brother  peers  welcomed 
him  as  nn  accomplished  colleague.     With 
this  superiority  both  as  a  judge  and  a  sena- 
tor, his  advance  to  a  higher  dignity  could 
not  but  be  anticipated.     The  opportunity 
soon  occurred.    Lord  Talbot  died  after  a 
short  and  brilliant  career ;  and  on  the  very 
day  of   the    event    the  Great  Seal  was 
pressed  upon  Lord  Hardwicke.    He  hesi- 
tated to  accept  the  precarious  honour,  and 
to  give  up  a  permsiient  position,  to  the 
duties  of  which  he  was  accustomed,  and  in 
which  he  had  the  opportunity  of  providing 
for  his  family  by  the  expected  falling  in  of 
a  valuable  office.  This  difficulty  being  soon 
overcome  by  giving  him  an  equivalent  in  a 
grant  in  reversion  to  his  eldest  son  of  a  tel- 
lersbip  of  the  Exchequer,  he  undertook  the 
office  and  was  constituted  lord  chancellor  on 
February  21,  1737. 

For  the  next  four  months  Lord  Hard- 
wicke held  both  the  offices  of  lord  chan- 
cellor and  lord  chief  justice,  and  occasionally 
sat  in  the  King's  Bench  till  June  8,  when 
the  appointment  of  Sir  William  Lee  to  the 
latter  court  took  place. 

He  retained  the  Great  Seal  for  nearly 
twenty  years  of  his  life,  and  rendered  his 
name  illustrious  both  as  a  statesman  and  a 
judge.  The  acts  and  policy  of  the  govern- 
ment, for  which  as  a  member  of  it  he  was 
responsible,  and  which  he  moderated  by  his 
prudent  counsel  and  supported  by  his 
powerful  eloquence,  belong  more  to  the 
nistory  of  the  country  than  to  the  bio- 
graphy of  the  man.  But  under  Sir  Robert 
Walpole*s  ministry,  and  those  that  suc- 
ceeded it,  Vie  %t\\l  maintained  his  infiuence, 


to  refer  to  the  satisfaction  they  gave  to  his 
contemporaries,  to  the  deference  with  wbkh 
they  are  still  always  quoted,  aad  to  tbe 
veneration  with  which  his  very  name  u 
regarded,  even  at  this  distance  of  time,  hj 
the  ablest  practisers  of  the  law. 

Lord  Hardwicke*s  entrance  into  tbe 
chancellorship  was  anything  but  awpiciouz^ 
He  at  once  was  mad<)  to  experience  the 
disagreeables  of  office,  by  being  forced  to 
enter  into  the  personal  (Usputes  of  the  roral 
family.  He  was  commanded  by  the  kui^ 
on  the  very  day  of  his  appointment  tocarrr 
an  unwelcome  message  to  the  Prince  of 
Wales,  the  sting  of  which  however  be 
managed  to  make  less  poignant ;  and  in  tbe 
future  progress  of  the  quarrel,  harsh  ra  one 
side,  and  foolish  and  insolent  on  the  other, 
he  exerted  himself  as  much  as  poenble  to 
effect  a  reconciliation. 

In  the  frequent  absences  of  the  king  from 
England,  I^rd  Hardwicke  was  alwavs  left 
as  one  of  the  lords  justices;  and  with  th« 
Duke  of  Newcastle  and  his  broths,  after 
Sir  Robert  Wal pole's  resignation,  had  tbe 
principal  management  of  the  atfaira  of  tbe 
Kingdom.     During  one   of  these  inteniLl^ 
commenced  the  Rebellion  of  174o,  which 
was  treated  at  first  with  apathy  and  indif- 
ference, and  as  of  tritling  moment,  till  tbe 
success  of  the  Young  Pretender  at  Prert(«Q 
Pans  and  his  march  into  England  roused 
the  country  from   its  lethargy,  and  led  to 
the  retreat  of  the  rebel  army'  and  its  »b- 
sequent  defeat  at  CuUoden.     In  the  tmls 
of  the  lords  engaged  in  the  conspiracr  Lonl 
Hardwicke  acted  ns  lord  high  steward,  c»- 
ducting  them  with  digrnity  and  firmne*; 
and,  though  some  writers  have  cnnadei^J 
his  address  to  Lord  Lovat  as  unnece«»nlT 
harsh  and  personal,  it  should  not  be  fe«- 
gotten  that  the    occurrence  of  a  wwa^ 
rebelhon  soon  after  that  of  1715  reqiffl^ 
a  more  solemn  and  circumstantial  eip* 
tion  of  its  enormity,  while  the  vife  «^ 
racter    and    disgraceful    conduct  ci  ^ 
titled  criminal  justified  any  severi^of  »* 
mark. 

In  July  1740  he  was  unanimom 
hi{(h  steward  of  the  univer^ 
bridge,  an  honour  for  which 
to  be  proudy  conferred  as  it' 


feuds  ia  the  caVAiwiX,  wxA\wk«^  xx-^  Vi^S>^\  ^^inS^Q>^  *^  tSaoaa.  oC 


•n  i 


YORKE 

cation,  had  acquired  the  reputation  of  hich 
classical  attainments,  in  addition  to  tne 
eminent  intellectual  powers  with  which  he 
was  endowed.  After  having  several  times 
declined  an  advance  in  the  peerace,  though 

1>res8ed  upon  kim  by  ministers,  he  was  at 
ast  induced  to  accept  it,  and  on  April  2, 
1764,  was  cieated  Earl  of  Hardwicke  and 
Viscount  Koyston,  dignities  which  were 
universailj  recognised  as  fitting  rewards  for 
his  long  and  valuable  services.  For  two 
years  and  seven  months  after  this  eleva- 
tion, he  continued  to  execute  the  duties  of  his 
high  office,  and  to  be  one  of  the  most  active 
and  eflicient  advisers  in  the  administration. 
But  when  the  Duke  of  Newcastle  was 
forced  to  succumb  to  the  opposition  and 
give  way  to  the  Duke  of  Devonshire  as 
first  lord  of  the  Treasury,  Lord  Hardwicke 
took  the  opportunity  to  retire  with  his 
friend,  and,  notwithstanding  all  the  efforts 
of  the  new  ministry  to  retain  him,  on  No- 
vember 19,  1756,  resisned  the  Great  Seal, 
after  holding  it,  accoruing  to  his  own  com- 
putation, 'nineteen  years,  eight  months, 
and  sixteen  days.'  Only  two  previous 
holdera  of  the  Seal,  whether  as  keeper  or 
chancellor,  had  exceeded  this  length  of 
service — Sir  Nicholas  Bacon,  who  was 
keeper  for  twenty  years ;  and  Sir  Thomas 
Egerton,  Lord  Ellesmere,  who  retained  the 
Seal  as  keeper  and  chancellor  twenty  years 
and  ten  months ;  and  only  one  subsequent 
lord  chancellor,  John  Lord  Eldon,  whose 
occupation  of  office  e^itended  to  tweaty- 
foui  yeai-s,  ten  months,  and  twenty-four 
days,  with  an  interval  of  about  a  year. 

Ob  the  return  of  the  Duke  of  Newcastle 
to  power  and  his  junction  with  Mr.  Pitt  in 
tbe  following  June,  Lord  Hardwicke  again 
refused  the  Great  Seal,  but  aided  the  mi- 
nisterial counsels  in  the  cabinet ;  and  it  is 
a  curious  circumstance  that  he  prepared  all 
the  speeches  from  the  throne  till  the  vear 
1762,  as  he  had  previously  done  while  in 
office.    On  Lord  Bute's  accession  to  the 
ministry.  Lord  Hardwicke,  though  offered 
the  privy  seal,  retired  altogether  into  pii- 
Tate  life.    His  health  began  to  decline  in 
October  1768,  and,  gradually  sinking,  he 
died  on  March  6,  1^64,  at  his  house  in 
Oxoevenor  Square,  in  the  seventv-fourth 
ytsi  of  his  age.     He  was  buried  in  the 
church  of  Wimpole    in   Cambridgeshire,. 
"where  he  had  purchased  in  1740  the  large 
•state  of  the  lilarl  of  Oxford,  the  mansion 
on  which  he  had  greatly  improved.     A 
handsome  monument  to  him  and  his  lady 
by  Scheemakers  adorns  the  chuoch. 

Lord  Chesterfield,  his  opponent  in  politics, 
•eknowledges  that  he  was  'unstained  by 
any  vice  (except  avarice),'  but  brings  no 
proof  to  sustain  the  exception ;  neither  do 
ve  find  anvthinff  in  his  career  that  substan- 
tiates it.  That  he  was  careful  of  his  gains, 
and  neither  profuse  nor  wasteful  in  Ms  ex- 


YORKE 


787 


penditure,  are  rather  proofs  of  his  prudence 
as  a  man  who  has  first  to  establish  himself 
in  the  world,  and  next  to  support  the  pro- 
minent position  to  which  he  was  called  at 
an  early  period.  That  he  kent  up  the  dig- 
nity of  the  varioas  stations  wnich  be  fiU^i, 
that  he  showed  no  peiurioasness  in  the 
education  of  his  seven  children,  that  he 
was  liberal  in  his  charities,  and,  above  all, 
that  he  declined  the  offer  made  to  him  of  a 
pension  on  his  setisement,  leave  a  very  con- 
trary impression. 

It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  the  repu- 
tation gained  and  deserved  by  Lord  Hard- 
wicke as  a  lawyer  and  a  uidge  was  not 
exceeded  by  say  previous  holder  of  the 
Great  SeaL  and  has  never  been  equalled, 
except  perhape  in  one  instance,  by  any  of 
his  successors.    The  justice  of  his  decisions 
BO  one  haa  ventured  to  impugn ;  all  have 
been  satisfied  with  the  equitable  principles 
they  established,  sad   have  admired   the 
reasoning  by  which   he   supported  them. 
That  on)  V  three  of  those  pronounced  in  the 
course  oi  nearly  twenty  years  were  the  sub- 
ject of  appeal,  and  that  none  of  them  were 
reversed  either  during  or  after  the  termi- 
nation of  his  chancellorship,  must,  notwith- 
standing the  depreciating  remarks  of  Jjord 
Campbell,  be  regarded-  at  the  present  time 
as  a  substantial  proof  of  the  excellence  of 
his  decrees,  as  it  was  in  hia  own  time  ac- 
knowledged by  the  President  Montesquieu 
to  be  '  un  4\o^e  au  dessus  de  toute  la  flat- 
terie.'  (HamSjU.  SOS,)  One  of  his  contem- 
poraries  who    practised   under   him  and 
became  the  ablest  common  law  jndge  that 
ever  sat  upon  the  bench.  Lord  Mansfield^ 
said  that  'when  his  lordship  pronounced 
his  decrees.  Wisdom  herself  might  be  sup- 
posed to  speak.'    Even  Horace  Walpole, 
whose  personal  antipathy  is  apparent  in  all 
he  writes  of  him,  does  not  deny  his  claims 
in  this  respect ;  and  the  depreciating  cha- 
racteristics which  he  malignantly  seeks  to 
attach  to    him  need  no  other  refutation 
than  the  contradictions  which  the  writer 
himself  unconsciously  produces. 

Every  contemporary  account  shows  how 
peat  was  the  influence  he  exercised  both 
m  the  House  of  Commons  and  in  the  House 
of  Lords.  His  ascendency  in  the  cabinet 
is  manifest  by  the  deference  paid  to  hie 
opinion  by  Sir  Eobert  Walpole  and  the 
Iiuke  of  >iewcastle,  and  by  the  respect  and 
affection  with  which  he  was  regarded  by 
his  sovereign.  Some  critics  have  objectedf 
to  him  that  he  was  not  a  law  reformer, 
seeming  to  consider  that  it  is  incumbent  on 
every  lord  chancellor  te  distinguish  his 
season  of  power  by  some  legislative  altera- 
tion in  the  existing  laws;  while  at  the 
same  time  they  complain  ef  the  onerous 
multiplicity  and  the  absorbing  nature  of 
his  various  avocations,  LaiA.  \\A3^:^rNdb^ 
I  probacy   \^o\3LV^\.   ^%X  >a%  ^^a  \«s^«t^ 


788 


YORKE 


employed  and  doing  more  essential  good  to 
his  country  by  establishinff  that  system  of 
equitable  junsprudence  of  which  he  has 
the  renown  of  being  the  framer,  than  in 
attempting  to  remove  some  slight  defects 
which  might  incumber  the  proceedinffs. 
His  justification  has  been  made  apparent  oy 
the  many  abortive  attempts  at  amelioration 
that  have  recently  seen  the  light  But 
though  he  abstained  from  interfering  in 
these  minor  grievances,  he  devoted  his 
attention  as  a  legislator  to  those  of  more 
importance.  By  him  was  the  bill  for 
abolishing  the  feudal  powers  and  the  sepa- 
rate juri^iction  in  Scotland  framed.  He 
succeeded  in  passing  an  act  for  the  natural- 
isation of  the  Jews,  with  a  view  to  remove 
civil  disabilities  on  account  of  faith,  which, 
however,  popular  prejudice  induced  parlia- 
ment to  repeal  in  the  following  year.  And 
he  put  an  end  to  the  miseries  to  which 
every  English  family  was  liable  by  intro- 
ducing the  act  for  the  prevention  of  clan- 
destine marriages — a  measure  for  which  all 
parents  (ay,  and  all  youths,  masculine  and 
leminine)  have  reason  to  bless  his  name. 

The  beauty  of  his  person,  the  urbanity  of 
his  manners,  and  the  peculiar  sweetness  of 
his  voice  enhanced  the  admiration  which 
could  not  fail  to  be  excited  by  his  excel- 
lence as  a  judge.  His  popularity  among 
those  who  practised  under  nim  could  not 
be  exceeded,  and  few  would  deny  the  truth 
of  the  expression  of  one  of  them,  that  when 
]h^  quitted  his  high  station  *  he  left  a  name 
that  will  be  mentioned  with  honour  as  long 
ii«  Westminster  Hall  lasts.'  (  Wynne's  Ser- 
jeant-iit'LaWf  103.)  The  unfortunate  poet 
Kichard  Savage,  in  his  '  character'  of  Judge 
I'age,  thus  alludes  to  him : — 

Were  all,  like  Yorke,  of  delicate  address, 
Strength  to  discern,  and  sweetneKs  to  express, 
liearn'd.  just,  polite,  bom  ev*ry  heart  to  gain. 
Like  Cummins  mild,  like  Fortescue  humane, 
All-eloquent  of  truth,  divinely  known, 
iSo  deep,  so  clear,  all  Science  is  his  own. 

The  Countess  of  Hardwicke,  after  a  happy 
union  of  forty- two  years,  died  before  her  hus- 
bHnd,  leaving  five  sons  and  two  daughters. 
The  eldest  son,  Philip,  succeeded  his  father 
and  died  without  male  issue,  but  by  his 
marriage  with  Lady  Jemima  Campbell, 
granddaughter  of  Henry  Grey,  first  Duke 
of  Kent,  was  the  father  of  two  daughters, 
who  by  special  limitations  became  succes- 
sively Baronesses  Lucas  and  Countesses  De 
Grey,  titles  which  are  now  united  with  the 
earldom  of  Ripon. 

The  chancellor*s  second  son,  the  next- 
mentioned  Charles,  was  the  father  of  the 
third  Earl  of  Hardwicke,  and  his  descen- 
dants still  inherit  that  title. 

The  third  son,  Joseph,  was  in  1788  raised 
to  the  barony  of  Dover,  which  at  his  death 
in  1792  became  extinct. 

The  fouith  aon,  John,  was  clerk  of  the 


YORKE 

crown,  F.R.S.,  and  M.P.  for  Reigate ;  tnd 
the  fifth  son,  James,  enjoyed  in  sucresnoa 
the  bishoprics  of  St.  David's,  Gloucester, 
and  Ely. 

Elizabeth,  the  elder  of  the  chancellor's 
daughters,  married  Admiral  Lord  Anscn; 
and  Margaret,  the  younger  daughter,  married 
Sir  Gilbert  Heathcote,  Bart ;  but  both  died 
childless.  {Cooksey's  SkeU^;  and  Livethf 
Mr.  George  Harris,  afid  in  WeUby's  Cd- 
lection,  and  in  Lord  Campbeits  Chtm^ 
lors,  &c.) 

YOBKS,  Charles,  was  the  second  son  of 
the  above  Philip  Earl  of  Hardwicke.  He 
was  bom  in  January  1722,  while  his  father 
was  solicitor-general.  At  about  ten  yean 
of  age  he  was  sent  to  a  private  school  at 
Hackney,  from  which  in  1739  he  wm 
removed  to  Corpus  Christi  College,  Cam- 
bridge. At  both  he  was  an  earnest  aod 
successful  student,  and  at  the  latter  he  gave 
early  proofs  of  his  classical  attainments  and 
his  refined  taste  by  his  contributions  to  the 

*  Athenian  Letters,*  printed  for  private  use 
in  1741.  His  father,  destining  him  for  his 
own  profession,  had  entered  him  at  the 
Middle  Temple  in  December  1735,  but  upon 
his  taking  his  degree  he  was  transferred  to 
Lincoln^s  Inn  at  the  end  of  1742,  and  asa- 
duouslv  availed  himself  of  his  father's  expe- 
rience Tby  listening  to  his  decisions  in  court, 
and  healing  their  explanations  in  priTate. 
as  well  as  by  a  diligent  study  of  the  ordi- 
nary books  of  legal  instruction.  In  the  be- 
ginning of  1745,  while  yet  a  student,  he 
issued  an  anonymous  publication,  entitled 

*  Considerations  on  the  Law  of  Forfeituie,' 
in  support  of  his  fa  therms  bill  to  attaint  the 
Pretender,  then  daily  expected  to  land,  ia 
which  he  so  ably  illustrated  the  constitu- 
tional argument  by  classical  allusions  that 
the  treatise  was  greatly  admired  and  went 
through  several  editions.  The  author  was 
called  to  the  bar  of  Lincoln's  Inn  on  Fe- 
bruary 1, 1745-G. 

The  son  of  a  chancellor,  with  a  capaatr 
to  improve  the  advantage,  was  not  likel?  to 
be  long  unemployed,  and  consequently  w« 
find  him  pleading  successfully  in  the  verr 
next  year  before  the  House  of  Loids,  ai^ 
receiving  the  praise  of  his  father,  who, » 
his  brother  says, '  is  not  flippant  in  his  cmb- 
mendations.'  He  became  ms  father's  pan^- 
bearer,  and  was  made  one  of  the  clerln  d 
the  crown  in  Chancery.  In  1747  he  w» 
returned  for  the  fiimily  {>orough  of  Reigtte. 
which  he  continued  to  represent  in  all  the 
subsequent  parliaments  till  that  of  17^ 
when  ne  was  elected  for  the  univemtr  d 
Cambridge.  In  the  Parliamentary  Report! 
there  are  few  specimens  of  his  speeches,  hot 
contemporary  letters  and  records  prove  that 
he  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  dehatea 
Amid  all  his  legal  and  senatorial  avocatiooi 
he  found  time  for  intellectual  rehixation.s 
and  for  the  enjoyment  of  friendly  intsr- 


YORKE 

coune.  He  kept  up  a  constant  correspond- 
ence with  the  President  Montesquieu,  and 
"with  Bishops  Warburton  and  Hurd,  for 
both  of  whom  he  exerted  his  interest 

In  1761  he  was  appointed  counsel  to  the 
East  India  Company,  and  in  the  next  year 
be  narrowly  escaped  being  burnt  to  death. 
Hia  chambers  in  Lincoln's  Inn  were  di- 
rectly over  Mr.  Wilbraham's,  which  caught 
lire,  and  Mr.  Yorke  had  barely  time  to  run 
down  stairs  almost  naked,  and  take  refuge 
with  an  opposite  neighbour.  His  whole 
property  was  destroyed,  including  his  books 
and  manuscripts,  and,  what  was  of  more 
importance,  the  valuable  collection  of  state 
papers  left  by  his  great-uncle  Lord  Somers, 
which  had  been  deposited  with  him  for 
examination,  and  of  which  only  a  yery 
small  part  was  saved.  Lord  Hardwicke 
became  extremely  anxious  about  him  in 
this  visitation,  as  he  knew  that  *  his  spirits 
were  not  of  the  best  and  firmest  kind,  and 
wished  to  do  something  to  encourage  him 
by  some  permanent  provision.  An  attempt 
was  accordingly  maae  to  obtain  for  him  the 
appointment  of  solicitor-general,  which  was 
not  however  successful ;  but  he  was  nomi- 
nated soon  after  solicitor-general  to  the 
Prince  of  Wales,  with  a  patent  of  pre- 
cedence. On  Lord  Hardwicke's  resignation 
of  the  Great  Seal  in  November  1756,  the 
king  promoted  him  to  the  solicitorship,  as 
a  mark  of  his  approbation  of  his  father's 
aerncea.  Mr.  Yorke  had  at  this  time  so 
large  a  practice  and  so  high  a  reputation 
that  the  appointment  caused  no  surprise  or 
jealousy  among  his  brethren.  After  a  few 
months  a  new  ministry  was  formed  by  the 
junction  of  the  Duke  of  Newcastle  with 
Mr.  Pitt,  in  which  Lord  Hardwicke,  though 
without  office,  had  great  power ;  who  m 
January  1762  saw  his  son  invested  with 
the  attorney-generalship. 

On  the  formation  of  the  Bute  ministry 
in  the  following  May,  the  new  attorney- 
general  began  to  feel  his  position  uncom- 
fortable, and  wrote  seriously  to  his  father  of 
his  intention,  if  he  resigned  his  office,  of 
retiring  altogether  from  the  bar.  Although 
his  father  was  at  least  in  latent  opposition 
to  Lord  Bute's  administration,  Charles 
ITorke  remained  attorney-general  during  its 
continuance,  and  at  its*  termination  he  ad- 
vised the  prosecution  of  the  famous  No.  45 
of  the  'North  Briton,'  published  on  April 
23,  1763 ;  but  he  had  nothing  to  do  with 
the  general  warrant  on  which  its  firebrand 
author  John  Wilkes  was  arrested.  In  the 
subsequent  ministry  of  George  Grenville  he 
defended  the  king's  messengers  in  the  ac- 
tions brought  against  them  lor  acting  under 
it;  but  in  subsequent  debates  he  acknow- 
ledged the  illegality  of  such  warrants.  In 
Aug^t  1763  an  attempt  was  made  to  form 
a  new  administration  on  a  whig  basis,  and 
the  king  had  apparently  a  satisfactory  in- 


YORKE 


789 


terview  with  Mr.  Pitt;  but  a  sudden  and 
unaccountable  stop  was  put  to  the  negotia- 
tion. On  the  3rd  of  November  following 
this  failure  Mr.  Yorke  thought  pmper  to 
resign  his  office;  and  in  the  debate  that 
soon  after  took  place  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons he  maintained  his  opinion  afirainst 
that  of  Chief  Justice  Pratt.  On  his  quitting 
office  he  attended  the  court  on  the  outside 
bar  in  his  stuff  gown,  although  when  ap- 
pointed solicitor-general  to  the  Prince  of 
Wales  in  1754  he  had  received  a  patent  of 
precedence,  deeming  probably  that    that 

J>atent  was  rendered  void  by  his  resignation, 
lis  brethren  of  the  bar  however  paid  him 
the  compliment  of  giving  him  the  privilege 
of  preceaence  and  pre-audience  over  them. 
He  was  chosen  recorder  of  Gloucester  in 
1764  in  the  room  of  his  father,  who  had 
died  in  March. 

On  the  subsequent  death  of  Sir  Thomas 
Clarke  the  post  of  master  of  the  Rolls  was 
offered  to  him  and  refused ;  but  he  accepted 
a  patent  of  precedence  next  after  the  at- 
torney-general. In  the  miserable  minis- 
terial difierenees  that  followed,  which 
resulted  in  the  Marquis  of  Rockingham  be- 
coming prime  minister,  Mr.  Yorke  was  in- 
duced again  to  accept  the  office  of  attorney - 
general  in  July  1765,  upon  the  king's 
promise  that  he  should  have  the  Great 
Seal  in  less  than  a  twelvemonth.  When, 
however,  in  the  following  year  by  another 
intrigue  the  ministry  was  again  changed, 
and  Mr.  Pitt  (now  created  £arl  of  Chat- 
ham) obliged  the  kinff  to  make  liord 
Camden  chancellor,  Mr.  Yorke  again  throw 
up  his  office,  but  kept  his  lead  at  the  bar 
with  the  same  success  that  had  ever  at- 
tended him.  The  .Earl  of  Chatham  soon 
retiring,  the  Duke  of  Grafton  became  the 
head  of  the  ministry,  against  whoso 
measures  a  strong  opposition  was  formed, 
in  which  the  Earl  ot  Hardwicke  was  one 
of  the  most  zealous;  and  Mr.  Yorke, 
though  taking  no  very  active  share,  was  of 
course  united  in  the  same  ranks  with  his 
brother.  Lord  Camden,  though  chancellor, 
at  length  felt  obliged  to  give  utterance  to 
his  condemnation  of  the  policy  of  his  col- 
leagues, and  was  accordingly  deprived  of 
his  office  in  January  1770.  The  Duke  of 
Grafton  knew  not  where  to  look  for  a  suc- 
cessor, the  tenure  of  his  power  being  so 
frail  that  none  of  his  own  party,  if  any 
were  competent,  would  accept  the  pre- 
carious honour;  and  among  nis  political 
antagonists  he  could  not  expect  to  find  one 
who  would  not  spurn  the  temptation.  The 
attempt  was  made  on  Mr.  Yorke,  then  the 
most  popular  lawyer  among  them,  and  he 
had  ffiven  the  duke  an  absolute  refusaL 
This  he  had  reiterated  to  the  king,  but  in 
an  evil  hour  he  was  induced  to  have  a 
second  interview  with  his  ma|esty,  when^ 


YOBEE 


t  were  iocid    ftM 


790 

bj  tbn«ta.  be  -wwm 
nniiillic^K  to  C(XU«Dt.wTthoal  nukinf  kcj 
Eti[>iiIancQ»  f>~ji  hi*  pmoiul  beneCL  llii: 
ucnuTcd  on  Jananr  IT,  1770. 

His  bother  arM,u  be  hji,  '  Bctound^d.' 
*nd  the  oppostitn  were  load  in  ibeir  dis- 
■ppnra«l :  Dot  «I1  obmemuoet  wei 
■lenced  bj  the  public  being  oTervbelnwi] 
b*  the  anDoanoemtnt  Ume  daii  kfter  of 
bu  (iiddai  dcatb.  It  is  not  to  be  iraodemi 
■t  that  under  aoch  dnmniMaiiM*  >  tvpoit 
■hoold  lu«e  Miwn  that  be  died  hj  hi*  own 
band,  that  it  •honld  be  circulated  with 
ninate  detaila  in  Tariona  paUii-stioiu.  and 
even  tbat  it  (hould  still  be  bElieTed  bj 
maoT,  thouffb  no  proof  mc  ever  produced 
tbat  it  had  anj  nbetantia]  fouudatioii. 
Tbe  eridenoe  on  the  contrarT  aeeuu  to  tv 
— that  no  inqueat  wai  holden  br  ike 
coitmer;  that  petaont  were  immediatrlj 
after  tbe  death  admitted  to  tiew  tbe  bodv : 
that  Horace  Walpole  (do  fiiend  to  tbt 
family),  in  a  private  letter  written  at  tbe 
time,  states  that  tbe  death  was  csuEed  b_T 
a  high  fpTer  ai>d  the  bunting  of  a  blood- 
Teawl :  and  tbat  oo  a  rec^it  leviTal  of  the 
Rrport  the  lurriring  memben  of  the  family 
gaTe  it  a  diitiiict  and  podtive  contndic- 
tiun.  (Jfora.  Ckrem.  AlaT  12,  June  6. 
1828.)  The  subject  is  too  Ilelicate  for  div 
cuMioD,  which  would  lead  to  do  useful  rt- 
ault.  It  is  enough  to  mv  that  tbe  melan- 
cholr  event,  however  it  occurred,  was  to  be 
attributed  to  bU  relation  catued  bj  bis 
fri^nda'dieappmbalion,  and  to  his  aniietv 
bow  to  meet  tbe  confusion  of  the  times. 
The  patent  couferriog  upon  him  the  title  of 
Lord  Moiden,  which  had  been  prepared, 
bot  bad  not  passed  the  Qreat  Seal,  wan 
after  his  death  preaaed  upm  hut  declined 
bybifiridow. 


S 


tOVCBS,  Auk  di,  wu  the  ton  of  Bt^er  ' 
de  Zouche.  of  Ashb^  in  LeicestetBhire,  and  i 
of  North  Moulton  ra  DeTonshire,  who  was  i 
grandson  of  the  Earl  of  Brittany.  (Baron-  i 
age,  i.  688.)  In  34  IlenrT  III.  the  custodv  : 
of  all  tbe  king's  lands  in  Cheshire  and  Nortb  '  i 
"Wales  was  granted  to  him.  This  Du^dale  !  , 
notices  in  his  'Baronage,'  but  makes  no  .  i 
mention  there  of  his  being  a  justice  of  the  '. 
KiDg's  Bench,  although  he  has  so  intro-  i  1 
d  uced  him  into  his  '  Chronica  Series,'  from  a  I  i 
patent  of  the  ssine  date,  adding  the  words  '  I 
*  et  ejus  empla  poteatas,'  impljing  apF*<-  '  1 
rentljthathewBschief  of  that  court.  The  '  i 
two  quotationa  are  no  doubt  tnltenfrom  the  ;  i 
aame  grant  which  included  in  his  office  of  - ; 
cusloB  of  Cheater  the  power  also  of  aciin^r  !  f 
as  king's  juatice  then  {Abb.  Ptacti.  142),  to  | ; 


ZOUCHE  DE  HARING WORTH 

^fter  the  battle  of  Evesham  he  was  one 
be  persons  nominated  to  carry  into  exe- 
on  the  dictum  of  Kenilworth,  and  on 
e  25,  1267y  was  appointed  constable  of 
Tower  of  London  (Ibid.  40),  in  which 
er  character,  no  doubt,  it  was  that  Stow 
»  him  custos  of  that  city.  Maitland  in- 
»  him  in  his  List  of  Majors  both  in  1267 
.  1268,  and  both  these  authors  allude  to 
site  of  his  house  in  Lime  Street. 
Jla  death  arose  from  a  broil  touching 
ae  title  to  land  with  John  Earl  Warren, 

0  assaulted  him  and  his  son  Roger  in 
Mtminster  Hallj  and  grievously  wounded 
li.  Some  accounts  say  that  Alan  was 
ji  on  the  8pot|  and  others  that  he  did 
>  die  till  two  years  from  that  time.  It 
sertain,  however,  that  his  death  occurred 
5ore  October  20,  1270,  64  Henry  IIL,  his 
I.  Roger  doing  homage  for  the  lands  of 

father, '  lately  deceased.'    Earl  Warren 
m  compelled  to  make  satisfaction  before 

was  pardoned  for  his  offence  in  that 
V,  and  a  fine  of  ten  thousand  marks  was 
posed  upon  him.    (Baronagey  L  78,  688 ; 
"'Cerpt.  e  Rat,  Fm.  ii.  525.) 
He  married  Helena,  one  of  the  daughters 

1  heirs  of  Roger  de  Quincy,  Earl  of  Win- 
sster.  Roger,  his  son,  succetnied,  but  the 
^ny  ffuled  in  the  male  line  in  1314,  and 
Qow  in  abeyance.  {Nicolas's  Synopm,) 
lides  the  above-mentioned  Roger,  they 
1  a  younger  son  named  Eudo,  who,  by 

tnarriage  with  Milisent,  widow  of  Roger 
^ontalt,  and  one  of  the  sisters  and  co- 
1^  of  Gleorge  de  Cantilupe,  baron  of  Ber- 
enny,  became  lord  of  Haringworth  and 
^y  other  manors,  and  was  apparently  the 
ter  of  the  next-mentioned  William  de 
iche. 

OUCte  DS  HABnrOWOBTH,  Willtax 
In  the  early  part  of  the  reign  of  Ed- 


ZOUCHE  DE  HARINGWORTH  791 

ward  ni.  three  eminent  individuals  named 
William  de  Zouche  flourished,  one  being 
of  Ashby,  and  the  other  two  of  Haring- 
worth. Of  the  two  latter,  one  held  the 
barony,  and  the  other  was  of  the  clerical 
profession,  archdeacon  of  Exeter  in  1330, 
dean  of  York  in  1336,  Archbishop  of  York 
in  1342,  and  died  in  1352.  There  are  two 
reasons  which  seem  to  prove  that  the  jus- 
tice itinerant  into  Derbyshire  in  4  Edward 
HI.,  1330,  was  the  baron  and  not  the  priest. 
Had  it  been  the  latter,  he  would  probably 
have  been  described  by  his  clerical  title 
and  dignity ;  and  the  only  other  commis- 
sion of  justices  itinerant  issued  during  that 
vear  was  headed,  as  we  conceive  this  to 
have  been,  by  a  nobleman. 

If  this  be  the  case,  William  de  Zouche 
was  the  grandson  of  the  above  Alan  de 
Zouche,  through  his  younger  son,  Eudo. 

The  manor  of  Haringworth  in  North- 
amptonshire, with  other  extensive  property, 
came  into  William*s  possession  at  the  death 
of  his  mother:  Milisent,  one  of  the  sisters 
and  coheirs  of  George  de  Cantilupe,  baron 
of  Bergavenny,  in  27  Edward  I.  Under 
Edwara  II.  he  distinguished  himself  as  an 
adherent  of  the  Earl  of  Lancaster,  and  ulti- 
mately assisted  in  the  deposition  of  that 
unfortunate  monarch.  He  died  on  March 
12,  i;552. 

He  married  Maude,  the  daughter  of  John 
Lord  Level  of  Tichmersh,  and  the  barony 
continued  in  the  male  line  till  1625,  when 
it  fell  into  abeyance  till  1815.  It  was  then 
terminated  in  favour  of  Sir  Cecil  Bishopp, 
who  died  in  1828,  leaving  only  two  daugh- 
ters. The  consequent  abeyance  was  termi- 
nated in  1829  in  favour  of  the  elder,  the 
wife  of  the  Hon.  Robert  Curzon,  the  mother 
of  the  present  baron.  {Park  WriU^  ii. 
1650j  Baronage^  i.  600  j  Nicoku's  Synopsis,) 


kssts^:s:^v^^ 


BACOH,  Jangs,  was  a  member  of  Grav'e  ' 
Inn,  aod  wna  called  tn  the  bnr  on  IiUr  III,  ' 
1&J7.  He  received  silk  in  184C.  He  waa  , 
liiftde  one  nf  tbe  Cnminimioncri  of  Bank-  I 
Tuptcj,  and  on  the  eatAbUahnient  of  the  . 
new  court  ha  waa  appoiDted  chief  judee-  ' 
On  Julj  2,  ]870,  he  was  eleratcd  to  the 
post  of  vice-chancellor  in  tbe  place  of  Sir 
William  Milboiime  Janie>s  ftitl,  however, 
rctainina:  hiH  place  of  chief  jud^. 
'  omAXS,  SiH  (iRURitB  Makktiak,  died 
Juljr  I'l,  ItifO,  alter  only  a  abort  illnen>, 
having  tilled  the  piwt  of  Ion)  justice  of 
appeal  a  little  nioro  tliiw  eighteen  months. 
Jle  was  coni<idered  one  of  the  moat  able 
judges  on  tbe  E^uitj  bennb.  The  remarks 
of  Lord  Justice  Jauies  on  bis  taking  hia 
seat  in  court  on  July  1 R,  which  are  annexed, 
show  the  eatiiuation  in  which  be  nan  held 
hy  bis  brethren:  '  I  canoirt  procwd  to  the 
husiness  of  the  day  without  aayins  a  few 
words  on  the  sad  event  which  catt  ita  black 
shadow  over  this  court.  During  tbe  sliort 
i>eriod  la  which  I  have  been  in  this  seat  it 
lias  bwn  my  misfortune  not  to  have  sat  b^ 
the  side  of  my  lamented  colleague,  but  it 
has  been  my  happiness  to  have  known  him 
well,  intimately  and  as  a  friend,  from  the 
ven- conimeuctment  of  his  profeseional  life, 
mkT  for  mwiv  years  we  sat  side  hy  side  in 
the  court  of  Vice-ChRntellor  Wood.  He 
lit  the  very  outset  obtained  an  amount  of  i 
biisini'iisuiider  wliichamin({oflesssfreu;.-tb 
might  well  have  fniled.  But  he  applied  | 
liiuinelf  to  it  with  an  iniluHtry  which  never  . 
to  the  end  flagged.  His  scnte  intellect,  i 
(^oiuid  judgment,  and  unsurpaMed  know-  | 
li'ilge  of  legiil  principles  made  him  tbe 
safest  of  advifera  to  the  numerous  clients 
-who  sought  bis  counsel.  What  bis  powers  , 
aa  an  advocnte  were  thoHe  only  know  and 
can  tell  who,  like  tnynelf,  were  fruqiieotly 
engaged  again.it  him  niid  found  how  for-  I 
iiiidable  an  opponent  he  was.  Itut  he  nas 
nut  only  a  great  lawyer  anil  a  ^ti'nt  advu-  . 
ente ;  he  was  every  inch  im  lOnglixh  genfk'- 
mnn.  When,  aftermany  Tears  of  successful  I 
prnclice,  he  was  elevated  to  tbe  bench  as  { 


tbe  office 
promotio 
with  one 
prufessiol 
the  just  I 
honours  i 

that  be 
before  hi 
judicial  < 
suitors,  tl 
for  manv 


has  B<'eui 
Diepnser 
bad  hop< 

feel  that 


i  After  pt 

'  Konbera 
:  in   1861, 

,  left  out 
point  of 
pointed 

I  with  gei 
principal 
shortlv  a 

I  a  nien'ibe 
POIXC 

I  1870,  in 
retired  fi 
I  toined  to